There’s a simple solution

Major activist groups protesting war in Iran have had millions of dollars funneled into them through George Soros-backed groups in the last decade. Leftist groups such as the ANSWER coalition, Code Pink, and other radical groups deployed protests almost immediately following the launch of U.S. strikes on targets in Iran. Several of those anti-war nonprofits […]

'You are a propagandist'

The Justice Department brought federal terrorism charges Monday against two men tied to the bombing of a New York City protest.  One of the suspects threw a homemade bomb that was inspired by the Islamic State terrorist group, said Attorney General Pam Bondi.  “We have charged the two alleged ISIS-inspired terrorists who attempted to bomb a protest in New York City,” Bondi posted on X.  We have charged the two alleged ISIS-inspired terrorists who attempted to bomb a protest in New York City.We will not allow ISIS’s poisonous, anti-American ideology to threaten this nation. Our law enforcement officers will remain vigilant. pic.twitter.com/4QMOrOvGhG— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) March 9, 2026 “We will not allow ISIS’s poisonous, anti-American ideology to threaten this nation. Our law enforcement officers will remain vigilant,” Bondi added. The incident occurred at a protest Saturday outside Gracie Mansion, the home of New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani.  ?TWO ISIS SUPPORTERS CHARGED WITH ATTEMPTING TO DETONATE EXPLOSIVE DEVICES DURING PROTESTS OUTSIDE GRACIE MANSIONAvowed ISIS supporters Emir Balat and Ibrahim Kayumi attempted to detonate two devices containing shrapnel and highly volatile explosive material during a protest… pic.twitter.com/AjbyR9CBN9— U.S. Department of Justice (@TheJusticeDept) March 9, 2026 Activist Jake Lang led a protest of about 20 people on Saturday outside the residence, claiming the Muslim mayor was leading an Islamic “takeover” of New York City. About 125 people participated in the counterprotest. Police said suspect Emir Balat was among the counter protesters as he lit and threw a device, which extinguished before it exploded. Police also identified Ibrahim Kayumi as a suspect and arrested both him and Balat at the scene. After apparently igniting Device-2, BALAT dropped Device-2 near where several NYPD officers were standing, ran away from the NYPD officers, and jumped over a barricade. pic.twitter.com/q6w5pwV9x3— U.S. Department of Justice (@TheJusticeDept) March 9, 2026 Balat dropped a second device at the protest that police recovered and examined, New York City Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch said. The two suspects, already in police custody, were charged Monday in the Southern District of New York. The defendants were inspired by ISIS to carry out their attack,” Tisch said during a press conference Monday. “There should be no confusion about what ISIS constitutes.” New York City Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch recognizing officials who responded to Saturday's bomb threat: "The NYPD remains on heightened alert, and our mission is simple, to keep New Yorkers safe. That responsibility belongs to the nearly 35,000 members of this department.. pic.twitter.com/3zCQJfE4VQ— CSPAN (@cspan) March 9, 2026 New York City Police on Sunday described the device as a jar filled with nuts, bolts and screws and wrapped in black tape with a fuse. It extinguished itself before any explosion. Tisch previously said she did not believe Mamdani and his wife were home at the time. Mamdani previously condemned the protest but also said, “Violence at a protest is never acceptable. The attempt to use an explosive device and hurt others is not only criminal, it is reprehensible and the antithesis of who we are.” Reuters contributed to this report. The post DOJ, NYPD Call New York Terror Suspects ISIS-Inspired appeared first on The Daily Signal.

This Post is for Paid Supporters Reclaim your digital freedom. Get the latest on censorship and surveillance, and learn how to fight back. SUBSCRIBE Already a supporter? Sign In. (If you’re already logged in but still seeing this, refresh this page to show the post.) The post How to Actually Disappear on Proton Mail appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Is Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei Actually Alive?

The Bride!, Warner Brothers’ angry, male-hating, violent, heavy-handed woke movie bombed in its opening weekend, trounced by a family-friendly film – and even by the sixth sequel of a horror-movie satire. The feminist vision of the bride of Frankenstein took in a measly $7,260,000 in its first weekend, despite being shown in 3,304 theaters across the U.S., averaging $2,197 gross per theater. The film had been projected to take in $16-18 million domestically. Meanwhile, Disney/Pixar’s animated Hoppers took in $46,000,000 ($11,500 per theater) – or about six times the box office sales of The Bride! And, the second weekend of Scream 7, the sixth sequel of the comedic slasher satire franchise, more than doubled The Bride!’s opening weekend performance with box office receipts of $17,300,000, an average of $4,887 per theater. The Bride! bombed at the box office, even though it “had everything going for it”: Christian Bale and Jessie Buckley in starring roles. A massive $90 million budget. $65 million of promotion. A wide release in theaters. A popular genre. But, none of that could overcome what The Bride! doesn’t have – audience appeal – as Variety explains: “Reviews were weak. But moviegoers were downright dismissive, saddling ‘The Bride!’ with a ‘C+’ grade on CinemaScore exit polls. “When word-of-mouth is that lethal, there’s no amount of marketing magic or charming stories on late-night talk shows that can convince people to get off the couch.” "‘The Bride!’ is steeped in woke storytelling, but nobody told writer/director Maggie Gyllenhaal that clunky messaging drives people away from theaters,” Christian Toto, host of The Hollywood in Toto podcast, tells CNSNews: “The film is visually striking, but heavy-handed lectures are the antithesis of entertainment. We're seeing that in the tepid box office results. “No one factor contributes exclusively to a film's dismal box office performance. Some early reviews skewered the film in ways that may have made it toxic for on-the-fence audiences. And even IndieWire.com, an aggressively left-leaning film site, used the term ‘woke’ in its dismissive review.” “Set in the 1930s, ‘The Bride!’ follows a very lonely Frankenstein’s monster (Christian Bale) and his undead love interest (Jessie Buckley) as deranged outlaws on the run,” according to Variety’s recap. “It’s a garishly beautiful lecture, but the film’s core themes are redundant and dull. Men bad. Women good … and oppressed … and angry. Sorry. They’re angry!” a review by Hollywood in Toto explains: “The story’s anachronisms are maddening and inconsistent, and they’re all about pushing an agenda. The phrase ‘Me too’ is literally shouted in case you missed the film’s true north.” A major theme is that that the woman reanimated to be Frankenstein’s bride didn’t give her “consent” to be brought back to life, the film’s director told Deadline: “Through her reimagined take on the iconic Frankenstein bride character, Maggie Gyllenhaal says the upcoming horror/sci-fi crime flick The Bride! cannot skirt past the issue of consent as a central thesis in the film. “‘In the mythology of the Bride of Frankenstein, that’s the major issue,’ she told Deadline at the London-held world premiere of the movie. ‘I can’t make a movie about the bride of Frankenstein without consent being really on the table because she fundamentally has no say in it.’” “I actually think that when I really became a director was the morning that Trump was first elected,” Gyllenhaal told The New York Times, signaling the leftist political motivation behind her work. “I was like, I have a lot more to say than I’ve been saying.” Breitbart describes The Bride! as “an angry feminist diatribe,” in which the director “threw a bunch of feminist tropes against the wall” hoping that some would stick. “The news that The Bride! is a super-woke spin on The Bride of Frankenstein (1935) and Bonnie and Clyde (1967) has been obvious for some time and became blatantly obvious when the reviews poured in.” “Ida (the bride) and Frank (Frankenstein) begin traveling the country, exploring feminist concepts while occasionally killing people,” Reason writes: “As Ida (the bride) and Frank (Frankenstein) continue their Bonnie and Clyde-like crime spree, they spark a national feminist revolution, in which women begin rebelling against the patriarchy in various nonsensical ways, mostly by shouting things in the streets. “There are explicit references to riot grrrl culture, and the film's climax literally involves Ida repeatedly shouting ‘me too!’ at no one in particular.” Indeed, the film portrays males as sadistic, abusive, misogynistic rapists. The film’s violence is necessary to portray her view of reality, Gyllenhaal told Entertainment Weekly: “I have to say, I felt strongly that the sexual violence had to be brutal, real, because if you gloss over it, it doesn't feel like the brutality that it is." “And therein lies the problem with the modern entertainment industry,” Outkick comments on Gyllenhaal’s worldview in an article describing The Bride! as the “latest gigantic Hollywood box office disaster”: “Nobody knows what they're doing creatively. And the executive and development ranks are infested with hard-left ideologues who live in a bubble of progressive absurdity. Instead of prioritizing quality, originality, humor, and talent, they've chosen political conformity. The most generic, boring, divisive, cringe view anyone's ever seen, with tens of millions of dollars wasted on films that have no chance of success.”

Monday’s New York Times brought more “strange new respect” for Christianity in a 1,600-word story pumping up James Talarico, yet another Democratic candidate for a U.S. Senate seat in Texas, where the Democrats haven’t won a stateside office since 1994. Lisa Lerer, national political reporter, and Elisabeth Dias, national religion correspondent, brought a religious angle, and the paper, typically hostile to mixing faith (at least Christian faith) in politics, is on board with Talarico and his warped version of Christianity. The headline was quite bold: “In Senate Race, Talarico Challenges ‘Heretical’ Right-Wing Christianity.” James Talarico, in one of his first interviews since winning the Democratic nomination for Senate in Texas, attacked the use of Christianity to promote conservative politics, saying his candidacy was part of a broader mission to counter what he sees as a partisan takeover of the American church. Mr. Talarico, a state legislator and seminary student, used unsparing language to describe what he called “Christian nationalism,” saying such beliefs were “fundamentally un-Christian,” a “perversion” of his faith tradition, “unbiblical” and “heretical.” The criticism amounted to a declaration of war against Christian conservative leaders in a deep red state who have successfully pushed policies that ban abortion, weaken the separation of church and state, and insert their Christian values into public schools. Support from conservative Christians has fueled President Trump’s successful transformation of the American evangelical church into the backbone of his MAGA movement over the past decade. Christians from more progressive traditions have fought back with little success. Now, Mr. Talarico, 36, is positioning his candidacy as an effort to break the stranglehold conservatism holds over both American politics and Christianity itself. The Times portrayed conservative Christians as furious with Talarico, the gentle sheep. His victory has unleashed a wave of fury from conservative Christian leaders attacking the theological underpinnings of his political positions and moral values. Hours before his victory last Tuesday, prominent politicians, activists and pastors began assailing what they called Mr. Talarico’s “blaspheming tongue.” They blanketed podcasts, social media platforms and right-wing media outlets with video clips of him using the story of Jesus Christ’s conception to defend abortion rights, saying “God is nonbinary,” and finding spiritual truths beyond Christianity to support religious pluralism. Such positions, they argued, were an “abuse of Scripture” that disqualified him as a Christian leader. As he moves into the general election, Mr. Talarico is pushing Christians to reclaim what he sees as core principles of their faith in American political life, including compassion for immigrants, helping the poor and loving one’s neighbor. In doing so, he poses a new kind of threat to Republicans. The Times sounded positively puritanical in their sudden insistence that there is only one true path to holiness, the left-side one. Asked if such conservative Christians are transgressing God’s call to love their neighbor, he said, “Yes.” After misleading about Talarico’s aborted appearance on Stephen Colbert’s late-night “comedy” show (CBS did not block his appearance under F.C.C. pressure), the article continued taking Talarico’s claims of deep faith at face value, not even hinting at potential religious hypocrisy, as the Times surely would with a Christian Right politician: "Mr. Talarico’s faith has been a core motivator of his life since childhood...." The paper treated the politician as a prophet without honor in his own country. For his part, Mr. Talarico is deeply aware of how his conservative Christian opponents view his reading of the Gospel. On election night, he invoked the example of Jesus, “that barefoot rabbi,” who in the gospel story overturned the tables of money changers in the temple. “They’re going to call me a radical leftist,” he warned supporters gathered in Austin. “They’re going to call me a fake Christian.” But are they wrong? To quote the Bible: “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” In 2018 Dias celebrated another Texas Democratic hopeful for the Senate, Beto O’Rourke (remember him?) showing similar strange new respect for his Christian supporters.

Communist China isn’t hiding its ambitions. Beijing wants to displace the United States as the world’s leading power. It flies spy balloons over our country, runs influence operations, steals technology, pressures neighbors, menaces Taiwan, and builds missiles and ships meant to drive America out of the Western Pacific.The Pentagon’s newly released National Defense Strategy puts the People’s Republic of China at the center of the threat picture. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth frames the task in blunt terms: “peace through strength,” including a favorable balance of power in the Indo-Pacific so that China can’t “dominate us or our allies.”China won’t ‘take over the world’ in some comic-book way. But it will keep testing the seams of American power — and it will keep exploiting our habits of denial and delay.That doesn’t mean the United States and China are “destined for war.” China’s weaknesses cut against that. It lacks the kind of soft power that makes alliances easy and coercion unnecessary. Outside its borders, China inspires far more fear than admiration. Demographic collapse also looms. The one-child policy left China facing an aging population and a shrinking workforce.None of that makes Beijing harmless. A declining regime can still lash out. It can still intimidate neighbors, manipulate markets, and exploit American openness. It can also run influence operations in plain sight — through front companies, academic partnerships, lobbying, investment vehicles, and the slow capture of key choke points in tech and infrastructure.That calls for something Washington too often refuses to do: enforce rules like a serious country.Start with basic counterintelligence hygiene. Aggressively investigate covert foreign influence. Enforce FARA. Protect sensitive research. Tighten screening around critical supply chains. Treat strategic industries like strategic industries. Strip Chinese “paper Americans” of their citizenship and deport them.This is where internal discipline matters as much as external posture. A national strategy collapses when parts of the bureaucracy slow-walk it, freelance against it, or treat it like optional guidance.Consider the recent ouster of Assistant Attorney General Gail Slater. She was in charge of the Department of Justice’s antitrust division until last month. But she butted heads repeatedly with Attorney General Pam Bondi. Their disagreements slid into insubordination. Slater allegedly lied to Bondi on national security matters that appeared to help China.RELATED: Iran, China, and Trump’s ‘art of the squeal’ White House via X Account/Anadolu via Getty ImagesFor example, Slater opposed the Hewlett-Packard Enterprise acquisition of Juniper Networks, which national security experts say is essential to combat Chinese tech dominance. Blocking the deal would have hurt U.S. industry and helped Chinese telecom giant Huawei. Happily, the administration overruled her and approved the deal.Washington can’t run a serious China policy with internal sabotage, bureaucratic drift, or officials acting like they answer to a different set of priorities.The same standard applies to national security decisions in the tech arena. If competition with Huawei and China’s tech ecosystem matters — and it does — then Washington should evaluate mergers, procurement, and infrastructure policy through that lens, not just through abstract theories divorced from geopolitical reality. America needs to win the next generation of networks, not regulate itself into strategic dependence.China won’t “take over the world” in some comic-book way. But it will keep testing the seams of American power — and it will keep exploiting our habits of denial and delay.Peace through strength isn’t a slogan. It’s a posture: defend critical systems, enforce the law, remove vulnerabilities, and stop treating strategic competition like a seminar topic. The first step is simple and unglamorous: clean up our own house, then face Beijing with the seriousness the moment demands.

Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger (D) has refused to hand over an illegal immigrant with over 30 prior arrests to ICE.The suspect, Abdul Jalloh, is an illegal alien from Sierra Leone with at least 30 arrests on violent charges.“She is now saying that she will not turn over a guy who [allegedly] murdered a woman at a bus stop, stabbing her to death. Okay? Will not turn him over to ICE because they need a warrant. Can I ask you — and this is an honest question — why, why, for the love of Pete, are the Democrats so intent on protecting murderers, rapists?” Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck comments.“The police knew who this guy was because they had arrested him so many times. He had been arrested like 40 times. One of them was for rape, and they let him out on the streets — returned him to the streets — because they want to protect him and his rights,” Glenn says.Glenn admits that he doesn’t “understand.”“Immigration policy can be really, really complicated. Border enforcement: complicated, okay? Work visas, asylum laws, all of that stuff. But in this case, it is not complicated at all. A woman standing at a bus stop, a normal American moment, waiting for the day to begin, waiting for a bus, and she’s stabbed to death,” he says.“And this isn’t somebody who just slipped through the cracks one time. A guy who had been arrested again and again and again. … Assault, rape, and now [suspected] murder, stabbing,” he continues.“Can I ask you: If it is not the government’s job to protect, what is their job?” Glenn asks. “Because they weren’t protecting you or this woman or anybody in Virginia. They weren’t protecting any American by putting him back on the street.”“Now, here’s the question that every single American should be asking, and I mean this honestly: What possible justification exists for keeping somebody like this in our communities?” he asks. “Can you give me one single explanation that is logical, that is not evil, quite honestly?”Want more from Glenn Beck?To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.