Cartels are bad but they’re not ‘terrorists.’ This is mission creep.

There is a dangerous pattern on display by the Trump administration. The president and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth seem to hold the threat and use of military force as their go-to method of solving America’s problems and asserting state power.

The president’s reported authorization for the Pentagon to use U.S. military warfighting capacity to combat drug cartels — a domain that should remain within the realm of law enforcement — represents a significant escalation. This presents a concerning evolution and has serious implications for civil liberties — especially given the administration’s parallel moves with the deployment of troops to the southern border, the use of federal forces to quell protests in California, and the recent deployment of armed National Guard to the streets of our nation’s capital.

Last week, the Pentagon sent three guided-missile destroyers to interdict drug cartel operations off the coast of South America, giving the U.S. Navy unprecedented counternarcotics authority and foreshadowing a potential military stand-off against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, who is wanted by the United States on charges of narco-terrorism. This development is echoed by President Trump reportedly seeking authorization to deploy U.S. military forces on the ground against drug cartels in Mexico.

These efforts are not new. Trump and the GOP have increasingly called for U.S. military interdiction against Mexican drug cartels under the banner of counterterrorism. During his first administration, Trump seriously considered launching strikes at drug labs in Mexico in an effort that was successfully shut down by then-Secretary of Defense Mark Esper.

But there are no such guardrails in the new Trump administration, and the rhetoric has progressively crept toward the use of U.S. special operations, specifically. During an interview on Fox News in November, incoming Border Czar Tom Homan announced that, “[President Trump] will use the full might of the United States special operations to take [the cartels] out.”

If that is indeed the direction the administration wants to go, it appears to be taking action to set plans into motion, starting with an executive order on day one that designated cartels as foreign terrorist organizations — thus opening a Pandora’s box of potential legal authority to use military force. On signing the order, President Trump acknowledged, “People have been wanting to do this for years.” And when asked if he would be ordering U.S. special forces into Mexico to “take out” the cartels, Trump replied enigmatically, “Could happen … stranger things have happened.”

The executive order upholds that drug cartels “operate both within and outside the United States … [and] present an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States.” It declares a national emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The specificity of both “within and outside” the U.S. combined with the declaration of a national emergency is perhaps the first step toward the broader use of executive power to deploy military forces in counternarcotics operations not only within Mexico, but potentially the United States too.

To be sure, the Trump administration is already testing the limits of Posse Comitatus — the law that prevents presidents from using the military as a domestic police force — by invoking questionable authorities to use National Guard and active duty troops during the counter-ICE protests in California and, most recently, to declare a “crime emergency” in Washington, D.C. federalizing the police force and deploying troops to patrol the district’s streets. Reports this week suggest the administration is preparing to do the same in Chicago.

Keep reading

Decades Later, It’s Time To Seriously Rethink—And Reduce—The TSA 

As a retired international airline captain, my relationship with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has been fraught ever since its inception after 9/11. Before that seismic event, I logged countless hours as a Delta Airlines pilot, operating in an environment defined by professionalism and mutual respect among crew, passengers, and airport staff. Today, I view the TSA not as an indispensable pillar of aviation safety, but as an institution whose practices have needlessly burdened travelers and which, after more than two decades, may do more harm than good to the spirit and efficiency of air travel. 

Personal Experience with TSA 

My experiences with TSA have run the gamut: some screeners are cordial and efficient, while others act with indifference—or outright hostility. Despite my decades in aviation, both my wife and I found ourselves subjected to heightened scrutiny and what felt like constant harassment at security checkpoints. This pattern was not isolated to us; colleagues and fellow travelers shared similar frustrations. The inconsistency in treatment reflects deeper problems in TSA’s culture and priorities. 

More troubling is my memory of reporting suspicious activities in airports and on airplanes long before 9/11—concerns that were either ignored or dismissed. In the worst cases, I was treated not as a professional fulfilling a duty of care, but as an alarmist, or, unconscionably, accused of prejudice. These failures of the pre-TSA security apparatus were tragic enough. The answer, however, was not to swing to the other extreme by creating an agency whose methods too often resemble performative security theater rather than effective defense. 

TSA: Record Size, Questionable Effectiveness 

The TSA today is larger, wealthier, and more technologically advanced than at any point in its history: in 2024, it screened over 900 million passengers, processed nearly half a billion checked bags, and employed the largest screening workforce on record.  The agency celebrates its lowered attrition rates, large-scale recruitments, and new technologies, but these metrics only tell part of the story. What goes unaddressed mainly is the pressing question: has all this intrusion, inconvenience, and expense made us significantly safer? 

Keep reading

FBI: Southern California Man Arrested with Homemade Bomb After Sending Money to ISIS

Federal authorities arrested a Southern California man Friday for allegedly sending a dozen payments to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, commonly known as the foreign terrorist group ISIS.

The feds charged Mark Lorenzo Villanueva, 28, of Long Beach with “attempting to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization, a felony offense that carries a statutory maximum sentence of 20 years in federal prison,” according to a statement released by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California.

The statement reported that Villanueva is a lawful permanent resident from the Philippines.

“Supporting a terrorist group, whether at home or abroad, is a serious risk to our national security,” said Acting United States Attorney Bill Essayli. “We will aggressively hunt down and prosecute anyone who provides support or comfort to our enemies.”

The U.S. Attorney’s Office account added:

According to an affidavit filed with the complaint, Villanueva communicated via social media with two individuals who self-identified as ISIS fighters. During these communications, Villanueva discussed his desire to support ISIS, and offered to send money to the ISIS fighters to support their terrorist activities.

Villanueva told one of the self-identified ISIS fighters that Villanueva wanted to fight for ISIS himself, stating, “It’s an honor to fight and die for our faith. It’s the best way to go to heaven.” Villanueva also stated, “Someday soon, I’ll be joining.”

The man also allegedly told one of the ISIS fighters that he had a bomb and knives. The FBI recovered what appeared to be a bomb from Villanueva’s bedroom during his arrest, prosecutors said.

Villanueva then allegedly sent 12 payments totaling $1,615 during a five-month period to two intermediaries who accessed the money overseas, the office reported, citing Western Union records.

Keep reading

Ron DeSantis’ Superior Speaks Out Amid Guantanamo Torture Accusations

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis‘ former boss weighed in on the accusations that DeSantis oversaw the torture of prisoners during his tenure at Guantanamo Bay.

DeSantis, a Republican who has become a leading conservative figure in the United States, was accused of overseeing torture at the prison where the Untied States detained suspected terrorists, despite concerns over detainees being held without criminal charges being filed.

Mansoor Adayfi, former detainee at Guantanamo Bay who was held for 14 years without being charged with a crime, made the accusation during a November 2022 interview on the Eyes Left podcast, in which he said DeSantis observed guards force-feed him amid a hunger strike, laughing during the procedure. DeSantis, however, has not been accused of torturing inmates.

These accusations reemerged on Tuesday following a report from McClatchy/The Miami Herald that shined a light on the governor’s time at Guantanamo Bay, a topic on which he has offered little public comment. He joined the Office of the Staff Judge Advocate in 2006, four years after the facility opened.

Amid these accusations of overseeing torture, DeSantis’ former supervisor, retired Navy Captain Patrick McCarthy, defended the governor, explaining that he was tasked “with detainees when there were any complaints to ensure they were lawfully addressed.”

“DeSantis served honorably and professionally in a very complex mission,” McCarthy told the Herald.

DeSantis has not publicly addressed Adayfi’s allegations, which could not be independently verified.

Retired Colonel Michael Bumgarner told the Herald that DeSantis would have had “very, very intimate knowledge” about conditions at Guantanamo Bay, which have been long criticized by human rights advocates as violating detainees’ rights and due process.

Keep reading

Army Sends Letter to Pro-Life Groups Apologizing for Referring to Them as ‘Terrorists’ During Training Under Biden

The Gateway Pundit reported that during Joe Biden’s regime, the Defense Department categorized pro-life organizations as “terrorist organizations” during an anti-terrorism briefing held at Fort Bragg’s Directorate of Emergency Services, formerly known as Fort Liberty.

Citizen journalist Sam Shoemate, or @samour, shared the disturbing slide on X.

“An anti-terrorism brief was held on Fort Liberty (Bragg) today where they listed several Pro-Life organizations as “terrorist organizations.” The slide you see here followed right after a slide about ISIS, a terror group in the Middle East,” Shoemate wrote on X.

The presentation slide, which was widely circulated on social media, lists these pro-life organizations that oppose “Roe[sic] v. Wade” under a headline reading “TERRORIST GROUPS.”

The presentation specifically targets groups like National Right to Life and Operation Rescue, which have long been pillars of the pro-life community.

These organizations are dedicated to peaceful advocacy against abortion, grounded in the belief that every life is valuable and worth protecting.

The slide shockingly equates their activities, such as demonstrations, protests, mass demonstrations, Life Chain, The Rescue, The Truth Display, and picketing, along with counseling efforts at sidewalks and crisis centers, with terrorism.

Now that the DOD has rational, non-woke leadership, U.S. Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll sent a letter offering a “sincerest apology” for the actions taken under the prior administration on behalf of himself and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.

Keep reading

Smoking Gun: Biden White House Colluded with Merrick Garland on Memo Labeling Parents ‘Domestic Terrorists’

America First Legal obtained new documents proving what we knew to be true all along: Merrick Garland’s infamous memo labeling concerned parents at school board meetings “domestic terrorists” was politically orchestrated and driven by the Biden White House.

In October 2021, Mark Levin broadcast a letter with insider information on the teachers union, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and the FBI who met and organized how to combat America’s parents who were speaking out at local school board meetings across the country.

The parents were outraged at the COVID masking and vaccination rules, critical race theory indoctrination and open porn disguised as literature promoted in American schools.

Biden’s Attorney General Merrick Garland even sent federal agents and a helicopter circling overhead to threaten parents attending the Fairfax County School Board meeting in Virginia.

This was after Garland testified and said he was not sending the feds to threaten American parents who speak out at their local school board meetings.

Merrick Garland labeled the concerned parents “domestic terrorists” in a memo addressing the “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence” toward school officials.

Parents showed up to school board meetings to reject the porn and LGBTQ propaganda being forced on their children and Merrick Garland called them terrorists.

America First Legal previously sued to obtain documents related to Merrick Garland’s memo and on Friday it was revealed the Biden White House coordinated with Garland to terrorize concerned parents.

“We’re aware; the challenge here is finding a federal hook. But WH has been in touch about whether we can assist in some form or fashion,” Biden’s Deputy Attorney General aide Kevin Chambers wrote in an October 2021 email.

Keep reading

DHS Secretary Suggests Liquid Carry-On Limits On Flights Might Be Eased

More changes could be coming to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), including on whether more liquids can be taken through airport security, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem suggested on July 16.

But I will tell you—I mean the liquids—I’m questioning. So that may be the next big announcement is what size your liquids need to be,” Noem told NewsNation in a live interview with The Hill published on July 16, referring to the amount of liquids people can transport through security in their carry-on bags. “We’re looking at our scanners.”

The TSA website says that you “are allowed to bring a quart-sized bag of liquids, aerosols, gels, creams and pastes in your carry-on bag and through the checkpoint,” but are “limited to travel-sized containers that are 3.4 ounces (100 milliliters) or less per item.”

Noem’s comment comes just days after she announced that the TSA has lifted its mandate for travelers to take off their shoes at security checkpoints.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) secretary said that her office is “working with several different companies with technologies to give us competitive bids on what they actually do.”

She added that DHS is “working to see what we can do to make the traveling experience much better and more hospitable for individuals, but also still keep safety standards.”

Keep reading

Syrian HTS Troops Mass Murder Civilians At Hospital In South, Days After US Drops Terror Designation

There is gruesome evidence emerging of mass atrocities in the southern Syrian province of Suwayda, where government soldiers under the Sharaa/Jolani regime have been conducing sectarian attacks on Druze and Christians, while seeking to get the etho-religions Druze community to lay down their weapons.

New disturbing images emerging Wednesday show dozens of dead civilians strewn about the floor at the National Hospital of Suwayda. The images seem authentic and verified, as Syria expert Joshua Landis of the University of Oklahoma has described that a regime soldier in the aftermath filmed the results of the massacre while proclaiming “God is Great” and that there has been ‘victory’ over the Druze there.

Russia’s RT News has also picked up on the footage, captioning the “HORRIFIC images reportedly out of Suweida hospital in South Syria shows staff MASSACRED” for “Suspected of being Druze” — as the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) describes.

Keep reading

The ‘Global War on Terror’ Is Over. Terror Won.

On Sept. 16, 2001, five days after the attacks on New York and Washington, DC, President George W. Bush declared, “This crusade – this war on terrorism – is going to take a while. And the American people must be patient. I’m going to be patient. But I can assure the American people I am determined.”

Four days after that, President Bush declared the “war on terror” to be primarily against al-Qaeda. “Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda,” he said in an address to Congress and the nation, “but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated.”

He described the enemy thus:

This group and its leader — a person named Osama bin Laden — are linked to many other organizations in different countries, including the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan.  There are thousands of these terrorists in more than 60 countries.

Bush was correct in his assessment of the group.

One of those countries into which al-Qaeda jihadists implanted themselves was Syria, where from 2011 – with the support of the Obama Administration – they attempted to overthrow the secular leader, Bashar al-Assad, using terrorist tactics they had been well-trained in.

They soon changed their name – but not their stripes – and became the Al-Nusra Front, headed up by an experienced jihadist who fought against US troops in Iraq by the name of Abu Mohammad al-Jolani. His group was known for chopping off heads. Perhaps even American heads.

Last December Jolani’s jihadists – with support from the US, Turkey, and Israel – finally brought down the Assad government and quicker than you can say “Washington PR makeover” he clipped his beard, switched out his tactical military watch for a $90,000 Patek Philippe World Time Chronograph, and declared himself president.

The “civilized world” cheered the re-emergence of democracy in Syria!

At their first meeting earlier this year in Saudi Arabia, President Trump praised jihadist Jolani as “a young, attractive fellow” and “a tough guy, a fighter, with a very strong background. He has a lot of potential, he’s a real leader.”

This was a US-designated global terrorist with a $10 million bounty placed on his head by the US authorities. His “wanted” poster STILL remains on the X account of the US Embassy in Syria!

This week, President Trump “removed sanctions on Jolani’s Syria at (Israeli Prime Minister) Netanyahu’s request,” and just yesterday Secretary of State removed Jolani’s old al-Qaeda affiliate (which had gone from al-Nusra to HTS over the years) from the US terrorist list.

As one observer on X quipped:

The history of the GWOT (Global War on Terror) began in 2001 with the US invading Afghanistan to dig out Al Qaeda. It ends twenty-four years later with the US recognizing an AQ affiliate as the new ruler of Syria.

According to Brown University’s Cost of War Project, the “Global War on Terror” cost the American people at least eight trillion dollars. It also took the lives of perhaps a million people.

And what did we get for all this blood and treasure? In Afghanistan, the Taliban were after 20 years of US military action replaced by the Taliban, and in Syria a fierce opponent of al-Qaeda was replaced by… al-Qaeda!

As Jake Sullivan, then right hand to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, wrote to the Secretary in 2012, “al-Qaeda is on our side in Syria.” He wasn’t joking!

That was the shot… here’s the chaser:

In the same week the United States removed sanctions on al-Qaeda ruled Syria, it placed sanctions on… UN Special Rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories Francesca Albanese!

Who is Albanese? She is the fearless defender of human life in a Gaza where it is slowly being extinguished by Israel with the backing (and weapons) of the US government.

Keep reading

Watchdog finds Border Patrol failed to screen possible terror-linked aliens, lacks a uniform policy

The Department of Homeland Security watchdog found that at least one Border Patrol office failed to adequately screen aliens with possible links to terrorism because the agency did not have a consistent policy under the Biden administration. 

A review conducted by Homeland Security’s Inspector General’s Office found that the Border Patrol Office in San Diego did not have a set policy to deal with so-called Special Interest Aliens (SIAs), which are defined by the department as “a non-U.S. person who, based on an analysis of travel patterns, potentially poses a national security risk to the United States or its interests.” 

The finding from the DHS watchdog is only the latest evidence of significant deficiencies in the past administration’s handling of the southern border, especially when it came to proper vetting and tracking of immigrants. 

The inspector general found that despite other Border Patrol offices on the southern border successfully developing screening policies for SIAs, the San Diego office failed to do so. 

No agency-wide policy was in place

The watchdog squarely blamed the wider Customs and Border Protection agency for the failure because it had not promulgated a uniform policy for the screening of such aliens. 

“In July 2023, CBP’s Office of Field Operations (OFO) San Diego Field Office and the U.S. Border Patrol (Border Patrol) Yuma and El Centro sectors had a process to identify and provide additional screening of SIAs, yet San Diego sector did not,” the inspector general wrote. “This inconsistency occurred because CBP did not have an agency-wide policy stating whether to identify aliens from certain countries as SIAs,” the watchdog added. 

Because San Diego lacked a sufficient vetting process, the inspector general found “aliens from countries with links to terrorism entered at least one CBP region that did not provide additional screening.”

You can read the report below: 

File

OIG-25-29-Jul25-REDACTED.pdf

No country-specific screening published

The inspector general initiated its review to evaluate Customs and Border Protection’s screening of “Central Asian aliens” who entered the country via “smuggling networks” from June to October 2023, the report says. 

It is unclear what countries the watchdog is referring to because the specific characteristics of the aliens are redacted. However, several countries in Central Asia are home to terrorist activity, including Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. 

Keep reading