Sanctuary Cities Protect Crooked Employers and Human Traffickers

We have all heard the bogus claim that “Sanctuary Cities” and “Sanctuary States” protect the “immigrants” from ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents and that the mayors of sanctuary cities are being compassionate.

There is no compassion to be found in exploitation

In reality, politicians who create and support sanctuary policies are every bit as disgusting and exploitative of illegal aliens as are human traffickers and unscrupulous employers who intentionally hire illegal aliens and benefit by sanctuary policies and, indeed those human traffickers and employers of illegal aliens are being provided with “sanctuary” and are being shielded from detection by ICE.

Mayors and governors of “sanctuary” jurisdictions are actually “partners in crime” with human traffickers and exploitive employers.

Before we go further, however, it is imperative to lay waste to that the false claim that mayors of sanctuary cities protect immigrants from immigration law enforcement agents.

Lies about sanctuary policies being motivated by “compassion” creates a hostile environment and antipathy for ICE agents and Border Patrol agents that impedes them from locating and arresting aliens who violate our immigration laws, but also makes it far more difficult for ICE and Border Patrol agents to engage with the public to develop actionable intelligence. 

This hostility also endangers their safety (reportedly physical attacks on immigration law enforcement personnel have more than doubled in the past couple of years).

Let’s be clear, Immigrants need no protection from immigration law enforcement authorities. 

Lawful immigrants and nonimmigrant aliens who have been admitted for a temporary visit under the aegis of various forms of visas, need no protection from immigration law enforcement authorities unless they violate the terms of their admission. They were lawfully admitted into the United States by CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors in the first place.

Lawful immigrants who were have been granted lawful permanent residence in the United States and/or nonimmigrant (temporary visitors) who abide by their terms of lawful admission need no protection from immigration law enforcement officers.

Lawful immigrants only become subject to deportation (removal) is if they are convicted of committing serious crimes.

However, aliens who evade the inspections process conducted at ports of entry enter the United States without inspection should be fearful of detection, arrest and deportation (removal).

In point of fact, the fundamental law that underlies the decisions made by CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors at ports of entry as to whether or not to admit a foreign visitors into the United States is Title 8 U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible aliens.

That section of law is contained within the Immigration and Nationality Act and enumerates the grounds for excluding aliens from the United States and includes aliens infected with dangerous communicable diseases, suffer from extreme mental illness and are prone to violence, aliens who are criminals, human rights violators, war criminals, spies or terrorists.

Finally that list also includes aliens who would likely become public charges or provide unfair competition for American workers and would either displace American workers or cause suppression of wages and have a deleterious impact on working conditions.  

Nothing in that statute that makes any distinctions about the race, religion or ethnicity of aliens.

Aliens who evade the inspection process conducted at ports of entry do so because they know that they fall into one or more categories of aliens who, by law, would be inadmissable.

In the past I have written about how Sanctuary Cities Betray America and Americans and that by shielding illegal aliens from detection by ICE agents prevents those agents from discovering the human traffickers and other criminals who enabled those aliens to gain entry into the United States and perhaps, in the parlance of the 9/11 Commission, embed themselves in communities around the United States.

Sanctuary jurisdictions attract large number of illegal aliens including transnational gang members, international terrorists or fugitives from other countries because they know that local police, in those jurisdictions, will not report them to immigration law enforcement authorities even if they are arrested for committing crimes in those jurisdictions.

Transnational gangs invariably set up shop among immigrants from their home countries who live within the ethnic immigrant communities,  This is not only true for gangs from Latin America but from all over the world.  Human nature is universal and criminals can be found within every ethnic immigrant community.

In point of fact, the most likely victims of the crimes of these pernicious gangs are the members of these ethnic immigrant communities who often immigrated to the United States to get away from these very same criminals, only to find that they are now, once again, forced to live with them.

Sanctuary Cities also attract huge numbers of foreign workers who, because of their desperation, are willing to take whatever risks that they must in order to evade detection from the United States to take jobs in the United States, confident that sanctuary policies will shield them from ICE.

This incentivizes illegal immigration and, consequently, overwhelms Border Patrol resources to secure our borders.  This further undermines national security and public safety in violation of 8 U.S. Code § 1324 which, deems the following actions to constitute felonies:

(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;

(iv) encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law; or


(I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or

(II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts, shall be punished as provided in subparagraph (B).

When I was an INS agent, particularly when I was assigned to the Anti-Smuggling Unit in New York City many of the female illegal aliens we encountered told me that they took birth control pills for several months before they made their attempt to run our borders because they anticipated that they would be raped by the smugglers. 

Today the level of violence perpetrated against these smuggled aliens by human traffickers has increased exponentially as the drug cartel and violent gangs became more involved in human trafficking, virtually cornering the market of this pernicious and violent “trade.”

Considering the extreme that these illegal aliens will go to in order to enter the United States, it is clear that they will also endure extreme exploitation by employers who intentionally hire them.

Sanctuary Cities provide a veritable “army” of readily exploitable illegal alien workers who are sought after by unscrupulous employers who eagerly hire alien workers they can exploit, paying them substandard wages under substandard, indeed, dangerous conditions that lawful immigrants and American workers would never tolerate.

The obvious question then, that must be asked, is why would a mayor or governor declare his/her city or state to be a “Sanctuary” given that this runs contrary to law, commonsense, morality and even the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission that determined that multiple failures of the immigration system enabled foreign terrorists to enter the United States and then embed themselves in communities around the U.S.

A good place to start looking for the answer to that question can be found in the headline of a February 28, 2018 Breitbart news report, NY City Officials Hide Huge Workforce of Illegal Immigrants from ICE Enforcement.

Clearly sanctuary policies attract huge numbers of illegal aliens who entered the U.S. without inspection and often with the assistance of human traffickers- at great risk and expense, to seek illegal employment. 

Employers who intentionally hire illegal aliens do so, not out of compassion, but out of greed. 

Such unscrupulous employers hire illegal aliens because they know that these aliens will work for significantly substandard wages under substandard, indeed, often illegally hazardous working conditions.  Exploitation is not a demonstration of compassion.

Alan Greenspan included in his prepared testimony at an April 30, 2009 Senate Immigration Subcommittee hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform chaired by Sen. Schumer, the following:

Some evidence suggests that unskilled illegal immigrants (almost all from Latin America) marginally suppress wage levels of native-born Americans without a high school diploma, and impose significant costs on some state and local governments.

Greenspan blithely neglected to note that “marginally suppressing wages” of those American workers all too often causes them to become homeless.

Furthermore, as was noted in the Breitbart article which focused on NYC,

The huge labor force of illegals has successfully kept food-industry wages extremely low, according to 2017 state data, despite the high cost of living in the city.

The report went on to state:

The taxpayers’ cost of this illegal immigration is high, partly because of the very low wages. In 2009, New York city’s support for illegal immigrants — including aid, education, housing — cost taxpayers roughly $9.5 billion, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform.

On December 6, 2007 the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) issued a report, The Impact of Unauthorized Immigrants on the Budgets of State and Local Governments.

Cheap labor is anything but cheap and, as the saying goes, there is no such thing as a “free lunch.”

Read more from Front Page Magazine…

Video: Why We Need The K-12 Code of Ethics

Editor’s note: In the following video, “Actual Justice Warrior” Sean Fitzgerald takes a close look at the principles and precepts of the Code of Ethics for K-12 Teachers, a measure proposed by the David Horowitz Freedom Center which would forbid teachers from using their classrooms for political, ideological, or religious advocacy. Teachers in violation of the Code would be subject to penalties such as probation, suspension and loss of their teaching licenses. The Freedom Center is currently working with legislators in several states to introduce versions of the Code of Ethics as legislation. The accompanying cartoon by Glenn McCoy (above) illustrates the urgent need for the Code of Ethics. To learn more about the Freedom Center’s campaign to halt indoctrination in K-12 schools, please visit our campaign website,  To order the Freedom Center’s new pamphlet, “Leftist Indoctrination in Our K-12 Public Schools,” CLICK HERE.

Read more from Front Page Magazine…

Entitlement Rogues: Alive and Well on America's Campuses

On Monday, April 16, twenty students were arrested at Yale University after refusing to leave the school’s financial aid office during a rally. They were demanding that Yale remove what they regard as a financial burden for its low-income students on financial aid. The burden in question was the Student Effort requirement which requires students on significant financial aid to make a financial contribution of between $2,800 and $3,350 to their education by working on campus.

Chief among the protestors was an international student on a student visa from Pakistan, Shaheer Malik, who objected to the having to work up to 10 hours per week in the library scanning barcodes on the grounds that such work robbed him of his ability to fully enjoy the social activities that constitute the Yale experience. Other students complained that having to work was unfair because it discriminated against them based on their economic status whereas as their wealthier counterparts were spared the injustice of having to work.

The protestors prove once more that there are people in our county that fail to realize that immigration is a privilege and not a right; that their parents’ procreative choices are not the fiscal responsibility of others to bear; that our country was founded on political equality not economic equality; and that the task of assuming responsibility for one’s life as an adult supersedes any social activities or play time that might be part of the Yale experience.

I wonder by what infernal impertinence some of today’s young people would demand that their desire for a totally free education constitutes an unconditional public good for the rest of society, and that their desires and wishes to be absolved of all responsibility for their lives be regarded as an unchallenged moral imperative. The protesters rule by moral intimidation and they get away with it largely because much of the larger society has mistakenly come to feel that education is a natural right; but it is not a natural right for if it were that would mean that individuals would have to be responsible for the reproductive choices that others made and which they morally could not have undertaken as their own.

I am reminded of my own struggle as a legal immigrant in this country thirty-two years ago when I arrived here from Jamaica with $120 in my pocket. I worked for a year to save up enough money for a half a year of college, and for four years worked up to forty-five hours per week while going to school full time and surviving on four hours of sleep each night. I graduated magna cum laude and then earned a scholarship to pursued a doctorate in philosophy. Not once did I believe that the state or America owed me anything except a chance to earn a living and pay my way as I journeyed through life. 

I had made a covenant with this new country I would call my permanent home. I promised that, in the name of the best within me, I would cultivate the noblest virtues in my character and use them as the only legitimate currency to purchase a life that would be worthy of an American. That there would be no obstacles that my indefatigable spirit could not overcome, and that there would be no prejudice that a philosophy of individualism, which characterized the very essence of who I was at my core, could not transcend. This covenant spoke to the stupendous achievements I vowed to accomplish by taking advantage of the plethora of opportunities that I knew would become available to me. This was a moral contract I was making with my new country. The best within me was a code of conduct that I would enact between myself and my future compatriots. It was an ethos of benevolence and goodwill that I would extend, and one that I expected to be reciprocated. The America I anticipated meeting, and the one I have come to know and love, is a country predicated on mutual exchange.

What the entitlement children of today do not realize is the sacredness of grit and commitment to decent and hard work that can be learned from life in America. Regardless of what you do, whether you scrub a toilet, practice medicine, clean someone’s bedsore, or fly a plane, dignity is something you possess inside and it is something you bring to whatever you do in your line of work. That work reaffirms your commitment to the sanctity of your life.

Your life is never cheapened by the work you do. You enhance the dignity of the work you do by imbuing it with the magnificence of your humanity, the grandeur of your soul, and the inviolability of your individuality. The work is enriched simply by your touch. That grandeur is yours. You’ve earned it.

Give up the claim to entitlement, young protesters. You’ve not earned it!

Jason D. Hill is a professor of philosophy at DePaul University and the author of several books. His forthcoming book: We Have Overcome: An Immigrant’s Letter to the American People, will be published in July by Bombardier Books and is now available on Amazon for pre-sale order.

Read more from Front Page Magazine…

The Irreproducibility Crisis of Modern Science

“Most Americans don’t even know that the crisis exists,” explain David Randall and Christopher Welser of the National Association of Scholars. Help has now arrived in The Irreproducibility Crisis of Modern Science: Cause, Consequences and the Road to Reform. The general reader might find the title puzzling but the concept is simple. 

If a scientific study is to be legitimate, it must be reproducible because replication allows examination of the data and the possibility of different conclusions. If the study is not reproducible it is not really science, and as the authors show, that type of non-science is now common. 

In June of 2016, Oona Lönnstedt and Peter Eklöv of Uppsala University published a paper in Science warning of the dangers of microplastic particles in the ocean. The study got considerable media attention but as it turned out, “Lönnstedt never performed the research that she and Eklöv reported.” So in philosophical terms, it had an existential problem, and veracity is also an issue.

In 2005, Dr. John Ioannidis argued, “shockingly and persuasively,” that most published research findings in his own field of medicine were false. This was due to many factors, including the limitations of statistics, “intellectual prejudices and conflicts of interest,” and researchers striving to produce positive results “in fashionable areas of research.” Based on these factors, the findings in other scientific fields were probably wrong too. 

Positive results, the authors show, are the kind that make for the “eye-catching headline and the breathless lead” from “science” journalists. Currently, positive results tell politicians what they want to hear, and pave the way for lucrative government grants and prestigious positions. So those whose conduct such research tend to shield their data.

For example, Tom Karl of the National Centers for Environmental Information at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration claimed to refute evidence of a global warming hiatus since the early 2000s. But since Karl failed properly to archive the data, his conclusions were not open to replication. 

If a researcher fails to share data and methodology, one skeptic observes, “we have no obligation to believe anything in his papers.” In current conditions, the authors show, “Groupthink also inhibits attempts to check results, since replication studies can undermine comfortable beliefs. An entire academic discipline can succumb to groupthink and create a professional consensus with a strong tendency to dismiss results that question its foundations.” 

“Science that touches on political agendas has contributed more than its share of problems to the irreproducibility crisis,” explains an afterword by William Happer, emeritus professor of physics at Princeton and former director of energy research for the US Department of Energy. Happer notes that research on the harmful effects  of carbon dioxide was published by “scientists” in peer-reviewed journals, but “almost none of it is reproducible.” 

These trendy scientists, Happer writes, think themselves far superior to those in the “basket of deplorables,” who “have a hard time understanding why scientists are so special, and why they should vote as instructed by them.”

Readers of the NAS study will understand that the irreproducibility crisis is about junk science, which is part of the larger jihad of junkthought now being waged in public policy, the media, and in our schools. 

“Education definitely seems to be a component of the crisis,” the authors told Frontpage. “It’s problematic that some progressive advocates seem to want people to just ‘believe’ in particular scientific conclusions as articles of faith. That runs counter to the spirit of science, which is based on a rigorous insistence that claims need to be supported by evidence, and it does tend toward indoctrination, because it implies that people shouldn’t think for themselves.” 

According to the authors, “anyone who puts the conclusions before the evidence or throws around phrases like ‘anti-science’ as a way to shut down debate, has the wrong frame of mind for really facing up to the irreproducibility crisis.” So “K-12 and higher education need to do a better job of teaching students how to think scientifically and statistically.” 

The authors cite a number of organizations that can help on that front, and contend that  “any citizen or professional who wants to see science done properly is a champion of reform, whatever his or her politics.” Meanwhile, readers can easily find the dynamics of the crisis on public display. 

EPA administrator Scott Pruitt recently announced,  “the science that we use is going to be transparent. It’s going to be reproducible.”  That fueled an angry response from Gina McCarthy, EPA boss from 2013-2017, and Janet McCabe, her assistant in the EPA Office of Air and Radiation. 

They contend that, “peer review ensures that the analytic methodologies underlying studies funded by the agency are sound.” However, some of the data is “confidential” because of patient privacy and “business reasons.” So McCarthy and McCabe oppose measures to require that all scientific and technical information is specifically identified, and publicly available in a manner sufficient for independent analysis and substantial reproduction of research results.

On McCarthy’s watch in 2015 readers may recall,  the EPA dumped millions of gallons of toxic waste into the Animas River. That create a fathomless environmental disaster in four states but the EPA refused to pay $1.8 billion in damage claims, some from Native Americans. 

Gina McCarthy was not fired and she now directs the Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard. The groupthink gang gets the big bucks and members never have to say they’re sorry.

Read more from Front Page Magazine…

Carter Center Sued for Providing Support to Hamas

The Washington Free Beacon reported Monday that the Zionist Advocacy Center is alleging in a suit that former President Jimmy Carter’s nonprofit organization, the Carter Center, “has used taxpayer funding to provide material support to international terrorist groups, including Hamas.” Given Carter’s longstanding and abundantly established hatred for the Jewish state, this allegation is no great shock. Nonetheless, the specter of an American President’s foundation funding a jihad terrorist group demonstrates how far we have fallen.

The Zionist Advocacy Center further alleges that the Carter Center “received more than $30 million in taxpayer grants while violating federal statutes barring it from using the cash to provide material support to terror groups.” Not only that: “The plaintiffs maintain the Carter Center has violated the law by hosting designated terrorists at is facilities, as well as by providing various forms of assistance to the Palestinian terror group Hamas and other known terror entities.”

No one who has watched Carter over the years can really be surprised. Back in 2008, Carter claimed that Hamas was prepared to accept the right of Israel to “live as a neighbor next door in peace.” He had no grounds for saying so, and it wasn’t remotely true, but this claim helped him perpetuate the fiction that the Israelis, not the Palestinians, were responsible for the failure of all peace talks and the ongoing tensions between the two.

Two years before that, Carter published the notorious book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, in which he ignored the jihad imperative to destroy Israel, and the numerous maximalist and even genocidal declarations from Palestinian leaders, and painted an outrageous fantasy of a peaceful Palestinian people, ennobled by suffering and besieged by a rapacious Israeli war machine that was imposing apartheid policies in the name of a false need for security.

In a review in the Huffington Post (of all places), Alan Dershowitz eviscerated Carter’s book, pointing out that in order to make his case, Carter not only had to ignore and misrepresent present-day realities, but rewrite history as well:

Carter repeatedly claims that the Palestinians have long supported a two-state solution and the Israelis have always opposed it. Yet he makes no mention of the fact that in 1938 the Peel Commission proposed a two-state solution with Israel receiving a mere sliver of its ancient homeland and the Palestinians receiving the bulk of the land. The Jews accepted and the Palestinians rejected this proposal, because Arab leaders cared more about there being no Jewish state on Muslim holy land than about having a Palestinian state of their own.

He barely mentions Israel’s acceptance, and the Palestinian rejection, of the U.N.’s division of the mandate in 1948.

He claims that in 1967 Israel launched a preemptive attack against Jordan. The fact is that Jordan attacked Israel first, Israel tried desperately to persuade Jordan to remain out of the war, and Israel counterattacked after the Jordanian army surrounded Jerusalem, firing missiles into the center of the city. Only then did Israel capture the West Bank, which it was willing to return in exchange for peace and recognition from Jordan.

Carter repeatedly mentions Security Council Resolution 242, which called for return of captured territories in exchange for peace, recognition and secure boundaries, but he ignores the fact that Israel accepted and all the Arab nations and the Palestinians rejected this resolution. The Arabs met in Khartum and issued their three famous “no’s”: “No peace, no recognition, no negotiation” but you wouldn’t know that from reading the history according to Carter.

Many find it odd that the renowned architect of the Camp David Accords would stoop to all this; but it must be remembered that at Camp David, Israel gave up a great deal in exchange for little more than promises – promises that have been repeatedly broken. Jimmy Carter’s record of hostility toward the Jewish state spans his entire career. He has never publicly recognized that it faces the same jihad foes that attacked America on September 11, 2001, and counsels policies of appeasement and accommodation that, if fully implemented, would only embolden the jihadis and further weaken Israel.

And so now it is being claimed in a court case that the Carter Center has been aiding Hamas. Longtime Carter watchers can only say: of course.

Read more from Front Page Magazine…

Israel Defangs Hamas

Hamas has lost. The Islamist terrorist entity that governs the impoverished Gaza Strip has run out of military and political options. Following Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, Hamas began a systematic campaign to harry and harass Israeli border communities by showering them with thousands of rockets. Soon, Hamas managed to increase the range, accuracy and payload of its rockets placing Ashqelon, Ashdod and even Tel Aviv in peril. But Israel answered the challenge by introducing its Iron Dome wonder weapon which effectively neutralized the rocket threat.

So Hamas turned to its Plan B – terror tunnels. Hamas began digging tunnels into Israel with the aim of carrying out mega attacks. In 2014, a plan was in the works to launch a massive attack on the Jewish new year of Rosh Hashanah in which Hamas would deploy hundreds of fighters who would emerge from tunnels and engage in a kidnapping-murder spree. As it would turn out, the plan never materialized. A series of Hamas provocations prior to Rosh Hashanah triggered a massive Israeli counter-insurgency operation against Hamas in the summer of 2014. 

During the course of the 50-day campaign, the Israel Defense Forces uncovered some three-dozen tunnels, many of which penetrated into Israel. They were destroyed but the revelation prompted Israel’s military planners to invest in technologies capable of detecting terror tunnels. The investment bore fruit. Israel is in the midst of constructing a massive underground barrier aimed at thwarting infiltrations. In addition, the IDF has devised methods and technologies specifically geared to detecting underground anomalies. 

In the past few months, the IDF has destroyed or caused the collapse of no less than five tunnels. Just days ago, a tunnel collapsed near the border in Deir al-Balah, in central Gaza killing a member of the so-called Al-Qassam Brigades. On April 15, the IDF destroyed a tunnel that it described as the “longest and deepest” yet uncovered. And in October 2017, the IDF destroyed a tunnel killing 14 terrorists – 12 belonging to Islamic Jihad and two from Hamas. Israel has transformed terror tunnels into giant burial chambers for terrorists.

Its rocket and tunnel threats neutralized, Hamas turned to a new tactic, one aimed at cynically employing civilians and garnering world sympathy. Three weeks ago, it began to stage mass protests along the border. These protests were anything but peaceful but the IDF was ready for all contingencies. In the first week of protests, 30,000 demonstrators, some of whom were armed, took part. That number whittled down to 20,000 in the second week and to about 5,000 in the third week. 

The downward trend is expected to continue as Gazans recognize the futility of their actions and exploitation by their government. Noteworthy is the fact that 80% of “peaceful demonstrators” killed thus far along the border actually belonged to one of three terrorist groups, the Al Qassam Brigades, the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade and Islamic Jihad. Photos of some of them can be viewed here.

Armchair elitists who sit within confines of the Hollywood bubble have the luxury of second-guessing Israeli military decisions but those living in the Israeli community of Nir Oz, just a few hundred meters from the border, have no such luxury. For them it is a matter of life and death and they are under no illusions about what would happen to them if their genocidal neighbors just across the border breached the border, from above or below.

Having failed with rockets, terror tunnels and mass demonstrations, Hamas’s options have been severely curtailed. Hamas has invested heavily in Unmanned Aerial Drone technology but here too, Israel has stymied their efforts.

Last Saturday, 35-year-old Fadi Muhammad al-Batsh, was liquidated as he was walking from his house to a nearby mosque in the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur. The assassins pumped 10 to 14 bullets into his body to ensure death. Al-Batsh, an electrical engineer, was a lecturer at the British Malaysian Institute at the University of Kuala Lumpur. But al-Batsh had a more sinister side. He was a high ranking member of Hamas and was responsible for advancing the group’s militarized UAV program. Hamas described him as its “engineer commander.” According to a New York Times report, Batsh may have also been secretly negotiating with North Korean agents, on Malaysian soil, for arms transfers to Hamas.  He thus became a legitimate target for liquidation.

In December 2016, Mohammad Zawari, another Hamas operative and an engineer who was also central to Hamas’s UAV program met a similar fate in Tunisia. In both cases, Israel remained tight-lipped but there is little doubt that Israel’s long arm of justice reached out and touched both of these menaces.

In the air and subterranean theaters, Israel has outmaneuvered Hamas and its affiliates. The Islamist group has plainly run out of options and is under extreme distress. Its negotiations to forge unity with Mahmoud Abbas’s Palestinian Authority (the other corrupt Palestinian entity that governs 40% of Judea and Samaria) have run into a brick wall. Graft and mismanagement are rampant in the Strip and unemployment for those between the ages of 15 to 29 hovers at an astonishing 60%. Drug addiction is prevalent as many have resorted to opioids to escape their abysmal, Hamas-created reality. Electricity and water shortages are commonplace and raw sewage remains untreated. 

Left with no viable military options to deflect Gazans’ attentions away from their hellish predicament, we can expect Hamas to resort to yet greater internal repression to maintain its vice-like hold on power.

Read more from Front Page Magazine…