At first, there were three of us. When I started work as a speechwriter for Richard Nixon in the White House Executive Office Building in the Fall of 1973, I was in a speechwriters’ suite of three extremely well-furnished offices facing 17th Street. I was by far the most junior of them all by experience. The man to my left was Aram Bakshian, Jr., a long-time speechwriter for conservative causes. He was a writer on food and on history. He was the same age as I was, but he had been a speechwriter for longer years than I. He was a dapper fellow whose knowledge of almost everything was breathtaking. I will never have another friend like John. I was just north of a man named John R. Coyne, Jr. He had been a speechwriter for Mr. Agnew, but when Mr. Agnew left office hurriedly, John was moved to the Presidential staff. He was a super-good writer for Mr. Nixon, as he was for National Review beforehand. He was a cordial neighbor from the first day. The first words he said to me were a question: “How does it feel to be on the first team?” I said, “It feels great.” He was under the impression that my father, Herbert Stein, Mr. Nixon’s power economist, had gotten me the gig. When he learned I had earned it by hard work, he became even more cordial. We often talked until late at night about America and about Mr. Nixon and about fathers. We frequently went out for lunch together at a nearby sandwich shop, “K’s Sandwich Shop,” the best food I have ever had. My wife came to visit me often and John took a great liking to her, as everyone does. The day RN resigned, he was with me all day. He was Gibraltar in those horrible days. When we all had left the EOB, I went to the Wall Street Journal editorial page. He wrote for Mr. Ford. Time passed. A lot of time. We spent years together on the phone. I was by then out of the WSJ, and John was in Chicago writing for a major energy entity. I came to Chicago many times. We talked and walked around the Loop. I was in Hollywood, writing scripts, books, articles, busting frauds. I was often in terror about money, a constant of my life. He listened and did not judge. He soothed me and trusted me, and I loved him. He died this morning at 90 of cancer. I am shaking with fear and horror. I will never have another friend like John. A brilliant talent. A super Christian. A great Conservative. I loved him then and I love him now and so does my wife. READ MORE from Ben Stein: Life in the Fast Lane Sons and Fathers It’s Hot Outside

In a bold move to protect our elections, the Department of Justice (DOJ) under President Trump has sued Maine and Oregon for stonewalling access to the states’ voter registration rolls. This isn’t some partisan tactic by the DOJ—it’s a straightforward enforcement of federal law to work toward accurate elections. The National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) requires that states make these rolls available for public inspection, yet these two states have continued to violate this law, hiding behind flimsy privacy excuses. Securing American elections isn’t optional — it’s essential. On September 16, 2025, the DOJ filed lawsuits alleging that Oregon and Maine violated the NVRA by refusing to provide complete voter rolls. Maine’s Secretary of State had refused to provide the voter rolls despite earlier requests from the DOJ, making the preposterous claim that the DOJ was interested in the data for nefarious reasons, and telling the DOJ to “go jump in the gulf of Maine..” Regardless, the NVRA explicitly requires states to allow public access to voter registration records, including for federal oversight to verify accuracy. It’s built into federal law to ensure that states are not sitting on voter rolls full of deceased voters, duplicate entries, non-citizens, and other ineligible individuals. Other states have had no issue providing their voter rolls in the interest of working with the federal government and the resources available to ensure proper voter list maintenance. Maine and Oregon have cited privacy concerns as the primary reason for denying the DOJ’s request for voter rolls. But that can’t really be it — because at the same time they deny access to the DOJ, they are providing free and complete voter roll access to Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) — and not just voter rolls, but also of lists of eligible but unregistered people in their states — people not even on the voter rolls yet. It’s like complaining a mile is too far to walk and then cheerfully running a marathon. Maine and Oregon happily deliver their voter data to ERIC, which they trust despite its track record. They claim federal requests violate data privacy, yet ERIC’s data-sharing model exposes the exact same data to a private organization with clear partisan ties. This double standard reeks of political gamesmanship. If privacy is in fact the hill to die on, why not apply it consistently? The DOJ’s suit cuts through this nonsense, forcing compliance with federal law and increasing accountability and transparency in voter rolls. And what exactly is ERIC? Why is this such a concerning hypocrisy by these states? ERIC purports to be a nonprofit that’s supposed to help states clean up voter rolls by sharing data across borders. But it seems to be not quite what it claims. Founded in 2012, it is funded by a network of leftist dark money and is staffed and led by former leftist bureaucrats and lawyers. ERIC claims to be nonpartisan. But in recent years, states have hemorrhaged from this “nonpartisan” partnership, citing among other concerns — shockingly — serious privacy breaches. Florida left in March 2023, criticizing ERIC for data privacy lapses and blatant partisanship. Alabama, Iowa, Louisiana, Ohio, Missouri, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia followed suit, viewing ERIC as participating in partisan scope creep and unwilling to share voter data with an organization that had such serious data privacy concerns. It’s too ironic that this is the exact reason Maine and Oregon are alleging of the federal government while actively compromising their voter data in sharing it with ERIC. The states leaving ERIC aren’t conspiracy theorists; they’re responding to real issues. ERIC requires members to send mailings to potentially eligible but unregistered citizens every two years, which does nothing to ensure voter roll accuracy. But ERIC doesn’t require states to remove voters who ERIC identifies as potentially ineligible — the whole point, ostensibly, of the interstate agreement. Now, why would the DOJ actually want these rolls? How can the federal government help states keep voter rolls accurate and NVRA-compliant? First off, the NVRA isn’t just a suggestion — it’s law. It mandates that states make “a reasonable effort” to remove ineligible voters. States can use data from sources like the U.S. Postal Service’s National Change of Address database or death records from Social Security to flag removals, and since these are federal databases, the DOJ can also easily audit voter rolls against these databases to make sure states are actually maintaining their voter rolls. Lawsuits like this one compel states to provide rolls for audits that catch inaccuracies. That is the reason for the requests — in no way nefarious. Why is this lawsuit critical? Well, bloated rolls lead to fraud risks — dead people voting or double registrations across states, for example — and every fraudulent vote negates the value of a legitimate one. By suing Maine and Oregon, the DOJ isn’t overstepping; it’s upholding the NVRA’s mandate for accuracy, especially when states like Maine and Oregon fail to follow the law and the DOJ can help ensure that every legitimate vote counts without dilution. This isn’t about suppressing voters or playing political games — it’s about safeguarding democracy. In this circumstance, the DOJ is simply enforcing a law already on the books to ensure there’s no foul play with voter rolls. Securing American elections isn’t optional — it’s essential. Kudos to the DOJ for working tirelessly towards that end, and for calling these states on their bluff. READ MORE: Voters Wisely Dropped Ranked-Choice Voting Ensuring Greater Trust in Mail-in Voting New York’s Mayoral Race May Define the Future of the Democratic Party Brett Tolman is chair for American Justice at the America First Policy Institute. He previously served as the U.S. Attorney for the District of Utah, and as a federal prosecutor for many years. Anna Pingel is the director of the Secure Elections campaign at the America First Policy Institute.

My article yesterday morning on the telecom threat to New York City represented my 100th article here at American Spectator. My first article, an analysis of Yevgeny Prigozhin’s semi-farcical attempt to overthrow Vladimir Putin, appeared on June 30, 2023. I thought of that article as something of a one-shot venture, a diversion from my new retirement career as a thriller writer. But the article was positively received, and with this encouragement, I wrote several more. Soon I found myself contributing steadily, across a wide range of subjects. Indeed, one can read the whole George Floyd episode … as a carefully orchestrated and encouraged effort by the elites to undermine the conservative opposition. Going back through the author archive, just glancing at the titles, my first thought was that, if there was a common thread, that thread was the challenge of civilizational suicide. Over and over, the unifying theme seemed to be the inability — really, the unwillingness — of those in power to stand up for America, either in the face of threats from abroad or here at home. Our position in the world seemed under constant attack, and the position of right-thinking Americans at home was being undermined at every turn, oftentimes by a political and cultural establishment that seemingly hated everything that this country had once stood for. Worse, when one looked to the nations that historically had been our friends and allies, the rot seemed even deeper. The UK had become a cesspool of political correctness, France bitterly divided against itself, Germany sinking into cultural and economic dysfunction. All of western Europe was overrun by an increasingly radical Islamist wave, with whole sections of great cities, even, astonishingly, in places like Sweden, turned into “no-go” zones run by unassimilated gangs. There was no place to turn if we wished to look for help; if things were to be turned around, if the march to self-destruction halted, we would have to find the necessary strength in ourselves. Early on, I wrote on multiple occasions about subjects I knew from my career in national security, nuclear weapons and countering terrorism. Again, on multiple occasions, I wrote on the Ukraine war, on the threat from Iran, and the challenge posed by China. These were the things I knew best, the things that I wanted most to write about, the topics where I felt most ready to speak. But events soon called for a different focus. Outraged by Hamas’ October 7 massacre of innocent Israelis, I responded that very day with an angry essay, and, in the months following, I returned to the subject again and again. This also meant writing about the unavoidable corollary, the broader threat to our way of life posed by radical Islam — -in an early article I characterized Israel as the “canary in the coal mine” for all of Western civilization as we once knew it. This also prompted several essays on the plight of poor Christian farmers in Nigeria and across Africa, victimized by Muslim terrorists, ignored, by and large, by Western governments and many of our so-called “humanitarians.” This led, inevitably, to consideration of the explosion of anti-Jewish hatred on our college campuses, our city streets, and even more powerfully, in the capitals of western Europe. Suddenly, a past hatred had become a terrible force in the present day. Worse, it wasn’t just a product of our “colonization” by Muslim immigrants, but instead had become fashionable among our own so-called “progressives.” “From the river to the sea,” a catchphrase for genocide, became common currency in our public discourse, not least led by the Ilhan Omars and the Rashida Tlaibs. Inverting the popular leftist messaging, we now found ourselves in a world where hate had a home. Contemplating the way that so many leftists have cheered the assassination of Charlie Kirk, with no meaningful rebuke from the Democrat establishment, one sometimes feels that hate now has much more than a home — it has a gilded palace. And again, one of the most distressing things was that ordinary people, otherwise down to earth people, erstwhile friends, people who should have known better, have allowed themselves to be captured by a roiling wave of intellectual dishonesty. This became all the more evident when it blended with hatred for Donald Trump, and, by extension, all those Americans who supported him. The mildest of these was the condemnation of Trump as an aspiring autocrat, once again an inversion of the march of leftist autocracy begun under Obama and continued under Biden (but I repeat myself). More often, and more viciously, this became Trump the fascist and Trump as Hitler. The attempts on Donald Trump’s life and, tragically, the assassination of Charlies Kirk, all testify to what happens when Nazi slurs become the common coin of the left’s contribution to political discourse. I regard the “Trump equals Hitler” assertion as utter nonsense. And the idea that the left is in any way, shape, or form the “resistance” is even more nonsensical. When you have the universities, the news and entertainment media, and a phalanx of billionaire patrons on your side, your claim to be downtrodden is laughably absurd; this alignment of power on the left more nearly approximates Nazism in power than anything on the right. It is precisely what the Nazis undertook to achieve after seizing power through a process called “Gleichschaltung.” Drawing on nearly a decade spent studying the rise of Nazism, I challenged this leftist fantasy repeatedly. The true “resistance” today can only be resistance to this all-encompassing progressive establishment. Ironically, for all the complaints about the (virtually non-existent) propensity for violence on the right, we see every day how the left has embraced violence, violence in words and violence in deeds. In Weimar Germany the assassins stood on the right; in today’s America they stand on the left. If anything, the Nazi shoe more nearly fits the leftist foot in today’s America, with Antifa the poster child for storm trooper thuggery. And ICE? As agents are threatened with assassination for simply enforcing the law of the land, it’s time for the mindless hatred to end. As I came to the end of an afternoon spent re-reading old articles, my first reaction was one of sadness, almost depression. Over and over, I recalled moments of despair as I tried to make sense of the things occurring all around us today. But within these 100 articles, I also found a source of hope, specifically in the numerous articles I’d written about the heroes from World War II. These young men were not, as some facile leftists proclaim, the agents of an anti-fascist crusade, but simply the defenders of the American way of life. Children of the depression, they knew their country in all of its flaws, but believed it better than all other countries on earth. They loved it devotedly, and often enough, sacrificially. More, they loved it concretely, rejecting high-sounding political .abstractions in favor of a heartfelt dedication rooted in faith, family, and friendship. In this, they found common ground with allied nations, Britons, Australians, Canadians, Frenchmen, and Poles, citizens from around the world, united not by political abstractions and high rhetoric, but by a simple desire to not be ruled from Tokyo or Berlin. One of the most insidious features of post-World War II international relations has been the rise of globalism, the triumph of the “anywheres” over the “somewheres.” Loving one’s country, wanting to preserve it, wanting to live in peace across the globe with those who also loved their countries — this was passé, old hat, a contemptible relic. The new world order was one of global institutions, the UN, the European Union. It was all about the triumph of the all-knowing elites and about putting the home-loving “deplorables” in their place. It was the top-down authoritarianism of the “experts” and their slavish followers. Barack Obama epitomized this triumphalism, not just at home, but among the progressives of Europe. It was scarcely accidental that he received the Nobel Peace Prize, only months into his presidency, at a time when even he himself wondered aloud what he’d done to deserve it. But it was really no wonder at all, but rather the perfect moment of world progressivism on the march. Then, in 2016, came the two-fold shock, first the British public’s rejection of European Union membership with the Brexit vote, then the rejection of Hilary Clinton — the great avatar of progressivism at its worst — in favor of Donald Trump. After 2016, nothing could be the same. After disbelief, the so-called “elites” reacted with rage, employing every lever of power to reassert their control. “Russiagate” was one such action, and there were many more, here and across Europe. Indeed, one can read the whole George Floyd episode, all the “mostly peaceful protests” and the like, as a carefully orchestrated and encouraged effort by the elites to undermine the conservative opposition. The same was obvious in the crude exploitation of Covid to propel Joe Biden into the White House. The sheep wore their masks, even alone in their cars, a sign less of “following the science” than of obedience to fashionable prejudice, more “Handmaid’s Tale” cosplay than serious health device. But now the “deplorables” are on the march once again, both here and in Europe — witness the rise in Italy, of all places, of Giorgia Meloni. We find ourselves fighting a daily battle for the soul of America, indeed the soul of the Western world. And the Western world, however hesitantly, is fighting back. How heartening it has been to see massive demonstrations in the UK and elsewhere, demonstrations occasioned by the assassination of Charlie Kirk, demonstrations supportive of the values he stood for. After decades in which our institutions have been corrupted and destroyed, when our weakness was exposed at every turn, it’s nice to look around and see that we’re no longer alone in our resistance. In the midst of all this, it’s been an honor to write for The American Spectator, an honor to share a tribune with so many wonderful writers and thinkers. And it’s also humbling to think that my words resonated with so many great and thoughtful readers. There’s much to be done, and the forces ranged against us are powerful. We can still lose. Our slow-motion civilizational suicide has not yet been prevented, but thus far merely delayed. But the first signs of victory are all around us, across the U.S. and around the world. It’s a great time to be in the fight. We might call it a turning point. READ MORE from James H. McGee: The Ever-Evolving Terrorist Threat Ted Cruz and the Specter of ‘Roland, the Headless Thompson Gunner’ Sentries at Every Church Corner — The Cameronian Tradition James H. McGee retired in 2018 after nearly four decades as a national security and counter-terrorism professional, working primarily in the nuclear security field. Since retiring, he’s begun a second career as a thriller writer. He’s just published his new novel, The Zebras from Minsk, the sequel to his well-received 2022 thriller, Letter of Reprisal. The Zebras from Minsk finds the Reprisal Team fighting against an alliance of Chinese and Russian backed terrorists, brutal child traffickers, and a corrupt anti-American billionaire, racing against time to take down a conspiracy that ranges from the hills of West Virginia to the forests of Belarus. You can find The Zebras from Minsk (and Letter of Reprisal) on Amazon in Kindle and paperback editions.  

The Trump administration’s abrupt move to impose a $100,000 fee on new H-1B skilled worker visa applications has sent shockwaves through America’s technology sector and the vast Indian immigrant community that powers it. Announced last Friday and set to take effect this past Sunday, the directive sparked panic and confusion for workers, businesses, and families — culminating in a frenzied rush to return to the United States before the new rule’s midnight deadline. The initial communication was so vague that even major corporations and foreign governments scrambled for clarification, fearing a sudden halt to the flow of talent that has become vital to American competitiveness. A transparent, expedited pathway to residency and citizenship for Indian immigrants of all backgrounds is a moral imperative and an economic necessity. Over the course of a tense 24-four hours, large firms like Microsoft, Amazon, and Goldman Sachs issued urgent messages to Indian H-1B visa holders abroad, warning that travel could trigger prohibitive costs or entry bans. Families cut vacations short; business trips were canceled; tech stocks even dipped as uncertainty rocked U.S. and Indian firms reliant on skilled labor. It took until Saturday for the White House to clarify: the $100,000 fee was a one-time charge, not a recurring annual bill, and would only apply to new applicants — leaving current visa holders relieved, but still shaken by the episode’s chaos. As Indian officials pointed out, such abrupt changes carry “humanitarian consequences” for families, who must constantly adjust to shifting rules while living in limbo for years on temporary visas. The rollout typified an immigration system that neither reflects nor supports the talent and stability Indian immigrants offer the U.S. Indian immigrants are not just a fraction of the tech workforce — they are central to American innovation, occupying crucial roles from entry-level coding to C-suite leadership. In 2024, 16 Fortune 500 companies were headed by CEOs of Indian origin, including Google, Microsoft, and Adobe. Indian Americans have spearheaded dozens of “unicorn” startup ventures, generated groundbreaking research, and led complex teams in artificial intelligence, pharmaceuticals, and engineering. Their achievements go well beyond Silicon Valley, encompassing scientific advances, health care leadership, and economic stewardship. It’s important to note, however, that Indian immigrant impact transcends the H-1B program. Those arriving on other visas, or via “nontraditional” paths, become the backbone of America’s small business success. Whether in motels, convenience stores, transport, or food service, Indians routinely accept work that few others want — using grit, frugality, and deferred gratification to build businesses and create jobs. Many start their U.S. lives working long, challenging hours, saving every dollar in pursuit of eventual ownership. Today, Indian Americans own 60 percent of all U.S. hotels and a significant portion of convenience stores, generating annual revenues in the hundreds of billions and employing millions. Supporting their climb is a family structure rooted in stability and mutual sacrifice. Multigenerational family networks reinforce educational achievement, emotional resilience, and entrepreneurial spirit. Indian families typically invest in tuition above all else, prioritizing their children’s academic and professional futures and weathering adversity unified. Marriage rates and family cohesion among Indian Americans far surpass national averages, giving rise to tight-knit communities with a focus on collective advancement. Deferred gratification — both financial and emotional — is a hallmark of the Indian American experience. Parents, siblings, and elders routinely forgo personal indulgence to ensure the next generation succeeds, an ethos that spreads from boardrooms to small businesses and community organizations. Despite their outsized role in American prosperity, Indian immigrants face some of the longest and most opaque immigration hurdles. Green card backlogs often stretch for decades, trapping skilled workers and their families in legal limbo despite years of economic and social contribution. Temporary visa holders live with constant anxiety: should they lose their job, change employers, or need to travel, their right to remain in the U.S. — and sometimes even to see their families — is at risk. The latest Trump policy debacle only underscores how little consideration is given to the broader effects of visa regulation. Families and businesses had no time to adjust; critical talent pipelines threatened; children and parents worried about separation or forced departure, all against a backdrop of unprecedented achievement and loyalty to their adopted homeland. America’s greatness has always depended on the drive, ingenuity, and sacrifice of its immigrants. Indian Americans — who lead at the frontier of technology, science, health care, and small business; who bolster American values of hard work, family, and philanthropy — deserve more than perpetual uncertainty and bureaucratic neglect. The country owes fairness not only to skilled H-1B holders but to all who contribute, whether as entrepreneurs, workers, or community builders. Oddly enough, one would expect the Trump administration to be more attuned to the struggles of Indian Americans — especially given that the Vice President’s wife is herself of Indian descent. A transparent, expedited pathway to residency and citizenship for Indian immigrants of all backgrounds is a moral imperative and an economic necessity. Failing to match their contributions with respect and security is no longer tenable — for America’s leaders, institutions, or its promise. As the Trump administration’s recent actions demonstrate, policy must change to honor those whose relatively small numbers have contributed so much to the success of America. READ MORE from Walter Myers III: California’s Identity Support Plans Erode Parents’ Rights California Proposal Further Erodes Parents’ Rights Blacks Need High-Quality Education, Not a DEI Agenda — Part 2 Walter Myers III is a Southern California-based technologist and Senior Fellow at Discovery Institute.

Last week, the U.S. Treasury sanctioned the Al-Bara’ ibn Malik Battalion, the Muslim Brotherhood’s most powerful armed wing, for fueling Sudan’s civil war, partnering with Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, and sabotaging every chance for peace. Across the Muslim world, leaders and organizations are working to reclaim faith from extremists. Meanwhile, Senator Ted Cruz has launched a renewed call to designate the Brotherhood a terrorist organization. He has introduced similar bills for a decade, but this time — with a Republican Congress and president — he believes the political stars have aligned. This may seem like another round in a partisan fight over foreign policy. But I know what it looks like when political Islam takes power. I know the lies it tells, the cruelty it unleashes, and the lives it destroys. That is why today, as an American Muslim woman, I support Cruz’s call. The carnage unfolding in Sudan is proof of how far its toxic grip can reach once it is left unchecked. From Cairo to Tunis to Gaza, the Brotherhood’s fingerprints appear wherever there is bloodshed. In Egypt, I saw it win elections in 2012 on promises of democracy, only to deliver repression. Opponents were harassed, women sidelined, and religion bent into a weapon of control. Their grip on power lasted only a year, but left lasting scars. The same script emerged in Tunisia. Politicians linked to the Brotherhood wrapped themselves in the language of rights and reform while quietly tightening their hold on institutions. Step by step, they worked through laws, courts, and elections to entrench themselves. Outwardly it looked like democracy; in practice it was anything but. The pattern is consistent. Since its founding in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, the Brotherhood has presented itself as a religious revival movement while becoming the most enduring Islamist network of the modern era. Its followers believe Islam should govern every corner of life — political, social, and personal. Once centered in Cairo, the movement is now dispersed, operating across borders through branches and affiliates. One of those affiliates, Hamas in Gaza, makes the link unmistakable. Hamas was born from the Brotherhood’s ideology and methods. It is already designated as a terrorist organization by the United States, and its 2023 massacre in Israel revealed — in the most shocking, brutal terms — what that lineage produces. Two weeks after October 7, I tiptoed through homes where families had been butchered. The smell of dried blood still clung to the walls and floors. That is a memory that will never leave me. Nor can I forget the screams of the Yazidi women I met, who were kidnapped, raped, and sold by ISIS fighters. That, too, was borne of the Brotherhood’s poisonous ideology. The names change — from ISIS, to Hamas, to Jamaa Islamiya — but the DNA remains the same. This is not just my conclusion. Several Arab states who know its tactics firsthand — including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Syria — already classify the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. In the U.S. and Europe, Brotherhood-linked groups have been caught laundering money, running shadow lobbying operations, and moving funds through sham “charities.” You can find its traces in classrooms, community centers, and even political movements. Yet the debate drags on, with the U.S. opting for a piecemeal approach to the Brotherhood’s slippery, diffuse network — sanctioning violent factions like Al-Bara’ ibn Malik Battalion while leaving the parent movement untouched. We’ve been too scared of alienating U.S. allies like Morocco, where Brotherhood-linked parties hold political ground. And our courts have been overly cautious of criminalizing against political or religious association. But now we must go beyond passing Cruz’s bill. We need a strategy to choke off the Brotherhood’s cash pipelines, reward whistleblowers, and demand transparency from organizations posing as charities. Banks, campuses, and community groups that refuse honest disclosure should not get a pass. Without such measures, the Brotherhood’s ideology will evolve unchecked, both abroad and at home. Congress could take a number of different steps to strip the Brotherhood of the legitimacy and funding it exploits. It could add it to the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1987, restricting visas and financial transactions. The State Department could designate it under the Immigration and Nationality Act. Or the Treasury could list it as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist entity. But we must also recognize that Islam itself is not the enemy. Across the Muslim world, leaders and organizations are working to reclaim faith from extremists. The Muslim World League, under Secretary General Sheikh Dr. Mohammad Al-Issa, has convened the historic “Charter of Makkah,” which laid down a set of principles which support and promote anti-extremism, religious and cultural diversity, and call for legislation against hate-motivated crimes and violence — endorsed by scholars from across the Muslim world. The MWL has stood with Afghan women and children to demand their right to an education and organized interfaith dialogues from the Vatican to Washington. Its work shows how faith can be a force for reconciliation rather than division. Other organizations, like Nahdlatul Ulama in Indonesia — the world’s largest Muslim civil society group — have pursued similar paths, challenging extremism while promoting pluralism. Together and with their partners, they demonstrate that the Muslim Brotherhood’s vision is not Islam’s future. I write as a Muslim woman who refuses to cede her faith to men who would weaponize it. Islam is my faith, not their ideology. Designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization is not an attack on Muslims; it is a defense of them — alongside Christians, Jews, Yazidis, and others who have suffered from its violence. If the United States refuses to act, it will dishonor the victims, betray the survivors, and endanger our future. READ MORE: My Own Operation Midnight Hammer — Iran A Texas City’s Quiet Claim to Islamic Territory Why Bader Khan’s Story Is Different — and More Alarming Dalia al-Aqidi is an Iraqi-born journalist and Republican politician who fled Saddam Hussein’s regime in 1993. With 35 years’ experience, she has reported from war zones and champions counter-extremist action.  

How far are we willing to go in the name of “progress”? Picture a menu like you might find in a restaurant, but instead of choosing your next meal, you’re selecting your baby’s characteristics. Blue eyes or brown? Dark or light hair? Your nose or your spouse’s? The field of genetics may not have reached that point yet, but it’s getting close. If we continue down the path we are on, the task of deciding the world’s genetic winners and losers will eventually fall to someone. Who will get that honor? Genetic testing is already a standard practice for couples exploring in vitro fertilization, or IVF, to grow their families. Embryos created in labs are routinely screened for various genetic abnormalities and then culled based on the results. Meanwhile, calls for loosening ethically based restrictions on germline genome editing — the genetic engineering of human beings — have already begun. “There are no sound reasons to delay the use of genome editing due to excessive caution,” bioethics and genetics researcher Kevin Richard Smith asserted in a July 2024 article in the Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics. “Starting genome editing sooner will allow future children to experience its benefits earlier,” Smith wrote. “As the practice becomes more widespread, we can expect rapid technological advancements, leading to future generations of people benefitting from avoidance of, or reduced susceptibility to, the myriad of disorders that presently afflict humanity.” Of course, the concept of genetic cleansing is nothing new. The eugenics movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, popular among elites, fueled Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger’s push for widespread access to birth control and abortion and the Nazis’ genetic experimentation throughout their concentration camps. Notably, just two months ago many on the Left went into a tizzy over a denim ad they bizarrely swore was a revival of Hitler’s Aryan supremacy. Yet the same people fuming over actress Sydney Sweeney’s “great jeans” would likely only have positive things to say about IVF, a process through which human beings are created in petri dishes and then selectively implanted according to their genetic code. The truth is we are already halfway down the slippery slope to Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. But how far are we willing to go and when is it too late to turn back? Playing God On Sept. 27, the scientific community celebrated what would have been the 100th birthday of Robert Edwards, the man often heralded as the father of IVF. Edwards’ Nobel Prize-winning research led to the birth of the world’s first “test tube baby,” Louise Brown, in 1978, marking the dawn of a new era in assisted reproductive technology. But one unfortunate truth of Edwards’ legacy that his admirers often omit is his affiliation with the eugenics movement. Edwards was reportedly a longtime member of the Eugenics Society in Britain — now called the Adelphi Genetics Forum — and served on the organization’s council as a trustee at three different times. During a rare interview in 2003, he told the London Times that his research was about more than just infertility. “I wanted to find out exactly who was in charge, whether it was God himself or whether it was scientists in the laboratory,” he said. His conclusion: “It was us.” Edwards never denounced his support for eugenics, and it isn’t hard to see how the technology he developed could be exploited to that end. In fact, it already has been. In 2019, a court in Shenzhen, China, sentenced researcher He Jiankui to three years in prison for genetically modifying three human embryos, forging ethical review documents, and then misleading doctors into implanting them into the wombs of women via IVF. Jiankui’s alleged goal was to make the babies resistant to HIV infection. The ethical concerns of experimenting on human babies evidently were not a factor. Federal law has effectively banned germline gene editing in the United States for now, though there are interested parties who would like to change that. Tumbling Down the Slippery Slope Though usually not required, preimplantation genetic testing is a popular choice among prospective parents attempting to conceive through IVF. Vendors promise to speed up what can be a lengthy process by screening for genetic anomalies that could prevent successful implantation or increase the possibility of miscarriage. But some companies have begun offering more in-depth testing that goes beyond genetic anomalies. Orchid, for example, offers “whole-genome sequencing” to screen for neurodevelopmental disorders, birth defects, and risk levels for cancer and other diseases. Meanwhile, Heliospect Genomics reportedly offers IQ screening and has suggested that its process could even produce an average IQ gain of more than six points, according to undercover footage obtained by the Guardian. Sadly, at least as far as preimplantation screening for future disease risks is concerned, an astonishing 72 percent of U.S. adults approve of the practice, according to a 2023 Harvard Medical School survey published last year. Further, nearly one-third (30 percent) said they approved of selecting embryos based on the likelihood of certain physical traits, while another 30 percent said they would consider undergoing IVF for the sole purpose of gaining access to genetic testing. Soon, everyone could have “great jeans.” But at what cost? Thanks to “intended dad” Matt Tolbert’s brutal honesty, we have an idea. Tolbert and his husband rented the wombs of two women in Mexico to birth them two baby boys. In a video he posted to TikTok last year, Tolbert explained that 28 of the 40 frozen eggs they purchased survived the thawing process and were fertilized. Of those 28 eggs, just 16 developed into “usable embryos” that were sent for genetic testing. Using Post-It notes to represent the remaining embryos, Tolbert illustrated how the two gay men whittled down the list, casually tossing Post-Its — his children — aside as he explained the various genetic defects for which they had been deemed deficient. “All in all, we’re so happy that we decided to purchase as many frozen eggs as we could, 40, because that leaves us with these 10 embryos for two babies,” Tolbert said, adding that they had already decided which two they would try to implant first. Tolbert’s tone-deaf presentation aside, his demonstration highlights another important ethical concern of IVF: The process produces more death than it does life. The Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology reports that more than 95,000 babies were born out of more than 432,000 IVF cycles in the United States in 2023. How many more unique individuals were discarded after someone decided they didn’t make the cut? Unsurprisingly, the industry never shares those numbers. A Natural Alternative In a society where abortion is idolized and children are seen as a stumbling block to happiness and success, the desire to become a parent is worthy of commendation and encouragement — especially for those who have struggled with infertility. Two years ago, I lost a child due to miscarriage. Having experienced that soul-crushing pain, I wouldn’t wish it on anyone. But even the purest intentions and desires of our hearts can lead to destruction. In the case of IVF, the technology certainly has a benefit, but I would argue that one benefit is dramatically outweighed by its risks for the future of mankind. If we continue down the path we are on, the task of deciding the world’s genetic winners and losers will eventually fall to someone. Who will get that honor, and which skin colors, facial features, intelligence quotients, and personality traits will be discarded in the process? The good news is there are alternatives for prospective parents that don’t carry the same risks. Adoption, for one, is an option most couples are already aware of. But for those hoping for biological children, restorative reproductive medicine is another approach that aims to diagnose and treat the underlying causes of infertility rather than bypass them. Though less well known, the method has gained traction in recent years as a natural and more affordable alternative to IVF that carries none of the ethical problems of eugenics, the freezing and destruction of human life, or the circumvention of God’s design for procreation. Hormonal imbalances, polycystic ovary syndrome, endometriosis, low sperm count — these are all conditions that could contribute to infertility. Doctors practicing restorative reproductive medicine will screen for such issues and work with the body to restore normal reproductive function. President Donald Trump, who undoubtedly means well, has been vocal in the past about his support for IVF. But as part of his administration’s focus is to Make America Healthy Again, he and his Cabinet should consider promoting the natural alternative of restorative reproductive medicine over a technology that poses a real danger to the future of humanity. READ MORE from Samantha Flom: We Are Charlie Kirk, And We Will Not Be Silenced. Pedophiles Are Buying Children. Does Surrogacy Deserve More Scrutiny? Samantha Flom is a senior investigative researcher for Restoration News covering life issues  

I Was the 1%er Prospect They Warned You About ??

This article is probably the most important article I’ve ever written for this website. (Bookmark this page, because you’re gonna want to return.) In the past I’ve given you information that the Establishment wants to keep from you. I’ve told you about grounding. I’ve told you about electro culture. I’ve told you about the QLink pendant. And we’ve received a lot of feedback from you all, saying how much those tips and items have helped you and family members! That’s so amazing to hear. Truly. I’ve never really helped anyone like that so I didn’t really know how to react. (So thank you for taking the time to write back and share with me and Noah.) Even our fearless leader, Noah, mentioned how electro culture has turned his plants into a Jumanji jungle! (Well, not that much, but they’re pretty huge!) SO…..are you ready for the next installment that I have for you? It’s a BIG ONE. And it begins with the Navy. US Patent 10,716,953 BI What’s that? It’s W.L.T.  I don’t mean this site. I mean Wearable Light Technology. (Funny coincidence, eh? Confirmation that we’re on the right path.) Easily bigger than all the other life and health hacks I’ve shared with you, hands down. Get ready to be blessed! You see, the Navy requested David Schmidt, the owner of Advanced Applications Group (a research and development center that specialized in energy-production technologies) to develop a product for their sailors to make them, well, super sailors. The product was made and was a huge success! And from that, a company was born: LifeWave. Then about 2 months ago, yours truly discovered them and it blew my mind! I just had to get my hands on their flagship product! Want to know what happened to me after 2 days of using it? Of course you do. But I’ll share that at the end, and it was awesome! An answer to prayer, to be honest. I was also shocked to find that RFK Jr was already their customer. (I’m hoping he tweets about it). It’s groundbreaking and NO OTHER COMPANY is creating anything like this. NO ONE. I’m talking, this device was able to by pass four $25,000 stem cell injection for one person! How insane is that?! You don’t have $100,000 for stem cell treatment? No problem. What if you could do it yourself? Turns out there’s quite a number of things that have been hidden from us in order to get us dependent on petroleum-based medicine. And expensive procedures. Even Joe Rogan talked about the benefits of stem cells on his podcast: This is 2025, the year to thrive. And thriving includes your health. So what could top what I’ve already shared with you in past articles? What is RFK Jr using, hidden in plain sight, while most don’t notice? I bet you saw it, but did you notice it? (I’ll show you) It’s called X39. Its a patch that uses phototherapy. The results from LifeWave’s X39 patch are nothing but astounding! We’re talking age reversal stuff here! No hyperbole. Literal science. When stem cells die off as you age, the signs of aging occur: the aches, the pains, the wrinkles, etc. But this patch activates new stem cell creation, so it’s literally going to reverse the symptoms of age. Did you know God made use with an emitting internal infrared light? Why would God, “who is light”, do that? (1 John 1:5) Watch this short clip: Here’s RFK Jr, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, wearing the patch: (LifeWave has other patches, but the X39 is their flagship product and it’s the one worn most often on the neck. Their other patches are usually placed elsewhere on the body.) You see, with the X39 patch, it signals your brain to increase the level of a copper peptide (GHK-cu) your body makes. This basically TURNS ON and creates new stem cells. In a sense, it’s starts reversing the damage. What damage? Damage you know about in the body. And damage you don’t. Damage you’ve acquired over the years through numerous ways. Through injuries, toxic medication, toxic food, toxic water, toxic air, toxic chemicals constantly around us, toxic cleaning items, even chemicals in our clothes and on ATM and cash register receipts. Damage you’ve just accepted as “normal signs of aging”. Put a patch on and have it tell your brain to TURN THOSE CELLS BACK ON! And it doesn’t just deal with your trouble spots, it deals with all the spots. Even age spots: And it helps wrinkles, skin tone and texture. Those two pictured above just applied the patch daily for a few months. That’s it. What can you expect after you put on a patch? The timeline is: Imagine that! Your heart reverses in age within 6 months! What better time than now to start using this! Get your patches here today! (Warning: Bill Gates and Big Pharma won’t be happy with you if you get them) Would the medical establishment tell us we can create NEW stem cells when they can make THOUSANDS of dollars $$$ per stem cell injection, up to $50K for a treatment? Exactly. They wouldn’t. Anyone here have an extra $50,000? It’s outrageous! And insurance won’t cover it. If only God knew how to get around the medical establishment…maybe He would let us know how to turn the stem cells back on ourselves, don’t you think? Ever wonder if the world’s elite athletes know something that you don’t? Do they have a competitive edge or is it just their grit and determination that gets them the gold? Well, would you look at that… Looks like word spread about the Navy’s super sailor tech among the elite: All these champions just happened to be wearing it. Would they have won if their competitors also had them? (The first patch LifeWave released back in 2004, Energy Enhancer, uses a 2-patch system) Here’s what a Hollywood stunt man says about using it:   Here’s a women’s perspective on how it helped her: Note: For every 10 years of your life you’ll need to wear the patches for 1 month to boost your stem cells levels back up to a proper amount, to what you used to have when you were younger. Start your relief and reversal journey today! Get you patches here. So what happened to me after starting it? 3 things. One: Lower back pain gone. It was a constant dull ache. And it was there to greet me every morning. It wasn’t that bad, BUT that’s not the worst part. You see, lower pain in that area could also be a beginning sign of kidney stones. I’ve had that before (worst pain I’ve felt, it was like torture).  So having this dull ache in my lower back was giving me constant anxiety and stress. I would always have in the back o f my mind the thought that “is this pain going to led to a kidney stone? Is this my body telling me that a stone is forming?” Well, after wearing a X-39 patch for about 2 days, I woke up and the pain was gone! Thank God. It’s not that the pain was bad, it was the constant worry that came with it. What a relief that was to wake up without that constant daily threat. PEACE OF MIND is what I got the most from this patch. Two: I was also having a sharp chest pain. I realized it was from stress. And now that I’m writing this out, I realize it might’ve been caused by the stress I just wrote about, the fear of another kidney stone forming. So a few days after wearing the patch, that chest pain vanished too. Three: After about 3 weeks I noticed that my knees weren’t sore anymore going up and down the stairs. They didn’t make the cracking and odd noises anymore either when I would bend my knee. In fact, today I did a workout and did some squats and I was surprised that I didn’t hear anything. I did a few more just to listen. There’s always been some kind of sound and slight discomfort. But there was nothing. Just a normal knee bending the way it was designed to. It just feels good to have a body working normally and proper once again. How do you wear it? Did you read that last line? Stay properly hydrated because your electrical internal system doesn’t communicate well if you’re dehydrated. Drink water and use electrolytes if you have them. Notice how you have to add water to a car battery? You’re body is similar.   Listen to the inventor himself:   It’s amazing how many benefits come from just 1 patch! Wish I had this years ago. I’m surprised Big Pharma and the FDA doesn’t try to shut them down for taking away their lifelong customers.   The patents and studies are here. Testimonials for over 25 different health issues are here. More info is here. ORDER YOUR PATCHES TODAY and see how much can improve over 30 days! Of course, you don’t have to get the patches. You can always do what this lady did and go down to Tijuana, Mexico for stem cell treatment and shell out up to $10,000, while trying not to get kidnapped. Or you can just pop on a patch. Someone get that lady a patch so she doesn’t have to go down to Tijuana. By the way, LifeWave has a collection of patches. Other than their foundational X39 flagship patch, their Aeon patch is highly recommended to pair with it. Why? Aeon (nicknamed the “Happy Patch”) lowers inflammation in the body. “It unlocks relaxation, alleviating discomfort, and melts away tension.” This paired with the X39 is the Dynamic Duo! When your body starts making more stem cells with X39, a lot of them just go to where the inflammation in your body is instead of other areas that you want them to heal. So, the AEON patch will deal with the inflammation while the stem cells focus on healing and restoring your body. I just started the Aeon patch on July 16 so I’ll give you a more in depth review after I’ve worn it for a while. But I’ll say, I do feel pretty good lol. Feels like God is taking care of everything in my life and it’s all going to work out, somehow. IceWave patches are solely for pain, deals with it quickly. That’s one you’ll want to have in your first aid kit, just in case. That’s the next one I’m getting. X49 patches are what you’d use when you’re going to the gym and want to increase performance and build muscle. Since 30 patches come in a pack, and I only workout about 3 times a week, 1 pack will last over 2 & 1/2 months for me. Here’s some comments and reviews: