Latest Analysis and Commentary
by Drieu Godefridi • June 14, 2026 at 5:00 am
In a ruling that should send chills down the spine of anyone who still believes in the Enlightenment values of reason, evidence, and open debate, a Belgian court has convicted nationalist activist Dries Van Langenhove for the crime of stating uncomfortable facts. This is not merely another skirmish in Europe's war on free speech. It is something far more sinister: the explicit criminalization of observable, verifiable reality itself. Van Langenhove warned of "the great replacement," and linked mass migration to housing shortages, strained welfare systems, rising criminality, and cultural erosion. He criticized multiculturalism as incompatible with cohesive societies and mocked certain progressive dogmas on gender. None of these points was fabricated. The court itself acknowledged that many of his statements rested on scientific evidence and official statistics. This turns justice on its head. Since when does presenting verifiable facts about crime rates, IQ distributions, or fertility differentials constitute "criminal intent"? Where is the evidence of incitement to violence? There is none. The "proof" is the speech itself — and the judges' subjective interpretation of its potential emotional effect on special protected groups. In liberal democracies worthy of the name, truth has always been a defense against charges of defamation or incitement. In 21st-century Belgium, truth is now aggravating evidence. European elites have made him a repeated target precisely because he articulates what growing numbers of citizens observe daily: mass migration from culturally distant regions correlates with parallel societies, higher welfare dependency, and spikes in certain crimes. Across Europe — from hate speech laws in the UK and Germany to "disinformation" monitors in the EU — authorities are not merely restricting expression. They are punishing the acknowledgment of reality when it contradicts the multicultural narrative. Facts about integration failures, no-go zones, grooming gangs, or group differences in outcomes are treated as heretical, regardless of their empirical basis. While facts concerning Arabs, Africans, or Muslims are thus censored or forbidden, in Belgium, as soon as it concerns Jews, then absolutely everything is permitted. When courts declare that even accurate statistics can be criminal if they foster "intolerance," they do not protect minorities — they infantilize them and infantilize the public. They signal that native Europeans have no right to discuss the transformation of their own societies. Van Langenhove will appeal his conviction, as he has before. The real verdict, however, is already in: Western Europe's governing class has chosen repression over reality. They would rather punish the messenger than confront the inconvenient data on the real costs of migration.
In a ruling that should send chills down the spine of anyone who still believes in the Enlightenment values of reason, evidence, and open debate, a Belgian court has convicted nationalist activist Dries Van Langenhove for the crime of stating uncomfortable facts. Pictured: Van Langenhove speaks to the media at the Gent Court of Appeal on June 20, 2025. (Photo by James Arthur Gekiere/Belga Mag/AFP via Getty Images)
In a ruling that should send chills down the spine of anyone who still believes in the Enlightenment values of reason, evidence, and open debate, a Belgian court has convicted nationalist activist Dries Van Langenhove for the crime of stating uncomfortable facts. On May 26, 2026, the Correctional Court of Leuven fined Van Langenhove €4,000 for a February 2024 lecture at KU Leuven University. The offense? Presenting data on mass migration, group differences in intelligence and achievement, crime statistics, and the failures of multiculturalism — in a manner the court deemed to create an "us versus them" atmosphere. This is not merely another skirmish in Europe's war on free speech. It is something far more sinister: the explicit criminalization of observable, verifiable reality itself. What Van Langenhove Actually Said
Continue Reading Article
by Amir Taheri • June 14, 2026 at 4:00 am
Trump was the only US president to make a serious attempt to mend relations with Iran. Tehran misinterpreted that [the June 2025 ceasefire] as American weakness and reignited the fires by resuming its campaign against Israel through proxies. [T]he fact is that so far at least Trump is the winner of this war. Tehran's illusion is that by waiting until US midterm elections, which they think Trump will lose, they could claim victory. That is a foolish dream. The longer they wait before they accept a truce, the heavier Iran's losses shall be. In my opinion, the wars involving Iran will not end without regime change in Tehran....
President Donald J. Trump was the only US president to make a serious attempt to mend relations with Iran. Pictured: Trump addresses the nation from the White House in Washington, DC on June 21, 2025, following the announcement that the US bombed nuclear sites in Iran. (Photo by Carlos Barria/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)
Who is playing with whom? This is the question posed by the behavior of President Donald Trump and whoever is still running Iran from Tehran in the current phase of a war that started more than 100 days ago. Both Trump and his Iranian co-authors of this war appear as if they are prepared for this war to last 100 years. At the same time, both pretend that an accord leading to a sine die [without a day cited] truce is one step away. According to CNN, Trump has trumpeted that elusive accord 38 times in two months. According to IRGC's news agency, Tasnim, Tehran's authorized or self-authorized spokesmen have a more modest record by announcing an imminent accord only 22 times. What is certain is that neither side wishes to return to the early phase of the conflict that saw Iran suffer the heaviest air attacks the world had witnessed since World War II.
Continue Reading Article
by Majid Rafizadeh • June 13, 2026 at 5:00 am
Iran's rulers might sign a piece of paper -- as Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Chairman Yasser Arafat did with Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin with the 1993 Oslo Accord – but, like the PLO, its fundamental goals will not change. The regime cannot abandon "Death to America" or "Death to Israel" without dissolving its own reason for being. Leaving it in place only ensures that it will dig its hooks in even deeper -- especially after President Donald J. Trump leaves office and his successor possibly turns to interests more enjoyable than "enforcement." Iran's regime will not change -- especially not for "infidels." Deals simply buy time for the regime to rebuild its power. Deals do not alter core behavior. If the regime wanted reform, it could easily have renounced those slogans and stopped sponsoring terrorism. Any negotiations or deals that leave the current system intact simply grant it "oxygen," resources, and time to rebuild capabilities aimed at annihilating its perceived enemies, foreign and domestic. The West's -- particularly the United States' -- most important decision is recognizing that the Iranian regime simply cannot be reformed. No deal will essentially alter it. It will continue its objectives, its terrorism, and its oppression. We should not be deceived by tactical "moderates" fronting for the IRGC. The regime's revolutionary identity has brought only suffering -- for Americans, for Iran's neighbors in the Gulf, for Israelis, and especially for the Iranian people. Ending this regime is the only path to peace.
Iran's regime cannot abandon "Death to America" or "Death to Israel" without dissolving its own reason for being. Leaving it in place only ensures that it will dig its hooks in even deeper -- especially after President Donald J. Trump leaves office and his successor possibly turns to interests more enjoyable than "enforcement." Pictured: Iran's then "Supreme Guide," Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, gives a speech on November 1, 2023, televised on Iran's Channel 1. (Image source: MEMRI)
We have seen in the last few weeks — and for the last 47 years — that Iran's regime is not one with which any responsible actor should seek a deal. Iran's rulers might sign a piece of paper -- as Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Chairman Yasser Arafat did with Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin with the 1993 Oslo Accord – but, like the PLO, its fundamental goals will not change.
Continue Reading Article
by Eric Levine • June 12, 2026 at 5:00 am
The Obama strategy was apparently to make any deal and call it a "good deal." In exchange for these concessions to the Ayatollah, the Obama Administration agreed to lift economic sanctions on Iran at a time when its frozen overseas assets totaled approximately $115 billion, and delivered $400 million of cash on a pallet as ransom for American hostages being illegally held by the Islamic Republic. In short, Obama gave away everything and got nothing in return. Now that is a really bad deal. Obama and his lead negotiator, Secretary of State John Kerry, must have understood that the money Iran received was to be used to fund its military, its international terror network, and to advance its hegemonic goals in the region. Obama rammed the deal down the throats of a skeptical American public and implemented it in the face of overwhelming bipartisan congressional opposition. Moreover, Israel and the Gulf Arab states -- the countries most directly impacted by the deal and that strenuously opposed it -- were not consulted. The Obama propaganda machine also understood that it could not tell the truth about the terms of the deal if they wanted any support from the American people. So they simply lied about them. The current hostilities with Iran are a direct result of Obama's failed policy. Obama did not just save the Iranian regime; he empowered it. Iran's regime will only make a deal with the US if Iran's rulers believe the survival of the regime is guaranteed. No matter what is agreed to by Trump, Iran's rulers are sure to violate the agreement. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but as soon as Trump leaves office. If Trump makes a deal, even a great one, it will last no longer than his presidency. The Gulf states will hedge their bets. Trump will be gone but the Iranian regime, perhaps with the support of a new American administration, will still be in their midst.
The current hostilities with Iran are a direct result of Obama's failed policy. Obama did not just save the Iranian regime; he empowered it. The Obama strategy was apparently to make any deal with Iran and call it a "good deal." Obama and his lead negotiator, Secretary of State John Kerry, must have understood that the money Iran received was to be used to fund its military, its international terror network, and to advance its hegemonic goals in the region. Pictured: Iran's then Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif (center) shares some laughs with his delegation during nuclear deal negotiations with Kerry in Vienna, Austria, on June 30, 2015. (Photo credit should read Carlos Barria/AFP via Getty Images)
Before agreeing to the JCPOA (the Iran "nuclear deal") in 2015, President Barack H. Obama assured the American people that he understood, in the words of his press secretary, Josh Earnest, that "no deal is better than a bad deal." Obama then proceeded to make a historically epic terrible deal. Because Obama made it clear to friend and foe alike that he would never use military force to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, the only possible outcome was a "bad deal." As Obama told a skeptical and worried Israeli public on June 1, 2015: "I can, I think, demonstrate, not based on any hope but on facts and evidence and analysis, that the best way to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon is a verifiable, tough agreement.... A military solution will not fix it. Even if the United States participates, it would temporarily slow down an Iranian nuclear program but it will not eliminate it."
Continue Reading Article
by Khaled Abu Toameh • June 11, 2026 at 5:00 am
Hamas is not agreeing to disarm. It is bargaining. The Cairo meetings reportedly focused heavily on what mediators described as the "restriction of weapons" rather than outright disarmament. Some proposals reportedly envision Hamas and other armed groups "depositing" weapons with Palestinian authorities or placing them under international supervision. This brush-off alone should convince Washington that the current strategy of negotiating with Hamas, as with Iran, is failing. The notion that Hamas would voluntarily surrender the means that allow it to dominate the Gaza Strip, intimidate Palestinians, and wage jihad (holy war) against Israel is detached from reality. Hamas did not spend decades building a military infrastructure, digging tunnels, stockpiling rockets, and indoctrinating generations of Palestinians only to hand over its weapons because mediators asked politely. Any agreement that allows Hamas to survive politically while retaining influence over the Gaza Strip is only postponing the next war. That Qatar and Turkey are once again serving as mediators just adds another layer of lunacy to the process. Both countries have long been among Hamas's most important political and financial supporters. Expecting Qatar and Turkey to pressure Hamas into disarming is asking sponsors to dismantle the very organization they have spent years supporting. For months, Washington has sought calm and stability across the Middle East. America's adversaries, however, increasingly interpret this desire for stability as weakness. Hamas sees endless negotiations. Hezbollah, Iran's Lebanese proxy, sees repeated efforts to preserve ceasefires. Iran sees a US administration eager to avoid significant escalation at any cost. Instead of complying with American demands, Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran are setting conditions and leading the Trump Administration around by the nose. For the past few years, every ceasefire has allowed Hamas to regroup. Every negotiation has given it time. Every diplomatic initiative has enabled it to re-entrench itself. That is not a sign of diplomatic progress. It is evidence of diplomatic failure. At some point, the Trump Administration might confront a simple reality: terrorist organizations do not voluntarily negotiate themselves out of existence. For both Hamas and Iran, survival means remaining armed so that they can continue pursuing their ultimate goal: the elimination of Israel, and for Iran, eventually Europe and the US. Until this reality is acknowledged, the world will continue to witness the same futile spectacle: mediators begging a terrorist organization to surrender weapons it never intends to give up.
The notion that Hamas would voluntarily surrender the means that allow it to dominate the Gaza Strip, intimidate Palestinians, and wage jihad (holy war) against Israel is detached from reality. Hamas did not spend decades building a military infrastructure, digging tunnels, stockpiling rockets, and indoctrinating generations of Palestinians only to hand over its weapons because mediators asked politely. Pictured: Hamas terrorists in Gaza City on January 25, 2025. (Photo by Abood Abusalama/Middle East Images via AFP)
Nearly three years after the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led massacre in Israel, and more than six months after US President Donald Trump announced his ceasefire initiative for the Gaza Strip, one reality remains painfully clear: Hamas is still armed, still in control of large parts of the Gaza Strip, and still openly refusing to surrender its weapons. This week, mediators from Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey gathered in Cairo with Hamas leaders and representatives of several Palestinian factions in yet another attempt to persuade the Iran-backed Islamist group to comply with Trump's peace plan, which calls for the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip and the decommissioning of weapons held by Hamas and other armed groups.
Continue Reading Article
by Robert Williams • June 10, 2026 at 5:30 am
"Qatar is at the top of funding terrorism worldwide.... Even more than Iran." — Udi Levy, a former senior official of Israel's Mossad spy agency who dealt with economic warfare against terrorist organizations, YNet, April 18, 2024. It was disclosed last week that Qatar has been funding US institutions of learning for years with donations amounting to more than $400 billion. Those were just the ones for which there were receipts. Qatar also hosts the forward headquarters of US Central Command (CENTCOM) at Al Udeid Air Base in addition to a recent promise from the Trump administration to defend the emirate if it is attacked. It is hardly a secret that Qatar is no friend to Israel. Qatar has been called "A genocidal anti-Israel propaganda machine." After Trump leaves office, will Qatar be one of the new launchpads from which to try to eliminate the Jewish State? During the first Trump administration, the US warned Israel that "security cooperation with the U.S. could be reduced," due to a deal signed with China's Shanghai International Port Group to operate a new terminal at Haifa Port, where the U.S. Navy ships often dock. How come the US does not have the same concerns with Qatar?
US President Donald J. Trump is reportedly strengthening Qatar's military and giving immunity from any potential future attack by supplying it with state-of-the-art counter-drone capabilities, including Raytheon's FS-LIDS system. Qatar is also purchasing the MQ-9B SkyGuardian remotely piloted aircraft system ("the most advanced multi-mission remotely piloted aircraft in the world"). The rapid increase in Qatar's military power is a direct reflection of the strides that the terror-sponsoring and terror-propagandizing Islamist state has been able to make in its gradual buy-up of a greedy and flatterable Western world. Pictured: U.S. Air Force KC-135 Stratotankers at Qatar's Al-Udeid Air Base on Aug. 19, 2017. (Photo by U.S. Air National Guard/Andrew J. Moseley)
Wherever you look, Western leaders are engaging in policies that invite civilizational suicide by arming enemies of the West who would like to see it dead. Sadly, the last place one would expect such policies is the Trump administration. It claims it wants to "Make America Great Again." Now it has been incentivizing countries -- such as Qatar, Turkey and Pakistan -- that want to "Make States that Sponsor Terrorism Great Again." "Qatar," according to Udi Levy, a former senior official of Israel's Mossad spy agency who dealt with economic warfare against terrorist organizations, "is at the top of funding terrorism worldwide.... Even more than Iran." It was disclosed last week that Qatar has been funding US institutions of learning for years with donations amounting to more than $400 billion. Those were just the ones for which there were receipts.
Continue Reading Article
by Lawrence Kadish • June 10, 2026 at 4:00 am
Eighty years ago we learned costly lessons in the Pacific regarding just how difficult it is to supply, fight, and win in this part of the world. Lessons learned, lessons remembered, and lessons for our foes: never underestimate the United States. Pictured: The fast-attack submarine USS Springfield arrives at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, in Hawaii, on October 21, 2019. (U.S. Navy photo by Michael Zingaro)
Not so very long ago, the Pacific was the scene of some of the bloodiest battles of World War II, where no quarter was given. While the guns have long since gone quiet, that vast area of the globe remains a source of intense military brinksmanship. This time it is the giant of Communist China seeking to dominate the Pacific's democratic nations that range from Japan in the north to Australia in the south. In between those nations is the U.S. Seventh Fleet, along with an island chain with American outposts such as Okinawa and Guam.
Continue Reading Article
by Pierre Rehov • June 9, 2026 at 5:00 am
The murder of Henry Nowak did not reinforce the reigning story. It contradicted it. This contradiction, more than any failure of policing, explains why one death summoned a global movement while the other is being swiftly filed away as an inconvenience. How do trained police officers, standing over a boy bleeding out onto the pavement, become incapable of seeing what lies in front of them? Sigmund Freud and Stanley Milgram, among others, have noted how readily ordinary people defer to an authority that relieves them of responsibility. The lesson was never that monsters walk among us. It was that the instinct to comply, to belong, to escape the punishment reserved for those who break ranks, can override even the evidence of one's own eyes. When... fear of the word "racist," grows so large that it eclipses a dying man on the ground, morality itself has been hollowed out. No order need be issued; the response becomes a reflex. After years of training and disciplinary precedent, a career can be ended by a single allegation. It is safer to doubt a white victim than to risk the accusation that can destroy one's life. This failure to adhere to fact-based reality should disturb anyone who values a free society more than any question about the private convictions of the officers involved. The danger is not that policemen harbor secret prejudice in either direction. It is that an entire culture has been trained to pass every event through an ideological filter before it consults the facts, so that reality becomes negotiable and a boy can plead that he has been stabbed while the men sworn to protect him decide, on the strength of his attacker's word, that he has not. Nowak's murder tells the "wrong" story. It tells of a white victim, a non-white attacker who weaponized the accusation of racism, and a police force paralyzed by the very fear that this accusation was designed to exploit. A civilization that is now calibrating its compassion to political utility and that makes decisions on whose suffering counts by whether it flatters the prevailing creed, has already begun to rot from within. The scholars who studied conformity after 1945 left a warning: The gravest threat to human reason is not open hatred. It is the longing to remain inside the lines of permitted opinion, to be spared the cost of seeing clearly.
Henry Nowak's murder tells the "wrong" story. It tells of a white victim, a non-white attacker who weaponized the accusation of racism, and a police force paralyzed by the very fear that this accusation was designed to exploit. When fear of the word "racist," grows so large that it eclipses a dying man on the ground, morality itself has been hollowed out. Pictured: People gather at Guild Hall Square in Southampton, England on June 6, 2026 to protest the police's handling of Nowak's murder. (Photo by Finnbarr Webster/Getty Images).
When George Floyd died in Minneapolis on May 25, 2020, the Western world convulsed. Within days, European capitals were burning, corporations were confessing to sins they could not name, governments were rewriting their codes, and great institutions were lowering themselves to one knee before a doctrine that had arrived without debate. Three words — "I can't breathe" — became the liturgy of an age that had at last identified its original transgression: whiteness, policing, the inherited architecture of the West. One could accept or reject every conclusion drawn from Floyd's death and still concede the plain fact that he became a planetary icon, his name stenciled on walls from Berlin to Sydney.
Continue Reading Article
by Khaled Abu Toameh • June 8, 2026 at 5:00 am
"You are not trying to help us; the people of Lebanon are paying the price for your own interests.... Our interests do not align with yours.... This is not your country, it is our country." — Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, directly addressing Iran's regime; CNN, June 5, 2026 Aoun's remarks amount to a public admission that Hezbollah has effectively created a state within a state, one that decides when Lebanon goes to war and when it agrees to a ceasefire, regardless of the wishes of the elected government of the Lebanese people. "Spare our South, and cease treating it and its people as mere bargaining chips to improve your negotiation terms.... this war is not ours, that it is not fought for us, but on our soil and at the expense of our people." —Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, June 5, 2026. The Lebanese leaders are finally saying publicly what many observers have argued for years: Hezbollah is not defending Lebanon. It is defending Iran's regional interests. The tragedy of Lebanon closely resembles the tragedy of the Gaza Strip. The Palestinians in Gaza are paying the price for decisions made by Hamas, another Islamist terrorist organization acting in accordance with Iran's broader regional agenda. All terrorist roads lead first to Tehran. Without Iran's interference in Lebanese and Palestinian affairs, both peoples would likely be focused on building their economies, strengthening their institutions, and improving the lives of their citizens instead of enduring endless cycles of war and destruction. [Iran's] goal is always the same: expand Iranian influence while keeping the region in a permanent state of confrontation. The ceasefire agreements brokered by the Trump Administration were also supposed to strengthen Lebanese sovereignty and curb Hezbollah's military power. Why, then, is Hezbollah still armed? Why does it continue to decide matters of war and peace? Why is the Lebanese government still unable, or unwilling, to assert full authority over its territory? The same questions apply to Hamas. Why is Hamas still in control of large parts of the Gaza Strip? Why is the Trump Administration's "Board of Peace" still talking about the disarmament of Hamas instead of insisting upon it? Why do mediators continue to negotiate with terrorist organizations that openly reject disarmament? Washington needs to demand the immediate and unconditional disarmament of Hezbollah and Hamas -- terrorist organizations that seek Israel's destruction. The Trump Administration would greatly help its agenda if it insisted that the Lebanese government alone exercise control over decisions of war and peace. It would help to stress that no sovereign state can tolerate an armed militia operating outside government authority. So long as Hezbollah and Hamas remain armed and in power, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps remains ruling Iran, there will be no lasting peace or stability in the Middle East. All three remain deeply committed to their jihad (holy war) against Israel and are prepared to pursue it indefinitely. Lebanon's leaders have finally identified the problem. The question is whether they have the courage, and the whole-hearted, committed support of the United States to back it up.
Perhaps for the first time in such direct and uncompromising language, Lebanon's President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam are openly acknowledging that Iran, through its proxy Hezbollah, has hijacked Lebanon's sovereignty, transformed the country into a battlefield, and dragged its people into repeated wars with Israel. Pictured: Aoun (R) and Salam at a cabinet meeting in the presidential palace near Beirut, on February 11, 2025. (Photo by Anwar Amro/AFP via Getty Images)
For years, many Lebanese politicians avoided publicly confronting the obvious truth: Iran, through its proxy Hezbollah, has hijacked Lebanon's sovereignty, transformed the country into a battlefield, and dragged its people into repeated wars with Israel. Now, perhaps for the first time in such direct and uncompromising language, Lebanon's President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam are openly acknowledging what many Lebanese have known for decades. Their statements are significant because they expose the central role played by the Iranian regime and Hezbollah in destroying what was once one of the most prosperous and stable countries in the Middle East. Aoun accused Iran of using Lebanon as a "bargaining chip" in its conflict with the United States and demanded that Tehran stop interfering in Lebanese affairs. Addressing the Iranian regime directly, Aoun declared:
Continue Reading Article
by Guy Millière • June 7, 2026 at 5:00 am
The massacre of thousands of Israelis by the terrorist group Hamas on October 7, 2023 triggered an explosion of attacks on Jews in the United Kingdom. "London has become a no-go zone for Jews...." — UK Commissioner for Countering Extremism Robin Simcox, BBC, March 8, 2024. After every attack, the British government, along with other political leaders, take great care to condemn antisemitism. They also take great care each time to avoid saying who the perpetrators are. Their condemnations therefore amount to empty words. If you do not identify the source of the Jew-hate, how can you combat it? In July 2025, on behalf of the United Kingdom, Starmer agreed to the publication of a communiqué — also signed by 28 other countries — falsely accusing Israel of depriving Palestinians of "human dignity" and perpetrating the "inhumane killing of civilians." The communiqué was – no surprise -- exploited by all of Israel's enemies, particularly those also falsely accusing Israel of genocide. Starmer was just warming up. As if that were not odious enough, Starmer went on, in the name of the UK, officially to recognize a non-existent "State of Palestine." Starmer recognized this fictitious "State of Palestine" even as Hamas still held power and hostages in Gaza. His weakness cannot be overstated. He was -- along with the current leaders of France, Belgium, Ireland, Spain, Norway and Sweden -- just among the too many countries also recognizing an imaginary Palestinian State. "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality, today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism. For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan." — Zoheir Mohsen, senior official of Palestine Liberation Organization, Trouw, March 31, 1977. Meanwhile, Muslims continue to enter the UK, both legally and illegally. As their population continues to grow, they have been integrating less and less. Many appear to have come not only for employment opportunities and welfare benefits, but also to transform Great Britain into a country indistinguishable from the ones they left. Some people might call that imperialism. The Portuguese and Spanish displaced the cultures of South America; England tried to bring its customs to its colonies, and so on. At the time, the countries overtaken did not have the means to stop these invasions. Today's Britons are not Aztecs. Hatred of Israel and Jews, doctrinally imposed by the Qur'an and the hadith, is deeply entrenched within Muslim communities in Western Europe, and accommodated by much of non-Muslim society there.
Hatred of Israel and Jews, doctrinally imposed by the Qur'an and the hadith, is deeply entrenched within Muslim communities in Western Europe, and accommodated by much of non-Muslim society there. Almost all antisemitic acts in Britain are carried out by radicalized Muslims, yet it has become a problem to state that openly. Britons who question Muslim antisemitism are accused of "stirring up racial or religious hatred." Pictured: A demonstration supporting the Iranian regime in its war against Israel and the US, in central London on March 15, 2026. (Photo by Justin Tallis/AFP via Getty Images)
London. Sunday, May 10. A protest against rising anti-Semitism is organized in front of the prime minister's residence. About 20,000 people are present, mostly Jews. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Pat McFadden, who addressed them, was jeered and booed. "I feel your pain," he told the crowd. The reply was, "Action, no more words." When British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, a few days before the protest, visited Golders Green, a heavily Jewish area of London where two Jews had been stabbed on April 29, he was greeted with chants of "Keir Starmer, Jew Harmer." Jews in the United Kingdom are no longer safe. The year 2025 saw 3,700 anti-Semitic incidents recorded — approximately ten a day. By the end of 2026, it looks as if the figures will be at least as high. In 2023, the figures were even higher. The massacre of thousands of Israelis by the terrorist group Hamas on October 7, 2023 triggered an explosion of attacks on Jews in the United Kingdom.
Continue Reading Article
by Ahmed Charai • June 7, 2026 at 4:30 am
Iran remains what it has long been: a state controlled by a narrow ruling clique that preserves its power through repression, intimidation, corruption, and support for armed groups. Tehran's rulers operate according to the logic of a mafia state: Protecting the ruling network, intimidating opponents, threatening neighbors, exploiting disorder, and using negotiations to gain time or strategic advantage. By generating several emergencies at once, Tehran hopes to divide America from its allies and distract from its nuclear ambitions. Washington must not allow that strategy to succeed. Restrictions cannot disappear through convenient expiration dates. Sanctions relief must be gradual, conditional, and reversible. There can be no secret facilities, delayed inspections, or endless arguments over obvious violations. Enforcement is the agreement. [Trump] prefers an agreement to another prolonged war, but he also understands that an agreement reached through weakness can produce an even greater conflict. International law without enforcement is an appeal. International law backed by power is order. American leadership is essential. Iran benefits whenever Washington's partners doubt American resolve or respond separately. The answer must be unity, credible deterrence, and a refusal to accept regional blackmail. The Iranian people are not America's enemy. Trust [for Iran's leaders] is unnecessary. Verification, deterrence, and the credible power to punish violations are indispensable.
Iran remains what it has long been: a state controlled by a narrow ruling clique that preserves its power through repression, intimidation, corruption, and support for armed groups. Pictured: A funeral procession featuring banners memorializing senior officers from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps who were killed in Israeli strikes, in Tehran's Enqelab Square on June 28, 2025. (Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)
Iran remains what it has long been: a state controlled by a narrow ruling clique that preserves its power through repression, intimidation, corruption, and support for armed groups. My judgment of the regime has not changed. Tehran's rulers operate according to the logic of a mafia state: Protecting the ruling network, intimidating opponents, threatening neighbors, exploiting disorder, and using negotiations to gain time or strategic advantage. Nothing in Iran's conduct justifies trust, and no future agreement should be mistaken for evidence that the regime has changed. That is why President Donald Trump's approach matters. Trump is not asking the world to trust Tehran or have us believe that its rulers are reliable partners. His method is direct: apply overwhelming pressure, establish an unmistakable red line, leave the door open to an agreement, and make clear that deception or refusal will bring serious consequences.
Continue Reading Article
by Amir Taheri • June 7, 2026 at 4:00 am
Because President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu do not enjoy widespread popularity across the globe, MSM covers the war with a clear bias in favor of Iran. Paris walls are plastered with posters shrieking "Trump, Netanyahu! Stop the War!" as if Iran was not involved except as a victim. I also know no other country where the ruling elite is so different, in a negative way, than the mass of people it dominates. What the MSM choose to ignore is the war within this war, one that the regime is waging against Iranian people. To shed Lachrimae Amoris (lover's tears) for such a regime and depict it as an innocent victim because of partisan prejudices is a betrayal of both the Iranian people and the tragedy of this war. More importantly, it is a betrayal of the first victim of war: truth.
Because President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu do not enjoy widespread popularity across the globe, the mainstream media cover the war with a clear bias in favor of Iran. Pictured: AFP photojournalist Atta Kenare photographs a regime-organized protest against the US and Israel in Tehran on April 27, 2026. (Photo by AFP via Getty Images)
In decades of journalism, part of it as a reporter covering a dozen or so wars in the Indian subcontinent, Indochina, the Middle East, Africa and Europe, I have never been as puzzled by media coverage of a conflict as I am today with how the Iran-US-Israel war is depicted in much of the mainstream media. The first curious feature of this war is the absence of clearly identifiable battlefronts. This is partly because it is a war almost exclusively waged through the skies. Even the war in Ukraine has some battlefields on the ground. In Lebanon, which is an offshoot of the current war, the Israeli army and Hezbollah fighters seldom come face to face.
Continue Reading Article
by Majid Rafizadeh • June 6, 2026 at 5:00 am
In the midst of ongoing diplomatic efforts and an ostensible truce, Iran launched missile and drone strikes on Kuwait and Bahrain — countries not even remotely involved in its conflict with Israel and the US — and then revealed that it signed a $25 billion nuclear deal with Russia. Striking them deliberately during a ceasefire appears just part of Iran's blackmail plan to have its neighbors press US President Trump to permanently end military action against Iran, so that Iran will not attack their oilfields. The Iranian regime has repeatedly shown that when it comes to achieving its goals, it has no red lines. In 2026 -- not even half over -- Iran has targeted multiple Gulf states, Israel, and US bases with countless missiles and drones, causing civilian casualties across the region. This is in addition to reportedly murdering more than 40,000 of its own citizens just in January, as well as decades of murderous terrorist attacks against Americans. Deals, to Iran's regime, are about getting money to rebuild its military and its nuclear weapons program. Iran's regime views attacks and expansion as a way to keep on inflicting more attacks and expansion. Even if a new deal were reached, with temporary halts on uranium enrichment for sanctions relief, what happens after? Iran's regime can buy time. It plays the long game. Just wait out US administrations. A future US leadership could be weaker. In addition to Iran's $25 billion nuclear deal with Russia, it could receive additional help from its other allies, China, North Korea and Pakistan. Should the IRGC be allowed to "save face" or be removed entirely? Did the Allied forces in World War II allow Germany's Nazi regime to save face? Hardly. There were consequences for criminal behavior, the Nuremberg Trials, as well as searches for war criminals for decades. The latest attacks on Kuwait and Bahrain clearly show that trusting the Iranian regime with any deal is playing Russian roulette with regional and global stability. The US administration cannot afford to fool its people or itself.
Even if a new deal were reached, with temporary halts on uranium enrichment for sanctions relief, what happens after? Iran's regime can buy time. It plays the long game. Just wait out US administrations. A future US leadership could be weaker. In addition to Iran's $25 billion nuclear deal with Russia, it could receive additional help from its other allies, China, North Korea and Pakistan. Pictured: The reactor building of the Russian-built Bushehr nuclear power plant in southern Iran. (Photo by Atta Kenare/AFP via Getty Images)
In the midst of ongoing diplomatic efforts and an ostensible truce, Iran launched missile and drone strikes on Kuwait and Bahrain — countries not even remotely involved in its conflict with Israel and the US — and then revealed that it signed a $25 billion nuclear deal with Russia. Iran's regime, controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which is headed by General Ahmad Vahidi, appears not to have the slightest intention of decreasing its hostilities. Kuwait and Bahrain have historically played constructive roles in regional de-escalation, including efforts to mediate or support deals involving Iran and the West. Striking them deliberately during a ceasefire appears just part of Iran's blackmail plan to have its neighbors press US President Trump to permanently end military action against Iran, so that Iran will not attack their oilfields.
Continue Reading Article
by Con Coughlin • June 5, 2026 at 5:00 am
American military historian Victor Davis Hanson... suggested that Iran's excuses might actually be an ever-extending "good cop-bad cop" routine, whereby the good cops, the negotiators, make acceptable proposals -- to be shot down immediately by the bad cops, General Ahmad Vahidi and other members of Iran's ruling Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Above all, Hanson stressed, the current rulers appear determined to remain in power at any "level" to be able to claim victory over Trump and the American "Great Satan." [T]he intransigence of Iranian leaders could ultimately persuade him that, in order to ensure the Iranians have no chance of resuming their nuclear and ballistic missile programme, he has no alternative but to resume military action against the regime.
American military historian Victor Davis Hanson... suggested that Iran's excuses might actually be an ever-extending "good cop-bad cop" routine, whereby the good cops, the negotiators, make acceptable proposals -- to be shot down immediately by the bad cops, General Ahmad Vahidi and other members of Iran's ruling Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Pictured: Vahidi on October 27, 2020. (Photo by Office of the Supreme Leader of Iran)
In the seemingly endless to and fro over the Trump administration's attempts to negotiate a peace deal with Tehran, the one red line upon which there can be no hint of compromise is US President Donald J. Trump's insistence that the ayatollahs will never be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. While speculation continues to mount that a deal to end the three-month conflict between Iran and the US is in the offing, it is clear that Iran is still resisting demands that it surrender the estimated 970 pounds of enriched uranium -- whose main utility is for the production of nuclear warheads. Trump's insistence that he would not sign any deal that enabled Tehran to continue work on its nuclear programme was very much in evidence following a meeting of senior administration officials in the Situation Room last week to discuss the draft Memorandum of Understanding that has been drawn up between Washington and Tehran.
Continue Reading Article
by Khaled Abu Toameh • June 4, 2026 at 5:00 am
The message emerging from Hamas -- and Iran -- is unambiguous: Hamas and Iran believe they are winning. Iran has been dictating to Washington when and with whom it will negotiate. Washington apparently never insisted upon face-to-face negotiations with Iran. Why not? By discontinuing talks with the US, Iran also succeeded in maneuvering the Trump Administration into two huge victories for the current regime. First, as the Wall Street Journal pointed out in "Iran Gets Trump to Rescue Hezbollah," US President Donald J. Trump demanded that Israel stop defending itself against attacks from another proxy of Iran: Hezbollah in Lebanon. Second, Iran -- as a result of a much-publicized shouting match between Trump and Netanyahu – masterfully created "daylight" between its two main adversaries: Israel and the United States. Even though Iran's weapons have been decimated, the current regime, run by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), has reportedly been using its leisurely, ever-extending ceasefire to rebuild them. The IRGC has been calling the shots and has stood up to the "Great Satan," the US. No wonder the regime thinks it is winning. These are not the words of a defeated terror organization. These are the words of a group that believes time is on its side. Abu Obeida's remarks are particularly alarming because they come after nearly three years of war, the elimination of many top Hamas leaders, and countless declarations by international mediators that Hamas would eventually be removed from power. Instead, Hamas is still standing. Hamas, like Iran, appears increasingly confident. The "Board of Peace" was supposedly created to bring stability to the Gaza Strip, end Hamas rule, and establish a new political reality after the war. The truth is that the "Board of Peace" has failed in its central mission. Six months after Trump's ceasefire initiative and almost three years after the October 7 atrocities, Hamas remains in power. It continues to control large parts of the Gaza Strip, maintains its military infrastructure, and openly refuses to disarm Recent reports that the Trump Administration pressured Israel to cancel a planned strike against Hezbollah targets in Beirut's Dahiya district sent a troubling message throughout the region. For Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah, any indication of friction between the US and Israel is good news. Terrorists thrive on the perception that their adversaries are divided. Across the Middle East, terrorist organizations constantly search for signs of weakness among their enemies. Jihadists interpret "restraint" quite differently from the way Western policymakers do. What many Western leaders describe as diplomacy, patience, or de-escalation is frequently seen by Islamists as surrender, fear or exhaustion. The October 7 massacre was partly the result of Hamas's belief that Israel had become weak, divided, and vulnerable. Today, Hamas appears once again to be reaching similar conclusions. This expectation should deeply concern policymakers in Washington. Weakness, hesitation, and public divisions send exactly the wrong message to Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran. Every appearance of indecision only encourages further aggression and convinces terrorist leaders that persistence will eventually bring victory. A united American-Israeli front creates deterrence. Public disputes create opportunities. The latest Iranian and Hamas statements are not merely propaganda. They are a warning. The question is whether decision-makers in Washington are listening.
Across the Middle East, terrorist organizations constantly search for signs of weakness among their enemies. Jihadists interpret "restraint" quite differently from the way Western policymakers do. What many Western leaders describe as diplomacy, patience, or de-escalation is frequently seen by Islamists as surrender, fear or exhaustion. In a video statement this week, Hamas spokesman Abu Obeida (pictured) declared that despite the deaths of many senior commanders, Hamas remains strong and determined to continue the fight against Israel. (Image source: Hamas via Telegram)
Nearly three years after the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led massacre in Israel, led by the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, that Iran-backed terror group remains as defiant as ever. Far from showing any willingness to disarm, abandon terrorism, or relinquish control of the Gaza Strip, Hamas leaders are once again issuing threats, glorifying jihad (holy war) and promising more violence. Their statements should serve as a wake-up call not only for Israel, but also for Washington and the wider West. The message emerging from Hamas -- and Iran -- is unambiguous: Hamas and Iran believe they are winning.
Continue Reading Article
|
