Chuck Schumer’s Government Corruption Tip-Line Backfires! thumbnail

Chuck Schumer’s Government Corruption Tip-Line Backfires!

By NEWSRAEL Telling the Israeli Story

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) launched a tip-line for whistleblowers to report “abuses of power” in the Trump administration. However, Schumer’s snitch portal immediately backfired after conservatives bombarded the tip-line with alleged abuses of power committed by Democrats. 

BLAZE MEDIA — On Monday, Schumer and Governmental Affairs Committee Ranking Member Gary Peters (D-Mich.) announced a new portal for whistleblowers to lodge a complaint about “abuses of power.”

“As Senate Republicans refuse to fulfill their constitutional duty to provide a check on the executive branch, Senate Democrats remain steadfast in our commitment to uncovering the truth. We are prepared to issue demand letters, preserve public records, and pursue legal action where necessary,” Schumer and Peters wrote in a letter to “brave public servants and whistleblowers.”

The letter described whistleblowers as the “backbone of government oversight and accountability.”

“Whistleblowers are essential in helping uncover fraud and abuse in the federal government,” the letter continued. “If you have information you want to share about wrongdoing, abuse of power, and threats to public safety, we stand ready to support you in your pursuit of truth and justice.”

The portal is hosted on the website dedicated to Senate Democrats.

“Whistleblowers are a vital part of congressional oversight to hold the administration accountable,” the site states.

Schumer wrote on the X social media platform, “I’m calling on our brave public servants: I’m launching a new portal for anyone who wants to expose corruption, abuses of power, and threats to public safety with the legal protections of being a whistleblower.”

Schumer likely did not receive the internet reactions that he had hoped for as conservatives flooded the tip-line with accusations of wrongdoing by Democrats.

Elon Musk mocked Schumer by telling his 217 million X followers that the responses to the tip-line are “comedy gold.” Musk didn’t stop there. The Tesla CEO added, “Look into this Schumer guy, he’s definitely done crime!”

Schumer’s X post received over 33,000 responses, including no shortage of replies spotlighting Democrats for alleged abuse of power.

EDITORS NOTE: This Newsrael News Desk column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


Download the Newsrael App: Google PlayAppStore

MUST WATCH: Hunter Biden Ran White House After Biden-Trump Debate thumbnail

MUST WATCH: Hunter Biden Ran White House After Biden-Trump Debate

By NEWSRAEL Telling the Israeli Story

Elon Musk re-posts this SHOCKING video: Hunter Biden reportedly ‘commandeered’ the White House after Biden’s disastrous debate with Trump. 

Former Democrat fundraiser Lindy Li: “After the debate, Hunter basically commandeered the White House. He sat in on all of the White House top level meetings.

We had a former cocaine addict sitting in on the most sensitive meetings of the most consequential and most important government in world history. Does that sit right with you?”

Shawn Ryan: “No.”

Li: “Without security clearance mind you. That’s basically who was running the show. Hunter basically batten down the hatches after the debate to make sure his father would only receive intel he pre-approved.”

The Biden administration makes a lot more sense if you view it through the prism of ‘The brains of the operation was on crack’ with a Vice-president who seemed to be smoking weed and giggling all the time, busy running for president!

WATCH: Former Democrat fundraiser Lindy Li: Hunter Biden Ran White House After Biden-Trump Debate

RELATED ARTICLES:

Vice President Vance visits Dachau concentration camp

IDF attacks missile launcher in Gaza

Chuck Schumer’s government corruption tip-line backfires!

EDITORS NOTE: This Newsrael News Desk column with video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


Download the Newsrael App: Google PlayAppStore

Resettling Gaza thumbnail

Resettling Gaza

By Jihad Watch

Is it the right thing to do and can it work? Yes it can.

After President Trump proposed resettling the Arab Muslim settlers currently living in Gaza, there was an outbreak of furious objections from politicians, activists and media outlets.

The objections could be roughly divided into the moral and the practical. The ‘moral’ objection was that it was ‘wrong’ to resettle the population currently occupying Gaza, and the ‘practical’ objection was that it would be impossible to accomplish. Both objections do not hold up.

The Jewish population of Gaza was resettled twice, once after the Egyptian invasion and the conquest of Gaza during the War of Independence, and the second time after the 2005 ‘disengagement’ forcibly eliminated 21 Jewish communities and expelled families living there.

Not only did politicians and the media not object to the forcible removal of the Jewish communities of Gaza, but they celebrated it as a step forward for peace in the region.

Many, if not most ‘peace plans’, propose the further resettlement of hundreds of thousands of Jews living in Judea and Samaria to make way for a ‘Palestinian’ state. Even as they object to  resettling Gazan Muslims in Arab countries, they refer to Jews living in the ‘West Bank’ as settlers, to their communities as ‘settlements’ and propose that they be resettled elsewhere.

UN Resolution 242 has been interpreted by many politicians and the media to mean that Israel must withdraw from territory, including parts of Jerusalem, where 450,000 Jews live. The same people who insist that it’s morally wrong and impractical to resettle 2 million Muslims out of Gaza also argue that it’s morally right and practical to resettle nearly half a million Jews in Israel.

Opponents of Trump’s proposal don’t believe it’s wrong to resettle a population, they would just rather expel and resettle Jews than expel and resettle the Arab Muslim colonial population.

They don’t oppose resettlement, they support terrorism.

With the moral question out of the way, what about the practical one: is it even possible?

Some say that the Gaza Arab Muslim population could not be moved without ‘door-to-door fighting’. But Israel’s recent experience in the war after Oct 7 shows that’s clearly not true.

Despite the false claims of genocide, the Israelis kept civilian casualties to a minimum by evacuating as much as the ‘civilian’ population as possible from one part of Gaza to another.

Despite being told it was impossible, Israelis evacuated hundreds of thousands of Gazans to make way for military operations. During the beginning of the  war, around 1 million Gazans left the north for the south and the UN would later claim that as many as 1.5 million Muslim settlers in Gaza had been displaced. Most of those in Gaza followed orders and got out of the way.

Looking to examples beyond Israel, the Black September war between Jordan and the PLO resulted in the deaths of some 4,000 terrorists, as many as 25,000 civilians, according to Yasser Arafat, and some 20,000 ‘Palestinians’ were resettled in ‘refugee camps’ in Lebanon

After the Gulf War, Kuwait punished the ‘Palestinians’ who had collaborated with Saddam Hussein, by expelling some 280,000 of them in a mass purge that was later joined by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Gulf allies for a total estimated by ‘Palestinian’ advocates at 400,000.

Kuwait shelled ‘Palestinian’ neighborhoods and sent in death squads to massacre them. Tanks and troops were deployed, checkpoints were set up and most of the ‘Palestinians’ were driven from their country and their neighborhoods were eliminated. Parts of Hawally, where the ‘Palestinians’ used to live, were bulldozed and turned into an amusement park.

This was done with the support of the first Bush administration.

“I think we’re expecting a little much if we’re asking the people in Kuwait to take kindly to those that had spied on their countrymen that were left there, that had brutalized families there, and things of that nature,” President George H.W. Bush told reporters at a press conference.

Saudi Arabia deported over 50,000 ‘Palestinians’, Bahrain, the UAE and Qatar, which has since become a state sponsor of Hamas, also began firing, expelling and deporting ‘Palestinians’

None of these events occasioned much protest or commentary, they occurred with the support of western governments who, like President Bush, compared it to the reactions of the French against collaborators after the Nazi occupation, and life soon went on as it had before.

The resettlement of large numbers of ‘Palestinians’ has happened before in the Middle East. While the resettlement of Gaza would take place on a larger scale, it would not be that much larger than the resettlements during the war or in the aftermath of the Gulf War.

Such a resettlement is both practical and morally defensible since there are no other options.

The underlying problem in the conflict is that Israel resettled some 800,000 Jewish refugees from the Muslim world, while the Arab Muslim nations who attacked it failed to do likewise. Along with the UN, they insisted on maintaining them under the fake identity of ‘Palestinians’ as a perpetual army of occupation: forming into terrorist groups for an endless war with Israel.

“You have to learn from history. You can’t keep doing the same mistake over and over again,”  President Trump pointed out.

Every possible effort has been made to create a ‘Palestinian’ state for over 30 years. After multiple peace proposals, land concessions, endless rounds of negotiations and taxpayer funding (over $2 billion through USAID to the ‘Palestinians’ since Oct 7 alone) nothing worked.

When Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, leaving behind greenhouses and plans for new industries, along with sizable international funding, Hamas turned it into a war zone.

Two-state solutionists continue to argue that if Israel were to offer even more land, expel and resettle more Jews, the Muslim terrorists would finally agree to a permanent peace.

But there has never been a single shred of evidence that would work. None of the Israeli proposals or concessions undertaken since the late 1980s have led to any kind of peace. The PLO and Hamas used terrorism at every turn to press for more Israeli concessions while giving nothing in return. Their leaders have said again and again that they intend to destroy Israel.

After Oct 7, everyone is finally taking them at their word.

Diplomats insisted that peace could not come without the expulsion and resettlement of Jews from Judea and Samaria. President Trump flipped the table by suggesting that it can’t come without the resettlement of Arab Muslims from Gaza. Which makes more sense?

Debate is still going on about President Trump’s proposal for an American role in Gaza. Many Americans and Israelis see the move as unnecessary. They would prefer to have Israel take care of business alone with the political support of the United States. Just as Bush provided political support for the Kuwaitis to expel the ‘Palestinian’ population from their country.

President Trump is a visionary and his idea reframed the entire view of the conflict, and while it may only be an opening for a negotiating position, like his talk of annexing Canada or Greenland, there is no doubt that it has shaken up all the conventional wisdom in the Middle East. His basic  premise, that Gaza is a lovely place that will be a source of conflict as long as it is populated by Islamic terrorists and their supporters, is fundamentally sound.

The objections to it, both moral and practical, are groundless. Resettlement is feasible and moral. If the Kuwaitis and the Jordanians could resettle the ‘Palestinians’ out of their countries on far less grounds than the atrocities of Oct 7, the Israelis certainly have the right to do it.

The politicians, diplomats and reporters who advocated for the mass resettlement of nearly half a million Jews have no moral grounds for opposing the resettlement of Gaza Muslims.

And after trying everything else, including decades of failed efforts to make peace with the terrorists or trying to coexist with them in the absence of peace, it’s time to do what makes the most sense for everyone, and the only thing that has any hope of bringing peace to the region.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

What Do Young Gazans Want?

Syrian Army Enters Lebanon to Take On Hezbollah

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

Financial and Moral Bankruptcy thumbnail

Financial and Moral Bankruptcy

By Jerry Newcombe, D. Min.

Today, we as a nation are monstrously in debt and borrowing more and more off the backs of our children and grandchildren. Yet Alexander Hamilton, our country’s first Secretary of the Treasury, said in Federalist 35 that our economy will work best when we have less needless regulations.

He notes: “It might be demonstrated that the most productive system of finance will always be the least burdensome.” He says what we need is “a judicious exercise of the power of taxation.”

Fast forward to today. President Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and his whiz kids at DOGE (the Department of Government Efficiency), are uncovering outrageous misuse of our hard-earned tax dollars by previous administrations.

Take USAID, which was established over sixty years ago to provide “U.S. foreign development assistance from the American people

Most Americans, if they knew anything about the agency, thought we were providing food or clean water to impoverished nations, but noooo.

What has been revealed is outrageous. U.S. Congressman Brian Mast from Florida has released a laundry list of outrageous uses of our tax dollars, supposedly to help with “development assistance.” This list includes USAID funding as well as that of the State Department.Mast notes that these are some of the ways our tax dollars are at work around the world— because of the left’s hijacking of USAID and the State Department:

  • $15 million for condoms to the Taliban through USAID.
  • $446,700 to promote the expansion of atheism in Nepal through the State Department.
  • $1 million to boost French-speaking LGBTQ groups in West and Central Africa through the State Department.
  • $14 million in cash vouchers for migrants at the southern border through the State Department.
  • $20,600 for a drag show in Ecuador through the State Department.
  • $47,020 for a transgender opera in Colombia through the State Department.
  • $32,000 for an LGBTQ-centered comic book in Peru through the State Department.
  • $55,750 for a climate change presentation warning about the impact of climate change in Argentina to be led by female and LGBT journalists through the State Department.
  • $3,315,446 for “being LGBTQ in the Caribbean” through USAID.

As Gary Bauer puts it (End of Day Report, 2-10-25): “they are promoting anti-Christian values, including LGBTQ ideology and abortion worldwide.”

Half a million dollars spent to promote atheism in Nepal? The founding fathers said America was founded on the belief that God is the source of our rights. Why are we spreading unbelief in other places? To this day, our national motto is “In God We Trust.”

Mast also lists: “$425,622 to help Indonesian coffee companies become more climate and gender friendly through USAID.” And on it goes. Think about this when you’re doing your taxes this year.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio is now the head of USAID, and he said last week he’s paring that staff down from 10,000 to 300. That’s like Gideon’s army in the Bible. There were 10,000 wanting to serve, but God had Gideon trim it down to only 300, and He gave them the victory.

The founders of America would be appalled that this is how far we have fallen from their vision of limited government, based on God-given rights and the consent of the governed. I never consented, nor would I consent, to such immoral goals.

No wonder President Trump is trying defund this wasteful spending.

In his Farewell Address, George Washington warned the new nation to be careful about national debt: “As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible.” Yet we are not using public credit “sparingly” at all.

James Madison said, “I go on the principle that a public debt is a public curse, and in a Republican Government a greater curse than in any other.”

Thomas Jefferson also gave some strong warnings about our economy. In his First Inaugural Address, our third president stated, “a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.”

Thomas Jefferson once said, “To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. If we run into such debts, we must be taxed in our meat and drink, in our necessities and in our comforts, in our labor and in our amusements. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labor of the people, under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.”

And to think part of our debt today is because of these left-wing boondoggles. One can only imagine what the founding fathers would think of our bloated government today.

©2025   All rights reserved.

Wife of Radical Far-Left Judge Blocking Trump’s Agenda is a USAID Recipient thumbnail

Wife of Radical Far-Left Judge Blocking Trump’s Agenda is a USAID Recipient

By The Geller Report

USAID: The swamp is deep. One of the activist judges blocking Trump’s agenda, Judge John Bates, is married to the founder of a USAID-funded NGO.

Carol Rhees is a Democrat lawyer who started Hope for Children in Ethiopia a long-time USAID grant recipient. (Amuse ON X)

You see how that works?

John Bates is the judge who ordered the Trump admin to restore website info on gender ideology and sex change operations.

Elon Musk on Wednesday criticised a federal judge’s decision to reinstate government web pages removed under President Donald Trump’s executive order on gender ideology, calling it “truly absurd.”

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Far-Left Judge Reverses Order, Trump Can Proceed To Cancel Funding

Impeach Radical Obama-Appointed Rogue Judge John McConnell Jr.

CNN, MSNBC, NPR, WSJ, NY Times Spew ‘Constitutional Crisis’ Hundreds of Times Since DOGE Shut Down USAID

DOGE is Investigating Wealthy Federal Employees With High Net Worth Despite Low Pay

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

CULTURE SHOCK: Why Super Bowl LIX Was More Significant Than Met the Eye thumbnail

CULTURE SHOCK: Why Super Bowl LIX Was More Significant Than Met the Eye

By The Daily Signal

In what turned out to be hardly a showdown at all between the triumphant Philadelphia Eagles and Kansas City Chiefs, Super Bowl LIX still surprised audiences with its pro-America themes throughout.

Here is your cultural rundown of what happened during the big game Sunday night:

Player and Prayers

The two biggest players in Sunday night’s game directly attributed their successes to their faith. When sideline reporter Erin Andrews asked Eagles quarterback and Super Bowl LIX MVP Jalen Hurts how it felt to win, he replied:

“God is good. He’s greater than all the highs and lows.”

Even Chiefs’ quarterback Patrick Mahomes on X thanked God for “every opportunity he has given me” after his team’s devastating loss, which he took responsibility for.

Patriotism Is Back

Christian singer Lauren Daigle got her “moment of vindication” while performing “America the Beautiful” at Sunday night’s game just five years after New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell attempted to cancel her New Year’s Eve performance in the same city.

Why? In 2020, Daigle gave an impromptu performance at an outdoor prayer service and concert that also served as a protest against COVID-19 restrictions on churches.

During jazz singer Jon Batiste’s rendition of the national anthem, some players were moved to tears. Moreover, The New York Times reported that not a single player took a knee during the anthem in protest of racial inequality this year.

Also during the national anthem, the crowd roared with applause and cheers when the jumbotron showed President Donald Trump.

He is the first sitting president to attend the Super Bowl, and he came flanked with an all-star crew of congressmen and prominent conservative voices.

But not all celebrity attendees were feeling the love, as Taylor Swift was met with boos when she appeared on the jumbotron. Bad night for “Miss Americana” as her “Heartbreak Prince” and Chiefs’ tight end Travis Kelce gave credence to her lyrics, “My team is losing.”

The NFL removed the “End Racism” messaging from the end zone. Maybe with the woke scolds gone from the White House, people realize we aren’t the racist nation they told us we were.

‘Trad’ Ads

Instead of forcing wokeness down our throats between plays, this year’s Super Bowl advertisements promulgated traditional (trad) values, much to the surprise of everyone.

One category of ads in particular promoted creating healthy, women-only sports spaces. An NFL ad advocated for making “girls flag football” a varsity sport rather than inserting girls into the more dangerous, male-geared version, football.

Nike also ran an advertisement with the theme of female empowerment, and not a single male transgender-identifying athlete was featured.

Kendrick Lamar’s Halftime Performance

Rapper Kendrick Lamar’s halftime show has conservatives divided on whether his performance was just alright or the worst of all time.

I will let you make up your own mind on this one. From where I’m standing, there were no indecent wardrobe malfunctions, vulgar dances, or obviously woke messages thrown in our faces. A win is a win.

Lamar also performed his Grammy award-winning song “Not Like Us,” in which he calls out rapper Drake for allegedly being a “certified pedophile” on the national stage—a bold choice that should strike fear in the hearts of his fellow entertainers who conceal this kind of behavior.

Regardless of which team you were personally rooting for—if either at all—this Super Bowl indicated a shift in American culture. The oddly apolitical messaging of the big game cannot be ignored considering its past inclination for the woke, and we should embrace these small wins as potential indicators of a much larger move back to sanity.

AUTHOR

Elise McCue

Elise McCue is a digital fellow for The Daily Signal. Elise on X: @EliseMcCue.

RELATED ARTICLES:

It Isn’t Country Music: The Real Reason CMA Awards’ Snub of Beyoncé’s ‘Cowboy Carter’ Wasn’t ‘Racist.’

GOP Culture War Fights Were Instrumental to Trump Win, Report Says

For Super Bowl 60, This Would Be a Halftime Show Worthy of the Big Game

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


The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

Trump Hits Highest Approval Mark of Either Term as New Poll Finds America Loves His Policies thumbnail

Trump Hits Highest Approval Mark of Either Term as New Poll Finds America Loves His Policies

By The Geller Report

President Trump is dismantling the corrupt deep state. In doing so, Trump is giving this country back to the American people where it belongs. And the American people are loving him for it. Expect President Trump’s popularity to continue to surge in the months ahead.

President Trump is the GOAT POTUS! He should end up on Mount Rushmore in the years ahead.

Trump hits highest approval mark of either term as new poll finds America loves his policies

By Yahoo, Feb 11th, 2025

What a difference four years can make.

Polls are showing Donald Trump’s early moves in office are yielding the highest approval ratings of either of his terms in the White House, a stark change from when he left office in early 2021 with the lowest support in his presidential career.

Overall, 53 percent of respondents approved of the job Trump was doing, according to a CBS News / YouGov poll conducted in early February.

AUTHOR

Geller Report Staff

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Says Ukraine Has Agreed to Hand Over $500 Million in Rare Earth Metals to U.S. For Military Aid

Immigration Industrial Complex Struggling to ‘Keep Their Lights on’ After Trump Decree

VIDEO: PM Netanyahu: Hamas has until Shabbat thumbnail

VIDEO: PM Netanyahu: Hamas has until Shabbat

By NEWSRAEL Telling the Israeli Story

Israel demands release of all nine “Phase A” hostages by Shabbat afternoon — or else! 

PM Netanyahu in a video statement to the Israeli people: 

Hamas violated the agreement and therefore there will be no progress in the further implementation of the agreement and in negotiations on Phase B – without the return of our hostages. The cabinet expects the release of all nine Phase A hostages by Shabbat noon.

“The decision that I passed unanimously in the cabinet is this: If Hamas does not return our hostages by Shabbat noon – the ceasefire will end, and the IDF will return to intense fighting until Hamas’s decisive defeat.”

NEWSRAEL: We see there is some ambiguity in the government decision, but according to several sources, the meaning is for all remaining NINE hostages from Phase A.

WATCH: Hamas has until Shabbat

RELATED ARTICLES:

Netanyahu Puts Hamas on Notice: Release the Hostages or ‘Ceasefire Will End’

Netanyahu: Israel will not ‘repeat mistake’ of Oslo vision

Isolated, starved, burned, gagged: hostages’ testimony reveals Hamas’s cruelty

USAID gave MILLIONS to designated terrorists

Support for Israel stronger than ever, says Latino evangelical leader

Alice Nderitu, Who was UN’s ‘Genocide’ Investigator at the UN, Has Been Let Go

Syrian Army Enters Lebanon to Take On Hezbollah

Hamas rejects Trump’s ultimatum, says ‘language of threats has no value and further complicates matters’

EDITORS NOTE: This Newsrael News Desk column with video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


Download the Newsrael App: Google PlayAppStore

Iran’s Dangerous Push To Become An AI Superpower thumbnail

Iran’s Dangerous Push To Become An AI Superpower

By Middle East Media Research Institute

Iran | MEMRI Daily Brief No. 715

Heads of state, top government officials, leaders of international organizations, tech CEOs, and academics from over 90 countries are meeting this week in Paris for the Artificial Intelligence Action Summit. In his speech at the summit, Vice President JD Vance, who led the U.S. delegation, stated: “We will safeguard American AI and chip technologies from theft and misuse, work with our allies and partners to strengthen and extend these protections and close pathways to adversaries attaining AI capabilities that threaten all of our people.”

One such adversary not invited, for good reason, was Iran. In its approach to AI, Iran is following its successful development of drone technology, which began with the reverse engineering of a U.S. RQ-170 Sentinel drone it downed in 2012 by using its technology to produce its Shaheed drones. As it now develops its AI expertise via theft, copying open-source software, and collaborating with Russia and China, the Iranian government – which recently acknowledged its failure to reverse-engineer a Tesla electric vehicle – is quietly pursuing AI advances for military, cyber, and defense purposes.

The world has already witnessed the dangers of Iran’s drone program, and Iran’s development and destructive capabilities have surprised Western military and intelligence agencies. If proper attention is not given to another nascent Iranian threat now emerging: a clandestine yet intensifying rush for mastery of AI – this too will become another national security threat.

Iran’s investments into its AI engineers seem to be paying off. So far in 2025, Iran has announced the following: it is allocating $115 million to AI research, it has added an “advanced data-processing” warship equipped with AI to its naval fleet and 1,000 new combat drones, some with AI navigation, to its army; and it has boosted the precision of its missiles using AI, and many of these new weapons will be stationed as part of electronic warfare units in the strategic port of Jask on the Gulf of Oman. It also announced it is testing ‘smart’ combat robots.

According to findings released by Google on January 29, 2025, Iranian groups are using the company’s Gemini AI chatbot for researching defense organizations to target with hacking attempts, to generate content in English, Hebrew, and Farsi to be used in phishing campaigns, and other purposes.

For Iran, AI is an inexpensive path to power. It is already using it for cyberattacks and influence operations abroad, and to upgrade its drones and ballistic missiles, deploy swarms of unmanned watercraft, surveil and repress its citizens, and control its borders. Alarmingly, it could now be exploring AI’s potential nuclear applications.

The U.S. government’s October 2024 landmark national security memorandum on AI reflects awareness of such threats, and details how the U.S. “must develop safeguards for its use of AI tools, and take an active role in steering global AI norms and institutions.” The memorandum sets out guidelines for the Pentagon, intelligence agencies, and national security organizations to add “guardrails” to prevent AI from being hijacked by hostile governments such as Iran, to develop nuclear weapons or “generate or exacerbate deliberate chemical and biological threats.” It also calls on intelligence agencies to begin protecting work, and the chips used to power it, as national treasures.

The Iranian government has already conducted successful campaigns using AI. The Iranian covert influence operation known as Storm-2035 used ChatGPT to disseminate disinformation and generate false news reports on a variety of topics, including the U.S. presidential election.

On numerous occasions, the Iranian leadership has declared its intent to make the country an AI superpower. By November 2021, it completed an official “study of the national artificial intelligence development roadmap,” and Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has since then publicly discussed Iran’s strategy to master AI. He said that “one of Iran’s goals is to be among the top 10 countries in the area of artificial intelligence,” and asked Iranian scientists to focus on this goal.

Less than two months after Iran’s launch of its national AI center, Khamenei stressed, in August this year, that Iran must act fast to “master all layers of AI.” He went on to warn of “attempts by the world’s opportunists and those seeking power to target Iran by “establish[ing] an IAEA-like body [to regulate] AI” and “prevent countries’ progress in this field.”

Based on their ongoing public cooperation, it should be deduced that Russia and China have already provided AI technology and knowledge to Iran. In 2020, the Iran-Russia Cooperation Group on Communications and Information Technology began working together on AI, and this year, the two countries signed an official agreement on AI cooperation. Iranian Army deputy chief of staff Brig.-Gen. Mehdi Rabbani attended a Beijing forum on topics including AI back in 2019. By January 2022, the vice chancellor of a top Iranian university was pointing at the 3,000 Iranian students already in China and stressing that the 25-year Iran-China agreement of March 2021 offered a “golden opportunity” to boost the two countries’ AI cooperation.

The most dangerous potential of Iranian mastery of AI is for military uses and nuclear weapons technology. Ali Akbar Salehi, head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI), said in January 2021 that the organization was striving to use the quantum technology it had been developing since 2016 for AI.

The IRGC and Iran Army added to their arsenals in July 2023 an Iranian-made missile that, Iran claimed, “has artificial intelligence and stealth capabilities.” IRGC commander Gen. Hossein Salami said in February 2024 that Iranian missiles and vessels were “equipped with highly accurate AI technologies,” adding that “today, we can move from [the Iranian nuclear facility at] Bushehr to the American coasts.” IRGC Aerospace Force commander Brig.-Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh boasted, in January 2021, about “the use of artificial intelligence technology” in Iran’s surface-to-surface ballistic missiles. Just yesterday, on February 10, IRGC Naval Commander Ali Reza Tangsiri announced the unveiling of supersonic cruise missiles with a range of 2,000 kilometers, saying: “All these missiles are sophisticated – designed and manufactured on the basis of artificial intelligence – and will be unveiled next year.”

The October 2024 U.S. security memorandum gives the U.S.’s new AI Safety Institute (AISI) the power to help inspect AI tools prior to release to make sure that they cannot be used by terrorists and bad actors to build weapons of mass destruction or help hostile nations improve missile accuracy, as Iran admits doing. Amid reports in 2023 that the IRGC navy had developed AI-enhanced unmanned military vessels, that could be used for mass attacks, commander Tangsiri said that the navy had developed AI-equipped long-range strategic cruise missiles. In August, IRGC naval exercises featured AI-enhanced unmanned vesselsTangsiri explained that the IRGC had fitted drones with AI for improved range, precision, and radar evasion, and that the IRGC was implementing AI in the drone, missile, vessel and submarine industries.

As AI development is moving at the speed of light in Iran, Khamenei is right to worry about international efforts to stop Iran from using it for advancing its military aims. But these efforts, like efforts to slow Iran’s nuclear program, will be difficult to bring to fruition. They will need to include the usual measures, such as leveling sanctions any time the country is caught trying to obtain technology by illegal means.

The new Trump administration will need to act fast to strengthen guardrails to ensure that America’s enemies such as Iran are not able to access its technology. The severity of the threat was reflected in statements by the head of the Pentagon’s newly created Artificial Intelligence Office, who acknowledged in December that “AI adoption by adversaries like China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea is accelerating and poses significant national security risks.” This week China surprised the world with its DeepSeek AI, action should be taken to make sure Iran doesn’t have the same opportunity with its own AI model.

AUTHOR

Steven Stalinsky

Steven Stalinsky, Ph.D., is Executive Director of The Middle East Media Research Institute.

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

PODCAST: Trump’s Gaza Proposal & Tariffs 101 thumbnail

PODCAST: Trump’s Gaza Proposal & Tariffs 101

By Conservative Commandos Radio Show and AUN-TV

GUESTS AND TOPICS

DR. RICH SWIER, LTC U.S. ARMY (RET.)

Dr. Rich Swier is a “conservative with a conscience.” Rich is a 23 year Army veteran who retired as a Lieutenant Colonel. He was awarded the Legion of Merit for his years of service. Additionally, he was awarded two Bronze Stars with “V” for Valor and Heroism in ground combat, the Presidential Unit Citation, and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry while serving with the 101st Airborne Division in Vietnam. Dr Rich now publishes the the “drrichswier.com report”. A daily review of news, issues and commentary! Dr Rich has a new book out, “DISSENT: The Highest Form of Patriotism.”

TOPIC: Trump’s Gaza Proposal

KENNETH RAPOZA

Kenneth Rapoza is an Industry Analyst at The Coalition for a Prosperous America. Kenneth is a seasoned, veteran business journalist with more than 20 years of experience reporting locally for The Boston Globe, and stationed abroad as a staff reporter for The Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones News in Sao Paulo where he won awards for his work. Ken has covered trade, big business and investing in Brazil, Russia, India and China for Forbes and is considered to be one of the magazine’s most reliable experts on those countries. He has traveled throughout all of the countries he covers and has seen first hand China’s impressive growth and its ghost towns as recent as 2017.

TOPIC: Tariffs 101

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Tulsi Gabbard Reveals Plans To ‘End Politicization’ Of Intel Agencies On Day One In Office thumbnail

Tulsi Gabbard Reveals Plans To ‘End Politicization’ Of Intel Agencies On Day One In Office

By The Daily Caller

President Donald Trump’s Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Tulsi Gabbard, will prioritize ending politicization of the Intelligence Community (IC) and restoring transparency, according to a list of priorities obtained by the Daily Caller.

The Senate confirmed Gabbard as DNI on Wednesday. Her day one priorities highlight politicization and the need for unbiased intelligence collection.

“End politicization of the IC and ensure clear mission focus to the IC on its core mission of unbiased, apolitical collection and analysis of intelligence to secure our nation” the document reads.

Facts. https://t.co/uVZ0RlwTqT

— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) February 2, 2025

She assailed weaponization of the intelligence community during her confirmation hearing’s opening statement, citing Trump’s reelection as a “clear mandate” to end weaponization of the intelligence agencies.

She specifically pointed to the 51 former national security officials who signed a letter implying the New York Post’s Hunter Biden laptop story was a “Russian information operation.” That was proven false and Trump recently revoked the officials’ security clearances.

Gabbard will also work to restore trust “through transparency and accountability,” the document said, calling the priority a “national security imperative.”

Two Republican senators who were initially hesitant to support Gabbard, Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Maine Sen. Susan Collins, cited the ODNI’s bloated size in their endorsements of Gabbard.

Collins said in a statement that the ODNI is too expansive and that Gabbard shares her “vision of returning the agency to its intended size.”

I will vote to confirm Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence. While I continue to have concerns about certain positions she has previously taken, I appreciate her commitment to rein in the outsized scope of the agency, while still enabling the ODNI to continue its…

— Sen. Lisa Murkowski (@lisamurkowski) February 11, 2025

Gabbard will also work to “address efficiency, redundancy, and effectiveness across ODNI to ensure focus of personnel and resources is focused on our core mission of national security” on day one.

Gabbard will also prioritize assessing threats and identifying gaps in intelligence.

“Assess the global threat environment and where gaps in our intelligence exist, integrate intelligence elements, increase information-sharing, and ensure unbiased, apolitical, objective collection and analysis to support the President and policymakers’ decision-making,” the document reads.

She also plans to collaborate with Congress, specifically the Senate Intelligence Committee, on these issues. Senators expressed frustration about intelligence failures during her meetings, citing a “lack of responsiveness” to information requests, according to the document. There have been several major intelligence blunders under past DNIs, including the Afghanistan withdrawal and terrorists taking over Syria after the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

The document also referenced “failures to identify” the origins of COVID-19. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) said in January that it now believes the virus came from a lab in China, according to The New York Times. The agency reached this determination with “low confidence.” This typically indicates that the agency making the determination lacked sufficient credible information or had concerns or issues regarding their sources, according to the DNI’s website.

“Lt. Col. Gabbard looks forward to working with Senators and the Intelligence Committee directly on those issues,” the document concludes.

AUTHOR

Eireann Van Natta

Intelligence state reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Tulsi Gabbard’s Critics Ushered In Era Of Civil Rights Abuses And Intel Failures

‘Previously Unrecognized’: FBI Confirms It Discovered 2,400 Other Records Related To JFK Assassination

Tulsi Gabbard Was Victimized By The Intel Community — Now She’s Trying To Oversee It

Senate Confirms Tulsi Gabbard As Director Of National Intelligence

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

More WOKE CRAP in Florida Senate’s Bill SB2 on Illegal Immigration thumbnail

More WOKE CRAP in Florida Senate’s Bill SB2 on Illegal Immigration

By Geoff Ross USN retired Surface Warfare/Air Warfare

Much research and effort has gone into investigating Senate Bill 2 (SB 2). I don’t take credit for this excellent investigative work detailed below but I am sharing it.

  1. Language influenced by three (3) leftist lobby groups e.g. ACLU (Fl), FL Rising & SIX (State Innovation Exchange) – no conservative lobbyists listed.
  2. Enforcement control is now supervised by a Board including Agriculture Commissioner who can Veto a board decision.
  3. Costs have risen to 611M 1-time and 13M annually.
  4. Creates another huge FL state bureaucracy at large costs to taxpayers.
  5. No penalty for those helping illegals to vote fraudulently if they claim they “did not know” they were illegal aliens.
  6. Employers can transport illegals to and from work sites.
  7. All references/language related to E-Verify and deportation have been removed.
  8. No guarantee that illegals caught must be detained and they can obtain bail.
  9. No definition for “dangerous unauthorized alien offender” and no language requiring their removal after serving a jail sentence.
  10. No prohibition against incentives such as illegal aliens students receiving in-state tuition benefits; removal of rights for FL welfare benefits; removal of children K-12 from schools.
  11. No language regarding accountability or penalties for employers who hire illegals.

Seriously Governor, do you expect us to accept this crap? Who wrote this garbage bill, George Soros? Don’t tell me Republicans are allowing illegal immigrants to get rides to work without consequences. No E-verify?

I am so glad I left the do nothing worthless Republican Party. I look at all the corruption Elon Musk is finding with his team of experts. Why did the Republican controlled Congress not initiate this effort years ago?

They are worthless.

Matt Gaetz made the right decision not to return to the GOP Congress. He has a much higher IQ than to continue working alongside this flange of spineless baboons.

Let’s not forget the Democrats who are corrupt Communists screaming to stop the Trump investigations with their corrupt Obama appointed judges who are more interested in hiding the corruption from WE THE PEOPLE than lowering the deficit.

We love seeing Trump and Elon Musk pull the Democrats pants down to their bony ankles having their private secret squirrel deals exposed by the Trump Team.

It’s a crying shame the Republican Controlled Congress are too scared of offending their Democrat friends across the aisle and refused to do this very important work in the past. As for me — both political parties can go XXXX themselves.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

No, Trump Does NOT Have to Abide by Mythical “Judicial Supremacy” thumbnail

No, Trump Does NOT Have to Abide by Mythical “Judicial Supremacy”

By Selwyn Duke

It’s an old story: When people are allowed to get their way for too long, when they’re never told “No!” they may get too big for their britches. They may develop a sense of entitlement and even become narcissistic. And proving that judges are no exception are a number of recent court “opinions” designed to scuttle President Trump’s agenda.

One disallows DOGE from scrutinizing Treasury Department data.

Another states that the Trump administration must unfreeze funding on grants and loans.

A different opinion puts a freeze on Trump’s buyout offer for federal employees.

And yet another ordered the administration to restore sexual devolutionary (on “gender” and “sex changes”) government web pages Trump’s team had rightly deleted. So Biden could create those pages but, somehow, the current president may not remove them. Yes, it’s insane.

There’s a little known reason, however, why the rogue judges in question could so confidently engage in such insane judicial overreach. To wit:

We long ago accepted the overreach known as “judicial supremacy.”

This brings us to the simple remedy. Trump could just paraphrase the paraphrase of Andrew Jackson and say, “The courts have made their decisions — now let the judges enforce them.”

A “Constitutional Crisis”?

Some say this is illegal, that it would create a “constitutional crisis.” A “legal analyst” and ex-federal prosecutor named Elizabeth de la Vega, for example, condescendingly stated Monday that someone taking this position should “at least read Marbury v. Madison.” That’s a deal.

Note here that Marbury was the 1803 SCOTUS opinion declaring that the judiciary must be the ultimate arbiter of laws’ and actions’ constitutionality and that, consequently, its rulings can constrain the other two governmental branches. Translation:

The courts gave the courts their trump card (and Trump card) power.

Not the Constitution — the courts themselves.

Well, that’s like me crowning myself King of America and saying, “Now I get to rule — and you have to obey me.” Are you O.K. with that?

(And while we’re at it, off with those activist judges’ heads.)

As to this, there’s a reason Thomas Jefferson said in 1819 that if the judicial-supremacy opinion is valid, “then indeed is our constitution a complete felo de se” (act of suicide).

There’s a reason a 5th Circuit judge pressed Barack Obama’s DOJ in 2012, after Obama had spoken dismissively of the courts, to submit a memo on the administration’s position on judicial supremacy.

And there’s a reason late Justice Antonin Scalia warned in his dissent against the outrageous 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges (marriage) opinion that with “each decision…unabashedly based not on law” the Court moves “one step closer to being reminded of [its] impotence.”

That is, judicial supremacy is not in the Constitution. That’s why Jefferson was incredulous about it, the 5th Circuit judge was insecure about it, and Scalia warned that the Court could be told to forget about it.

It’s an extra-constitutional power the courts enjoy at the other two branches’ pleasure. The moment they decide to stop playing the sub role in this master-servant relationship, the power goes bye-bye.

Method to the Madness

Now, it’s helpful understanding why, in a world in which arrogating power to oneself or one’s corps is status quo, the other two branches do play this sub role. First, it’s a tradition, one so entrenched that pseudo-intellectuals will defend it as if it’s law. But a very significant reason was epitomized by something then-Ohio governor John Kasich said in 2015 after the Obergefell decision.

“[T]he court has ruled,” he proclaimed — “and it’s time to move on.” He seemed almost gleeful. And why not?

Kasich no longer had to take a stand on the controversial marriage issue and thus alienate part of the electorate.

And Kasich’s attitude is the norm. It’s the same reason why, I can guarantee you, many Republicans got severe agita when Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022. Now they actually had to legislate, as they’re supposed to, on prenatal infanticide. So what legislators — and presidents often, too — get from judicial supremacy is the luxury of, like Pontius Pilate, being able to wash their hands of a matter: “The courts have ruled! Don’t look at me!”

Apropos here, just as legislators outsource their responsibility to judges, the latter outsourced their responsibility to bureaucrats with the now overturned Chevron opinion. What judges got from this was the benefit of lightening their case loads and not having to strain their gray matter trying to settle legislative ambiguities.

Regardless, whether the decisions are made by unelected judges or unelected bureaucrats, the result is identical: You don’t have a government of, by and for the people. In fact, it’s even worse than that.

If the courts can overturn law, contravening the will of the people’s duly elected representatives, then they’ve to an extent arrogated to themselves the legislative power. If they can dictate to the president what executive actions he may or may not take, they’ve to an extent arrogated to themselves the executive power. And, of course, they enjoy their judicial power.

Now consider something James Madison, Father of the Constitution, wrote in The Federalist Papers, Number 47: “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands” is “the very definition of tyranny.”

We have for ages been venturing too close to judicial tyranny. In fact, Jefferson warned that judicial supremacy would reduce us to an oligarchy — of judges.

How it’s Supposed to Work

Remember, too, that federal and state officials take an oath to uphold the Constitution.

They do not take an oath to uphold judges’ opinions.

This means that if I’m a president or governor and a court issues a ruling I truly believe is unconstitutional, I have a duty to ignore it. Otherwise, I’m violating my oath.

“But what of rogue legislators or presidents?” some may ask. Well, what of rogue judges (who apparently are everywhere)?

The answer is the Founders’ one: No branch can intrude into the others’ spheres. This doesn’t mean there aren’t checks and balances. If, for example, a president believes a law is unconstitutional and refuses to enforce it, or takes an allegedly unconstitutional executive action, Congress can try to remove him; it can also impeach and remove renegade judges. As for House representatives themselves, the remedy is removal via the ballot box. This is why they must run for re-election every two years: Since they’re meant to be the most powerful branch (e.g., spending bills must originate in the House, and only it can file impeachment charges), they’re placed closest to the people’s reach.

Power means nothing, though, if not exercised. If congressional and executive powers are outsourced, it then can reduce us to what we’ve become: a government of, by and for judicial oligarchs.

So, no, President Trump doesn’t have to obey blatantly unconstitutional court opinions. This said, with how he’s shaking up the system and busy draining the bureaucratic swamp, it’s perhaps politically prudent to remedy the current judicial adventurism through the higher courts, as he’ll almost assuredly win on appeal. At some point, though, it will be time to drain that fetid judicial swamp and address the real constitutional crisis: the rule of judges who would be kings.

©2025 . All rights reserved.


Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on X (formerly Twitter), MeWe, Gettr, Tumblr, Instagram or Substack or log on to SelwynDuke.com.

Trump’s plan may work! thumbnail

Trump’s plan may work!

By NEWSRAEL Telling the Israeli Story

44% of young Gazans considered emigrating even before the war. 

The question being asked today around the world is whether President Donald Trump’s plan to resettle Gazans in other countries can succeed. Judging by a poll taken just prior to the war, before much of Gaza was destroyed, Trump’s proposal is reasonable.

The poll by the top Palestinian polling agency, the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, found that a full 44% of Gazan youth between the ages of 18-29 were considering emigrating. Nearly a third (31%) of the entire population considered emigrating.

Gazans’ “most preferred destination for immigration is Turkey, followed by Germany, Canada, the United States, and Qatar,” the poll found.

The largest percentage said they want to leave for economic reasons; second and third reasons are “political” or educational opportunities. The fourth reason is security, and the fifth is corruption.

Since such a large number wanted to leave when there was no war and no destruction, there is no doubt that today, the numbers will be much higher.

Facing years of life in tents and rubble, breathing dust and hearing endless construction noise, the number wanting to leave today, especially among the youth who desire to start a life and build a future, will be far above 50%.

PA and Hamas will reject the plan

Two important things must be noted: Firstly, the Palestinian Authority and Hamas undoubtedly will reject this plan for political reasons, even though it is best for the residents. Neither the Palestinian Authority nor Hamas has put the good of its people ahead of political considerations. They will fight it in every possible way.

Secondly, if pollsters ask Palestinians what they want now, they might not choose emigration because of fear of being called traitors.

Accordingly, if Trump wants his plan to succeed, he must bypass the Palestinian Authority and Hamas and work directly with the people. Gazans who choose to leave must be guaranteed secrecy and protection during the process.

Once people start leaving, those left behind will feel jealous of those already out of the Gaza hell. Once those who are resettled start sending messages about their new lives and pictures of their new homes, the floodgates will open.

AUTHOR

Itamar Marcus

Itamar Marcus, Founder and Director of Palestinian Media Watch, is one of the world’s foremost experts on the Palestinian Authority (PA). He travels the world speaking to members of Congress, parliaments, and governments presenting PMW’s findings that have literally changed the way the world sees the PA.

Marcus wrote the reports that exposed how the PA names schools, sporting events, and streets after terrorist murders; revealed the hate and terror promotion in the PA’s schoolbooks; brought to the world’s attention the PA’s indoctrination of its children to seek Martyrdom; and uncovered that the PA rewards all terrorist prisoners with high salaries. As a result, four countries have cut off all funding to the PA, and many more countries have significantly cut funding.

The PA has long disparaged PMW and Marcus. Palestinian official Hanan Ashrawi called PMW a “toxic organization,” and Jibril Rajoub, the #2 in the PA, called Marcus “the Goebbels of the 21st Century.” In contrast, ZOA, EMET, and Israel Media Watch all honored Marcus and PMW with prestigious awards, and The Algemeiner named Marcus one of the world’s “top 100 people positively influencing Jewish life or the State of Israel.”

RELATED VIDEO: King Abdullah of Jordan has this to say to President Trump

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

AI and Chatting with Your Future Self thumbnail

AI and Chatting with Your Future Self

By The Catholic Thing

Francis X. Maier: Clichés become clichés because they’re true.  So, it’s worth recalling this one: Fools with tools are still fools.

Earlier this month, in its regular Artificial Intelligence section, the Wall Street Journal ran a 2,000-word feature – for a newspaper, that’s serious ink – on the AI program “FutureYou.”  Developed by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), FutureYou allows you to talk with your 80-year-old self.  It also (regrettably) projects what you’ll look like.  The idea, according to the WSJ author, “is that if people can see and talk to their older selves, they will be able to think about them more concretely, and make changes now that will help them achieve the future they hope for.”

Thanks to FutureYou, the author discovered that she’d write a book, have six grandchildren, live in the suburbs, take up gardening, survive a health scare, make a solo visit to Japan, and take a family trip to Thailand.  In the years ahead, her FutureSelf said, she’d regret not starting a business.  She’d also need to jettison her doubts and fears.  And she would always work for positive change. . .however she might define that.  Immersed in an ongoing, engaging, intimate chat with herself, the author gradually achieved what the program’s creators call “future self continuity” – strong identification with her online octogenarian avatar.

Some 60,000 people in 190 countries currently use FutureYou.  With that kind of endorsement, what could go wrong?  So I signed up myself.  The registration process was free.  I duly provided a wide range of personal data, concerns, and aspirations to a series of questionnaires, and a photo snapped by my computer – all of which, per MIT, will remain anonymous.

Alas, it turns out that 80-year-old Fran is tediously familiar. He’s not a riveting chat partner.  And that’s not a surprise.  I’m already in my mid-70s; and at 80 (assuming I’m still around) I’m likely to be more of the same old me.  FutureYou seems geared to those with a longer takeoff ramp;  people in the 30-50 age cohort.  So I won’t be joining Elon on Mars or writing the sequel to Dostoyevsky’s The Devils.  Dashed dreams are bitter.

On the bright side, MIT’s developers describe FutureYou as an “imagination aid,” not a fortuneteller.  It offers possibilities, not prophecies.  It doesn’t give medical or financial counsel or outcomes.  It’s designed to help people think more clearly about the person they might become.  It’s simply another self-help tool, and similar tools can be very useful.  I use Google’s Gemini chatbot for quick research every day.  The results, while not perfect, are nonetheless impressive.

The Wall Street Journal is easily (I’d argue) the finest newspaper in the land.  But it has a bias toward shiny new tools if they suggest a profit downstream.  And that bias, that subtle boosterism, frames its treatment of AI.  The Journal does caution readers about AI’s various dangers, with stories highlighting Anthropic’s anti-Doomsday Frontier Red Team, or the hapless and very real guy who fell in love with “Charlie,” his female chatbot, or the problem of AI “hallucinations.”  But if progress is good for business, then – the reasoning goes – so are the tools that drive it.

And it’s true:  In practice, tools like AI are often very “good” for advancing improvements in medicine, communications, and education. The trouble, as the cultural critic Neil Postman warned, is that human tools tend to reshape and master the humans who make them, with unhappy results.  To put it in Biblical terms, humans have an instinct to worship, and Golden Calves come in all shapes and sizes.  This accounts for how easily we can anthropomorphize the AI voices on our phones.

The advertising for Google’s Gemini tool promotes exactly that delusion.  I’ve had conversations with the personality on my Gemini app that were astonishingly relaxed, informative, and real.  Except they weren’t.  It’s hard to be skeptical when you have a warm and fruitful relationship with the algorithm in a microchip.  Or your 80-year-old “self” online.

Simply put, AI is the most dramatic technological development in a very long time; one whose advantages are easy to venerate, and negatives easy to miss.  AI will have an impact on human affairs that dwarfs the printing press. It needs a thoughtful response from Christian believers.  And, to their credit, on January 28 the Vatican Dicasteries of Doctrine and Culture jointly issued Antiqua et Nova [“Ancient and New”]: A Note on the Relationship Between Artificial Intelligence and Human Intelligence.

At 21,000 words and 215 footnotes, the text might seem daunting.  Poolside browsing it’s not.  But it’s rich in content, highly relevant to the moment, and well worth reading.  Early on, the document reminds us that:

While AI is an extraordinary technological achievement capable of imitating certain outputs associated with human intelligence, it operates by performing tasks, achieving goals, or making decisions based on quantitative data and computational logic. . . .[Even] as AI processes and simulates certain expressions of [human] intelligence, it remains fundamentally confined to a logical-mathematical framework, which imposes inherent limitations. . . .Although advanced AI systems can learn” through processes such as machine learning, this sort of training is fundamentally different from the developmental growth of human intelligence, which is shaped by embodied experiences, including sensory input, emotional responses, social interactions, and the unique context of each moment. These elements shape and form individuals within their personal history.  In contrast, AI, lacking a physical body, relies on computational reasoning and learning based on vast datasets that include recorded human experiences and knowledge.

            So here’s the lesson for the day:  We may be this planet’s dominant species, but along with our wonderful skills, humans have a genius for forgetting who and what we are, our limits, purpose and dignity as creatures, and what we can and can’t create.  The dead tools that serve us so well, including AI, are not and never will be “intelligent” or “conscious.”  But they do make great delusions, bad masters, and worse gods.

Clichés become clichés  because they’re true.  So it’s worth recalling this one:  Fools with tools are still fools.


You may also enjoy:

Robert Royal 1984 + 30
Brad Miner The Small World of ‘Her’


AUTHOR

Francis X. Maier

Francis X. Maier is a senior fellow in Catholic studies at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. He is the author of True Confessions: Voices of Faith from a Life in the Church.

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2025 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

VIDEO: Dr. Ann Gillies Interview On Trans-Killers, The Drugging of Our Youth Into Murderers thumbnail

VIDEO: Dr. Ann Gillies Interview On Trans-Killers, The Drugging of Our Youth Into Murderers

By Vlad Tepes Blog

We had the chance to interview Dr. Ann Gillies the other day who is one of the most outspoken and well informed experts on the Marxist intersectional line of attack against sexual identity, “Critical gender theory”.

This focuses more on the facts and somewhat the law. But apply your understanding of Marxist dialectical lines of intersectional destruction and the information here gives you a more complete picture.Critical Gender Theory is to human sexuality, what mass immigration + multiculturalism is to a cohesive nation state.

The transgender movement isn’t about ‘affirming gender identity’—it’s a government-backed experiment that drugs, radicalizes, and mutilates children while systematically destroying sexual identity itself, unleashing a wave of violence no one dares to acknowledge.

The transgender movement isn’t just about freedom of personal sexual identity. It’s a full-scale attack on Western and biological sexual identity altogether. one that’s being carried out on vulnerable young people with irreversible consequences. Canadian Doctor Ann Gillies has spent years warning about the dangers of Marxist radical gender ideology, and in an exclusive interview with RAIR Foundation, she pulled no punches.

From violent transgender gangs and the capture of medicine to a corporate and ideological agenda and for government-backed destruction of the family, Dr. Gillies made one thing clear: this isn’t about helping people—it’s about control, manipulation, and chaos.

Transgender Killers and the Media Blackout

It’s a story you won’t hear on the news: a group of self-identified transgender killers operating a cult out of California, tied to a cult-like organization. The details are disturbing, but what’s more shocking is the near-total silence surrounding it.

“In Canada, we don’t hear about this stuff happening, which is a little scary,” Dr. Gillies said. “At the same time, it’s not surprising to me because what we’ve witnessed at different events where these individuals show up is a lot of aggression.”

Dr. Gillies pointed out that while this gang may not be massive, it doesn’t need to be. The connection between violent behavior and radical transgender ideology is becoming undeniable.

“These individuals have been on very strong hormones,” she said. “It’s dangerous—very dangerous. A lot of them are women transitioning to men, which means they’re on super high doses of testosterone.”

And the effects of those hormones? It’s a ticking time bomb.

Testosterone Overload: A Recipe for Psychosis

The human body isn’t designed to handle massive hormonal shifts, and the numbers Dr. Gillies laid out are staggering.

“The normal range of total testosterone in a female is between 10 and 50 nanograms per liter. But what’s being prescribed under so-called ‘gender-affirming care’? Anywhere between 300 to 1,000 nanograms.”

That’s 600 to 100 times the normal level—the kind of hormonal surge that has never been studied long-term in healthy women.

“What we’re seeing now, from reports by doctors like Michael Laidlaw, is that these super high levels of testosterone are causing severe psychiatric conditions,” Gillies warned. “It’s a prescription for insanity.”

The effects of these high doses include:

  • Extreme aggression
  • Manic-like euphoria and grandiosity
  • Psychotic breaks from reality
  • Violent, uncontrolled rages

Gillies explained that historically, the only people with these kinds of hormone levels were bodybuilders abusing steroids or individuals with extremely rare tumors. Now, this level of hormonal manipulation is being intentionally prescribed to young women and teenage girls.

“I’ve talked to several detransitioners,” Gillies said, “and one of the things they’ve said to me is, ‘It made me crazy.’”

And it’s not just leading to self-harm—it’s pushing some of them toward homicidal behavior.

Transgender Homicidal Ideation: The Story No One Will Tell

For years, activists have used suicidal ideation as an argument for “affirming” gender confusion. But Gillies raised another issue, one the media refuses to acknowledge:

What about homicidal ideation?

“There’s a lot of pent-up anger,” she said. “Unexplained, violent rages. That could easily lead to homicidal behavior. Easily.”

She pointed to real-world cases of transgender-identifying killers.

“You look at that young woman who was transitioning to male, who shot up a Christian school,” Gillies said. “This is the reality of what happens when you take young people who are already struggling, pump them full of hormones, and put them in a radical ideological bubble.”

Gillies made it clear: the vast majority of these individuals had pre-existing mental health conditions before transitioning.

“You take kids who already have mental health struggles, you put them on testosterone—which we know can cause aggression and psychosis—and you push them into an environment where they’re encouraged to think everyone is their enemy. What do you expect?”

This isn’t a fringe theory. It’s happening. And it’s deliberate.

Unapproved, Off-Label Drugs: The Greatest Medical Scandal in Modern History?

One of the most shocking revelations from the interview was that these hormone treatments aren’t even approved for “gender transitioning”.

“These medications aren’t even approved for what they’re being used for. They are simply hormone replacement therapies,” Gillies said. “Doctors are prescribing them off-label, at extreme dosages, to children.”

This means there have been no long-term studies on the impact of these drugs when used for gender transition—yet they are being given out like candy.

“This is a giant experiment,” Gillies said bluntly. “But instead of lab rats, they’re experimenting on kids.”

Bill C-4: The Law Criminalizing Parents

If a teacher convinces a child they are transgender, they are protected by law. But if a parent suggests their child wait until adulthood before making irreversible decisions? They can be charged with a crime.

“That’s exactly what Bill C-4 does,” Gillies confirmed.

“If a parent tries to talk their child out of transitioning, they can be reported for ‘conversion therapy.’ The child can be taken out of their home. It’s happened multiple times across Canada.”

Meanwhile, radical teachers and activists are free to indoctrinate children into gender confusion with no consequences.

“This is about dismantling the family,” Gillies warned. “It’s about removing parental rights and putting the government in charge of children.

Trump’s Pushback: Will Canada Follow?

Gillies pointed out that while Canada is racing off the cliff, President Donald Trump has taken an unapologetic stance against this insanity.

“I wasn’t surprised when he said, ‘There are only two sexes,’” Gillies said. “I was thrilled. Because most people know that’s true.”

Trump is also going after the Department of Education, the driving force behind radical gender indoctrination in schools.

“Here’s a novel idea,” Gillies said. “Why don’t we have the money to follow the child? Let parents decide where to send their kids to school. That would end a lot of this garbage overnight.”

“We Need to Start Telling the Truth”

Gillies didn’t mince words: Canada is in trouble, and time is running out.

“Our children are being radicalized, medicalized, and mutilated. And if we don’t stop this, we’re going to see more and more violence—against them and by them.”

It’s not just about politics. It’s about basic reality.

“We need to start telling the truth,” she urged. “We need to stop being afraid of the mob. Because if we don’t fight back now, we’re going to lose a whole generation.”

The question is—will anyone listen before it’s too late?

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column with video posted by is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

USAID Funded Terrorist Regimes That Killed Thousands of U.S. Soldiers thumbnail

USAID Funded Terrorist Regimes That Killed Thousands of U.S. Soldiers

By Leo Hohmann

USAID sent $9.3B to Islamic terror states that killed 3,000 American soldiers. 

The explosive disclosures about how U.S. taxpayer monies are being used to subvert governments worldwide, while propping up others, continues to shed light on the outragious fools our own government must take us for. They steal our money and use it however they wish, often in secret deals that reward obedient foreign regimes while punishing the disobedient.

But the recent disclosures also reveal how the whole problem with modern Islamic terrorism is largely a creation of the West. Because without Western support, the modern Islamic jihadist movement would be broke and powerless. I would wager that the Western powers could wipe them out in a few months if they really wanted to, simply by cutting off the massive “aid” programs.

Yes, the Muslim terrorists hate Christians and Jews and wish them dead or subservient, according to their religious teachings. That’s a fact. But they would not be empowered to commit jihad were it not for the almighty U.S. dollar. And some of the dead end up being U.S. soldiers. U.S. taxpayer dollars being used to fund the murders of U.S. military personnel, imagine that!

And in the process of these needless wars, millions of Muslim refugees get driven into the Western countries. Talk about a duel bang for their buck, these globalists really know how to play the American people on their way to destroying nations and bringing in their one-world beast system. They are very good at what they do, you have to hand it to them.

The latest bombshell report comes from investigative reporter Daniel Greenfield.

Greenfield, in an article for Israel National News, reports that USAID doled out more than $9 billion to foreign terrorist groups that killed over 3,000 American soldiers in recent years. Below is an excerpt from Greenfield’s article.

Over the last two years, USAID doled out $2.3 billion in “humanitarian assistance” to Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s native Somalia. Last year it reported a request for $1.6 billion in aid and even in December 2024, with the Biden administration on the way out the door, it sent an additional $29 million.

USAID support for Somalia doubled under the Biden administration and with $3.3 billion from USAID allocated in the last 5 years. the threatened withdrawal of funding must have been a painful blow for Omar, who is very close to the Somali regime. Former Somali Prime Minister Hassan Khaire had stated “the interest of Ilhan are not Ilhan’s, it’s not the interest of Minnesota, nor is it the interest of the American people, the interest of Ilhan is that of the Somalian people and Somalia.”

Somalia, along with other Islamic terrorist entities, including the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Houthis in Yemen, and Hamas in Gaza, were among the top beneficiaries of USAID cash, Greenfield reports.

USAID sent $2.1 billion to Gaza and the “West Bank” since the Hamas attacks of Oct 7. In 2024 alone, $917 million was programmed for the terrorist areas occupying Israel.

USAID provided more than $3.7 billion to Afghanistan since the Taliban took over with $832 million in the previous fiscal year alone. The money was so unaccountable that USAID refused to cooperate with SIGAR: the government watchdog tracking spending in Afghanistan intent on blocking money from aiding terrorists.

Read the entire article by Daniel Greenfield here.

©2025 . All rights reserved.


Visit LeoHohmann.com: Investigative reporting on globalism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism and where politics, culture and religion intersect.

VIDEO: Sorry, Liberals. DOGE Is 100% Legal. Here’s Why. thumbnail

VIDEO: Sorry, Liberals. DOGE Is 100% Legal. Here’s Why.

By Dr. Richard M. Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.)

EDITORS NOTE: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis Hanson. 

Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. I want to revisit the hysteria, controversy—whatever term we use—about Elon Musk and his role in the Department of Government Efficiency—or DOGE—using that term for the executive officer of Renaissance Florence. The Italian word “doge” is a meme, so to speak.

There’s a lot of controversy about Elon Musk, and let’s just dispel some of it right at the start. He is not a freelancer. He was appointed a government official. Donald Trump, by an executive order, created the Department of Government Efficiency, and he made Elon Musk the head of it, along with Vivek Ramaswamy, who now has resigned.

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

Elon Musk has statutory authority. This Department of Government Efficiency is not a Cabinet agency. He does not have to be approved by Congress. And it only is going to last until July 4, 2026. It’s not a permanent agency, but he has the same power, or lack of such, as the national security adviser, who does not have to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

He’s more legitimate—or he has more statutory legitimacy—than earlier presidential advisers, like Harry Hopkins, who moved into the White House under the FDR administration, or Bernard Baruch, who basically ran two world wars, in terms of domestic production, under Woodrow Wilson and FDR. So, let’s just dispel the idea that he’s doing anything unusual.

As far as the executive orders that created the DOGE program and eliminated the U.S. Agency for International Development—that was perfectly legal in itself. USAID was created by John F. Kennedy in 1961 by an executive order. There was a statutory direction for the president to disperse foreign aid into a comprehensive body, but it didn’t say USAID—he could do whatever he wanted.

And so, Donald Trump has decided to end autonomous USAID and fold it into the State Department for disaster relief or poverty relief or famine relief.

But let’s get straight what Elon Musk is trying to do. He’s going through all of these agencies and finding waste and fraud. And he has executive authority to do so. The Democrats are suing on the principle that they have approved funds for some of these agencies and Donald Trump is not spending them. And they are also arguing that Elon must exist by an executive order and not a congressional statute.

And this is very ironic, to tell you the truth. If you look back at executive orders, the number of which have been issued by Democratic and Republican presidencies, you see two general terms: The two Bushes and Donald Trump are not that much different than the 16 years of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

Where you see the big divide in the number of executive orders is a break between FDR and Harry Truman, and to a lesser extent, Herbert Hoover and Coolidge, and the present. And believe me, during the Roosevelt years and Truman years, that was an all-time record of executive orders, and that got Roosevelt in trouble, of course, with the Supreme Court.

As far as impounding funds, Joe Biden set the precedent. You all saw him on tape when he said, “SOB—the son of a—I went in, over there, to Ukraine and I said, ‘You’re not getting this billion dollars until you do this.’” Well, that money had been approved by Congress.

And when he became president, there was a statute that said, “Here’s the money to build the wall.”

And Joe Biden canceled the wall. That was illegal. But he came up with all these—“Oh, we have to do environmental studies, or on endangered species.” But he didn’t spend the money. All Donald Trump is doing is saying, “I don’t believe the Impoundment Control Act is legal. We’ll see what the Supreme Court—but I’m just following the precedent that Joe Biden did.” But now the shoe’s on the other foot.

And so, again, there is a statutory authority for Elon Musk to do what he does. He has the executive order justifying his agency, his 20-some employees. And more importantly—there’s another thing no one talks about—Elon Musk is a controversial figure and everybody is attacking him. And whom are they not attacking? Donald Trump.

So, while the media is trying to make a split—Time magazine had a cover of Elon Musk behind the presidential desk in the Oval Office, Donald Trump didn’t get angry about that. He said, “I didn’t even know Time magazine was still in existence.” Why? Because Elon Musk, in addition to all of these executive duties he’s doing to cut back wasteful spending, he is redirecting animus away from the president to him.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.

AUTHOR

Victor Davis Hanson

Victor Davis Hanson, a senior contributor for The Daily Signal, is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and author of the book “The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won.” You can reach him by emailing authorvdh@gmail.com. Victor on X: @VDHanson.

RELATED ARTICLES:

DOGE Takes Over Washington, Literally and Figuratively

Trump’s Freeze of USAID Is a Blow to Global Leftist Empire

Ending the Taxpayer-Funded Blue Pipeline

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column with video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos.

Trump Admin. Goes to War over Court Order Blocking DOGE from Treasury Dept. thumbnail

Trump Admin. Goes to War over Court Order Blocking DOGE from Treasury Dept.

By Family Research Council

The Trump administration is challenging a federal court order blocking the government’s efficiency agency from accessing U.S. Treasury records. U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer issued a temporary restraining order on Saturday, barring the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from having “access to Treasury Department payment systems or any other data maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information.”

DOGE has been tasked by President Donald Trump with investigating and auditing federal agencies and departments in order to identify and eliminate wasteful spending and fraud. Last week, the agency gained access to Treasury Department payment system records after Acting Treasury Secretary David Lebryk, a 35-year Treasury bureaucracy veteran who had been blocking DOGE’s access, was placed on leave. However, a coalition of 19 Democratic attorneys general — representing the states of New York, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin — filed a complaint asking that DOGE continue to be denied access to the Treasury.

Engelmayer received the Democrats’ complaint and, without seeking arguments from the president and his attorneys, temporarily blocked the president “from granting to political appointees, special government employees, and any government employee detailed from an agency outside the Treasury Department access to Treasury…” The judge further ordered that Trump and his administration be “restrained from granting access to any Treasury Department payment record, payment systems, or any other data systems maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information and/or confidential financial information of payees” to anyone outside the Treasury’s Bureau of Fiscal Services and “restrained from granting access” to any such records to “all political appointees, special government employees, and government employees detailed from an agency outside the Treasury Department…” The order also demands that DOGE employees who have already been granted access to Treasury records destroy all copies they have obtained of those records.

The Trump administration was given until Tuesday evening to file a response, with the Democratic attorneys general being given until Thursday evening to file a follow-up response. However, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) submitted a response almost immediately, asking for the order to be dissolved. “On its face, the Order could be read to cover all political leadership within Treasury — including even [Treasury] Secretary [Scott] Bessent. This is a remarkable intrusion on the Executive Branch that is in direct conflict with Article II of the Constitution, and the unitary structure it provides,” the DOJ memorandum stated. It continued, “There is not and cannot be a basis for distinguishing between ‘civil servants’ and ‘political appointees.’ Basic democratic accountability requires that every executive agency’s work be supervised by politically accountable leadership, who ultimately answer to the President.”

“A federal court, consistent with the separation of powers, cannot insulate any portion of that work from the specter of political accountability,” the DOJ explained. “No court can issue an injunction that directly severs the clear line of supervision Article II requires. Because the Order on its face draws an impermissible and anti-constitutional distinction, it should be dissolved immediately.”

Although the agency conceded that the Trump administration is “in compliance with” the court order and its stipulations, Trump and his allies have vowed to combat the court’s overreach and even hinted at the possibility of ignoring the court’s order if it is not dissolved or adjusted in a timely manner. When asked about the court order on Sunday, Trump himself said, “We’re talking about fraud, waste, abuse, and when a president can’t look for fraud and waste and abuse, we don’t have a country anymore.” He added, “We’re very disappointed with the judges that would make such a ruling.”

Vice President J.D. Vance issued a stern statement on the subject over social media. “If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal. If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal,” he observed. He concluded, “Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.”

White House deputy chief of staff and top Trump policy advisor Stephen Miller called Engelmayer “a radical left judge” in an interview Sunday. He said of the court order, “This isn’t just unconstitutional. That ruling is an assault on the very idea of democracy itself.” He continued, “Donald Trump is engaging in the most important restoration of democracy in over a century by saying that we are going to restore power to the people through their elected president and his appointed officers.”

Miller added, “That is the only way we can have true democracy in this country.” The Trump counselor continued, “But this nonsense where we have rogue, unelected, unaccountable, and previously un-fire-able bureaucrats who do whatever the hell they want with no one telling them and no one controlling them, we’re not going to let that happen anymore.”

Commenting on the controversial court order, Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) declared, “The elected president of the United States should be allowed to function as such.” He continued, “No federal court should replace the president’s team with Deep State bureaucrats.”

Trump ally and Article III Project founder Mike Davis, commented, “These DC uniparty judges are shockingly insulated from Real Americans in Real America. They are arrogant and delusional enough to believe they are saving America from Trump.” He added, “Even though Trump campaigned on doing precisely what he’s doing. And won a decisive electoral mandate.” In comments published by The New York Times, Davis clarified, “President Trump is not stealing other branches’ powers.” He continued to say that Trump “is exercising his Article II powers under the Constitution. And judges who say he can’t? They’re legally wrong. The Supreme Court is going to side with Trump.”

Despite the complaints of Democrats, several department heads in the federal government have welcomed DOGE’s efforts to identify and eliminate waste and fraud. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem insisted on Sunday that she is “absolutely” comfortable with DOGE auditing DHS records. “This is essentially an audit of the federal government, which is very powerful and needs to have happened,” she said, adding that American citizens “can’t trust our government anymore” after years of waste and fraud being covered up.

Department of Defense (DOD) Secretary Pete Hegseth also welcomed DOGE audits in a Sunday interview, adding that Trump is “correct that American taxpayers deserve to know exactly how and where their money is spent.” He stated, “We welcome Elon Musk and DOGE coming into our department to help us identify additional ways in which we can streamline costs, fast-track acquisitions, cut waste, cut tail to put it to tooth.” Hegseth continued, “We know in a world where America is $37 trillion in debt, resources will not be unlimited. Every dollar we can find that isn’t being spent wisely is one we can put toward warfighters. So we welcome DOGE at DOD. We will partner with them, and it’s long overdue.”

Prior to the fracas surrounding its audit of the Treasury, DOGE has investigated several other federal agencies, including the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which Trump ordered almost completely shut down after the DOGE team discovered and exposed rampant waste and the funding of left-wing projects and programs across the globe. Trump announced last week that DOGE will also audit the Pentagon and the Department of Education. Shortly afterwards, DOGE chief Elon Musk announced, without elaborating further, that the Department of Education “no longer exists.”

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

PERKINS: Executive Orders Are Good, but Congress Must Make Them Permanent

DOJ Reverses Position on State Law Protecting Minors from Gender Transition Procedures

RELATED VIDEO: Speaker Mike Johnson: ‘Crooked judges are illegally interfering with the Executive Branch’

RELATED PODCAST:  Free Speech — A Legal Analysis with Jim Campbell

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 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.

The Panama Canal: An Artery for Global Trade thumbnail

The Panama Canal: An Artery for Global Trade

By MercatorNet – A Compass for Common Sense

In his inaugural address, Donald Trump declared that one of his administration’s priorities would be to regain control of the Panama Canal. This claim reopens a century-old debate over who built it, who lost it, and who truly owns this 80-kilometer engineering marvel that stitches together the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. With over 140 maritime routes, 1,700 ports, and 160 countries linked through it, the Canal is a key artery of global trade.

I visited the Canal a few years ago, and, beyond its logistical genius, what struck me the most was its turbulent history.

French vision, American execution, Caribbean workers

In 1869, fresh off his success with the Suez Canal, French diplomat Ferdinand de Lesseps set his sights on Central America. He was determined to carve a passage through the Isthmus of Darien, which was then part of Colombia.

This would be one of the 19th century’s most ambitious infrastructure projects.

report in The Economist from 1879 called it “a bolder enterprise even than the Suez Canal,” predicting the logistical, technical, and health nightmares ahead. As if they had a crystal ball, the project collapsed just a decade later, sunk by financial ruin, yellow fever, and an engineering failure. Lesseps’s Panama Canal Company would be bankrupt by 1888.

Yet where the French had failed, the United States saw an opportunity. Invoking the Monroe Doctrine—a US foreign policy that justified American influence in Latin America while keeping the continent off-limits to European colonial ambitions—Washington backed Panama’s independence from Colombia in 1903. It then secured the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty granting it full control over the Canal’s construction and operation. Nearly 40,000 workers from the Caribbean—mostly from Barbados—were recruited to build the Canal. And in August 1914, just as World War I erupted, the Panama Canal opened, redrawing the map of global trade.

Without the Canal, global shipping routes would be significantly different. Before 1914, ships traveling the east and west coasts of the American Continent faced a long and dangerous journey. The Canal slashed fuel consumption, cut transit times, and made global trade more efficient than ever.

Today, a San-Francisco–New-York voyage has five possible routes by sea. The fastest? Through the Panama Canal—10 days, 23 hours. The next-best option? A 27-day detour around the Strait of Magellan.

The canal moves the world… but at what cost?

For much of the 20th century, the Panama Canal was a geopolitical chess piece. The Canal Zone was US territory and a flashpoint for anticolonial sentiment in Central America. By the 1960s and ’70s, Panamanian resentment escalated, culminating in the 1964 Flag Riots. Clashes between Panamanians and US forces resulted in multiple casualties.

In 1977, the Torrijos-Carter Treaties established a phased transition plan that transferred control of the Canal to Panama by 1999, marking a major shift in US-Panama relations. Trump has called this handover “foolish,” blaming President Jimmy Carter for giving away a trade goldmine. At the time, the decision was intended to reduce anti-American sentiment in Latin America.

Today, the Panama Canal is a vital economic force. Managed by a private entity, it generates roughly 4% of Panama’s GDP, through the tolls paid by vessels using the Canal. About 5% of global trade flows through it annually, and the US is its biggest user—around 40% of US container traffic passes through each year.

Meanwhile, China is catching up fast. From October 2023 to September 2024, China accounted for 21.4% of the cargo volume transiting the Canal—making it the second largest user after the United States. Beijing has also been investing in Panamanian ports, raising concerns over who has more influence.

And the stakes are rising…

Water shortages in Lake Gatun (one of the lakes that feed the Canal) restrict ship crossings and raise questions about the Canal’s long-term viability, as does the fact that the century-old locks are not big enough to accommodate today’s largest container ships. All the while, Nicaragua is reviving dreams of an alternative Canal, backed by Chinese investors.

Trade is fragile

It’s easy to take global trade for granted—until it breaks. In 2021, one of the world’s largest container ships, the Ever Givengot stuck in the Suez Canal for six days, freezing $10 billion in global trade per day.

The lesson? Apart from countless memes, the Ever Given crisis reminded the world that maritime chokepoints matter.

Accidents are not the only threat to trade. Recent Houthi rebel attacks in the Red Sea—where 15% of global trade crosses—have forced shipping companies away from Suez, rerouting around Africa, adding weeks to delivery and millions in extra cost—proving just how vulnerable global trade is.

The Panama Canal’s strategic infrastructure has fuelled prosperity in a country that stands out among its peers, proving that commerce drives progress. But as history shows, when politicians meddle in trade, they distort it. Washington once controlled the Canal for geopolitical leverage, and now Beijing seeks influence over its ports. But the real power behind the Canal has never been politics—it has always been free trade.


What do you think of Trump’s plans for the Panama Canal?   


This article has been republished from FEE under a Creative Commons licence.

AUTHOR

Daphne Posadas

Daphne Posadas is the Associate Editorial Director at the Foundation for Economic Education.

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