Jake

Can someone explain how we ended up with a Director of the National Counterterrorism Center who apparently didn’t think his job includes figuring out how to neutralize the largest terrorism engine on the planet? After decades of attacks on American civilians, our armed forces, and our allies, along with mountains of intelligence spelling out exactly what they intend to do... you’d think he could come up with something better than denial.

After much reflection, I have decided to resign from my position as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, effective today. I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby. It has been an honor serving under @POTUS and @DNIGabbard and leading the professionals at NCTC. May God bless America.

As Trump said, we obliterated their nuclear program. That should have deterred them and forced them to move on without one. Instead, they began to rebuilt it, and they’re building massive numbers of ballistic missiles so that once it’s ready, stopping them would mean catastrophic destruction. If we only act when they can hit us tomorrow, we’re guaranteeing catastrophic destruction, because by the time tomorrow arrives, they’ll have too many missiles and too much protection for a successful campaign. Right now we still have the ability, along with our allies, to destroy them. So the question is simple: what sane president would choose to wait?

“We’re at a position where we need to take this threat out and get rid of it…” @MarkGeistSWP on the case for the Trump administration’s preemptive strikes on Iran. Watch below, and subscribe: youtube.com/c/MegynKelly?s…

A common deficiency among the groypers, and yes this applies to Matt Walsh and Megyn Kelly, is a failure of moral logic. Even if you are unsure of how soon it will materialize, if a threat to your children is guaranteed and you have the power to stop it, you stop it. Not when it’s convenient. Not when it’s politically safe. You stop it while you still can. Iran has spent forty five years proving its intent. They took American hostages for 444 days. They armed and trained forces that killed American soldiers in Iraq. They attack through proxies, fund terror, build ballistic missiles and drones, and harden facilities specifically to make future strikes harder. Their goal is power, immunity, and the ability to advance destructive capabilities without deterrence. They are willing to endure sanctions, economic damage, anything, to get there. So asking whether they were going to hit us today is morally unserious. If you see a regime building toward a position where it cannot be stopped later and you refuse to act now, that is not prudence. It is cowardice. There is no moral justification for allowing a guaranteed future threat to mature. The same moral failure showed up with Hamas. They slaughtered civilians and vowed to repeat it. When Israel weakened them, the demand was to stop. Stop so they can regroup. Stop so they can rearm. Stop so the next massacre is just a matter of time. Every pause became a rebuilding phase. Stopping before elimination guarantees repetition. You do not knowingly allow a threat to grow that will kill your children later. If you can prevent it and choose not to, you are abandoning the most basic duty of leadership. That is not restraint. It is cowardice. And there is no excuse for it.

@georgegalloway You can dress it up as moral superiority all you want, surrender is still surrender. How’s that strategy paying off for you guys?

What genius thought that murdering an 86 year-old ayatollah during Ramadan was a good idea…?

I don’t think anything was missed.If you want to understand this, you have to understand what Torah means to them. If you do not believe that Torah is the engine of Jewish survival, then of course their position sounds irrational. But they believe it literally. They believe the mesorah preserved us for thousands of years, not armies, not politics. From their perspective, they are not avoiding responsibility. They are protecting the transmission chain.If Israel claims to be a refuge for all Jews, that must include Jews whose entire existence is built around preserving Torah life as it has been lived for generations. If you cannot accept that they truly believe this, then you are not debating them. You are dismissing them. now to your points... V’chai bahem is about pikuach nefesh, not a slogan for fairness. If you want to argue halachic obligation to enlist, the proper categories are milchemet mitzvah and pikuach nefesh for the public. That requires demonstrating necessity, not simply invoking burden sharing. The Maccabees fought because Torah observance was being outlawed. They went to war so Jews could continue living a Torah life. Using them as an argument against uninterrupted Torah immersion reverses the historical reality. Questioning motives is not halachic analysis. Jewish life has always included differentiated roles. Levi is explicitly sustained for spiritual service. The Zevulun–Yissachar model reflects economic support for Torah study. Supporting Torah institutions is structural within Jewish history, not inherently parasitic. Rav Kook taught that spirit and body are both necessary. He did not argue they must become identical. Harmony does not require erasing distinct roles. You are applying modern civic egalitarianism to a Torah system that has historically functioned through differentiated responsibility. If you want to challenge that structure, do so directly. But do not stretch defined halachic principles beyond their scope or invert Jewish history to make the argument.

You are accurate in what you are saying, but there are a few important points you are missing: A: We are to live by Torah, not die by it. Right now, there is an existential threat against not only the State, land, and people of Israel;, bit against all of Judaism and all people of faith B: Some of Israel's greatest warriors, the Maccabee, were also Kohanim, dedicated to our spiritual survival. Are these young men "holier" or "more knowledgable" than the Maccabees? Our threat now is even greater than it was with the Seleucids C: For all too many of these young men, it is not about their desire to pray with full kavannah for the State of Israel. It is about their desire to keep suckling from the State combined with their desire to avoid any work or responsibilty D: IN NO EVENT IS THERE EVER AN EXCUSE OR TORAH JUSTIFICATION TO ATTACK IDF WARRIORS OR ANY OF THE PEOPLE OR ORGANIZATIONS WHO ACTUALLY ARE DEFENDING ISRAEL. There violence CANNOT be justified by Torah E: A century ago, Rav Kook z"l understood and guided the early pioneers to recognize that tbe observant Jews were the spirit and the secular Jews were the body... and they must work in harmony. Prayer does not preclude action; just as action should not preclude prayer.

This is what happens when a generation of young men are raised on the public dime with no expectation that they contribute to the larger society that funds them. On a side note, they look fit enough to serve and certainly don’t seem to be studying full time.

If you are going to host spaces perhaps make sure Co hosts do not have half your people blocked. No one should be co hosting large spaces if they block several people.

@RealCandaceO Does Candace even realize they were grooming her replacement? Once she torched her own credibility chasing fantasies and hallucination-tier “investigations,” she stopped being an asset and started being a liability.

Carrie didn’t hijack anything. You hosted a performative Zionist hearing meant to neuter the Christian faith. Carrie spoke truth, as a Catholic, and Christians, the Truth cannot be defeated. Zionists are naturally hostile to Catholics because we refuse to bend the knee to revisionist history and support the mass slaughter and rape of innocent children for occult Baal worshipers. Your decision will only further the Christian enlightenment which is taking place in this country. And for that, we thank you. ✝️ @CarriePrejean1 said no to selling her soul.

Farewell, brother. May God grant you eternal peace and rest your soul in everlasting light. Yitgadal veyitkadash shemei rabah.

@BushidoSouls @BenjiLeder @Lukewearechange AI fake ! This one is confirmed👇👇

@BenjiLeder @Lukewearechange You sound and look very Jewish… 🤔

CBS news really is trying to pin everything with Epstein on Russia.....

Mr. President, within ten years you will almost certainly be remembered the way Jimmy Carter is now, not for slogans or headlines but for the moral weight of the choices you made when power was in your hands. That is why this moment matters. In Iraq in 2017, in Syria in 2019, and again today, you removed American protection from the Kurds at the precise moments when it was the only thing preventing their destruction, not to avoid war but to accommodate stronger men who wanted them broken. You did not simply step aside from conflicts that had nothing to do with us. You removed the deterrent that kept invasions from happening and the invasions began the moment our soldiers were moved out of the way. Hundreds of thousands were displaced. Loyal allies who fought ISIS for us were abandoned. Our enemies grew stronger because of it. History will not judge you by how many wars you avoided but by whether you protected those who trusted America when it mattered most. You still have time to speak, to warn, to draw lines, and to repair what was done. Before you lie in a casket like every president before you, decide whether your legacy will be that you traded faithful allies for temporary deals or that you finally stood for the people who stood with us.

Donald Trump stunned members of his inner circle by calmly predicting when his own body would be lying in state, according to a new report. The 79-year-old president reportedly made the comment at Mar-a-Lago as television screens showed Jimmy Carter’s casket at the U.S. Capitol, telling the room: “You know, within ten years that will be me.” - Daily Beast

What most people do not realize is that one of the most important battles in the Middle East today is not only about territory, oil, or politics. It is a battle over history itself. Because buried beneath the soil of Syria, Iraq, and southeastern Turkey is the written memory of the ancient world — clay tablets and stone inscriptions that record how civilization, religion, and law first developed thousands of years before Islam, Christianity, or even the Bible were written. And the people who have done more than anyone else to protect this history, often at enormous personal cost, are the Kurds. Across northern Syria and northern Iraq lie the ruins of Ebla, Mari, Nineveh, Ashur, Babylon, and dozens of forgotten cities. From these places come hundreds of thousands of cuneiform tablets — state archives, treaties, hymns, trade records, temple lists — the administrative memory of the ancient Near East. These tablets name cities. They name kings. They name gods. They map trade routes. They record sacred centers and pilgrimage sites. They preserve the religious geography of the world in which Abraham himself lived. And in this immense written record, something very important appears. The tablets describe the sacred landscape of Mesopotamia and the Levant in extraordinary detail — Ur, Harran, Mari, Ebla, Canaan, Assyria, Babylon. But they never mention Mecca. They never mention Bakkah. They never mention the Kaaba. They never place an Abrahamic sanctuary in the Hijaz. The ancient record shows Abraham’s world firmly rooted in Mesopotamia and the Levant — exactly where the biblical narrative places him. And this creates a profound problem for extremist ideology. Because the legitimacy of the modern caliphate project depends on a single sacred claim: that Mecca was founded by Abraham, that the Kaaba was the first house of monotheism, that Arabia was the original center of Abrahamic faith. But the oldest written records humanity possesses do not support that claim. Instead, they show that pre-Islamic Arabia was overwhelmingly pagan. They record Arab tribes worshiping al-Lat, al-Uzza, Manat, star gods and storm gods. They describe caravan routes that pass through northern oases like Tayma and Dedan, but bypass Mecca entirely. They show no Abrahamic cult anywhere in western Arabia. This is not modern politics. This is not propaganda. This is the ancient record speaking for itself. And now ask a critical question. Who controls much of the territory where this history lies buried? The Kurds. Northern Syria. The Euphrates valley. The Nineveh plains. Upper Mesopotamia. The heartland of Assyria and Ebla and Mari. For years, Kurdish forces have been the ones guarding ruins, protecting museums, stopping looters, evacuating artifacts, and cooperating with international archaeologists while war raged around them. And who has tried hardest to destroy this same history? ISIS. Al-Qaeda. The caliphate movements. Extremist militias. When ISIS captured Mosul, they did not only kill civilians. They smashed the museum. They shattered Assyrian statues with hammers. They burned libraries. They dynamited temples. They looted tablets and sold them on the black market. This was not random. It was deliberate. Because those stones and tablets were preserving a story that extremist ideology could not tolerate. A story in which Mecca was not an ancient pilgrimage center. A story in which Arabia was not the cradle of Abrahamic monotheism. A story in which Islam emerged in a pagan landscape and later re-interpreted older traditions. As long as those tablets exist, the myth of uninterrupted Abrahamic purity in Arabia cannot be proven. And that is why the evidence had to be erased. That is why ISIS targeted museums before military bases. That is why they filmed themselves destroying statues. That is why they burned archives and sold tablets. They were not destroying idols. They were destroying evidence. And the Kurds stood in the way. They guarded ruins with rifles. They hid artifacts in basements and mountain vaults. They escorted archaeologists through war zones. They preserved archives when no one else could. Without the Kurds, vast portions of humanity’s oldest history would already be gone. This is not only a Kurdish story. This is a human story. Because whoever controls the past controls the future. And right now, in the middle of one of the most violent regions on earth, the Kurds are not only defending land. They are defending the written memory of civilization itself.

@mrcds6262 Jared K... soon you will be able to move here !

I hate it here. 🥶

What we’re watching in Syria right now is not just a policy failure. It is a total abandonment of every principle the West claims to believe in about stabilization, counterterrorism, and rebuilding broken states. The United States, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and several Western governments have now decided that Syria’s future must run through Abu Mohammad al-Shara, better known as Julani. A former Al-Qaeda commander. A man who, until recently, had a U.S. bounty on his head. A man who now wears a suit and calls himself a nationalist. And suddenly, we’re told this is the man who will unify Syria. The theory sounds elegant. Unify the country. Lift the sanctions. Bring in money. Rebuild the state. End a century of instability. But this is where the entire strategy collapses. At the exact moment this project begins, Syria’s new government, with the open blessing of Washington, Ankara, Riyadh, and others, announces that the Kurds and the Syrian Democratic Forces are not the solution… …but the problem. Not extremists. Not warlords. Not Iranian militias. Not the former jihadists running half the country. No. The main obstacle to Syria’s future, we’re told, is the single most stable, secular, institutional, and pro-Western force anywhere in Syria. The same force that destroyed ISIS on the ground when almost nobody else would. The same force that protected minorities, educated girls, ran courts, and kept order while the rest of Syria collapsed into chaos, sectarianism, and holy war. The only region in the entire country that actually works. And this is the region they choose to destroy. Not negotiate with. Not integrate carefully. Not protect. Destroy. They’re told to disarm. To dissolve. To surrender. And when they refuse, they’re bombed, displaced, punished, and ethnically cleansed. And we’re supposed to believe this is about stability. So let’s ask the question nobody wants to answer. How does it make sense that in a country shattered by war, drowning in militias and foreign armies, the highest priority suddenly becomes eliminating the only peaceful, functional, pro-Western enclave that exists? If this were really about rebuilding Syria, the policy would be obvious. You protect the stable region. You expand it. You build around it. You use it as the core of national recovery. You integrate later. Slowly. Voluntarily. When a real state actually exists. Instead, the policy is the opposite. Burn the one working model. Erase the only democratic experiment. Destroy the only force that actually defeated ISIS. All so that unity can be imposed under a former Al-Qaeda commander whose legitimacy depends entirely on foreign sponsors. So no, the real question is not why the Kurds resist. The real question is far darker. What strategic interest is so important… …that it justifies sacrificing the only moral and functional success story Syria has produced in an entire generation?

@mrcds6262 I know this isn't a space... and it is from last year, but the basics haven't changed...

Someone who is non emotional and educated in the Mideast needs to do a space on why Trump is hesitant to attack Iran. These spaces are all about a dream from 1979 and no facts. Attacking Iran is not simple and can have ramifications for America and Israel.

When the United States set out to "Nation Build" Iraq, the most rational starting point was obvious. There was a region that was already stable, pro-Western, orderly, educated, and governed by people who actually wanted a normal society. Eight million Kurds. Clean cities. Functioning institutions. A population aligned with Western values and eager to cooperate. And Washington ignored it. Why? Because of Turkey. An ally that vetoed the one strategy that had any chance of working Everyone knows the price we paid. Now fast-forward to Syria and we are watching the same insanity repeat itself. The United States and its partners are preparing to hand the future of the only relatively peaceful, pluralistic, and functioning part of Syria to a man with a terrorist past, an unknown quantity, someone whose entire movement comes out of jihadist networks. And we are told to trust him with the only corner of Syria that is educated, inclusive, secular, and capable of building something decent. Why would anyone do something this reckless? There is only one answer. Turkey. Again. The same country that blocked Kurdish autonomy in Iraq. The same country that has spent decades sabotaging any Kurdish success. The same country that uses NATO membership as leverage to destroy the only reliable pro-Western actors in the region. So the real question is no longer about Iraq or Syria. The real question is this. What should the United States and its allies do about Turkey after two historic strategic disasters that it helped engineer? We are not watching policy mistakes. We are watching deliberate, repeated sabotage of Western interests.

The Bible never says Israel stopped being Israel. It explicitly says the opposite. Anyone claiming the covenant is over is contradicting Paul, the prophets, and the character of God. Replacement theology requires: Redefining “Israel” (never stated in Scripture) Contradicting Paul’s explicit denials (Rom 11:1–2) Overriding “irrevocable” (Rom 11:29) Reversing the grafting metaphor (Rom 11:17–24) Violating God’s oath logic (Jer 31:35–37) Destroying the moral logic of the gospel itself

Why @michaeljknowles isn't a "Christian Zionist"

After 2,500 years of minorities governing themselves, the Persians built their modern country, the one they’re so nostalgic for, the one they want back so badly, on the violent suppression of those same minorities. Why would any of those minorities want that back? What they label “national identity” is not ancient or organic. It is a modern construction. Tehran first, everyone else last. Kurds, Arabs, Baloch, Turkmen, Lors, and others were all expected to sacrifice their identity, their resources, and their political agency for a state that returned repression instead of representation. This project emerged under the Qajar dynasty and was violently enforced under the Pahlavi dynasty.

Under Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Kurds in Iran were subjected to forced centralization, bans on Kurdish language education and political organization, military suppression of uprisings in Kurdistan provinces in 1946, 1967, and the early 1970s, arrests and torture by SAVAK, and economic marginalization, while limited cultural tolerance existed only when Kurdish activism did not challenge state authority, as documented by Amnesty International reports 1969–1977, U.S. State Department human rights reports 1976–1978, and the International Commission of Jurists 1974. Under Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, political prisoners were systematically tortured by SAVAK from the 1950s to 1979 using documented methods including electric shocks, flogging with cables, suspension, mock executions, sexual violence, sleep deprivation, and prolonged solitary confinement, as recorded by Amnesty International reports in 1975–1977, the International Commission of Jurists in 1974, U.S. State Department human rights assessments in the late 1970s, and survivor testimonies later published after the 1979 revolution.

This is a moral disgrace. Kurdish autonomy in northern Syria should have been protected and celebrated, not dismantled. In the vacuum left by state collapse, the Kurds built an administration that delivered what Damascus could not: security for vulnerable communities, protection for minorities, space for women in public life, and functioning local governance under constant threat. They restored education where schools had vanished and introduced Kurdish-language instruction for the first time in modern Syrian history, while keeping territory stable in one of the most volatile regions on earth. At the same time, Kurdish-led forces became the most effective ground partner against ISIS, absorbing immense losses to defend not only their own people but regional and international security. To erase this autonomy, earned through sacrifice, restraint, and governance, and return these communities to a regime defined by repression and broken promises is not reconciliation. It is a betrayal. History will remember that what was destroyed here was not separatism, but one of the few genuine successes to emerge from Syria’s ruins.

This isn't a brand-new position. A very similar joint statement condemning Christian Zionism came from the same group back in 2006 ("The Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism"), calling it a theology that supports "racial exclusivity and perpetual war" rather than gospel reconciliation.

Unprecedented statement from the Patriarchs and Heads of the Churches in Jerusalem accusing Christian Zionists of imperiling Christians in the Holy Land and implying that Christian Zionism is a form of idolatry

This is not “post-war stabilization” or “integration.” It is premeditated ethnic cleansing. After the Kurds defeated ISIS for the U.S. at enormous cost, they were pressured to disarm under a fake “peace” deal. Once they did, al-Qaeda-dominated Syrian army units, backed by Turkey, moved in, shelled Kurdish neighborhoods in Aleppo, and carried out forced displacement through terror: kidnappings, torture, murders, and mass expulsions. The SDF had already withdrawn, and there was no battle, no threat, no attack, no violence of any kind, only a small local community-defense force providing basic protection. The objective was not even to dismantle that force but to bomb civilian homes, terrorize the population into flight, and empty the area of its people. Western media calling this “integration” is lying. The U.S. is abandoning its most effective ally and normalizing jihadist rule, again.

🇸🇾 Betrayed and Cornered: How the U.S. Abandoned Syria’s Kurds While Damascus Offers Paper Guarantees Syria’s war is entering a new phase, and its long-time U.S. ground partner against ISIS — the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) — is once again being sacrificed. This is unfolding amid talk of strikes on Iran, Syria–Israel contacts, and renewed U.S. engagement with Damascus. In January 2026, under direct pressure from U.S. military commanders, Kurdish forces withdrew from the Sheikh Maqsoud and Ashrafieh districts of Aleppo, which they had controlled since 2012. SDF leader Mazloum Abdi was advised to hand over the areas without resistance. Damascus then pushed further, deploying Islamist forces toward Kurdish-held Deir Hafir [video], east of the Euphrates. With U.S. personnel also appearing on the scene, Kurdish units soon withdrew from Deir Hafir and Maskanah. The Euphrates now separates the sides, while oil-rich Deir ez-Zor may be next. Against this backdrop, Syrian leader al-Julani is playing a double game. He threatens to disarm the SDF while simultaneously issuing decrees recognizing Kurdish cultural rights — legalizing the Kurdish language, declaring Nowruz a national holiday, and promising citizenship to those previously stripped of it. Integration into the new Syrian state is presented as the only path to safety. Kurds remain deeply skeptical. Al-Julani’s power base is rooted in Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, whose fighters previously besieged and shelled Kurdish districts, including Sheikh Maqsoud. Their record elsewhere in Syria has not been forgotten. The result is a familiar pattern. The United States has effectively handed its former allies over to Damascus. In return, Syria’s new rulers offer rights on paper while keeping military force on the table. The fate of Syria’s Kurds will be decided not by them, but by negotiations between Ankara, Washington, Damascus, and Tel Aviv.