Benghazi Update

June 28, 2016

Nearly four years after the deadly attack on our diplomatic outpost in Libya, the House Select Committee on Benghazi is finally releasing its report.  For once, I don’t blame the slow-turning wheels of government, but the difficulty in getting anyone involved to tell “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but.” 

As expected, the official version goes easier on then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton than the report by the Committee conservatives (“a tragic failure of leadership”), but it still finds that Clinton and top aide Patrick Kennedy should have realized the risk their actions were causing to our diplomats and staff.  As to their claim that there was no “actionable intelligence” suggesting an attack, the report says it’s not clear how much more intelligence it would have taken to make them understand the risk, short of an attack.  So in summation, the best defense the Administration could make is that when it comes to dealing with radical Islamist terrorists, they suffer from a tragic lack of intelligence.  I think that’s something that we can all agree on.



The Democrats on the House Benghazi Committee tried to steal attention from the official report and muddy its findings by releasing their own report the day before.  As expected, their conclusion was that Hillary Clinton and her aides did nothing wrong at all, it’s all just a political witch hunt, so move along, nothing to see here.  It’s about as useful a report as you can expect from a group of politicians who mostly cite “witnesses” who were in Washington at the time, not Benghazi, and who actually devoted part of their official investigative report to attacking Donald Trump, who in 2012 was hosting “Celebrity Apprentice.” 

Amazingly, whoever released the Democrats’ report failed to save the file properly so that anyone reading it could reverse the cut-and-paste function and view the redacted parts of the testimony transcript, revealing the politically-motivated questioning and the huge amounts of money paid to Clinton crony Sidney Blumenthal.  Once again, the Democrats exhibit a “tragic lack of intelligence” in relation to Benghazi.  I don’t know which is more appalling: that these people are in charge of making America’s foreign and defense policies, or that they have any say in making our laws governing technology and cyber-security.

I disagree with this writer’s sympathy for the good intentions of globalist elites, but he’s right about the overblown hysteria over the economic repercussions of the Brexit vote (the UK somehow managed to muddle along just fine for quite a few centuries before the EU was invented).  Where he absolutely pounds the nail on the head and smashes the thumbs of the dictatorial pro-globalization elite is in listing the reasons why the peasants finally got fed up and revolted.  Read his summation of all the ways in which high-handed leftist elites bullied, lectured, ignored and looked down on the working people of Europe and bulldozed over their concerns, beliefs and traditions, and tell me if it doesn’t sound like a capsule history of the past eight years in America under Obama.

As I have been saying for much of that time, you can govern against the will of the people for only so long before they make you pay for it big time.  Voters repeatedly sent Obama warnings by giving the House, then the Senate, to Republicans, but he refused to heed their messages and instead defied the people’s representatives by ruling through executive orders.  Do you really think the people are going to reward his obstinate arrogance with a third Obama term for Hillary?   

It’s ironic that the left accuses Donald Trump of wanting to be a dictator when he’s talking about returning power to the people and the states.  Truth is, the left loves dictators, as long as they agree with their dictation.



The left raised a huge stink when Donald Trump suggested changing libel laws to stop the media from spreading false and defamatory political stories. This was called a scary, egocentric, fascistic attempt to undermine the First Amendment.  Yet they hardly even notice that liberals in positions of power are already threatening Americans with prosecution for exercising free speech, from hate speech laws to criminalizing climate change skepticism to the story at this link.  Maybe the real reason leftists want to repeal the Second Amendment is because it protects the First Amendment.



Thanks to Instapundit for this link.  An article about young Britons whining that older people voted to pry them out of the warm, cozy clutches of the EU and force unwanted independence on them prompted this must-read Facebook response from blogger Richard Fernandez.  This should be hung on posters in every classroom in America and printed on every useless college diploma handed to a whining SJW.

The recent mass shooting in Orlando will go down in history as the deadliest terror attack on U.S. soil since September 11, 2001.

Wait, I need to tell you that in the previous sentence, emphasis should be placed on the word “history.” That’s a very important word. We all need to keep in mind that history is being written with every new example of terrorist carnage that comes our way.

So why does the Obama Administration insist on re-writing it?

Like Winston Smith in George Orwell’s novel 1984, scribes and spinners at the Justice Department are busy turning it into our very own Ministry Of Truth, dropping inconvenient references to Islam down the memory hole to create their own version of what is happening. The rationale they offer for their novelization of the facts is so ridiculous that they may as well admit it: they’re telling lies about why they’re telling lies.

On Sunday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch went on the Sunday shows (our collective antennae should go up any time someone from this administration does that) to tell us that “partial transcripts” of Orlando terrorist Omar Mateen’s 911 calls would be made public. Wait a minute --- partial? On CNN, she said the redaction was done “to avoid re-victimizing those that went through this horror. But it will contain the substance of his conversations.”

Reality check: the omissions from this record include references to Islam and ISIS, and it makes no sense to say they were made for the reason she states. The opposite could, in fact, be argued: that in creating a fiction about the motive for the killings, they further victimize the people who suffered. Those people are owed the truth.

And the edited versions absolutely do not contain the substance of the killer’s conversations. In his actual calls to 911, he repeatedly pledges allegiance to ISIS. Commentator Pamela Geller has pointed out that his very first words are the Islamic prayer. The terrorist speaks of Allah, but the word “Allah” never appears in the government-approved version. “Allah” is changed to “God [in Arabic].”

Reading through the reworked transcript, one might think some enraged Presbyterian had taken up arms for no particular reason and slaughtered 49 people. This is the version of history our government wants us to see. But in this context, the words “God” and “Allah” are hardly interchangeable. When mouthed by a terrorist, the word “Allah” means something very specific. It means hatred fueled by twisted religious fervor.

Ironically, by trying so hard to purge history of the terrorists’ real motives, President Obama gives us good reason to question his own.

13 Words

June 14, 2016

ADVERTISER:  Dealing with serious illness? Find out more about how healthcare planning can help you.  Complete this 3 question health survey today to get your free assessment from Iris Plans.

If you’re wondering how such an obvious ticking time bomb as Orlando mass murderer Omar Mateen was somehow overlooked by our massive federal security apparatus, it turns out that was deliberate.

Fox News’ Catherine Herridge reports that in a closed door meeting Monday, FBI Director James Comey confirmed to reporters that there was a full, 10-month investigation of Mateen in 2013. It started after his co-workers reported that he had told them he had family connections to Al Qaeda, he was a member of a Shi’a terrorist group, and that he hoped police would raid his home and assault his wife so he could retaliate and die a martyr.

So why in the world did they drop the investigation and walk away after 10 months? They bought his claim that he was teasing his co-workers because he thought they were trying to marginalize him for his Muslim faith. In other words, they were more willing to believe that all his American co-workers were bigots than that he might be a danger to society. He’d learned to speak the language of political correctness well and used it to manipulate guilty liberals.

At the same time that the Obama Administration was arguing for the right to gather electronic data on every US citizen, including reporters, it was abandoning real leads, killing a serious terrorist investigative unit and deleting its files, and removing experts and training materials on how to identify threats, all because those things might be seen as culturally insensitive to Muslims. This is how political correctness kills, and it just set a new US record.

To sum up the Obama Administration’s counter-terrorism strategy in 13 words:

Feds: “If you see something, say something!”

Citizen: “I see something.”

Feds: “Bigot!”

ADVERTISER:  Dealing with serious illness? Find out more about how healthcare planning can help you.  Complete this 3 question health survey today to get your free assessment from Iris Plans.

The News...My Take

June 8, 2016

Advertiser: Watch Tom Brokaw share a secret with his daughter about his plans for death: CLICK HERE.

In the most anti-climactic climax since the ship sank at the end of “Titanic,” Hillary Clinton officially grasped the Democratic nomination after Tuesday’s six primaries, a nomination she’d already unofficially grasped the night before when the AP reported that enough delegates and superdelegates were now backing her to win. Hillary beat Bernie big in California and New Jersey, but in an omen that must be rattling the DNC, her vote totals were down since 2008 by 30% in California and 13% in New Jersey. Also worrisome for Hillary: Sanders vowed to keep fighting right through the convention. But it’s questionable how much fight is left in Bernie (he'll now be under heavy pressure from party bigwigs to play ball, and after a surprisingly weak showing in California, he reportedly plans to lay off at least half his staff today – a move downplayed by his campaign as routine downsizing near the end of the primaries).


As the first female presidential nominee of a major party, Hillary Clinton had the spotlight for what should have been a historic victory speech. But her speech was more of a rambling laundry list of talking points, veering from the history of feminism to attacking Donald Trump to praising Bernie Sanders and appealing to his voters to come over to the Dark Side, to promising to bring back good-paying jobs without saying how, to vowing to get unaccountable money out of politics (has there ever been a worse spokeswoman for that cause?) and so on. As for her claim that “We have a prosperity that lifts everyone who has been left out,” I’d sure love to know where that’s happening. There were also the usual cliché attacks on Republicans (“Make America Great Again” means we want to turn back the clock to the days of racism and sexism) and another slam at Trump for attacking reporters for asking tough questions. That’s particularly ironic coming from someone who hasn’t held a press conference this year (and it's June already) and whose last informal Q&A lasted all of eight minutes and didn’t include a single non-puffball question.


In Tuesday’s Republican primaries, Donald Trump won lopsided but low-turnout victories, which tends to be the case when the suspense is long over. The fact that Cruz and Kasich still got 17% and 16% of the vote respectively in South Dakota shows that Trump still hasn’t won over a big slice of Republicans. Maybe his latest actions will help repair the damage from his unforced error in going after the judge in the Trump University lawsuit.

After several days of taking flak from all sides, Trump issued a lengthy statement, claiming he was misconstrued and didn’t mean the judge was biased against him because of his “Mexican heritage” (his parents were from Mexico but he was born in Indiana), but because of his case rulings so far. Trump said this will be his last statement on the subject, and let’s hope that’s a campaign promise he keeps (one note I’ll add: reports that linked the judge to the leftwing group La Raza were incorrect; he’s a member of an unaffiliated group called La Raza Lawyers of California).

Later, Trump made a speech in which he appeared at last to start pivoting to a more presidential tone. He thanked the voters, made a play for Bernie Sanders voters who were “left out in the cold by a rigged system of superdelegates,” and promised that he would soon turn his fire on the Clintons, who “have turned the politics of personal enrichment into an art form for themselves." Perhaps the part about the speech that was most reassuring for Republicans: it was written in advance and he read it off a prompter instead of tossing it out off the top of his head.

Hillary Clinton’s camp barely had time to sweep up the confetti before this news arrived: Lawyers for Bryan Pagliano, the former State Dept IT guy who set up her Rube Goldberg email server, had to explain why he should be allowed to take the Fifth in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit to obtain her emails. In doing so, they revealed something ominous about his immunity deal.

It’s called a “use” immunity, which is limited only to the FBI investigation, not subsequent investigations or cases, such as the Judicial Watch suit. According to his own lawyers’ argument, the fact that he was offered that deal “strongly attests to the injurious nature of (his) evidence” being potentially dangerous enough to expose him to prosecution. Then might it also be dangerous enough to expose other people involved to prosecution, as well?

The 2016 Democratic presidential nominee might yet turn out to be historically unique in more ways than one.

If you’re not already tired of hearing about the controversy over Donald Trump’s criticism of the judge in the Trump University case, here’s a unique perspective. Former US Attorney General and Hispanic-American Alberto Gonzales defends Trump – sort of. Well, he disagrees with what Trump said, but defends his right to say it, since every American has the right to a fair trial before an impartial judge and to voice an opinion if he or she doesn’t believe the judge is impartial.

I’d just like to add that one of Trump’s loudest critics is, of course, Hillary Clinton, who seems outraged that Trump would attack the integrity of the official overseeing accusations of impropriety against him. Say, hasn’t it been only a couple of weeks since her camp was accusing the Obama-appointed State Department Inspector General of being a Republican shill for writing a negative report on her email server?


Advertiser: Watch Tom Brokaw share a secret with his daughter about his plans for death: CLICK HERE.

For those who still aren’t sick to the gills of the Trump University trial controversy, the National Review put together a detailed resume on Judge Gonzalo Curiel. Oddly enough, judging from his court rulings cited here and his history of fighting Mexican drug cartels, if this current brouhaha hadn’t happened, you might imagine him being on a list of potential Trump judicial appointees.


The presidential race wasn’t the only vote making history Tuesday. In North Carolina, Rep. Renee Ellmers became the first Congressional Republican of 2016 to lose her primary. Much will be made of the fact that she was an early Trump endorser, and Trump endorsed her in return. But her problems went far deeper. Her original Tea Party supporters felt she had betrayed them, and redistricting gave her another Republican incumbent, Rep. George Holding, as a rival.

But as this story notes, the really newsworthy thing about her loss is that despite the media declaring this the year of pitchfork-waving voters and insurgent outsiders, very few down-ballot incumbents and only one Republican so far have actually lost their primaries.


Political correctness has some people so overly sensitive (and other so terrified of twitter mobs of the easily-offended) that comedians feel as they’re having to perform in straitjackets. For centuries, the court jester was often the only person who could tell the truth to the king without losing his head, because it was couched in humor. Now, mobs call for beheading jesters just for telling one joke the audience doesn’t like at a Chuckle Hut in Boise,after some jerk in the audience posts an out-of-context cell phone video on the Internet. When even a comedian as clean and benign as Jerry Seinfeld is afraid to play college campuses, you know this has gone way too far.

Well, good news: some comics got together to make a stand on behalf of free speech. A new documentary called “Can We Take A Joke?” opens in New York and L.A. on July 29th, then will be downloadable from iTunes on August 2nd.

It features a number of top comics who have felt the wrath of the PC police (Adam Carolla, Gilbert Gottfried, Lisa Lampanelli, Penn Jillette and many more), talking about the PC clampdown and the need for free speech not only in comedy clubs but in society at large. Warning: there will undoubtedly be jokes and language that some might find very offensive. If so, rather than going ballistic, just skip ahead 10 seconds. See how easy that was? The first trailer for the film is now on YouTube here:


Very moving story of how a woman and her daughter spotted a Vietnam veteran in a wheelchair outside a homeless shelter. Taking far more action than the V.A. would, they brought him some food, befriended him, prayed with him and learned how he and his wife lost their home. They enlisted their church to help, and started a GoFundMe page for him. Read the entire story at this link, which also has a link to the GoFundMe page. Any donations to help this forgotten wounded warrior, no matter how small, can add up fast and make a big difference.


A big Huck’s Hero salute to four young men in Calgary, Canada, who suspected a young woman might be in danger. Instead of “not getting involved,” they went out of their way to check on her and ended up saving her from a devastating sexual assault. Read the full story of this real-life Fantastic Four here:


Advertiser: Watch Tom Brokaw share a secret with his daughter about his plans for death: CLICK HERE.

A Stroke Of Luck

June 3, 2016

It’s a small-scale miracle…with the potential to become a life-changer for victims of stroke, brain injury and neurodegenerative disorders.

Previous research has shown that stem cell treatments can help stroke patients when given within a few days of the stroke. But a new study shows that such procedures can help within a much larger window, six months to as long as three years after the stroke. Even 70-year-old patients and the profoundly disabled can regain their ability to walk.

The procedure is simple enough (at least for neurosurgeons). Patients remain awake under local anesthesia while a small hole is drilled into the skull and stem cells are injected into the damaged part of the brain. Don’t try this at home, unless you’re Dr. Ben Carson.

Larger studies will have to be done, but this new research is incredibly promising for those suffering the lingering effects of brain injury. Click here to see some of the wonderful ways in which this treatment is already transforming lives.


See you at the Berkeley Islamophobia Conference!

Not really. Darn, I missed my chance to go, because it was held last month. But a scan of this story in the Independent Journal Review tells us all we need to know. In April, Berkeley was the proud host of the Seventh Annual International Islamophobia Conference.

Opening remarks were given by the director of the UC Berkeley Islamophobia Research and Documentation Project (yes, this exists), Hatem Bazian, followed by a rousing speech by John Esposito, founding director of Georgetown University’s Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, in which he accused the media of hyping the terrorist threat in America and Europe and, according to this article, actually asserted that the “main terrorist threat is from white, anti-government, also often Christian-identity type movements.”

The study of Islamophobia at the college level has adopted its own unassailable belief system couched in learned-sounding academic jargon. At the risk of making your head spin around and around on your body, you definitely should check out this article to find out for yourself what’s being said from the liberal sanctuary of today’s college campuses.

Click here to read the full story.

For those who say “Never Trump” and pretend it’s because you’re too principled and pure to trust someone who has in the past had more than one marriage, supported very liberal abortion laws and labor unions, who was okay with tax increases, and who compromised with Democrats and rarely went to church, then I know you probably hated Ronald Reagan. Yet those of us who supported Reagan never regretted it. The ones who didn’t later pretended they did, and all claimed to be on his side.

Recapping Tuesday’s primaries: Donald Trump won overwhelmingly in West Virginia and Nebraska, which is expected when you’re the last man standing, but still a nice feeling.  With the GOP race all but settled, the real news is happening on the Democratic side (not that you’d know it from all the media outlets wringing their hands about how the Republican Party is so disunified, a tragedy that surely must keep them awake at night.) 

A funny thing happened on the way to the coronation: the court jester keeps tripping up the queen.  Hillary Clinton won the Nebraska primaries by about 53-47% (but it was the May 5th caucuses that bind delegates, and Bernie won those 57-43%).  But that barely caused a media ripple among all the chatter about the shellacking she took in West Virginia.  To paraphrase Sally Field, “They hate her.  They really, really hate her!” 

Hillary not only lost West Virginia’s Democratic primary to Bernie 51-36%, but in a Fox News exit poll of Democrats, only 45% said they would vote for her for President in November, with 35% choosing Trump and 18% neither.  Again: that’s among DEMOCRATS.  When voters are actually telling you to your face, “We don’t want you here, get out,” it’s not a good omen.

(To see the depths of Hillary’s WV problem, check out this CNN interview of random people on the street, as they tried to find anybody who planned to vote for her, even in a Democratic stronghold.  You won’t believe who 19 out of 20 did plan to vote for:  CLICK HERE )

The media are again trying to do damage control for Hillary, supporting her claim that when she publicly declared that her policies would put a lot of coal miners out of work and a lot of coal companies out of business, she was taken out of context.  After all, she went on to propose a $3 billion job retraining program for those unemployed workers. 

Okay, let’s put that in the context West Virginians heard:  She’s going to destroy the industry that’s been our way of life for generations and cut off our family’s income, but she’ll try to get back on our feet with some government job training programs (you know what a great record of success those have) to help us find one of the plentiful jobs that will spring up after she kills our state’s largest industry.  But maybe we can get jobs in one of West Virginia’s other growing industries: oil, natural gas and logging.  Oh, wait, forgot: her green supporters want to destroy those, too.

It’s no wonder that Hillary is about as popular in West Virginia as a Yankees fan in Boston. 

Two more stunning exit poll findings:

NBC reports that 39% of Sanders voters said they would vote for Trump over Sanders in November, as would 9% of Clinton voters.  Again: DEMOCRAT voters.

CNN found that nearly 40% of Democratic voters say they want the next President to be less liberal than Obama.  Of those, 62% voted for self-proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders.   At first glance, that seems crazy…unless maybe they think Obamaism is further left than socialism.  Then it sort of makes sense.

Here’s more on the WV vote, with some interesting demographic breakdowns: CLICK HERE

I can just hear the tourists now: “Come dear, let’s visit the Muslim holy site called The Western Wall, where the Prophet Muhammad tied his winged horse!” In my latest film (The ARK Report – Sequel) there’s an exclusive interview with Gov. Mike Huckabee, who was one of the candidates for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.

Although I interviewed many politicians and ambassadors for the film, one particular remark keeps coming up with viewers. Huckabee mentions something that happens every time he comes to Israel, year after year, and this point has apparently made a lasting impression on many people.

At the beginning of the video he states: “Every time I take a big group to Israel, one of the things I love to do is get one of the Palestinian maps that I can get in the Old City. I unfold it and ask one of the people that are with me: ‘Where’s Israel on the map?’ They’ll look, and they’ll look... and I’ll say: ‘Can you find Israel on the map?’ The answer is no, they can’t find it. I ask them why, and they say, ‘I don’t know!’ I say, because the people that built this map, they don’t believe there is such a thing as Israel.”

Last October, UNESCO was forced to drop the Palestinian Authority’s bid to declare the whole Western Wall Plaza an official Muslim holy site, amid widespread criticism from many Western sources. If you think about it for a moment, to even try to pull off that kind of publicity stunt in a convincing way, one needs two things: some serious chutzpah, and some serious (what we call in Hebrew) protexia, or connections. The unbelievable thing is, the PA used both and it just about worked for them.

As most of us know, this past April 15 the executive council of UNESCO adopted a new resolution that specifically calls the Western Wall only by a Muslim name (ignoring any Jewish ties to the holy site). In fact, when the text mentions the Western Wall Plaza, it’s actually placed in quotation marks, only after using the Arabic “Al-Buraq Plaza” as its official name. Further in the resolution, only the Arabic term for the Temple Mount, i.e., al-Aqsa Mosque/Al-Haram al-Sharif, is used.

The reason, of course, is that the name “Temple Mount” obviously infers that at some point in history there was a Temple on that mountain. The fear of the PA (and the UN) could be that there may actually be another, third Jewish Temple coming at some point in the future, and therefore any Jewish ties must be somehow delegitimatized now, before any facts on the ground (as it were) can be established.

If that isn’t sufficient, the resolution continues to include other holy sites in Israel proper: “[The Executive Board] reaffirms that the two concerned sites located in Al-Khalil/ Hebron and in Bethlehem are an integral part of Palestine,” in reference to the Tomb of the Patriarchs and Rachel’s Tomb, respectively. (Interesting to note here that the resolution had actually been pre-approved by France, Russia, Spain and Sweden!) Indeed, looks like Huckabee has a good point.

It’s simple: take away the Jewish holy sites and it becomes that much easier to take away Israel altogether, from the inside out.

So where is the outcry? Where are the religious leaders of the world – the pope, for instance? Israel must issue a firm response to such land-grab attempts and blatant falsifications of history, or it will certainly continue, only worse.

Here’s an unconventional response that might eventually provide a solution for all parties concerned – and it has been done before. There’s an historical precedent. Not once, not twice, but believe it or not a whopping six times since the destruction of the Second Temple people have built some kind of “place of worship” on the Temple Mount. In this case, a place suitable for all faiths, and for all peoples. Sounds more like a dream than something that really happened. But it did.

What follows is some (rather dry) history.

Approximately 50 years after the destruction of Herod’s Temple by the Romans in 70 CE, Emperor Hadrian (76-138) granted the Jews permission to start building a structure on the Mount, being eager to gain the cooperation of Jerusalem’s Jewish community. This didn’t last too long, however, and the project stopped shortly afterwards. Later, Constantine’s nephew Julian, who later became emperor in 361 CE, turned his back on Christianity and issued an edict of universal religious tolerance for all, a novel idea at the time. Two years later he promised to build an edifice on the Temple Mount, taking the incredible step of ordering the imperial treasury to make available large sums of money and materials toward this effort. Unfortunately, this project too was halted, perhaps due to Julian’s death, or an earthquake.

Then, after the invasion of Jerusalem by King Khosru II of Persia (613), who succeeded in wresting control of the city, the appointed governor wasted no time in re-establishing a place of worship on the Mount, as was witnessed by the renowned rabbi and poet Elazar Kalir. About the restoration, he wrote: “When Assyria [Persia] came to the city... and pitched his tents there / he permitted the re-establishment of a Temple / and they built there the holy altar....”

Furthermore, even in the early years of Muslim rule, when Jerusalem was conquered by strictly Arab forces in May 638 Caliph Umar declared the right of Jews (and others) to continue praying on the Temple Mount, without interference, in return for assistance in the taking of the city.

Even at that point in history, note that the gradual evolution of the Mount into Islam’s third holiest site didn’t result in a total exclusion of Jews from the location. In fact, soon after the Muslim conquest, Jews actually received permission to build a small wooden structure on the Mount.

According to Rabbi Petachia of Ratisbon (London 1856), that place remained active during most of the early Muslim period, and then again from approximately 1100 CE up until the conquest of the Crusaders. Even today, one can still see Hebrew writings found on the internal walls of the eastern Golden Gate written by Jewish pilgrims about 1,000 years ago.

Someone should take a picture of that now so it too is not erased from Israel’s history! Saladin at one point permitted both Jews and Muslims to settle in Jerusalem and worship together, to the extent of even permitting Jews to erect something of their own on the site (as per Emil Offenbacher). Later on, because subsequent Ottoman rulers invested little to no effort in the upkeep of the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque, there was never any record or precedent of Muslim clerics ever visiting the Temple Mount or of evicting Jews those places.

In modern times, the late Sephardi chief rabbi of Israel Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (1929-2010) suggested a concrete plan for some type of structure to be located in the open area to the northeast of the Dome of the Rock, closer to the eastern wall. He made his intentions clear when speaking on the subject, saying: “that also the Children of Israel will enter into the areas that are permitted [to pray], in holiness and purity according to Jewish Law....”

At the end of the day, what can we glean from this history? There was a working solution that was generally accepted by the various governments of the time, and for all parties concerned.

Is there any chance of this type of thing being suggested vis-à-vis the geopolitical scenario in Israel today? Not a chance. But now, just as back then, the idea still holds merit. Emperor Julian had it right: universal religious tolerance is indeed the way to go. Moving forward, the PA , and more importantly UNESCO, must abide by the latter’s very own universal principle and slogan: “Building peace in the minds of men and women” – i.e., all men and women (including Jews and Christians), and to respect their ancestral holy sites of worship, and especially those in Israel.

This column originally ran in the Jerusalem Post. READ IT HERE.

Today’s must-see video: Many of the “Never Trump” crowd say their anti-Trump zeal is based on their belief that Trump has always been a Democrat, that he only recently became a Republican and will break all his promises to blue collar voters and govern like a liberal as soon as he’s elected.

Heaven knows, I would never claim to be able to predict what Donald Trump will do in the future. But a rare piece of video has been unearthed that casts doubt on his critics’ claims about his past. It’s an interview with Trump at a major Republican event. He claims he’s a Republican, but rejects the label of “moderate” or “Rockefeller Republican.” He says he believes in certain principles of the party, but he’s more comfortable with people like cab drivers and construction workers than with wealthy elites, who don’t like him because he competes with them, and he likes to win.

I know, it sounds just like any recent Trump rally. But this piece of video is actually nearly 30 years old. Larry King was interviewing him at the 1988 GOP Convention, where Trump was supporting George H.W. Bush…who is currently refusing to return the favor, even though Trump was his invited guest to the '88 convention. I’d say that unless Trump has developed a time machine, this video is pretty convincing proof that he’s been a populist Republican longer than most Bernie Sanders voters have been alive. Click the link to see the full video.

Click here to watch the video on Conservative!

A Four Legged Hero

May 9, 2016

I love a good dog story, and this is a great one. This particular four-legged Huck’s Hero didn’t perform any dramatic feat. But she’s a quiet hero every day to a young boy from Louisiana, and his school found a unique way to commemorate her service.

Read the rest here.


May 6, 2016

An Israeli man petitioned a court in Haifa to put out a restraining order against God. He claims that over the past three years, God has been particularly unkind to him, and he wants the Almighty to leave him alone. The judge rejected his request, calling it ludicrous.

"To Stop Clinton"

May 6, 2016

Trump has won passionate supporters and vitriolic detractors for his blunt talk and hardline proposals, including his call for a ban on Muslims entering the United States, his vow to force Mexico to pay for a border wall, and his promise to renegotiate international trade deals.

My prayers and condolences today for the family of former Utah Sen. Bob Bennett, who passed away Wednesday at 82 from complications of pancreatic cancer and a stroke. Praise is flooding in from virtually every political figure who ever worked with Bennett. He’s being remembered as wise, kind, a fighter for his constituents and small businesses, a pro-life and pro-family conservative and a true gentlemen, even to his opponents. His votes for the bank bailout and immigration reform made him one of the first Senators to fall to a Tea Party challenger, but even the man who replaced him, Sen. Mike Lee, expressed his condolences and respect for Bennett for his courage in fighting cancer and for spending his life “in service to others.”

In an age when politics has become blood sport and debate has degenerated into character assassination, let’s hope more politicians will be inspired by Bob Bennett’s example. He showed us that it is possible to be an effective politician and still be a fine and decent human being.

Click here to read this Washington Times story about Senator Bennett.

Donald Trump’s opponents flooded Indiana with negative ads about him, and Hillary Clinton is already gearing up to go full-bore negative against him. But negative ads were shockingly ineffective against Trump in Indiana, and it’s possible they’ll be equally useless nationwide.

The data analysis firm Evolving Strategies tested four anti-Trump ads focusing on four themes, on a cross-section of Indiana voters. They found that one ad (accusing him of not being a real conservative) had zero effect on both men and women. The other three had a marginal effect, slightly swaying women against him, but no impact at all on the men.

Read the full story for the fascinating details. If Trump proves impervious to negative ads nationwide, it could spell Hillary’s worst nightmare: she’ll actually have to run on her record.

Click here to read more at Conservative Tribune.

Please leave me a comment below. I read them!

Donald Trump broke the code, owned the media, and inspired the masses. I will be all in to help him defeat Hillary Clinton and I call upon all fellow Republicans to unite in defeating Hillary and abandoning and repudiating the hapless “Never Trump” nonsense.

Communism, Cuba…And America

Welcome to Obama’s "fundamentally transformed" America.

May 3, 2016

We can soften it with non-threatening words such as “liberal,” “progressive,” and “concerned citizens,” but those euphemisms are being used to mask a radical shift towards communism and the increased government control of American lives.
In case you weren’t keeping up with the outrageous behavior of anti-Trump protesters in California, here is a handy blow-by-blow recap in photos of their actions outside the state convention, complete with burning American flag. This followed the rioting outside a Trump rally in Orange County Thursday, where protesters blocked streets, smashed police cars and waved Mexican flags. Nobody is trying to deny their right to protest, but this was not “peaceful assembly,” it was violent confrontation in an attempt to suppress their opposition’s right to free speech.
Even after nearly eight years of trying, President Obama has not been able to enact the strict gun control laws he’s wanted, largely because Americans kept asking the question gun control advocates have never been able to answer: “How, exactly, would this law actually prevent violent crime?” We know that most criminals obtain guns illegally, so gun laws mostly just disarm the law-abiding.

Give Kasich A Break

April 26, 2016

The Cruz-Kasich alliance to deny delegates to Trump lasted all of one weekend. Who would’ve imagined these two would have trouble getting along with others? Comic Jimmy Kimmel said, “It’s a crazy plan, but as long as they did it three months ago, it just might work.”

Donald Trump not only blasted Cruz and Kasich for “colluding” against him, he also riffed on the “disgusting” way John Kasich eats food on the campaign trail. This is the type of both-barrels bluster his fans love, but that critics call vulgar and unpresidential. Personally, I think the Donald should get back to talking about the pocketbook issues that got his base fired up in the first place and cool the personal mockery. With the poll and delegate lead he has over Kasich, it just looks like he’s punching down.

Besides that, I feel a little sympathy for Kasich. When you’re campaigning, people hand you all kinds of foods they expect you to eat, and it can be awkward to try to oblige, especially when you’re in a hurry and it’s some messy and unfamiliar dish. For instance, this year marks the 40th anniversary of then-President Gerald Ford visiting the Alamo, being handed a tamale, and trying to eat it with the corn husk still on. It wasn’t his fault that nobody told him you have to take the wrapper off. Yet it’s 40 years later, and here we are still talking about it. I wonder which one we’ll remember longer: the Alamo or the Great Tamale Blunder?

Read this Fox News story for more. CLICK HERE

Obama and Veterans

April 25, 2016

Maybe a better solution would be to concentrate on getting the private sector economy revved back up and once again creating good-paying jobs. Then veterans wouldn’t need to land government jobs. They could work in the private sector, where being efficient and goal-oriented are actually considered positives.

Let’s all offer a big Huck’s Hero salute to Cumberland County, North Carolina District Court Judge Lou Olivera. Judge Olivera stepped up to help a fellow vet even when standing by his side meant spending a night in jail with him. In a time when so many government officials whose job is to help our wounded warriors have shamefully let them down and really deserve to see the inside of a jail, Judge Olivera showed them what “leaving no soldier behind” looks like.