US Soldier Injured During Biden's Failed Gaza Pier Operation Has Died

A U.S. Army soldier died last week after suffering non-combat injuries earlier this year while supporting President Joe Biden’s humanitarian pier off the coast of Gaza, the military announced Monday.

The post US Soldier Injured During Biden's Failed Gaza Pier Operation Has Died appeared first on .

Did the FBI push this soldier into radicalization?



Earlier this month, the Department of Justice announced the sentencing of U.S. Army soldier Pfc. Cole Bridges. He pleaded guilty to terrorism charges in 2023 and received a 14-year federal prison sentence for attempting to assist ISIS.

To the lay reader, the Justice Department’s statement appears to be another example of the FBI’s steadfast commitment to combat terrorism. But a deeper look into the bureau’s history of counterterrorism investigations reveals patterns of entrapment, presenting this case as another instance in which the federal government’s actions could be seen as questionable under the guise of national security.

Rather than simple outreach, the FBI encouraged Bridges’ radicalization as part of its six-year ISIS investigation.

The FBI “playbook” for its counterterrorism investigations is straightforward and rarely contravened.

First, identify a vulnerable person. The individual may be emotionally disturbed, financially indigent, lonely, low-intelligence, or (increasingly) juvenile. The FBI uses confidential human sources to identify these targets. CHSs serve as paid informants for the bureau and are only compensated for contributing to successful counterterrorism cases and arrests.

Second, foster a relationship with the newly acquired terrorism subject. Confidential human sources learn the subject’s vulnerabilities and groom him to embrace his worst ideas — regardless of his ability to act on them.

Third, introduce the subject to an FBI undercover employee or online covert employee and encourage him to engage in a violent act he is neither predisposed toward nor capable of achieving.

Fourth, arrest the subject for providing material support to terrorism or another federal crime that could be construed as violent.

The public’s view of the FBI as a bastion of objectivity in America’s domestic anti-terrorism efforts is increasingly at odds with reality. Notably, a May 2014 study by Project SALAM highlighted that between 2001 and 2010, an overwhelming 94.2% of all Department of Justice terrorism-related convictions were categorized as “pre-emptive prosecutions.” These cases often centered on the defendants’ perceived ideologies rather than any concrete criminal activity, suggesting a troubling reliance on unconstitutional “pre-crime” investigations by the FBI. This raises significant concerns, to say the least, about the validity and fairness of the bureau’s counterterrorism tactics.

Perverse incentives

The FBI playbook sometimes backfires. But by the time these schemes are exposed, the FBI has already benefited from promoting its “successful” operations. Its employees advance their careers, and the wrongly accused endure long, unjustified prison sentences.

Let’s reconsider Cole Bridges’ story. In 2019, Bridges expressed support for ISIS on social media. At 19 years old, he was too young to recall more prominent terrorist organizations like al-Qaeda or Boko Haram. Instead, he latched onto the latest ideology promoted in popular culture.

By 2019, ISIS no longer posed a significant threat to the American homeland. Bridges’ actions point to his immaturity, low intelligence, and possible emotional instability. His online behavior made him a prime target for recruitment by an FBI informant.

Bridges’ enlistment in the military raises additional concerns. The U.S. Army performs background checks on new recruits, looking at social media activity and criminal records. Yet no red flags appeared that would have disqualified Bridges from joining. Did the Army overlook crucial details during its vetting process? Did the FBI and Department of Justice fail to disclose an ongoing counterterrorism investigation? Or worse, did the FBI and the Army collaborate to ensure Bridges’ successful enlistment to build a case against him?

If the answer to either of the latter two questions is yes, it raises another question: Did an FBI informant encourage Bridges to enlist?

The FBI stuck with its standard playbook when Bridges was assigned to the Third Infantry Division. An undercover FBI agent posing as an ISIS supporter began communicating with him online. Bridges fell for the trap. Despite being from Ohio, living in Georgia, and having no clear knowledge of New York City’s vulnerabilities, he provided the agent with guidance for a potential attack on the city.

Later, he offered the undercover agent advice on military maneuvers, fortifying encampments, and ambush techniques against U.S. Special Forces. Bridges, a cavalry scout, had no expertise related to U.S. Special Forces operations.

When re-examining Bridges’ story through the lens of the FBI’s approach, the narrative shifts significantly from the one presented in the Department of Justice press release. Bridges is undoubtedly troubled. He is possibly emotionally disturbed, with delusions of grandeur. He even may have sympathized with violent jihadist ideology. But his susceptibility to a basic government entrapment strategy casts serious doubt on whether he was ever a legitimate or capable national security threat.

A troubling trend

The FBI, constrained by the U.S. Constitution and committed to upholding civil liberties, cannot focus on First Amendment-protected speech, association, ideology, or religion. The critical factors are individuals’ capabilities, intentions, and legitimate opportunities to commit illegal acts.

The bureau identified Cole Bridges as vulnerable and conditioned him to engage in activities with undercover assets that would never result in real harm. Instead, the bureau manufactured a plot that led to his inevitable arrest. Worse, the FBI jeopardized the safety of U.S. Army personnel by allowing Bridges to work and train with live firearms and ammunition for over a year, putting innocent service members at risk.

Rather than simple outreach, the FBI encouraged Bridges’ radicalization as part of its six-year ISIS investigation. Upon discovering his online activities in 2019, the reasonable response would have been for an FBI special agent to warn Bridges about his path toward radicalization.

Unfortunately, today’s FBI shows little thoughtful consideration. Instead, the agency focuses on identifying vulnerable targets for easy arrests, regardless of the collateral damage.

This isn’t a defense of Bridges’ online statements, associations, or ideology. The fact is that America guarantees citizens the right to hold and express even abhorrent beliefs. A nation dedicated to these liberties cannot abide government-manufactured terrorism schemes. Sadly, as long as the FBI sticks with the playbook, it will continue the troubling trend of entrapping vulnerable Americans. And we all suffer the consequences.

Comparing Helene To Katrina Suggests Americans Are Left To Die Because Democrats Run The White House

As a veteran of military logistics, I can tell you exactly why the Democrat administration's response to Helene has been abysmal.

'Bull****. This is systemic': Army won't identify consequences for briefing that designated pro-life groups as terrorists



Members of the House Armed Services Committee grilled the U.S. Army's deputy chief of staff for operations, plans, and training this week over the recent revelation that nearly 10,000 soldiers at North Carolina's Fort Liberty — called Fort Bragg prior to the Biden-Harris administration — were trained to believe that pro-life organizations qualify as "terrorist groups."

Lt. Gen. Patrick Matlock suggested during the Thursday hearing that corrective action has been taken, though he was altogether light on details, refusing to indicate whether someone had actually been fired, suspended, and/or demoted for likening champions of the unborn to mass-killing jihadists.

Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), chairman of the subcommittee on military personnel, and members from both parties did not appear to be buying what Matlock was selling — especially his piece about accountability.

"I think the reason that you can't answer the question is because you know and we know that no one has ever been held accountable for this training that started in 2017 and occurred until a few months ago," said Banks. "I think that's a big embarrassment for the U.S. Army."

"It's dangerous; it's a bad pattern," added Banks, who stressed at the outset that the Biden-Harris Pentagon and the U.S. Army are undermining the First Amendment and "targeting conservative speech and values."

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) suggested that letting this happen for nearly seven years and then remaining mum on what the consequences are when finally called out serve only to "increase the recidivism of this type of behavior."

"He's literally saying that we have no idea whether or not it's going on in other locations in the Army," said Florida Rep. Cory Mills (R). "We have no idea whether or not this is continuing as it has for seven-plus years."

'Peaceful pro-life Americans are labeled "terrorists."'

Blaze News previously reported that a slide from the Fort Liberty anti-terrorism awareness training session was posted on social media on July 10 by DOD whistleblower Samuel Shoemate.

Shoemate received the image from a U.S. Army soldier who sat through the training meeting.

That same soldier told Blaze News, "The briefing was simply a class on how to be a gate guard and what to look for when on duty."

"Gate guard duty is something all of us have to do from time to time. It was presented by a DOD civilian, not an anti-terrorism officer," added the soldier.

The offending slide, which appeared immediately after a section on the mass-raping, mass-killing jihadist group ISIS, was labeled "Terrorist Groups" and featured the logos of National Right to Life and Operation Rescue.

It also featured an image of a customized "Choose Life" license plate — the kind sold in at least 33 states and the District of Columbia to help raise money for crisis pregnancy centers.

The slide noted that extra to opposing "Row [sic] v Wade," these supposed terrorist groups engage in picketing, demonstrations and protest, and mass sidewalk counseling.

"Only under the Biden administration can peaceful law-abiding citizens and their peaceful activities be considered 'terrorism,'" NRL president Carol Tobias responded at the time. "The Biden administration promotes the deaths of preborn babies and advocates for unlimited abortion, but peaceful pro-life Americans are labeled 'terrorists.'"

Blaze News' Steve Baker, the investigative journalist who originally spoke to the soldier who first exposed the pro-life group's misleading characterization in the Army briefing, said, "That slide is devastating."

"Can you imagine a soldier's wife with one of these pro-life bumper stickers, of which there are millions across the country, pulling up to a guard gate at Fort Liberty or Fort Wherever, and all of a sudden, the guard who sat through that training where that slide was showed ... immediately figures the soldier's wife and the two kids in the back seat for terrorists on the level of ISIS?" said Baker.

Despite the appearance that the Army has an issue with Americans harboring pro-life views, Matlock alleged Thursday that the Army is unbiased, that there was "no political motivation behind the training," and that the issue was localized.

'Bull****. This is systemic.'

Baker cast doubt on Matlock's claims.

The Army initially implied in July that the slide was an aberration, stating that "the slides presented on social media were not vetted by the appropriate approval authorities" and that they "do not reflect the views of the XVIII Airborne Corps and Fort Liberty, the U.S. Army, or the Department of Defense."

However, Baker noted that military whistleblower Samuel Shoemate of Terminal CWO was soon inundated with calls and messages from all over the country "saying, basically, 'bull****. This is systemic. We've seen it in our own bases and in our own briefings.'"

Baker underscored that the systemic antipathy for Americans with pro-life views at the Pentagon has made its way down to the lowest rungs but that this ideological capture has been years in the making.

"The decapitation and replacement of the military's leadership began in earnest during the Obama administration," said Baker. The bulk of the top brass were "dismissed and replaced for nothing more than philosophical and political reasons."

Now, the senior leadership is largely made up of political activists, said Baker.

Baker's recent exclusive report about how the Pentagon dropped the ball on the Jan. 6, 2021, riot highlighted the fallout in the military of the prioritization of politics over strategy and effectiveness.

Baker and Joseph M. Hanneman detailed various indications that career officials at the Pentagon interfered with the deployment of the National Guard on Jan. 6 over fear of bad "optics."

"This can only be solved by the next commander in chief," said Baker. "He's the only one that can solve it. He's the only one that will have the authority to go in and replace those political activist generals, admirals, and the rest of the leadership within the Pentagon, both enlisted and civilian."

It's clear which commander in chief Baker has in mind.

"It's not going to be fixed under a Harris-Walz administration, because this activism falls in line with their ideals, their values, their desire to use the military as a social engineering playground," said the investigative journalist.

Subcommittee Chairman Banks noted in his prepared remarks, "The Army is using an overly broad policy to police the speech of conservative service members, quiet dissent, and require service members who believe in conservative ideals to hide their identities for fear of retaliation from their commands."

Danielle Runyan, senior counsel at First Liberty Institute, the legal outfit representing the whistleblower, said in a statement Thursday, "Once again, the Army was caught exercising clear viewpoint discrimination in their training slides — offering that some views and religious exercise are worthy of punishment."

"We are thankful the House Armed Services Committee and the 88 members who sent a letter to the Army are committed to holding their feet to the fire. The flagrant lack of political neutrality in our military must be rectified immediately," added Runyan.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Massachusetts Governor Healey comes up short when asked to defend one of Harris' bigger falsehoods



Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey (D) appears to be auditioning for a job in a possible Harris administration. Things aren't going too well.

In a Sunday interview on ABC News, Healey was asked to explain one of the various falsehoods that the network initially let Kamala Harris get away with in last week's presidential debate. It quickly became clear that while Healey was heavy on rhetoric, she was short on answers.

During the debate, Harris dodged the question of whether she bore any responsibility for the botched Afghanistan withdrawal during which 13 American service members were slain and many more were left behind.

Before attempting to shift blame onto President Donald, Harris said:

I agreed with President Biden's decision to pull out of Afghanistan. Four presidents said they would, and Joe Biden did. And as a result, America's taxpayers are not paying the $300 million a day we were paying for that endless war. And as of today, there is not one member of the United States military who is in active duty in a combat zone in any war zone around the world, the first time this century.

Martha Raddatz, co-anchor of "This Week," asked Healey about Harris' remarks, particularly her suggestion that there are no active-duty service members in a combat zone anywhere around the world.

"Our fact-checkers found that to be false," said Raddatz. "And I have a lot of experience in that area."

Raddatz was likely referring to her time reporting from Iraq as a national security correspondent and her extensive sources inside the Pentagon.

"There are currently 900 U.S. military personnel in Syria, 2,500 U.S. troops in Iraq. All have been under regular threat from drones and missiles for months," said Raddatz. "We also have action in the Red Sea. We also — every single day the Navy SEALs, Delta Forces, special operators can be part of any sort of deadly raid."

'Did she not know about these people in Syria and in Iraq?'

"So why would she make that claim?" asked Raddatz, undoubtedly aware that Harris' remarks came just days after seven American troops were wounded in a deadly raid in Western Iraq.

Healey desperately tried to evade the question, saying, "What I think what's important here, Martha, is that Kamala Harris, in contrast to Donald Trump, demonstrated herself to be commander in chief."

"We are in a world where there are all sorts of conflicts," Healey continued, apparently referring to the Russia-Ukraine war and the latest Hamas-Israel war that kicked off while Harris was vice president. "It's all the more reason we need somebody who's serious and who supports the military."

Raddatz prevented Healey from retreating to the comfort of well-worn talking points, saying, "Governor, excuse me, but she said, 'There is not one member of the United States military who is in active duty in a combat zone.' That is not true."

"You say she demonstrated her ability to be commander in chief, but did she not know about these people in Syria and in Iraq? Why would she say that?" added Raddatz.

Healey tried passing off the falsehood as a "comment in a debate" and an attempt to make a "broader point," which the Massachusetts governor proved unwilling to share or unable to make up.

'She doesn't even recognize that our own troops are getting hurt.'

Growing visibly flustered, the governor desperately returned to well-worn albeit debunked talking points. Extra to claiming that "Donald Trump stands with Vladimir Putin," Healey repeated the baseless "suckers and losers" smear first advanced by the Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg.

Healey continued her verbal flailing until Raddatz abandoned the effort.

Service members currently in war zones and veterans' families have criticized Harris over her false claim.

Brad Illerbrunner, whose son, Chief Warrant Officer Garrent Illerbrunner of the U.S. Army's 82nd Airborne Division, was critically injured on Christmas Day, told the New York Post that Harris' lie "really [hit] below the belt. ... She doesn't even recognize that our own troops are getting hurt."

"We're still in war zones," said Illerbrunner, adding that the vice president was "trying to snow the public."

"If you're in Jordan in the middle of nowhere to fight ISIS, and you're getting attacked by Iranian drones and rockets on a daily basis, you're in a war zone," added Illerbrunner.

Three American soldiers were killed in Jordan by an Iranian proxy in January.

Footage has also appeared online of service members reacting to Harris' remarks while stationed abroad.

The Biden-Harris Pentagon has attempted to give Harris cover, noting in a statement obtained by the Wall Street Journal that "just because a service member is in one of these locations does not mean they are engaged in war. The U.S. is not currently engaged in a war and does not have troops fighting in active war zones anywhere in the world."

This, however, is a deception.

Although Congress hasn't declared a war since 1942, hundreds of thousands of U.S. service members have been killed in war zones in the years since. The technical wording appealed to here by the Pentagon and Harris would mean those who perished in Afghanistan, Iraq, Korea, and Vietnam don't count.

Mark Montgomery, a retired rear admiral, recently told Fox News Digital that despite the government quietly shutting down designations of war zones, one need only "ask: 'Is anyone getting combat-related hazardous duty pay?'"

"The answer is yes," added Montgomery.

Robert Greenway, a U.S. Special Forces combat veteran and former senior director for the National Security Council, said that the comment "is especially egregious, as she is the current VP and should know that we recently conducted a raid in Syria, killing a senior ISIS commander. Several U.S. troops had to be medically evacuated after another raid against ISIS in Syria."

"Several service members were wounded in Iraq when Al Asad Airbase was attacked by Iranian-sponsored terrorists less than a month ago, and our ships are under near-daily attack in the Red Sea," he told Fox News Digital.

Harris did not limit herself to falsehoods about the military during the debate.

The Democratic candidate also repeated the "fine people" hoax; claimed that Trump would be implementing the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025; claimed that Trump would ratify a national abortion ban; recycled the "bloodbath" smear; and claimed law enforcement officers died on Jan. 6, 2021, in reference to the Capitol riot.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Maryland Gov. Moore calls stolen valor over Bronze Star an ‘honest mistake,’ deflects blame



Maryland Governor Wes Moore (D) has been accused of stolen valor for previously failing to correct the record about a Bronze Star he never received, but claimed he had, while serving in the United States Army.

A New York Times report published Thursday revealed that in 2006, Moore, then 27 years old, claimed on an application for the White House Fellowship that he had received the award.

'I should have corrected the interviewers.'

“For my work,” he claimed, “the 82nd Airborne Division have awarded me the Bronze Star Medal and the Combat Action Badge.”

Bronze Star awards are given to military members who perform “acts of heroism in ground combat.

He had not been awarded with either the Bronze Star or the badge at the time of the submission. The Times found that Moore never received the Bronze Star but earned the badge in May 2006, according to an Army spokesperson.

During a Wednesday interview, Moore called the statement on his application “an honest mistake.”

“While serving overseas with the Army, I was encouraged to fill out an application for the White House Fellowship by my deputy brigade commander,” Moore stated. “In fact, he helped me edit it before I sent it in. At the time, he had recommended me for the Bronze Star. He told me to include the Bronze Star award on my application after confirming with two other senior-level officers that they had also signed off on the commendation.”

“I made an honest mistake by including something because my commanding officer thought it was a good idea,” Moore added. “He thought that I earned it and he was already going through the paperwork to process it.”

Moore’s then-commanding officer, Lt. Gen. Michael Fenzel, confirmed to the Times that he had advised Moore to include the Bronze Star on his application. He told Moore that he and others had already approved the medal. Fenzel noted that Moore initially objected to including it on his application.

Fenzel stated that he was unaware that Moore had never received the medal, adding that he plans to resubmit the paperwork.

However, despite claiming it was “an honest mistake,” Moore has had several opportunities to correct the record, including during a 2008 PBS panel discussion with Gwen Ifill and a 2010 appearance on “The Colbert Report” with Stephen Colbert.

“I should have corrected the interviewers,” Moore said. “In retrospect, I’m sorry that I didn’t.”

Moore has received several other medals for his time in the military, including a National Defense Service Medal, an Afghanistan Campaign Medal, an Armed Forces Reserve Medal with “M” Device, an Army Service Ribbon, and a Parachutist Badge.

Moore was initially included among Democratic presidential nominee and Vice President Kamala Harris’ list of candidates for running mate. According to Moore, questions regarding the Bronze Star did not come up.

Harris ultimately selected Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D) as her vice presidential nominee, who has also been accused of stolen valor. Walz referred to weapons he “carried in war,” but he was never deployed to a combat zone. He has also been introduced as a “command sergeant major” despite retiring at a lower rank and failing to meet the requirements associated with the higher position.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Tim Walz Said He Wants To Ban Guns He ‘Carried in War.’ He Never Saw Combat.

Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz claimed to have carried guns "in war" during his career in the Army National Guard, according to a video released by the Kamala Harris campaign Tuesday. There’s one glaring problem with his claim.

The post Tim Walz Said He Wants To Ban Guns He ‘Carried in War.’ He Never Saw Combat. appeared first on .

Congress wants women FORCED into the military draft to fight its endless wars



Is the government trying to draft our daughters? After the House of Representatives passed an updated version of the National Defense Authorization Act last week, it seems the answer is a resounding “yes.”

The act allows the U.S. government to automatically register men aged 18 to 25 into the Selective Service, but the Senate Armed Forces Committee has since created a version that would extend eligibility for the draft to women starting in 2025.

The bill was approved by a 22-3 vote and is now advancing to the Senate for consideration.

“Congratulations, feminists, you fought for all this equality, you wanted to pretend like men and women were no different, and now, they want to send your sons and your daughters to die in endless wars,” Sara Gonzales says, disturbed.

While Gonzales doesn’t have any daughters of her own, only sons, she says “over my dead body will they be going to war.”

“Are you telling me that you don’t want your sons to die for transgenderism in Ukraine?” Logan Hall asks, unfortunately only half-joking.

“That is what I’m telling you,” Gonzales responds, adding, “We can’t even defend our own border here in this country, but you want me to talk about sending my son to go die for Ukraine’s border? Absolutely not.”

Hall notes that this is all happening after the government kicked its own members out of the military for refusing to inject themselves with the COVID vaccine.

“They kicked a ton of soldiers out of the army for not taking this experimental vaccine,” Hall says, adding, “they’ve put these transgender admirals in charge, they’ve alienated their fighters. It’s like what other reason would you want to do this for other than to destroy the country?”


Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The Military’s Biggest Problem Is Readiness, Not Recruiting

If Biden really believed that 'we are the world power,' our military infrastructure wouldn’t be steadily diminishing under his leadership.