Bail “Reform” Reform

One of the greatest lies sold by liberals (rivaling Obamacare and comprehensive immigration “reform”) was bail “reform.” Americans were told countless people with minor offenses were languishing in jail awaiting trial, losing jobs and putting a massive strain on good families because they could not afford a bond. Liberals swore this would not be for violent offenders, but  a single mother arrested for driving with a suspended license or a minor shoplifter. 

As Dr. Evil says, Riiiiight. 

My home of Harris County TX (Houston) was known as a place where you didn’t want to get arrested, because our judges did not play around. Violent offenders got a significant bond (high five or six figures) to insure they would return, and if you jay walked while out your bail was voided. Unfortunately in 2018 we had a blue wave election where almost all of the county judges were replaced by Democrats. The results have been devastating.

Fox 26 in Houston has an excellent series called Breaking Bond. Since 2018, over 175 people have been murdered by felons on bond for serious violent offenses, including murder and capital murder. In one case a man was murdered by a defendant on bail for not one, not two, but seven violent felonies, all pending trial. You would think after one serious crime the judge would get the idea of remanding the defendant, but not with these progressive judicial geniuses. 

Thankfully there an effort to restrict the ability of judges to let violent offenders walk and prey on the public while they should be sitting in jail awaiting trial. The Texas legislature has less than a month (assuming they are not called by for a special session) but this is a critical matter that should have been handled in January. 

Abbott: Deny bail for some by default

Governor pitches violent crimes rule

By John Wayne Ferguson and Nicole Hensley

Gov. Greg Abbott on Wednesday demanded state legislators approve a constitutional amendment that — if passed by voters — would require courts to automatically deny bail to people accused of murder and other violent crimes in the state.

Surrounded by crime victims’ families at Crime Stoppers of Houston, Abbott called on lawmakers to start a process that could put even more stringent requirements on judges and magistrates, who decide if a person can go free in between their arrest and trial...

Abbott’s called-for reform was quickly called unconstitutional by groups already skeptical of other bail-related bills moving through the legislature.

Funny, these “groups,” aka The Usual Suspects, call an amendment to the Texas constitution unconstitutional. If it’s in the Texas constitution, it’s not unconstitutional. If they say it’s against the federal constitution, these legals scholars should read the 8^th Amendment. It only prohibits “excessive bail,” it does not forbid remand. 

The Texas Senate passed a bill in February, known as SJR 5, that proposes an amendment to the Constitution that would give judges discretion to deny bail to people accused of violent crimes and some sex-related offenses. The current bill requires judges to find evidence that a defendant won’t appear in court and is a danger.

Currently, the only crime a judge may initially deny bond for is Capital Murder. This bill would expand the crimes where a defendant may be disallowed bail. From the summary:

A person accused of committing a sexual offense punishable as a felony of the first degree, of committing a violent offense, or of committing continuous trafficking of persons may be denied bail pending trial if a judge or magistrate determines by clear and convincing evidence after a hearing that requiring bail and conditions of release is insufficient to reasonably ensure:

the person's appearance in court as required; or

the safety of the community, law enforcement, or the victim of the alleged offense.

Again, this does not make remand mandatory, only expands the crimes where a judge may deny bail to protect the populace, witnesses to the crime, or law enforcement. 

The burden should be on repeat violent criminals “to prove that they are not a danger to the community,” Abbott said.

Judges who don’t deny bail should be required to explain their decisions in writing and prosecutors should be able to appeal bail decisions to a higher court, he said

…Other bail-related bills being considered by the legislature would require immigrants in the country without permission accused of felonies to be held without bail and would put further limits on when cashless bonds can be granted.

Good point on repeating violent offenders having to prove they are not a danger to the public. If you are out on bond for aggravated robbery and rob another person at gun point, I think that shows you can’t be trusted and you should rot in jail awaiting trial. The issue on illegal aliens getting bond is obvious. Once you’re on the other side of the border, with few exceptions, you’re lost to American justice.

This shows another issue of the electorate in general. If an elected judge shows himself untrustworthy of the power of granting bond in serious crimes, he should be out of a job after the next election. The best term limit is an engaged voter base. Unfortunately, in too many cases, we don’t have that. Until our voters become more active in down ballot races, and hold officials accountable for their actions, we will have issues like this. So we must limit the discretion a judge has. Granted a blunt instrument, but if the judges acted like jurists and not liberal hacks, this would not be a concern. 

 

Bad and Good news for policing

Got some good news, and some bad news, on policing. Nothing is perfect. So, let’s take a look at the bad news first. 

 

First, from the former Windy City, now the Blowing Town, Chicago IL.  Previously one of the great metropolises in the world, The City of Big Shoulders, the Great Commercial Tree. It, like the formerly great state of Illinois, is having people run like hell out of it. Last ten years it’s lost almost three hundred thousand people. Within ten years is expected to be the fourth largest city in the US, after my adopted hometown of Houston, which has gained over two hundred thousand people since 2022. 

 

Despite the Democratic gains in the last few elections, Houston is a relatively pro-law enforcement community. The judges on our bench are a disaster (blue wave election in 2018), but we’re not as bad as New York, New Orleans or Los Angeles. So, again, would I want to be a cop in the Sucky City? Not looking at this (emphasis mine): 

 

Proposed Chicago Police Policy Does Not Prohibit Pretextual Stops

​

Chicago police officers would not be banned from making traffic stops based on minor registration or equipment violations that are designed to find evidence of “unrelated” crimes, under a new policy unveiled Thursday by Chicago Police Department leaders.

 

The proposed policy “acknowledges” that what the department calls “Pretextual Traffic Stops can be perceived by some members of the community as negative, biased or unlawful, WTTW reports. Therefore, any such use of lawful Pretextual Traffic Stops as a law enforcement or crime prevention strategy must strike a balance between identifying those engaged in criminal conduct and the community’s sense of fairness.”

 

…Advocates for police reform have long urged the department to ban pretextual stops, saying their use does not make Chicagoans safer and have been used by CPD officers to target Black and Latino Chicagoans.

No kidding. I’ve worked the streets most of the last 26 years and yes, pulling someone over is often used to look at what’s going on in a car. For example, if a car is swerving side to side but within the divided lines, has the driver committed a crime? No. However, it is suspicious they cannot drive straight and it may be indication of the driver being impaired (alcohol, drugs, etc.) and a hazard to the public. Or it  may be a sign the driver is trying to control the three kids in the back seat. Either way, it’s prudent for a cop to stop them (reasonable suspicion, not probable cause)  to insure the driver can safely operate a car. 

 

The ”advocates” for police reform want police not operating at all. They were the ones who screamed for police defunding, will make every effort to prosecute a cop who makes a split-second decision of the use of force, will threaten a cop’s family, and destroy police equipment and other faculties. All in the name of “making Chicagoans safer.” 

 

Yes, it works simply. I stop you for an expired registration, I run your driver’s license, it comes back with a traffic warrant, you’re booked. While I’m inventorying your car or searching you, I find the stolen pistol you have. Wait, you’re a convicted felon, you can’t possess a firearm, that’s another felony, so your parole is violated, the gun is recovered (either returned to the owner or destroyed), and you’re taken off the streets where you terrorize the law-abiding citizens. Oh, the fact you got stopped prevent you for conducting the aggravated robbery you were planning on at the cell phone store, and crime goes down.  

See how that works “advocates for police reform?” Yes, you understand, but don’t care. They live in gaged communities and employ private security yourself, or if you’re a city official, you may have taxpayer provided security. 

 

Something else. In the early 2000s, I went to roll call. Our shift commander had just come from police headquarters, where a “racial profiling” system was briefed. It had been created overnight, beginning immediately, in every self-initiated activity (e.g., traffic stops, street interviews) we must document the race, sex, why we stopped them, and the outcome (warning, ticket, arrest, etc.). If you stopped one-hundred white males and ticketed fifteen, then you should also ticket fifteen of the black males. If your numbers didn’t synch, I quote, “You can be investigated, suspended, terminated, criminally charged by the locals and the feds, even subject to civil liability…” 

 

Now go out there and do a good job. This was before automation, so we had to turn in a form with our daily work card. Self-initiated actions dropped immediately. Cops in roll call would fill out their racial profiling form (name, payroll number, unit) and then put a big “0” in the center. Traffic tickets dropped over 60% in a week. Within a month “clarifying guidance” was issues and the threats were removed. 

 

The point? You threaten cops, they will not go on a limb for anyone. Police work, to be effective, must be assertive. The cops have to go out, see the usual suspects they know are causing problems, notice they are “carrying heavy” on their right coat. You stop for an interview, pad them down, discover the outline of a pistol, arrest them for unlawful carry, and send them back to prison where they cannot commit crime on the general public. 

 

Well, onto the better news. President Donald Trump has started some actions to assist law enforcement. The war on the cops from Obama and O’Biden had a four-year cease fire from 2017 to 2021. Now we have some good news:

 

Trump signs executive orders to boost officer protections, target ‘sanctuary cities’

 

The first executive order, Strengthening and unleashing America’s law enforcement to pursue criminals and protect innocent citizens, directs Attorney General Pam Bondi to “Maximize the use of federal resources to improve officer training,  pay, benefits, legal protections, seek tougher sentences for crimes against police, enhance prison capacity, 

‘Improve uniformity in crime data reporting,’ review/reevaluate federal consent decrees and other out of court orders, expand the use of surplus military equipment.” 

 

The second order instructs Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to publish a list of sanctuary jurisdictions and withhold federal funding from those identified. The order also authorizes potential criminal investigations into alleged violations such as obstruction of justice and conspiracy to impede federal law enforcement... 

New York may have problems paying for the defense. They need to keep the illegal aliens in four/five-star hotels. 

 

Progress. Again, cops don’t trust politicians, and we know all this can change at the next election. But better to have someone actually supporting law enforcement, not attacking it at every chance. 

 

For the education bureaucracy, it's a matter of trust.

 A matter of discussion I’ve had many times, “Who does a bureaucracy work for?” In this case, who does the public school system work for? It’s  not who most people think. 

It’s not the students. They are the consumers of the efforts of the public school system, a (hopefully) good education. It’s not necessarily the parents. Not knocking them, an involved parent is a critical part of the education process. Mom and dad review their child’s efforts, insure they do their homework, support the educators in their works. Teamwork. 

The public school system, like every other public bureaucracy, works ultimately for the taxpayer. I say that because the taxpayer is the one paying the bills for the service, be it police, fire, roads, or education. I paid school taxes for over a decade before I became a step-father and had two girls enrolled, so I was supervisor of the school system. As such, the taxpayers have every right to see how that money is being used. 

I saw this article a few weeks back in the Houston Chronicle, and I’m not sure to find this an example of bureaucratic arrogance, or just incomprehension of the facts. 

Senate bill that cedes school library control is overkill

By Sara Stevenson

Sara Stevenson, a former middle school librarian, was Austin ISD’s first Librarian of the Year in 2013.

What is it that motivates school librarians? As a former middle school librarian, I can tell you it’s that moment of connection when you find the right book for the right child…

Unfortunately, Senate Bill 13, which aims to protect students from “harmful materials,” replaces the judgment of the school librarian with the authority of something called a local school library advisory council. This committee, appointed by the school board, must consist of at least five members, a majority of whom are volunteer parents who do not work for the district, but may also include non-voting educators, community members and even clergy. Its purpose is to approve all library books purchased or donated, classroom books, and even books weeded from the collections. The list must then be sent to the school board for approval. The council is required to meet only twice in a school year.

Yes Ms. Stevenson, volunteer parents, non-voting educators, community members and even clergy are all stakeholders in the education of the children. In case you missed it, they are your boss. I get that a lot on the street, but let’s go on. 

That means it’ll take ages to get new books on the shelves — and that’s a problem. When a new book in a popular series is coming out soon, kids check every day: “Is it here yet?” Because my district trusted my professionalism, I had the freedom to order that book so that it arrived on publication day…

You did, as did others. Bureaucrats abused that privilege by putting into schools’ books inappropriate for children, such as publications pushing LGBTABCDEFG etc. to six-year-olds. Senate Bill 13 is not a perfect solution, but it would be unnecessary if schools, libraries, etc. concentrated on reading, basic science, mathematics, etc., and not teaching about (not sure if this is the current number) 72 genders. 

…If the local school library advisory council and then the school board must approve every book on each school’s book orders, and the lists must be posted for thirty days before books can be purchased…

Senate Bill 13 throws a wrench in the library book acquisition system...

…The law requires little of these councils of parent volunteers, other than that they meet at least twice a year. In contrast, Texas requires school librarians in Texas to hold a master’s degree, have at least two years of teaching experience, and be trained in collection development. Librarians know intimately their school’s students, the community, the teachers and the curriculum. That allows them to make the best choices.

My grandmother was a public librarian for years and only a high school graduate. She also knew to segregate children to age appropriate reading material. As a first grader, you got Cat in the Hat, not mommy porn or other explicit material. Also you don’t know what’s best for students. It’s the parents, and you have no business saying you do. 

Ms. Stevenson, recently parents discovered school bureaucrats telling children they can change their “gender,” name, pronouns, and what restroom to use. School officials said they are under no requirement to tell the parent, much less ask. They seem to forget parents are responsible for child upbringing, not bureaucrats, elected or not. Yes, they are. Those are not their children, but the parents kids. Also, if a school has money to purchase a breast binder for an adolescent girl, they have too much money. 

Other problems, in the aftermath of the COVID epidemic, millions of parents actually saw what children were being taught in school and were horrified. Transgenderism is not something for a first grader, but many educators thought to. Basic mathematics have been around for thousands of years, but educators believe this is outdated and requires “New Math,” or “friendly numbers”:

Say you want to add two-digit numbers. The old-school way millennial parents were taught involved putting one on top of the other and carrying, if necessary. Now, students are encouraged to rethink how they arrange the numbers. Moldavan gives the example of 41 + 29. You could rewrite 29 as 30, which is a rounder, "friendly number." Then, you turn 41 into 40 (also "friendly"). You've subtracted 1 from 41, and added 1 to 29, so that cancels out. And now you have your product: 70.

No, we want elementary students to be taught basic mathematics, as well as English reading, comprehension, and grammar, as this is the building blocks of future learning. Whatever the subject (history, science) being able to read, write and comprehend the English language is critical. That is what the customers of the public school system require, the taxpayers, whether they have children enrolled or not. 

Though the requirements of an advisory council and waiting period may not be too onerous in a small Texas district, it will be nearly impossible for large districts to comply...

And it demands that we put a lot of trust on the handful of parents on the committee — but not on students’ parents in general. Since parents are overwhelmingly the most important influence in a child’s life, why don’t schools suggest that concerned parents talk with their children about what books they’re reading and checking out? Who knows your child better than you do?

You don’t say the parents need to be concerned with what their children are reading. Looks like a lot of them are, as well as other issues in public schools. Yes, it’s a matter of trust, to borrow the words from Billy Joel. The education bureaucracy, particularly in large city schools, has shown itself unworthy of the trust of the public, or parents. You and other bureaucrats needs to relearn that, which is not easy. I don’t know the author, but he said it well, “Trust takes years to build, seconds to break, and forever to repair.” That is your challenge. Good luck.

Fellow writer at The American Free News Network had a great piece here on how many who wear a badge suffer in silence. Cops (like firefighters and EMTs, as well as military veterans, often experience traumatic incidents during their service. What one person may consider a one a year to one a decade event (accidents with major injuries) are a day's work for a cop or EMT on the street. You put up a brave face, but it does build up. And not having an outlet is bad for the men and women in the uniform, and the people they serve. 

With that as an introduction, is Mr. Manney's piece. I think you'll find it insightful.  

The Weight Behind the Badge: When Our Guardians Suffer in Silence

April 8, 2025 by David Manney

“The best way out is always through.” — Robert Frost.

But what happens when there’s no way out or one to lead you through?

They do not die in shootouts, in car chases, or at the hands of violent criminals. They die alone, often in silence, by their own hand. And they do so at an alarming and increasing rate. These are not isolated incidents or statistical flukes. They are clear, grim warnings about a system that protects the public but too often neglects its protectors.

Between 2016 and 2022, over 1,200 law enforcement and corrections officers in the United States died by suicide. That’s more than 184 officers per year, with 2019 marking the highest count at 234. And those are only the reported numbers. The true toll is likely higher, obscured by stigma, silence, and a system that struggles to face its wounds.

The numbers are not confined to a single department or state. They are widespread, from New York to California, urban precincts, and rural sheriff’s departments. In Wisconsin, for instance, the suicide rate for the general population rose by 38% between 2000 and 2021, with nearly a thousand lives lost in a single year. While data specific to officers in the state remains scarce, there is every reason to believe they are far from immune.

So the question must be asked plainly: Why are the men and women behind the badge taking their own lives in such numbers? And perhaps more damning, why isn’t anyone talking about it?

A Culture of Stoicism at a Deadly Cost

The answer begins with a culture that both lionizes and isolates. Officers are trained to be strong, to handle trauma with composure, and to respond to domestic violence, overdoses, suicides, and murders without faltering. They are expected to witness the very worst of human behavior and return home as if it had never happened.

But trauma does not evaporate. It accumulates. Every cry of a battered child, every corpse found in a lonely field, every anguished mother screaming over a body, they stay. They weigh. And when there is no place to set that burden down, it begins to crush.

Studies show that police officers experience depression at nearly twice the rate of the general population. They are also at increased risk for PTSD, substance abuse, and anxiety. Yet, in too many departments, vulnerability is mistaken for weakness. Seeking help is quietly discouraged. Some fear losing their firearm access, their job, or the respect of their peers.

This cultural flaw is not a matter of political correctness; it is a matter of life and death.

A Deafening Silence from the Media

Equally troubling is the near-total absence of a national conversation. When an officer is killed in the line of duty, headlines mourn, vigils are held, and departments rally. But when an officer dies by suicide, there is often only a brief mention, if that. No public memorial. No flags at half-mast. No national outrage.

And why not?

Is it because suicide doesn’t serve a narrative? Because it challenges the simplistic portrayal of law enforcement as either heroes or villains, with no room for human suffering? Or is it simply because this topic is too uncomfortable, too complex, too unresolvable for a culture addicted to quick fixes and clickbait?

This silence serves no one. It certainly does not serve the officers still here, still carrying the load, still wondering if they, too, might one day become another hidden statistic.

We Owe Them More

There is no excuse for continuing down this path. We must act with real, institutional change, not with performative gestures.

We need consistent, national data collection. The 2020 Law Enforcement Suicide Data Collection Act was a good start, but data without accountability is just a spreadsheet. Departments must report, analyze, and act on these numbers.

Mental health resources must become as integral as weapons training. Peer support programs, anonymous counseling, and wellness checks must be standardized across all departments and not treated as optional luxuries.

We need a cultural shift. We must destigmatize emotional struggle. Officers should be praised, not punished, for seeking help. Leadership must model this from the top down.

The media must do its part. There should be no shame in these deaths, only tragedy. Let the public see the full cost of the badge. Let us mourn the fallen in action and the fallen in silence.

We say we back the blue. We put stickers on our cars and hang flags in our yards. But what do those gestures mean if we ignore the mental wounds they suffer in our name?

A nation that refuses to care for its guardians does not deserve their protection.

The men and women who wear the uniform deserve better. They deserve our respect not only when they stand tall but also when they need to lean on others. And they deserve to be remembered not just for how they died but for everything they endured while trying to live.

Behind every badge is a human being, a father, a daughter, a friend, who straps on armor each day, not just to face bullets but to shield us from the things we hope we never have to see. And sometimes, they pay a price far greater than any medal can acknowledge.

The truth is hard, but it must be spoken: Some of our bravest do not fall in battle. They fall alone, with no enemy in sight, only memories that won’t let go.

Their sacrifice is no less honorable. Their pain no less real.

And their silence, if we continue to ignore it, will one day become ours.

Much Adu About Nothing. The Signal Scandal.

The recent disclosure of a Signal thread by high level officials shows sloppiness, but not unauthorized disclosure of classified information. 

The usual suspects are screaming about a compromise of a classified war plan by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Advisor Michael Waltz, among others. Now people who should know better are screaming about the compromise of “classified” information on an unsecure network (paging Mrs. Bill Clinton).  

 

In handling similar issues over the years, I’ve learned to calm down, investigate the matter, obtain the facts, then go forward. First, look at the source. Jeffrey Goldberg and The Atlantic are known Trump haters, facts be damned. More on that later. 

 

It is useful define what is classified information? It’s information or assets secured to protect the nation’s security. There are three basic levels, in order: 

 

CONFIDENTIAL: Unauthorized disclosure will cause damage to the nation’s security, such as unit radio call signs (they are changed at least regularly).

 

SECRET: Unauthorized disclosure will cause serious damage to the nation’s security, such as most national defense plans or intelligence agency budget plans.  

 

TOP SECRET: Unauthorized disclosure will cause exceptionally grave damage to the nation’s security, such as technical specifications of weapon systems or intelligence assets. 

 

Also, what makes something classified? An office holder must, by statue, have Original Classification Authority. They are authorized by the president to declare information or items classified. The National Security Advisor,  Secretaries of State, Defense, or the Attorney General can classify up to and including TOP SECRET. The Secretaries of Agriculture, HHS, or Transportation can classify up to and including SECRET.  

 

Now, let’s look at Mr. Goldberg’s claims. He states he knew about the March 15^th attack on the Houthi. Did he?

The world found out shortly before 2 p.m. eastern time on March 15 that the United States was bombing Houthi targets across Yemen.

I, however, knew two hours before the first bombs exploded that the attack might be coming. The reason I knew this is that Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defense, had texted me the war plan at 11:44 a.m. The plan included precise information about weapons packages, targets, and timing.

 

This was precise information about targets? No question it was the Houthi, who had been attacking our shipping for years from Yemen, are in Yemen. So is it a surprise we would be attacking the Houthi in…Yemen? But looking at these two screenshots I don’t see the work Yemen mentioned once. So what are the targets specifically. His article has two screen shots from the thread and I don’t see the word Yemen mentioned once. The word Yemen is mentioned twice in this article, once in the introduction. So how did Mr. Goldberg get specific insight into our targets? Sounds like a spy in 1943 England informing the 3^rdReich, “The Allies are planning an invasion of Europe.”

Weapons, ok, there is a list of weapons. The F/A-18 has been our primary Naval aircraft since 1999. We have been using drones such as the MQ-9 Reaper have been used for over 20 years, and the Reaper has been used in Middle East and Afghanistan for attack and intelligence collection for over a decade. Again, it’s like being shocked B-17s are flying out of England to bomb the NAZIs during World War II. 

Timing, yes, he did get advanced notice of about two hours. Was this operational information for our enemies? I doubt the attack time was set four months ago, or one year ago (attacking our enemies was not the priority of the O’Biden administration). Bit of an OPSEC violation, yea. Especially if the NSA put on a high level distro list a radical leftist propagandist. We got enough people leading sensitive/classified information to our nation’s enemies (e.g., The New York Times). We don’t need to give it to them directly. 

But the question still remains, can we take this as the full story? I say that because Mr. Goldberg has not released every screen shot, only two he chose to put out on his magazine website. Not that we don’t trust you sir, but…

You lied about the Russian Collusion Hoax. A discredited narrative that was based on opposition  research from the Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign. 

You lied about President Trump calling fallen soldiers “suckers and losers,” relying only on “anonymous sources,” in spite of over 20 people who were present refuting it, including John Bolton. Mr. Bolton it’s safe to say is no friend of Donald Trump.

Under your “leadership” Mr. Goldberg, The Atlantic has pushed one piece of leftist propaganda after another, such as Jussie Smollett and the Charlottesville “very fine people” comment, which was taken out of context.

So no Mr. Goldberg you’re not give then benefit of the doubt. Or suspension of disbelief for that matter. My first boss in the Army was a great officer and man, and on day one he gave me his expectations for his new lieutenant. First, “You lie to me, you’re dead!” I take it you didn’t get kind of advise at journalism school.

 

If you want to read  the full article, it’s linked here.

Israel's ceasefire plan.

An excellent article from American Free News Network: 

Israel’s ceasefire plan; Blow terrorists up and they stop fighting.

October 7, 2024

The Daily Mail reported that Iran finally launched its oft-promised retaliation against Israel. It went as expected:

Israel’s defense system stood firm on Tuesday night as Iran unleashed a barrage of nearly 200 missiles across the country, sparking fears from world leaders that the escalation could plunge the Middle East into an all-out war.

Iran launched wave after wave of warheads towards Jerusalem and Tel Aviv in revenge for Israel’s campaign against Tehran’s Hezbollah allies in Lebanon, including the assassination of its leader last week.

In the most dramatic development of the Middle Eastern conflict, air raid sirens sounded as 181 missiles began raining down on Israel, with some rockets dramatically exploding into bright orange flames near Tel Aviv.

But as Iran unleashed a salvo of missiles, ordered by its supreme leader Ali Khamenei, falling projectiles burned like comets against the night sky after the rockets were intercepted by Israel’s Iron Dome defensive system.

The sickening attack, which Israel has vowed to exact revenge for, forced civilians to seek shelter as huge chunks of molten metal crashed to the ground.

The expected assault, hailed as heroic by Iran-backed Hamas, marks a major escalation in the Middle East, and was twice the scope of Tehran’s bombardment in April, which saw more than 170 explosive drones and 120 ballistic missiles launched.

In a major embarrassment for Iran, the U.S. said that the missile volley was defeated and ineffective, with just one reported death — a Palestinian man who was killed by shrapnel in the West Bank.

Communists and Nazis are sad because Israel lives. The Iron Dome turned the barrage of bombs into a nationwide fireworks display.

The American press never understood how impotent Iran is.

Last Wednesday, Thomas L. Friedman, the dour and serious self-appointed voice of the mythical Arab Street for the New York Times, wrote, “Why Everything Is Suddenly Spiraling for Israel.” A reader duly forwarded a link and declared TLF to be the Jim Cramer of global politics — that is a man who always bets wrong.

Two days later, Israel blew up the last of Hezbollah’s hierarchy as they met in secret in a totally secure bunker. Netanyahu casually addressed the UN while terrorist-supporting diplomats walked out of his speech. I wonder how many had pagers on their belts.

The big kahuna in the bunker busting was an austere religious scholar — as the Jeff Bezos Post might put it — named Hassan Nasrallah.

NYT praised him for seeking a limited war — you know, one in which Israelis die but not the terrorists. The paper quoted him as saying, when he could still talk, “Some in Lebanon say that we are taking a risk. But this risk is part of a beneficial, correct calculation.”

He found out the hard way just how beneficial and correct his calculation was. As Archie Bunker said 50 years ago, “and you do anything to a Jew, oh boy, the whole Israel Air Force swoops down on you and kicketh the crapola out of you.”

They do.

They infiltrate as well.

CNN Turk said, “Former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in an interview with CNN Turk said that Iran’s secret services had created a special unit to combat Mossad operating in Iran. However, turns out the head of this unit was himself a Mossad agent, along with 20 other agents, who were responsible for multiple intelligence operations in Iran including stealing nuclear docs and assassinating several Iranian nuclear scientists before allegedly fleeing to Israel.”

Part of Nasrallah’s calculation was that the USA would keep Israel on a short leash. But after Obama humiliated Netanyahu and Biden showed he’s just a pawn of an incompetent and ignorant deep state bureaucracy, Netanyahu just ignored the USA. Begone, Biden. You have no power in Tel Aviv.

Israel apparently did not give the Biden administration advance notice of Friday’s surprise attack. Eliana Johnson tweeted, “Lloyd Austin speaking to reporters just now: The U.S. had nothing to do with Israeli strikes and did not get a heads up. His aggravation is clear.”

It’s nice to see the part-time secretary is not in the hospital or on paternity leave. Oh wait, the paternity leaver was the gay guy.

This is Biden’s Team of Slackers. They went 11 months without a Cabinet meeting. Given the condition of our country, it shows.

If I see it in Poca, West Virginia, they see it even better in DC. And Tel Aviv and every other capital in the world.

Apparently Friedman is blind. He concern trolled about how everything is suddenly spiraling. Poor Israel? All its enemies are becoming room temperature.

Friedman wrote before Friday’s bombing that Israel asks the world, “What would your country do if terrorists crossed your western border and killed, maimed, kidnapped or sexually abused hundreds of Israelis they encountered and the next day their Hezbollah allies sent rockets over your northern border, driving away thousands of civilians — all cheered on by Iran?”

My answer on October 7 was level Gaza.

No, no, no. According to Friedman, that’s the wrong thing to do.

He wrote, “I’ve argued from Day 1 that it was a trap, a trap I’m sorry to say the Biden administration was not firm enough in stopping Israel from falling into and not firm enough in insisting on a better road, a road not taken.

“This is no time to be pulling punches. The Jewish state of Israel is in grave, grave danger today. And the danger comes from both Iran and the current Israeli ruling coalition.”

Let’s see, a year ago terrorists casually paraglided in, raped and tortured and killed 1,200 people and then took 240 hostages.

Today most of those terrorists and their leaders are dead. Their heads may not be on pikes — dust is hard to pike — but the message is clear. I don’t foresee a rush of applicants to replace them. Few men want to be pagered in the crotch.

After the IDF eliminated Nasrallah, Hezbollah picked Hassan Khalil Yassin as its leader. The IDF allowed him enough time to tell his mom about the promotion before eliminating him.

Rather than kill the bastards, Friedman and the loony left demanded Israel turn the other cheek. He wrote that he “would have done the following: 1) Opened the way to isolating and pressuring Hamas to agree to a cease-fire in which Israel gets out of Gaza in return for all the hostages — ending the war there and eliminating Hezbollah’s excuse for attacking Israel from the north.”

Israel abandoned Gaza on September 22, 2005. One would think that a Pulitzer Prize-winning self-proclaimed expert on the Middle East would know that by now.

He wrote, “Netanyahu’s strategy is a disaster. As a veteran U.S. military commander who has observed close up Israel’s war strategy in Gaza told me privately, anyone with two eyes in his head knows that the only way to defeat Hamas is a strategy of ‘clear, hold and build’: Destroy the enemy, hold the territory and then build an alternative local, legitimate Palestinian governing authority. Israel’s strategy in Gaza, he said, has been: ‘Clear, leave, come back, clear again the same place, leave again, come back and clear again.’ ”

Clear, hold and build is the strategy we used in Afghanistan. How did that work out?

The only trap is rewarding terrorism in any way, shape or form. Israel gave the terrorists Gaza. That emboldened them. They built Gaza City into a military fortress shielded by schools, hospitals and mosques. For 20 years, Hamas harassed Israel.

Israelis finally had enough after October 7, stopped worrying about world opinion and began destroying Hamas and then Hezbollah. Hamas already had a ceasefire. It violated the ceasefire. Friedman says Israel faces an existential threat — but he does not want Israel to fight.

Why would he? He has a cozy job and nice home. He gets to travel the world. The only existential threat he faces is Father Time.

Mossad did the world a favor by eliminating Hezbollah. First, it blew the balls off Hezbollah recruits. Then it went after its leadership.

Someone tweeted that Hezbollah learned not to mess with around with Israel. The rest of Arabia learned that lesson in six days in 1967. Egyptian tanks are surprisingly speedy in reverse gear.

Israel is unafraid now of any terrorist organization be they Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis or the United Nations.

You didn’t hear about that?

National Review reported, “A Hamas commander in Lebanon who was killed in an Israeli airstrike overnight was an accredited member of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, the embattled agency confirmed after his death.

“Hamas’s Fateh Sherif and his family were killed in an airstrike at a Palestinian refugee camp in the southern city of Tyre, the Israel Defense Forces announced on Monday. ‘Sherif was responsible for coordinating Hamas’ terror activities in Lebanon with Hezbollah operatives, as well as Hamas’ efforts in Lebanon to recruit operatives and acquire weapons.

“While leading terrorist activities, Sherif also headed the UNRWA teachers’ union in Lebanon. Though employed by the U.N. agency, Sherif was suspended without pay in March due to allegations involving ‘his political activities,’ UNRWA told the Times of Israel in a statement.”

He headed the teachers’ union! This is like a scene from a Woody Allen movie — back when he was funny and before he started dating his girlfriend’s daughter.

As Fred Kaplan explained in a tweet, “One of Woody Allen’s best, though esoteric lines, in Sleeper: the scientist, explaining the origins of the apocalypse: ‘We think it happened when a man named Albert Shanker got an atom bomb.’ ”

At the time Allen made the movie, Shanker was the radical head of a teachers’ union in New York City. That was back in the days when a teachers’ unions strike did not involve a missile.

Israel’s peace plan is spelled P-I-E-C-E. You put a piece of the terrorist here and a piece there and a piece over yonder and pretty soon the fighting ends. I have called it the FAFO War. Terrorists are finding out as they expel their final breath.

The Verse of the Day on Monday was Nehemiah 9:30: “For many years you were patient with them. By your Spirit you admonished them through your prophets. Yet they paid no attention, so you handed them over to the neighboring peoples.”

Netanyahu finally listened.

If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.

Substack: American Free News Network Substack
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA