Islamic radical convicted for planting fake bombs in Christian churches while working on real one



An ISIS-inspired radical who planted fake bombs at multiple Christian churches while also developing the means for a real church bombing was convicted Friday of a federal hate crime.

"This Department of Justice has no tolerance for anyone who targets religious Americans for their faith," said Attorney General Pam Bondi. "The perpetrator of this abhorrent hate crime against Christians will face severe punishment."

Zimnako Salah, 45, traveled to four Christian churches across three states — Arizona, California, and Colorado — in the fall of 2023 wearing black backpacks. Salah was able to plant these backpacks at two of the churches: one in the sanctuary of a church in Scottsdale, Arizona, and the other in the restroom of a Roseville, California, church.

These props helped the radical sell his corresponding bomb threats, which Sid Patel, the special agent in charge of the FBI's Sacramento field office, indicated were "intended to terrorize people of faith and disrupt the peace of our communities."

The discovery of the backpack latched to a toilet inside the non-denominational church in Roseville prompted an evacuation.

Security confronted Salah before he was able to fulfill his mission on two other occasions.

The Arapahoe County Sheriff's Office in Colorado indicated that a week after Salah placed a backpack in the Roseville church, the radical attempted a repeat performance in Greenwood Village, Colorado, on Nov. 19, 2023. Salah was, however, confronted by Kevin Heaton, then an off-duty, uniformed sheriff's deputy.

'Planting a hoax bomb at the Roseville church was not an isolated incident or a prank.'

Heaton, now a captain with the sheriff's office, greeted Salah, then followed him into the church, reported KCNC-TV. When Salah made his way for the washrooms, Heaton followed. The unwanted attention prompted the radical to leave the premises with the backpack still on his person.

According the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of California, in between fake bomb installations, Salah was building a real improvised explosive device capable of fitting in a backpack.

During a search of the radical's storage unit, an FBI bomb technician retrieved items that a bomb expert later identified in court as components of an improvised explosive device. There were apparently multiple propane canisters, including one with wiring jutting out from the neck as well as nails duct-taped to the side.

U.S. Attorney's Office, Eastern District of California

Salah's online social media records and search history revealed an interest in jihadist propaganda. Salah, who reportedly told investigators that he was a Sunni Muslim from Northern Iraq, apparently searched for videos of "infidels dying" and repeatedly watched ISIS execution videos.

"Planting a hoax bomb at the Roseville church was not an isolated incident or a prank for this defendant," said acting U.S. Attorney Michele Beckwith. "His actions were designed to threaten and intimidate the congregation because he disagreed with their religious beliefs."

Biden-appointed U.S. District Judge Dena Coggins will sentence the anti-Christian radical on July 18. Salah faces a maximum statutory penalty of six years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

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

A ‘free speech’ right to immigrate? Don’t be absurd!



Should we allow people in the United States to say hateful things? Absolutely — that is the essence of America. We cannot start down the slippery slope of punishing people for their beliefs, as we saw under the Biden administration with the treatment of January 6 defendants.

Does that mean we should admit foreigners who hold pro-terrorist beliefs and spread them on social media? Absolutely not! Freedom of speech is a right, but no foreigner has an affirmative right to immigrate. We must be discriminating about whom we allow into the country.

The United States already contends with enough homegrown anti-American extremism. Why import people with repugnant views that oppose universal Western values?

As part of a broader order addressing anti-Semitism, Trump directed federal agencies to monitor foreign nationals who promote hate and pro-terrorist sentiments, targeting them for potential removal.

The Hamas-aligned Council on American-Islamic Relations quickly objected, suddenly invoking the U.S. Constitution. “Free speech is a cornerstone of our Constitution that no president can wipe away with an executive order,” CAIR said in a statement.

The group likened today’s campus protests to past movements, saying, “Like the college students who once protested segregation, the Vietnam War, and apartheid South Africa, the diverse collection of college students who protested against Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza deserve our country’s thanks.”

Deportation is not a punishment

One key difference separates today’s campus protesters from those who opposed the Vietnam War. Trump’s order, if enforced, applies to foreign nationals in the context of their privilege to remain in the country — not to Americans or foreign nationals facing fines or imprisonment.

Repatriating a foreign national is not a punishment protected by due process. People are free to live in their home country without penalties or imprisonment. Deportation is an extension of national sovereignty, and the United States has the right to set admission conditions based on public charge, safety, and even anti-American views.

The Supreme Court affirmed this principle in Fong Yue Ting v. United States (1893), ruling that “deportation is not a punishment for crime” or “banishment” in the sense of expelling a citizen as a punitive measure. After all, deported individuals remain free in their country of origin.

The justices further stated:

It is but a method of enforcing the return to his own country of an alien who has not complied with the conditions upon the performance of which the government of the nation, acting within its constitutional authority and through the proper departments, has determined that his continuing to reside here shall depend. He has not, therefore, been deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

If a Hamas supporter is in the United States on a foreign visa, we cannot imprison him simply for expressing his views. But we do have the right to say, “Go back to your country and express your terrorist sympathies where they will be appreciated.”

Deportation of foreign nationals is a matter of executive authority, as delegated by Congress. Due process protections do not apply beyond what Congress has granted. Any lawsuit against this order is baseless.

In Turner v. Williams (1904), the Supreme Court reinforced this principle, stating, “No limits can be put by the courts upon the power of Congress to protect, by summary methods, the country from the advent of aliens whose race or habits render them undesirable as citizens, or to expel such if they have already found their way into our land and unlawfully remain therein.”

Yes, we can deport based on viewpoints

For over a century, Congress has enacted laws allowing deportation for expressing anarchist, communist, pro-Nazi, or pro-terrorist views. Here are just a few:

  • Section 212(a)(3)(E) of the Immigration and Nationality Act makes any alien who participated in Nazi persecution inadmissible and deportable.
  • Section 212(a)(3)(F) of the INA bars any alien deemed by the secretary of state to have been associated with a terrorist organization and who intends to engage in activities that could endanger U.S. welfare, safety, or security.
  • Section 212(a)(3)(D)(iv) of the INA renders inadmissible any immigrant who is or has been a member of or affiliated with a communist or other totalitarian party, whether foreign or domestic.

These provisions reaffirm the long-standing principle that the United States has the sovereign right to determine who may enter and remain in the country.

A formal membership in a terrorist group isn’t the only reason someone can be barred from entering the United States. The law bars entry to anyone who “endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization.”

Another statute gives the president expanded authority over nonimmigrant visas, including student visas. The administration can both deny a visa for any reason and also refuse entry even to those who already hold valid nonimmigrant visas. That law explicitly states that issuing a visa does not “entitle any alien” to be “admitted [into] the United States, if, upon arrival at a port of entry in the United States, he is found to be inadmissible under this chapter, or any other provision of law.”

Why can’t we vet these people better?

If foreign students express pro-terrorist sentiments, the law mandates their removal. More broadly, the United States must do a better job vetting the social media activity of foreign nationals, especially those from regions with a strong terrorist presence.

Trump hinted at this need in the executive order on vetting admissions that he signed on his first day in office. The consequences of lax vetting became painfully clear with Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani, the terrorist who killed three seamen at Naval Air Station Pensacola on Dec. 6, 2019. Despite posting pro-jihadi content and praising Osama bin Laden on social media, he was admitted from Saudi Arabia into a sensitive U.S. military pilot training program.

The United States already contends with enough homegrown anti-American extremism. Why import people with repugnant views that oppose universal Western values? During the debate on the nation’s first naturalization law, Theodore Sedgwick argued that America should welcome only “reputable and worthy characters; such only were fit for the society into which they were blended.”

Surely, we can all agree that those who supported the Oct. 7 massacre of Jews don’t meet that standard.

Allstate's wokeness under fire after CEO uses New Orleans massacre to lecture Americans about 'divisiveness'



The College Football Playoff quarterfinal at the Sugar Bowl was originally scheduled to take place in New Orleans on New Year's Day; however, the city was rocked in the early hours by an apparent Islamic terrorist attack.

Now-deceased terror suspect, Shamsud-Din Jabbar, allegedly drove a rented truck through a crowd of people on Bourbon Street, claiming the lives of at least 15 victims. Police were ultimately able to neutralize the driver, who was reportedly found with a "remote detonator" for explosives discovered in the French Quarter.

The Sugar Bowl was finally held on Thursday and attended by roughly 57,000 defiant football fans. While the day's big winners were the American spirit, which jihadists have repeatedly proven unable to dampen, and the Notre Dame Fighting Irish, who crushed the Georgia Bulldogs with the help of a 98-yard kick return, the big loser appears to have been the game's title sponsor, Allstate.

During the game, Allstate ran a promotional video wherein the company's president and CEO Tom Wilson used the New Orleans massacre as an opportunity to lecture Americans — including those who just lost loved ones as the result of an imported ideology — about "divisiveness." The video, which was swiftly met with widespread contempt and ridicule, prompted some critics to take a closer look at the kind of corporate culture that would have informed the decision to make such a statement at such a time.

"Welcome to the Allstate Sugar Bowl. Wednesday, tragedy struck the New Orleans community. Our prayers are with the victims and the families," said Wilson. "We also need to be stronger together by overcoming an addiction to divisiveness and negativity."

Wilson invited football fans to help his company "amplify the positive, increase trust, and accept people's imperfections and differences. Together, we win."

'To normal people this sounds like Allstate giving cover to an ISIS terrorist.'

BlazeTV host Steve Deace tweeted, "Still can't believe a venerable American company like Allstate sent its CEO on national television to lecture victims of terrorism about divisiveness. It's like a @TheBabylonBee parody of woke corporatism comes to life."

Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott wrote, "This is crazy by Allstate. Maybe — and hear me out here — we should all agree that terrorism will not be tolerated in the United States."

"Wtf is wrong with this guy," wrote Elon Musk.

Sean Davis, co-founder of the Federalist, noted, "Time to cancel Allstate. Do you really want an insurance company that talks about murder and terrorism this way?"

Numerous commentators online shared a 2016 tweet from the late comedian Norm Macdonald where he wrote, "What terrifies me is if ISIS were to detonate a nuclear device and kill 50 million Americans. Imagine the backlash against peaceful Muslims?"

Robby Starbuck, a normalcy advocate who has campaigned against the corporate embrace of DEI, wrote, "Only major companies somehow get this out of touch with society. To normal people this sounds like Allstate giving cover to an ISIS terrorist as if he wouldn't have killed those people if we all accepted his backwards ideology. This is the definition of suicidal empathy."

Libs of TikTok and other critics highlighted the company's woke policies in an apparent effort to figure out whether Wilson's statement was an aberration or par for the course, demonstrating it to have clearly been the latter.

The company notes on its website that DEI "is a core value at Allstate."

Wilson is a signatory of the CEO Action for Diversity and Inclusion pledge — the aim of which is to "rally the business community to advance diversity & inclusion within the workplace by working collectively across organizations and sectors." Extra to maximizing "diversity," Wilson and other signatories pledged to "address honestly and head-on the concerns and needs of our diverse employees and increase equity for all, including Blacks, Latinos, Asians, Native Americans, LGBTQ, disabled, veterans and women."

In its 2023 annual report, Allstate boasted about employing fewer white men on its management team, stating, "Inclusive Diversity and Equity is core to success and while more progress is needed, Allstate continues to lead. In the U.S., 56% of the management team and 48% of the company's officers identify as female or BIPOC, both of which increased from the prior year."

Allstate's racial obsession is manifest also in its voting roadmap concerning directors, where the presence of white men is the measure against which progress is apparently marked. Under the section in the annual report on board governance, Allstate notes, "Diversity, including race, gender, ethnicity and culture, are also important factors in consideration of Board composition."

The company has also secured a perfect score in recent years with the radical LGBT activist group Human Rights Campaign, in part by providing multiple LGBT training elements, including an "intersectionality training"; providing sex-change guidelines and at least one inclusion policy for cross-dressing employees; having either an LGBT employee resource group or non-straight diversity council; and engaging in LGBT activism.

Facing incredible backlash, the company told Fox News Digital, "To be clear, Allstate CEO Tom Wilson unequivocally condemns this heinous act of terrorism and violence in all forms. We stand with the families of the victims, their loved ones and the community of New Orleans. The reference to overcoming divisiveness and negativity reflects a broader commitment to fostering trust and positivity in communities across the nation."

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

German court fines activist who criticized political Islam just months after his stabbing by Afghan refugee



An Afghan migrant went on a savage stabbing spree at a May 31 anti-jihad rally in the German town of Mannheim, butchering 29-year-old police officer Rouvn Laur and attacking five demonstrators, including Michael Stürzenberger, an activist with the counter-jihad group Citizens' Movement, Pax Europa.

Months after Stürzenberger had his fears confirmed at the end of a hunting knife — receiving a stab to the thigh, a stab to the leg right above the knee, an injury to the upper arm, and a "gaping open wound" in the side of his face — a regional court convicted him of incitement for denigrating so-called refugees and radical Islam.

According to Berliner Zeitung, Michael Stürzenberger made statements at an October 2020 BPE rally in the presence of counter-protesters that authorities deemed hateful.

When the Hamburg District Court handed him a six-month prison sentence in 2022, the activist appealed. The court subsequently gave Stürzenberger a suspended prison sentence, but the activist appealed again. Finally, on Nov. 25, the court upheld the conviction and slapped him with a $3,804.65 fine.

'Everyone should be very careful how they express themselves.'

The right-wing German publication Nius reported that Stürzenberger was charged, in part, for criticizing German immigration policy; stating that unlike Muslim refugees from Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, North Africa, he had "never heard of a single Christian refugee who has committed a crime here"; suggesting that Muslim migrants from North Africa and the Middle East were disproportionately represented among those who have committed sexual assaults against German women; that a goal of political Islam is to "get women under control"; and for his statement, "We will not allow women in Germany who walk around scantily clad to become fair game for fundamentalist Muslims."

Stürzenberger told Nius, "I have always spoken about political Islam. Always said: It is not against Muslims!"

"Everyone should be very careful how they express themselves. One should always differentiate and speak of political Islam," continued the activist. "My criticism is only directed against the dangerous components of the ideology and those radicals who commit acts of violence as a result of it. Of course, it is not directed against all Muslims, as many are modern, value our democratic society, and respect our values and laws."

Stürzenberger is hardly the first German penalized in recent years for sharing inconvenient facts about the fallout of unchecked migration from terrorist hotbeds.

Blaze News previously reported that Marie-Thérèse Kaiser, a member of the popular Alternative for Germany party — which German authorities have sought to ban, vilify, disarm, de-bank, and criminalize — was convicted of a "hate crime" in May for sharing statistics about the disproportionate number of gang rapes committed by immigrants, specifically Afghan nationals, and for asking whether multiculturalism means accommodating rape culture.

While saying so is apparently verboten, mass immigration to Germany from Islamist states such as Afghanistan has coincided in recent years with a massive spike in rape and other violent crimes.

Of the roughly 1.35 million immigrants who flooded into Germany between 2010 and 2016, an estimated 850,000 were Muslims.

A government-commissioned study revealed in early 2018 that there was a 10.4% increase in violent crime at the height of the immigration crisis. Deutsche Welle reported that 90% of this violent crime increase was attributable to immigrants, predominantly males between the ages of 14 and 30.

Reuters reported earlier this year that the number of criminals with foreign backgrounds has since continued to rise, jumping by 13.5% in 2023.

Foreign nationals made clear that 2024 would be no different for Germany, ringing in the new year with violence. Blaze News previously reported that two-thirds of the rioters detained in the most recent explosion of New Year's violence were noncitizens, including 27 Afghans and 21 Syrians.

German Interior Minister Nancy Faeser stated in the aftermath on Jan. 4, "Good politics must clearly state what is happening: In major German cities we have a problem with certain young men with a migrant background who despise our state, commit acts of violence, and are hardly reached by education and integration programs."

While New Year's is now an annual problem, German cities are becoming increasingly unsafe all year, especially for gays and Jews.

Barbara Slowik, Berlin's chief of police, admitted in a recent interview that "there are areas — and we have to be honest here — where I would advise people who wear a kippah or are openly gay or lesbian to be more alert."

Slowik said she wouldn't "defame any groups of people here" but admitted that "there are certain neighborhoods where the majority of people liv[ing there] are of Arab descent, who also have sympathies for terrorist groups."

Extra to no-go zones and an unprecedented numbers of rapes, Germany has also been rocked by numerous ghastly incidents like the stabbing spree that left Stürzenberger scarred for life. For instance, just months after the bloody attack in Mannheim, a 26-year-old Syrian asylum-seeker allegedly attacked several people at a Christian music festival in Solingen, Germany, leaving three dead.

According to the German publication Spiegel, a witness heard the suspect, Issa Al Hasan, shout "Allahu Akbar" while randomly stabbing bystanders.

Another such attack may have been thwarted this week.

Politico reported Friday that a 37-year-old Iraqi asylum-seeker was arrested Wednesday after a foreign intelligence agency revealed he was allegedly plotting to launch an ISIS terror attack on a Christmas market in Bavaria, just as an ISIS terrorist did in 2016, killing 13 people.

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

Trio of Islamic extremists indicted over plot to massacre Jews in England



Britain's Community Security Trust, an anti-Semitism watchdog, observed a massive spike in hate incidents against Jewish citizens following the Oct. 7 Hamas terror attacks on Israel. This increase coincided with the mainstreaming of the kinds of genocidal and anti-Israel rhetoric that have since been recycled at various Democrat-supported campus protests in the United States.

Douglas Murray, the founder of the Center for Social Cohesion, noted in an Oct. 12 piece for the Spectator, "Within hours of the slaughter, people in London were driving around flying Palestinian flags and blaring their horns in celebration of the massacre. In Manchester the president of the local 'Friends of Palestine,' Dana Abuqamar, told Sky News, 'We're really full of joy, full of pride at what has happened.' At a Free Palestine rally in Brighton one speaker who claimed she was a Palestinian said: 'Yesterday was a victory.' She described the massacres in Israel as 'so beautiful and inspiring to see.'"

It appears that Britain and its Jewish population have something more to fear than murderous rhetoric.

A pair of Islamic extremists were arrested last week and charged with preparing acts of terrorism. 36-year-old Walid Saadaoui of Abram and 50-year-old Amar Hussein of no fixed address were hauled before the Westminster Magistrates Court and charged with planning an attack on "the Jewish community in the North West of England and members of both law enforcement and the military," reported the BBC.

Bilel Saadaoui, the brother of one of the alleged terror plotters, was also arrested. He has been accused of failing to disclose the details of the terror plot to the authorities, reported the Guardian.

Prosecutor Rebecca Waller indicated the duo set their plan in motion in December and planned "to conduct an ISIL [Isis] or Daesh-inspired terrorist attack in the UK during which they intended causing multiple fatalities using automatic weapons," not unlike the gruesome November 2015 Bataclan massacre where Islamic terrorists murdered 90 people and committed various other atrocities against their victims, or the March 22 ISIS terror attack in Moscow Oblast, Russia, where 145 victims were murdered and 551 were injured.

The plotters reportedly had designs on securing a machine gun, 1,200 rounds of ammunition, a handgun, and a safe house to store their weaponry. Saadaoui allegedly traveled with Hussein to Dover in March "with the aim of conducting reconnaissance of the port security" where the guns were to be imported, reported the Daily Mail.

"Both defendants took significant steps to prepare, and by May 2024, had reach the point at which, they believed, they were in a position to launch their attack," said Waller.

Police nabbed Saadaoui when he went to pick up the weapons.

Assistant Chief Constable Rob Potts of the Greater Manchester Police said in a statement Tuesday, "Today's first court appearance has outlined some concerning and distressing details about a suspected terrorist plot that we allege was being planned by suspects from Greater Manchester."

"Firstly, we know how significant the impact of this will be. Particularly for our Jewish community in Greater Manchester and across the country," continued Potts. "We have worked closely with the Community Security Trust, community groups and key stakeholders prior to today's hearing, and we will continue to update them and support them throughout the course of this case. The wider public will understandably be alarmed too."

Amanda Bomsztyk, the northern regional director of the Community Security Trust, said, "These are very serious allegations of a plan to commit a terrorist attack against British Jews at a time of record anti-Semitic hate crime levels. This is one of a number of recent and ongoing cases that demonstrate why the Jewish community needs such extensive security measures and why our continuing partnership with police and government is so vital."

When asked whether he wanted to apply for bail, Hussein reportedly answered, "Do whatever you want to."

Bilel Saadaoui applied for bail unsuccessfully and blubbered on his way out of court.

Blaze News previously reported that German and Dutch officials similarly foiled an Islamic terrorist plot in December, capturing four Hamas terrorists who had been targeting "Jewish institutions in Europe." Those arrests coincided with Denmark's capture of another four suspected terrorists.

Prosecutors indicated that four of the radicals "have been long-standing members of HAMAS and have participated in HAMAS operations abroad. They are closely linked to the military branch's leadership. This included Khalil Hamed Al Kharraz, the second in command at the 'Izz al-Din al-Qassem' Brigades."

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

'Australian censorship commissar' orders X to globally remove video of Islamic terror attack on Christian bishop



A bearded teen complaining in Arabic about insults to Muhammad rushed the sanctuary of an Assyrian Orthodox church in Sydney last week, savagely stabbing Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel and Fr. Isaac Royel. Australian officials determined that the attack on Christian clergymen, which was captured on video, was an act of religiously motivated terrorism.

While apparently willing to admit the attack was what it appeared to be on video, the Australian government has attempted to erase the video evidence from social media.

X, formerly known as Twitter, indicated Friday that the Australian government has ordered it to remove the video evidence of the anti-Christian attack. While the platform appeared willing to accommodate the Australian eSafety Commissioner regionally, that apparently was not enough for the Australian state, which has since demanded global censorship of the video.

South African billionaire Elon Musk and his company have effectively told the government to pound sand.

The terror attack

Blaze News previously reported that police were dispatched Monday evening to the Christ the Good Shepherd Church in Wakeley, a suburb of Sydney, in response to reports that a "number of people were stabbed."

A 16-year-old radical previously charged for knife-related offenses had rushed the altar with a knife concealed in his hand.

In the video the Australian government appears keen to hide from the public, the attacker can reportedly be heard saying, "If he [the bishop] didn't get himself involved in my religion, if he hadn't spoken about my prophet, I wouldn't have come here. … If he just spoke about his own religion, I wouldn’t have come."

The attacker lunges at Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel, a past critic of radical Islam, then repeatedly stabs the 53-year-old bishop.

The bishop and the parish priest who was cut up protecting him survived their injuries.

New South Wales Police Force Commissioner Karen Webb indicated Tuesday, "We believe there are elements that are satisfied in terms of religious motivated extremism."

"After consideration of all the material, I declared that it was a terrorist incident," added Webb.

Nothing to see here

X's Global Government Affairs team revealed Friday morning that after the attack, "The Australian eSafety Commissioner ordered X to remove certain posts in Australia that publicly commented on the recent attack against a Christian Bishop. These posts did not violate X's rules on violent speech."

Australia's woke commissar is Julie Inman Grant, an American who allegedly turned down a CIA job to work in the U.S. Congress before heading off to work for Microsoft. The censorious commissioner, who also worked for Twitter as the director of public policy in Australia, has been celebrated by the World Economic Forum as among "the world's most influential leaders revolutionizing government."

Grant indicated last week that she personally was not "satisfied enough is being done to protect Australians from this most extreme and gratuitous violent material circulating online," reported News.com.au.

Seeking satisfaction on the matter, Grant indicated she was "exercising [her] powers under the Online Safety Act to formally compel them to remove it."

While convinced "eSafety's order was not within the scope of Australian law," X initially complied with the directive, geo-blocking the relevant content in Australia pending a legal challenge. However, it was apparently met with a subsequent demand to "globally withhold these posts or face a daily fine of $785,000 AUD (about $500,000 USD)."

The Global Government Affairs team noted, "While X respects the right of a country to enforce its laws within its jurisdiction, the eSafety Commissioner does not have the authority to dictate what content X's users can see globally. ... Global takedown orders go against the very principles of a free and open internet and threaten free speech everywhere."

Musk noted, "The Australian censorship commissar is demanding *global* content bans!"

Angry censors

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese told reporters, "By and large, people responded appropriately to the calls by the eSafety Commissioner. X chose not to. They stand, I think — I find it extraordinary that X chose not to comply and trying to argue their case."

Albanese insinuated that the video evidence of the attack on a Christian cleric amounted to "misinformation."

"We know, I think overwhelmingly, Australians want misinformation and disinformation to stop. This isn't about freedom of expression," said the prime minister. "This is about the dangerous implications that can occur when things that are simply not true, that everyone knows is not true, are replicated and weaponized in order to cause division and in this case to promote negative statements and potentially to just inflame what was a very difficult situation."

"Social media has a social responsibility," added Albanese.

Musk responded Monday, writing, "I'd like to take a moment to thank the PM for informing the public that this platform is the only truthful one."

The tech magnate also noted that it is "absurd for any one country to attempt to censor the entire world."

The prime minister was apparently not the only Aussie official who figured video evidence amounted to "misinformation."

NSWPF Commissioner Web condemned "misinformation," stating, "I think leading a social media platform should bring with it big social, corporate responsibility."

"I think to have images like that online, they need to be removed immediately and not left up there," added Webb.

Tanya Plibersek, Australia's environment minister, suggested Elon Musk's commitment to free speech and transparency just "beggars belief."

"This egotistical billionaire thinks that it's more important for him to be able to show whatever he wants on X or Twitter or whatever you wanna call it today, it's more important for him to have his way than to respect the victims of the crimes that are being shown on social media and to protect our Australian community from the harmful impact of showing this terrible stuff on social media," said Plibersek.

Plibersek enthusiastically noted how Australia has quadrupled the eSafety Commissioner's budget.

With that increased budget, the commissioner had Australian mother and breastfeeding advocate Jasmine Sussex censored for daring to suggest that men cannot breastfeed. The taxpayer-funded commissioner also demanded that X censor Canadian activist Chris Elson over a post criticizing a United Nations-affiliated transvestite.

Australian court demands global censorship

Vastly exceeding his jurisdiction, an Australian judge ruled Monday that X must block the video across the globe.

The Associated Press reported that Justice Geoffrey Kennett demanded that the tech company block all users from seeing the footage, including sovereign American citizens. X has been given 24 hours to "hide" the video.

Stephen Tran, lawyer for the censorious commission, suggested that continued circulation of the footage would cause "irreparable harm."

In the meantime, the Australian censorship regime has been targeting individuals who have shared the video. Popular X user Ian Miles Cheong, for instance, indicated that X had received a report from the Australian government over content he shared but that the platform would not be taking action.

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

Democratic congressman hoping to unseat Sen. Ted Cruz ignores questions about his support for radical imam



Democratic Rep. Colin Allred is running to unseat Sen. Ted Cruz in Texas. While the race leans "likely Republican," the LGBT activist and former Tennessee Titan figures he'll be able to succeed where Beto O'Rourke failed, in part because he was able to defeat incumbent Republican Rep. Pete Sessions in 2018 and has demonstrated a knack for collecting donations.

Since Allred's leftist influence and efforts to help Democrats further curtail the Second Amendment would likely be more impactful in the Senate, at least numerically, critics have recently begun to give his past remarks and associations greater scrutiny, particularly his historic support for a radical imam who has trafficked in anti-Israel propaganda.

In 2019, Allred lauded New Orleans native Omar Suleiman for his "message of peace, unity, and support for our fellow Americans," stressing he "always represent[s] the best of North Texas."

— (@)

Beyond demanding that Israel suspend its war with Hamas, Suleiman has in recent days called Israel "an ethnosupremacist state" that advances "global white supremacy" and referred to Israel's war against Hamas as a "genocide." He has previously called Israel a "terrorist regime," likened Palestinian treatment to "liv[ing] under Nazis," and reportedly said, "We ask Allah to humiliate this Israel."

Suleiman, now based in Texas, reportedly said at the outset of the 2014 Gaza War, "God willing on this blessed night as the 3rd Intifada begins, the beginning of the end of Zionism is here. May Allah help us overcome this monster, protect the innocent of the world, and accept the murdered as martyrs. ameen."

This supposed representative of North Texas wrote in 2018 that Palestinian rioters were "fearless and steadfast. They will not be discouraged by those who betray them. They will continue to resist. They will continue to march. They will continue to demand their freedom. And so will we. By any means necessary."

The Daily Mail noted that Suleiman, a member of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, was photographed last year meeting with jihadists in Malaysia, one of whom previously declared that "every Muslim should be a terrorist" and signaled common cause with Osama bin Laden. The other jihadist suggested that non-Muslims are the "worst of Allah's creations, even lower than animals."

Following the Oct. 7 Hamas terror attacks, which claimed the lives of thousands of Israeli civilians and dozens of Americans, Suleiman circulated Hamas propaganda, claiming in one instance that Israel hit a Gazan hospital with an airstrike, when in reality an Islamist rocket had misfired. He has yet to take down his initial claim on X.

Weeks later, the Texas-based imam accused the U.S. of genocide on account of its support for Israel's security action against Hamas terrorists.

Rep. Allred clearly stated twice on Oct. 7 that he condemned "the unprovoked terrorist attacks against innocent Israeli civilians" and reiterated his "support for Israel and its right to defend itself."

Allred's messaging prompted interest in whether he'd changed his mind about Suleiman, given the imam's anti-Israeli vitriol.

Sen. Ted Cruz wrote in a Oct. 23 post, "Colin Allred embraced & welcomed this antisemite cleric to the House. Today, [Suleiman is] accusing BOTH Israael and America of 'genocide'? That is utterly false and a blood libel. Does Allred agree?"

"Does Allred still think that this antisemite represents (to use his words) 'the best of North Texas'?" added Cruz.

— (@)

It appears that Cruz was not the only person interested in Allred's opinion of Suleiman. After all, the congressman has set a low bar for those whom he considers "extremists," using this term in reference to law-abiding U.S. senators who've taken a stand against the Pentagon's legally dubious abortion initiatives.

A journalist recently confronted Allred about his support of Suleiman.

Your browser does not support the video tag.

Blaze News reached out to Allred for comment, but he did not respond by deadline.

It's unclear whether a condemnation of Suleiman might jeopardize Allred's ability to continue fundraising from groups critical of Israel, such as the George Soros-funded outfit J Street, which dumped hundreds of thousands of dollars into the Democrat's Senate campaign early this year.

"Anti-Israel J Street’s endorsement of Texas Democrat Colin Allred comes as no surprise, because Allred aligns with J Street’s radicalism," Sam Markstein, national political director for the Republican Jewish Coalition, told the Washington Free Beacon. "Allred fancies himself a moderate, but he voted to keep anti-Semite Ilhan Omar on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, supported the disastrous [Iran] nuclear deal."

A spokesman for Allred's campaign noted at the time that he had managed to swing the support of "both AIPAC and J Street."

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