Tag: history

‘Every Arab is to be killed’: New evidence confirms Zionist terror campaign fueled 1948 expulsion of Palestinians

New Israeli documents have emerged confirming that Zionist militias used massacres, rapes, and expulsions to ethnically cleanse some 800,000 Palestinians to create the state of Israel in 1948.

Haaretz reported on 27 February that the documents contain first-hand accounts of the 1948 war (known by Palestinians as the Nakba) written by commanders in the Zionist militias, which formed the core of the Israeli military.

The documents were discovered after someone left boxes containing thousands of documents next to a dumpster in a Tel Aviv neighborhood two years ago.

According to the Israeli newspaper, the discovery of the documents “completely dispels the Israeli narrative according to which the country’s Arab inhabitants fled of their own volition at the behest of their own leaders.”

The documents include an account of the war written by Yitzhak Broshi, commander of Golani’s 12th Battalion. Broshi explains that he gave the order to raze the village of Arab a-Zabah, a Bedouin community in the Lower Galilee, and kill every person found there. “Every Arab among the Zabahim is to be killed,” his order stated.

In another case, Broshi ordered his troops to search for Arabs hiding in the Mount Turan area of the Lower Galilee after it had already been conquered. “Kill anyone who is hiding,” Broshi’s order read.

Haaretz notes that although nearly 80 years have passed since the Nakba, which Israelis call the “War of Independence,” much material in Israel’s archives remains classified. As a result, “historical memory in Israel is a deception.”

“It can now be confirmed, on the basis of an impressive range of evidence, that the IDF [Israeli army] expelled Arabs systematically and violently during the War of Independence. The expulsion was effected by massacres, murder, and a variety of moves aimed at terrorizing this civilian population and expediting its flight,” Haaretz concluded.

“How do you expel a village?” asked Maxim Cohen, a commander of the Carmeli Brigade. “You lop off the ear of one of the Arabs before everyone else’s eyes, and they all flee. In practice, no village was evacuated without stabbing someone in the stomach or by means of similar methods. We won thanks only to the fear of the Arabs, and they were fearful only of deeds that were not in accordance with the law.”

Haim Ben-David, who later obtained the rank of major general and became former prime minister David Ben Gurion’s military secretary, explained that orders to kill and expel Palestinian civilians during the 1948 war were given verbally rather than written down.

“In our operative orders, we were careful not to mention killing. The orders relating to conduct were orally conveyed to the battalion commanders,” Ben-David explained.

Yisrael Carmi, a battalion commander in the 7th Brigade, stated that during the conquest of Beersheba in October 1948, he gave the order that any Palestinian who resisted expulsion was to be executed.

“I conquered the city,” Carmi testified. “In mopping up that area, I gave an order to annihilate anyone who appeared in the street, whether they resisted or did not resist. An order was given to destroy everything. After the conquest of the police station – after the surrender – the murder stopped. Until then, everyone was killed – women and children and everyone. Then an order was given to the people to go to Hebron. Anyone who didn’t go was ‘removed.’”

Mordechai Maklef, an operations officer, explained, “The intention was to expel.”

“It is impossible to expel 114,000 people who lived [in the Galilee] without terror. There had to have been an element of initial terror for them to leave.”

In an effort to conceal this history, Israel has released to the public only a million files out of 17 million in the Israel State Archives and the Army and Defense Establishment Archives.

The archives’ staff was told to conceal “material that might harm the [army’s] image [and show it] as an occupying army devoid of moral foundations, [which displays] violent behavior against an Arab population and cruel acts (killing, murder).”

Keep reading

Wait, That’s What Set Off Libs About Abigail Spanberger’s SOTU Response? You’re Gonna Laugh at This.

Virginia Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger is set to deliver the State of the Union response tonight. Scratch that—it’ll likely be early Wednesday morning. President Trump is set to deliver one of the longest addresses of this nature ever. It’s going to be one for the history books. If Trump, who is known to go off-script, says this is going to be long, it’s going to be long.  

You don’t want to be the person selected to deliver the rebuttal at the State of the Union. No one cares, no one is watching, and in this case, no one literally won’t be watching. Yet, the Left is already having a tantrum on Bluesky because Spanberger will be delivering her remarks from Colonial Williamsburg.

These people are unserious and impossible to speak to, lost in their self-riotousness, drowning in arrogance, and so ignorant that they render everything incomprehensible with their random tangents that go nowhere. It’s truly an odyssey into who can come off as a bigger idiot who feigns academic bona fides.

Keep reading

HUH? AOC Gives Word Salad About Inequality, Suggests Marco Rubio is Racist for Saying Cowboys Came From Spain – “I Believe The Mexicans and Descendants of African slaves Would Like to Have a Word”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) made a fool out of herself once again while speaking on income inequality during an event on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference on Sunday. 

While speaking at a TU Berlin event with German Bundestag member Isabel Cademartori, AOC was asked about her comments regarding wealth redistribution and taxing the rich, which she had made on Saturday, and she randomly pointed to remarks by Marco Rubio about Cowboy culture coming from Spain.

While speaking at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday, Rubio highlighted the spiritual and cultural connections between America and Europe. Rubio noted that America began with Christopher Columbus,  the legend that defined the imagination of our pioneer nation,” bringing Christianity to the new world. He further described how English settlers brought their language and political and legal systems, how the Scots-Irish brought the American pioneer spirit, and how German farmers and craftsmen sparked an agricultural boom in the early days of America.

“Our expansion into the interior followed the footsteps of French fur traders and explorers whose names, by the way, still adorn the street signs and towns’ names all across the Mississippi Valley. Our horses, our ranches, our rodeos – the entire romance of the cowboy archetype that became synonymous with the American West – these were born in Spain. And our largest and most iconic city was named New Amsterdam before it was named New York,” Rubio said.

This was AOC’s “favorite part” from the Cuban Secretary of State’s speech, which was rightfully, as she put it, “a pure appeal to Western culture.”

“He said that American cowboys came from Spain,” she reminded the audience. “I believe the Mexicans and descendants of African slave— enslaved peoples would like to have a word on that.”

However, it is well documented that Spanish conquistadors and missionaries heavily colonized Mexico and the Southwest region of the United States in the 16th century. Spanish vaqueros were the inspiration of the cowboy culture in the Southwest, not Mexicans or slaves.

She then went on a confusing tirade about the changing culture, aka race and demographics, as millions of unvetted aliens are shipped into the once-predominantly White United States and Europe, and demanded an end to “the hypocrisy towards the global south.”

“That is a challenge that is difficult for much of the typical crowd at Munich to hear,” she said before pivoting to the arrest of Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro and claiming that the US kidnapped him and engaged in “acts of war” against Venezuela, solely because “the nation is below the equator.”

Her hilarious comments follow her complete faceplant when asked a simple question about foreign policy at the Munich Security Conference on Friday.

Keep reading

Roy Cohn: From ‘Red Scare’ Prosecutor to Donald Trump’s Mentor

There are certain behind-the-scenes figures in American politics who, like Tom Hanks in Forrest Gump, seem to turn up everywhere. One of the most notorious is Roy Cohn, a man whose influence spans several decades of hot button issues, Republican politicians and LGBT history.

Cohn was a prosecutor in the Rosenberg spy trial, chief counsel to Senator Joseph McCarthy, a close friend to Nancy Reagan and a personal lawyer for Donald Trump. He was also a closeted gay man who helped purge suspected gay and lesbian employees from the government. Cohn died from AIDS-related complications in 1986, and afterwards was portrayed in the 1990s Broadway play Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes.

McCarthyism and the Lavender Scare

Roy Cohn entered the spotlight early. At age 23, he was a prosecutor on the trial of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, who were convicted of espionage on behalf of the Soviet Union in 1951 and executed by electric chair two years later. This gained him attention from two fervent anti-communists: longtime FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover and Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy.

Cohn became chief counsel to McCarthy as well as a chief architect of what we now call “McCarthyism”—the interrogation and purging of federal employees based on McCarthy’s unsupported claim that the government was filled with communists. In addition to this very public Second Red Scare, Cohn and McCarthy also led the less-public Lavender Scare against federal employees suspected of being gay.

It’s unknown how many employees the Lavender Scare forced out between the late ‘40s and early ‘60s, but the number is likely in the thousands. Like communists, McCarthy considered gay people security risks because of their supposed mental instability.

“In lavender Washington, Cohn was known as both a closeted homosexual and homophobic, among those leading the charge against supposedly gay witnesses who he and others believed should lose their government jobs because they were ‘security risks,’” writes journalist Marie Brenner in Vanity Fair.

Keep reading

Voynich Manuscript Breakthrough? The Secret Behind “The Most Mysterious Book in the World” May Involve an Ancient Cipher System

The year was 1637, and Georg Baresch, an alchemist and renowned collector of antiquities based in Prague, had a baffling mystery on his hands. For years now, he had been in possession of a most unusual item: a bizarre manuscript filled with strange imagery of plants, astrological diagrams, curious structures, human figures, and a range of other curiosities.

This “Sphinx,” as Baresch characterized it, was so strange that it prompted him to reach out to the Jesuit scholar Athanasius Kircher, known for his success in deciphering ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs, with hopes of obtaining information that might lead to a breakthrough in solving the mystery of the puzzling manuscript.

Today, the same bizarre treatise first obtained by Baresch in the seventeenth century is known throughout the world as the Voynich Manuscript, and despite the efforts of many since Baresch’s time who have sought to decode it, the document still refuses to give up its secrets. After more than a century of scrutiny, no one has convincingly explained who wrote it, what it says, or even whether its text carries any real meaning at all.

However, new research may finally offer scholars a fresh perspective on this confounding mystery. According to a recent peer-reviewed study, while the mystery of the Voynich Manuscript endures, a new theory strengthens the possibility that the text in a document often referred to as “the most mysterious book in the world” may have once served as a cipher system.

The hypothesis, detailed by researcher and science journalist Michael A. Greshko in the journal Cryptologia, indicates that the famous manuscript bears qualities that seemingly match the technological capabilities of scholars in the Middle Ages, potentially helping to reframe questions about the manuscript that have long perplexed researchers.

Keep reading

The FDR Pearl Harbor Question That People Are Afraid to Ask

Did you know that FDR likely had foreknowledge of the attack on Pearl Harbor but chose not to stop it resulting in the immediate loss of over 2,400 American lives and, subsequently, the U.S. entering World War II, resulting in over 400,000 more conscripted American deaths?

Declassified documents and testimonies from the time reveal a complex web of intelligence reports and intercepted Japanese communications, suggesting that U.S. officials, including President Roosevelt himself, had significant forewarning of Japan’s intentions.

One of the key pieces of evidence is the McCollum memo, written in October 1940 by Lieutenant Commander Arthur H. McCollum of the Office of Naval Intelligence. This memo outlined a potential strategy for forcing Japan into war with the United States, including actions that could provoke a Japanese attack. Additionally, the U.S. had been monitoring Japanese communications through its ‘Magic’ cryptographic program, which had successfully decrypted numerous Japanese diplomatic cables, including those hinting at a possible strike.

Despite this, no definitive action was taken to bolster defenses at Pearl Harbor, leading to the devastating attack on December 7, 1941. The consequences were catastrophic.

This might sound like a crazy conspiracy to some readers. I know I would have considered it such a thing at one time (albeit many years ago).

But there is a ton of historical evidence to support Allman’s central claim: FDR had plenty of reasons to suspect a Japanese attack was coming—and he wanted an attack to happen.

I first came to this troubling realization more than two decades ago after reading Thomas Fleming’s 2001 book The New Dealers’ War. (If I recall correctly, I bought my father the book for Christmas, partly because I wanted to read it myself.)

Fleming, who died in 2017, provided a page-turning history that makes a convincing case that FDR was angling for a war with Japan and searching for a casus belli.

It’s been years since I read the book, but I recall it’s beginning quite well. Fleming describes in great detail a poorly-equipped Naval vessel from the Spanish-American War trolling around in international waters where Japanese subs and other far more sophisticated war ships were roaming.

The vessel was never attacked, but Fleming used the episode to support his broader thesis: FDR wanted the US in World War II, was preparing for war well before Pearl Harbor, and appeared to be searching for an event that would justify America’s entry into the conflict.

Most Americans don’t know this today, and relatively few would accept it if they did. It strikes too close to the heart of the mythology of America the wish to believe, or too closely to the politician or ideology they revere.

Keep reading

Heroes, dictators, and the long fight for sovereignty in Latin America before Maduro

Latin America’s most celebrated heroes came from vastly different political traditions. What bound them together was not ideology, but a shared insistence on defending the interests of their people – and, above all, national sovereignty. In the 19th century, that struggle was directed against European colonial powers, primarily Spain. By the 20th, it increasingly meant confronting pressure from the United States, which since at least the late 1800s had openly framed the region – codified in doctrines and policy – as its strategic “backyard.

Those who chose accommodation over resistance left a far murkier legacy. Under intense external pressure, many leaders accepted limits on sovereignty in exchange for stability, investment, or political survival. Over time, this produced a familiar historical pattern: figures who aligned with foreign power were readily replaced when they ceased to be useful, while those who resisted – often at great personal cost – were absorbed into national memory as symbols of dignity, defiance, and unfinished struggle.

In this piece, we revisit the heroes and the betrayers who came to embody these opposing paths in Latin America’s modern history.

Keep reading

How Britain entrenched Zionist impunity in Palestine

Are we seeing the final dismemberment of Palestine and the end of the Palestinian struggle for freedom? It is a distinct possibility, and if it happens it will be the culmination of a long and cruel colonial journey that was imposed on the Palestinians from the time of the Balfour Declaration in 1917 until today.

That pernicious and ill-advised decision to create a ‘national home for the Jewish people’ in Palestine led inexorably to the current genocidal war on Gaza and Israel’s multiple human rights abuses against the Palestinians, ongoing since Israel’s establishment.

Balfour’s great crime in 1917 was not just to cede control of Palestine (which Britain did not own) to foreign colonists, but to do so specifically and, of all people, to a group of tormented, complex Jewish European Zionists with an acute sense of grievance about their historic persecution. The deep animus they held against a world, which had allowed it to happen, fed their belief that the world owed them recompense for their sufferings, and Britain’s offer of a ‘national home’ in Palestine was only their due.

It gave them a sense of entitlement to the country which bred an arrogant conviction that it belonged exclusively to them.

Such ideas, never questioned or rejected by Israel’s western supporters, but on the contrary indulged and accepted as valid, have led to the systematic depredations of Palestine and its people.

Keep reading

Ken Burns’ “The American Revolution” as Cultural Marxist Revisionism

As Donald E. Vandergriff, a lifelong defender of American exceptionalism and unapologetic supporter of President Donald J. Trump and the MAGA movement, I’ve watched with growing alarm as the radical left infiltrates every corner of our shared history. The so-called “new” Ken Burns documentary, The American Revolution—a bloated 12-hour PBS snoozefest that premiered on November 16, 2025—just proves how far the elites will go to rewrite our founding story.

This isn’t history; it’s propaganda, a slick hit job designed to undermine the heroic narrative of our forefathers and replace it with the victimhood gospel of Cultural Marxism. Trump warned us about this: fake news and leftist indoctrination masquerading as education. And here it is, straight from the swamp of public broadcasting, defunded under Trump’s wise leadership yet still spewing its bile.

Burns, that self-appointed oracle of the past, has built a career on slow pans over sepia-toned images and folksy narration that lulls you into complacency before slipping in the knife. Remember his Vietnam War series? It humanized the commies while downplaying American resolve.

Or his Civil War update, where he couldn’t resist injecting modern woke commentary? This Revolution doc is more of the same—only now, timed for the 250th anniversary, it’s a deliberate assault on the very ideals that made America great.

Keep reading