Taliban “Bringing Back” Executions As They Demand Representation At The U.N.

Today on Sekulow, as the Taliban seeks recognition at the United Nations, they also announce they're bringing back executions and amputations as punishment. We'll talk about what the international community will do with former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. We will follow Islam and we will make our laws on the Quran. Cutting off hands is very necessary for security. I mean, so much for the Taliban 2.0, Senator.

Yeah, Trace, I guess they will be very business-like when they execute the hands of minor felons and criminals in Afghanistan. We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110.

But who could have guessed that a degenerate gang of 7th century savages would behave like a degenerate 7th century savage. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Welcome to Sekulow.

We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110. We're going to talk about that with Secretary Pompeo in the next segment of the broadcast right off the top because, again, you've got the Taliban on the one hand trying to get UN recognition or other countries to recognize them. And yet they are coming out.

This is not like someone is reporting that they started doing this. They're coming out through their spokespeople and saying, no, we're going to install this harsh interpretation of Sharia law, cutting off people's hands. Miners get treated like adults. And, of course, public executions. Remember it was the Taliban that would use a stadium to execute a woman? And these charges that would be all you'd have to have is two men and you could bring any charge you wanted against a woman or a minor. And as long as two men agreed that they had done something illegal or wrong, I mean, they're being executed in public.

So we're about to see the return to that. So I have two questions for Secretary Pompeo. One is the world's response and the U.S. response as well, because the Taliban is not just doing this to do it. At the same time, they're trying to get international recognition.

And, of course, the support that comes with that and the money that would come with that, the resources that would come with that. So that's one issue we're going to get to today. The second issue, the Iron Dome has now been funded by Congress. There was a separate vote taken. You had the members of the squad, the Hamas caucus, if you will. Most of them vote no. AOC voted no, then changed her vote to present and then broke down in tears for voting present. And the fact that a defensive weapon that you cannot, again, you cannot use offensively. A lot of really harsh rhetoric, anti-Israel rhetoric was used by people like Rashida Talib.

We'll get into that as well. And then a vote just happened. Let me go to Thad Bennett, Washington, D.C. Thad, amidst all these other issues, a vote just occurred in the House of Representatives to codify, to put into legislation Roe versus Wade and the holding in Roe versus Wade. And that passed the House of Representatives. Passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 218 to 211, Jordan. It looks like one Democrat voted against it. Other than that, it was all party lines. We're still looking at the breakdown of the vote. But look, I think the message from this has to be very clear to voters across the political spectrum, Jordan.

This is the unfortunate position of the Democrat Party right now. They want to say they want abortions to be safe, legal and rare. Jordan, they just voted on a bill that would codify Roe and would wipe out every federal, state or local restriction or limitation on abortion past, present and future. So, Jordan, just one example.

If a state wants to say an abortion facility has to have an ability to admit a woman who is suffering after having a botched abortion to a hospital, the state cannot require the abortion clinic to have that hospital admitting privilege. That's how far this legislation goes today, Jordan. All right, folks, I encourage you to share this broadcast with your friends and family.

If you're watching online on the various places we're streaming or if you are listening in your car or on your radio, just encourage you to share the broadcast with your friends and family. If you want to be part of the show, 1-800-684-3110, we're going to get to all of these issues. But right off the bat, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, our Senior Counsel for Global Affairs, is going to be joining us to discuss the issues involving the Taliban as well as the border and the issue with Israel. We're going to get into all of that with Secretary Pompeo.

We come back on Sekulow. Always, as I encourage you to find out about all the work that we're doing, check out ACLJ.org. Be right back. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work.

Become a member today. ACLJ.org. Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, a play on parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life.

Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. Music We're joined now by our Senior Counsel for Global Affairs, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. I told you folks we want to hit a few issues here. One is the Taliban announcement and the Israel Iron Dome vote which went through and ultimately as well what is happening at the border. Secretary Pompeo, I want to ask you right off the bat, we're seeing now, we saw the President's address, we talked about that earlier in the week to the United Nations, and the Taliban is moving forward trying to get UN credentials. My first question is not what the U.S. would do on that, but where do you sense that the world is on recognizing the Taliban as the official government or representatives of Afghanistan?

Jordan, I'm very concerned. I think there are too many countries around the world who will for various reasons, some of which is because they don't like the United States very much, some of which will be because they think there's an economic opportunity, or frankly, the opportunity is to avoid being a terror target themselves who will accommodate the Taliban in ways that are completely inappropriate with their terrorist status. The good news is the United States could stop that. The United States could make clear that we believe the Taliban are not the rightful governors of the people of Afghanistan. In fact, our terrorist organization, and as you know, Jordan, when the United States does that, when we step forward, then these other countries will be much less likely to provide the Taliban with the fuel, the resources, the ammunition, all of the things that they need to begin to build out what they are hoping is ultimately recognition by the world as being appropriate to be part of the international community.

That is not true. We must do everything we can to prevent and I hope that this administration will do that. I was going to ask about the administration next because they seem to be, it's not that they're endorsing or embracing it, I don't want to go too far there, but they certainly aren't raising their voices real loud. They haven't taken that position yet. It doesn't feel like that, Secretary Pompeo, that if they have, it's been very much behind the scenes and not something we've seen play out publicly where they've put the pressure on the international community not to recognize the Taliban.

Well, they need to do it. I'm prepared to give them a little bit of time to get to the right place on that and that we still do have Americans who are trying to get out. I must say, my frustration is that the United States government hasn't done enough to get those Americans out.

So if there's something going on behind the scenes that we're not aware of that says, hey, for a day or a week or a month, we've got to do this so that we get everybody out that needs to get out, fine. But when we're looking at the medium term, near term, and of course, longer term, the Taliban are not a party who we should deal with. They are not a rightful set of leaders in Afghanistan. We see now they're bringing back all of the bad elements of what they had done and their fundamentalism, their Islamism inside of Afghanistan, the judicial efforts, the absence of women being able to be educated in the way they have for these past years.

We know who they are. They haven't changed their stripes and they ought not to be dealt with until such time as they are no longer that terrorist organization inflicting massive human rights violations on their own people. And we need to put pressure on the national community to walk away from that as well.

Mr. Secretary, Thanh Bennett here. Just one more question along those lines. I totally agree with you that we need to give the administration space and time to do the right thing with Americans still in country. But I wanted to ask you what it suggests to you when you look at the funding priorities of both the White House and also Democrats in Congress.

I mean, I think about this juxtaposition this week. On the one hand, you had squad leaders forcing Democrat leadership to strip Iron Dome funding out of the spending bill. And then on the other hand, you had the administration announcing the first wave of aid starting to go to Taliban controlled Afghanistan.

And as you know better than anyone where the dollars flow, that's often a good indication of where the priorities are. So what do you make just sort of generally of this new reality that Taliban funding seems to have higher priority in Washington, D.C. right now than does funding for our ally Israel? It's nuts.

It's absolutely crazy. It is literally the converse of how the Trump administration thought about the problem set of keeping America safe and making sure we knew who our friends were and punishing our enemies to begin to underwrite the Taliban in ways that they are not only undeserving of. But we'll use those funds for nefarious purposes, as you suggested.

This money is all fungible is is sick. Second, your point on the progressives basically owning the entire Democrat Party when it comes to the relationship between the United States and Israel, forcing the stripping out of that language is so so deeply. And he's so deeply inconsistent with making sure that your partners and friends are supported by this about saving American lives.

For goodness sake, the underwriting of Iron Dome. I was I was, frankly, surprised at the progress that the hard left part of the party had made inside the Democrat Party. It does not bode well for our relationship between United States and Israel to see that the Democrat Party is willing to walk away from funding for defensive weapons systems for the people of Israel.

And you all you also know there are Americans in Israel every day to keep those civilians safe and secure when they're out spending trillions of dollars in every other pocket of the world is something I didn't think I'd see the day that would happen. Secretary, we saw the infighting too. I mean, we saw Democrats versus Democrat. I think that the concern that I have is on the political front, I see it as this is where the Democrat Party is moving. And I don't like the fact that one of our two major political parties is moving in this direction where they're they're younger members are are taking this right out of it seems like right out of the academic world. Anti Israel approach and they're really, you know, hard, hard rhetoric, you know, which we're used to from a couple of members of Congress. But now it's up to about 10 members of Congress.

And it's enough to where they can push the the I mean, the backbone or the back the lack of backbone from Pelosi and others who have secretary. They've spent their entire careers as well being pro Israel, speaking at pro Israel events. They didn't have the backbone to step up and say, you know what, we're going to have this vote, and we're going to force you to force you to take a position on the issue and instead separating it out, which of course, in not not surprising it ultimately passes in Washington, because there still is that support for Israel, which is a good thing, but no backbone for the Democrat Party.

It's gone now. I saw England's of this during my time as the director and as Secretary of State, and even in Congress, when we were discussing the nuclear deal, the crazy nuclear deal, the JCPOA, we saw Democrats come out and support President Obama's position, which was clearly the position that the Israeli leadership didn't want. Frankly, that the Arab states, the people closest to the problems that with Iran didn't want, we saw them walk away from that deep commitment to Israel to the partnership and understanding the risks to the Israeli people from the Iranian regime. We thought, again, remember when we took the strike on Qasem Soleimani, the left still believes President Biden said himself during the campaign, we shouldn't have taken that strike. Those may seem far afield, but those are the kinds of things that the United States and Israel have always worked on to secure our mutual defense together, and so you saw the culmination of it with stripping out that language. I'm glad they got it back right.

I'm glad they got it back in the right place, but it's no longer six or eight or 10. It is now the case, the significant number of members of the Democrat Party in Washington, D.C. believe that it is not worthy to underwrite the defense of civilians in Israel. I wanted to find, I know we talked about a lot of topics, but the final topic I want to hit is the border. I mean, all of this involving our security and our country, but you tweeted out, quote, there's a crisis at the southern border because this administration stopped building the wall and undid the policies we had in place to strengthen our borders. We are still seeing, I mean, as of today, the administration secretary is still blaming, they're trying to blame President Trump and the Trump and the administration you served in and say, well, it's their fault that we're dealing with this. And it is, we're nine months in and the numbers don't lie. The numbers are clear. The numbers weren't there at the end of the Trump presidency.

They are double and triple that at the border right now. We had it figured out and we left them a roadmap, a plan and a legal structure with which to secure our southern border. And we were doing it.

We were doing it day in, day out, week in, week out, month in, month out. We were delivering for the American people, keeping our American sovereignty, doing a much better job of tracking who and what were coming across our border. And to your point about the data set, 208,000 in the month of August, typically a month where there are fewer people making the dangerous traffic across the Mexican country. This is a calamity. It's a human rights problem.

You saw what was going on under that bridge. We don't want anybody to live in that kind of squalor. And now they've taken the solution to release most of those folks inside of the country. This will come back to create enormous American security problems on top of the humanitarian calamity that we're all witnessing today. We had a plan. We had a plan, much like Afghanistan, Jordan, we had a plan.

It was working and they came in and ripped it up. Do you think, the final quick question, that the border patrol, they are being thrown under the bus consistently by this administration, but the rhetoric now has gotten very nasty. I'm sure you're there. Is there morale? I mean, it's feel like they went from an administration that had their back completely to an administration that is looking, you know, if a picture doesn't look right, they're willing to throw everything. You know, there's going to be severe consequences for these guys who are dealing with unbelievable amount of stress at the border.

I'll try and do this quickly, Jordan, but make no mistake about it. They defund the police and these attacks on these amazing people who are trying to scare a border come from the same place. They come from the progressive left's view.

But now it's moved, it's seeped further into the party. They don't have these people's backs. I want to tell every ICE agent, every CBP officer out there, stay at it, stay on the mission. The American people support you.

Secretary Pompeo, it's always great to have you, our Senior Counsel for Global Affairs. I'll tell you, I mean, that border patrol, it's like, how much are they going to take before they just say, you know what, enough. This is not worth doing.

It's not, you know, it's like, we're not paid enough to do this, to be thrown under the bus and say, you know, harsh and serious. Actually, we're going to talk about all that when we come back for the break. We'll start taking your calls as well. 1-800-684-3110 to join us on the air. That's 1-800-684-3110.

Be right back. Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life.

Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. The challenges facing Americans are substantial. At a time when our values, our freedoms, our constitutional rights are under attack, it's more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines protecting your freedoms, defending your rights, in courts, in Congress, and in the public arena.

And we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line, we could not do our work without your support. We remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms. That remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life changing work.

Become a member today, ACLJ.org. So you know how we talked about the Iron Dome funding got pulled out of the main finance funding of the government and because you had this uproar from about 10 progressives in the Democrat Party, all because of the Democrat Party. So Nancy Pelosi, instead of saying that we're going to have a vote on this, we stand with Israel. This is an issue court, it's a bipartisan issue, and having the vote. And again, wasn't going to get support from Republicans to pass a bill that they don't support with lots of other provisions. But likely that wouldn't have passed. It wouldn't have passed based off the numbers right now in the House of Representatives because there were 9, maybe 10 members of the House of Representatives, all of the Democrat Party, who were willing to vote no. Because when they brought this back up, as we knew they would, ultimately to get a standalone funding bill for the Iron Dome for the year, basically to replenish the missiles that the Iron Dome utilizes.

And remember, it's only defensive, so you don't have to get into issues post, they cannot use this as an offensive weapon. But I want you to hear, this is not just one member of Congress now, I mean they have their leaders now, like Rashida Tlaib, and 9 other members of Congress are saying, I'm going to vote this way too. Take a listen to her insane rhetoric against Israel.

I rise in opposition to this supplemental. I will not support an effort to enable and support war crimes, human rights abuses, and violence. We cannot be talking only about Israelis' need for safety at a time when Palestinians are living under a violent apartheid system, and are dying from what Human Rights Watch has said are war crimes. First of all, this is not where the world's attention is right now, because there's not war crimes going on, there's not massive conflict going on, and because of the Iron Dome, whenever Hamas tries to start a conflict now, it's actually pretty quickly resolved, thankfully, because the system is so effective in preventing civilian casualties.

Which prevents, then, Israel from feeling like they need to take more intense steps in response to these terror attacks. But it caused Democrat infighting, so this is interesting, because this is the struggle. This is as in tune as I can be with the Democrat party, they have to do it publicly for me, because I'm not very in tune with what's going on, but what I have a feeling, this is just from working on the other side of the aisle, and seeing shifts happen, there are shifts that happen inside the Republican party as well.

The people who are replenishing, you know, if someone retires, who's coming next in the Democrat party? This is the group, and it is anti-Israel, they're taking it right from the academic world, and they're applying it now into Congress. It wasn't just Rashida Tlaib, it was Ilhan Omar, surprise surprise, Pressley, Cori Bush, Andre Carson, Marie Newman, Raoul, I'm not sure how to say his last name, I've never heard of him, Congressman Garcia, and then you had one Republican, Congressman Massey, he's the outlier.

So I'd say, you know, I'll go to you first, you can have those outliers, you can have the Massey's of the world, you can have an AOC and a Rashida Tlaib, but they're starting to pile up on their AOCs and Rashida Tlaibs. Yeah, well first of all, Thomas Massey, I don't agree with his vote on this bill, Jordan, but it's not about Israel, he votes against virtually every spending bill that comes out of Washington, he does have a legitimate concern about spending that happens in Washington, this is how he registers that concern with every single vote, so again, I disagree with him on this vote. But it's not that he's anti-Israel, the other ten members on this, the eight members who voted no, and then the two who voted present, which that's a whole other issue maybe we can get into, this is a very confusing reason why AOC and Hank Johnson voted present, Jordan, they've made it very clear that it is about voting against Israel for them, remember, they were the ones that got it stripped out of the underlying bill in the first place, they're also the ones, Jordan, that on the underlying bill for the massive spending, they're in favor of that. So Thomas Massey's not in favor of that bill, they are, they are against this specific provision, and the last thing I'd say on this, Jordan, this is a huge victory for grassroots advocacy, getting this restored so quickly, but don't let it be lost on any of our listeners. This is still at the feet of Democrat leadership in the House of Representatives because they still granted the wish of these ten Democrats, there might have only been ten who voted against the restored funding, but Jordan, the vote wouldn't have been necessary at all had House Democrat leadership held the line.

This is the end of the day, if they would have held the line, they wouldn't have this divided issue where they separated out, I do think that, remember, one of the other things that Dan brought this up that's getting a lot of attention, and Harry, is AOC was in tears. Now, she voted no, and she switched it to present. There are reasons why if you're like the leader of the Senate, maybe the Speaker of the House, of leadership roles, to change your vote's procedure, there's not one for her.

So whether this was still done to protect herself politically, so down the road, running in New York, she doesn't have this no vote, but in tears, and being comforted like this is somehow, this is hurting them to take these votes on a defensive measure. Well, AOC is one of the worst actresses in the world, number one, but her approach to this particular vote represents, if you will, the leading edge of the Democratic sphere in the future, which is anti-Israel hatred on steroids. These Democrats claim that Israel is the only bad actor on human rights in the world. These Democrats, this is an opinion, they would gladly support giving funds to the Taliban, which has announced a policy of amputations and public executions going forward.

And so, at the end of the day, Democratic outrage is selective. They are willing to protest Israel, particularly, it's odd here, because the Iron Dome is a defensive measure. It is not an offensive measure, but nonetheless, they are quite willing to support the Palestinians in their efforts to support terrorism going forward. They're quite willing to support the Taliban and other bad actors.

It's about the pursuit of progressive power. At the end of the day, it's simply a power grab by a lot of bad actors on the Democratic side, and the Democratic leadership is allowing this to go forward. You know, Wes, we had a Democrat Congressman, and this is not one I'm a fan of at all, Congressman Deutch, but it does show the kind of more mainstream Democrat party where they are in Israel is where most of us are in Israel.

That's why it's been this bipartisan issue. We'll take a listen to his response back, and I just want to remind you, this is a Democrat responding to another Democrat, so this is dividing up their party. I have a speech about how important it is for us to stand up against terror, and the terror strikes against Israel, launched by the terrorist group Hamas from Gaza.

4,500 rockets that Iron Dome helped us stop. And I have a speech that's all about how important it is for us to replenish that. But Mr. Speaker, I cannot allow one of my colleagues to stand on the floor of the House of Representatives and label the Jewish Democratic state of Israel an apartheid state. I reject it. His point being is that if you put this position in Israel, again, you're in that situation where there is no safe haven for Jews in the world. Yeah, the weapons system was strictly, strictly defensive, and yet what is missing in all of these speeches is condemning Hamas for initially launching the attacks against Israel, which calls them to use the defensive system. None of that is coming from these Democrats who voted against this money for Israel. It's unthinkable, and by the way, the reason AOC wrote it present is because her house district was redistricted to include Riverdale, which is a large Jewish community in New York City. Her vote was strict political expediency. It wasn't about Israel. No.

I mean, it was bizarre, to say the least. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines, protecting your freedoms, defending your rights, in courts, in Congress, and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work. Become a member today.

ACLJ.org. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. So just to kind of recap, so you can catch up to speed where we are right now, so we talked Taliban with Secretary Pompeo, and the move by the Taliban right now to, one, try and get international recognition, as they're continuing to do through the United Nations and other international institutions. I think we have to watch very closely some other major world players and how they might respond, especially China and Russia, who are already hosting these Taliban officials, and it seemed like they might be willing to go that path. I don't think it would be a big stretch for them to recognize the Taliban, but in a time when the Taliban tried to do that, they tried to rebrand, in some sense of the word, their leadership again today. And so I always want to make this distinction, this wasn't a news report that the Taliban is doing this to people. They came out and said, we are going to start doing this to people again.

Public executions, some of those soccer stadium executions, also amputations for other crimes, and a lot of times that's targeted towards minors, they cut off someone's hand if they're accused of being a thief or being accused of stealing. So this idea that they still might get recognition, we talked about the Iron Dome, and really just started scratching the surface there because the division inside the Democrat party was already clear this week, and then the fighting continued. But you've got the radical position of the Rashida Talibs of the world, who just come right out and declare that Israel is an apartheid government, a terror government, and they are totally supportive.

And that is why they've gotten the moniker of the Hamas Caucus, is because they are in lockstep with the propaganda that comes out of the terrorists who run the Gaza Strip. We barely talked about what's happened with Roe vs. Wade and the codification of Roe vs. Wade, we're getting into that more, and also our border patrol agents, who are literally trying to do their job while, as Secretary Pompeo said, you've got the party in charge is to defund the police party. And at the same time, they're on the border dealing with double and triple the amounts of people they've never seen before. One photo comes out of a way a horse is positioned, and everybody acts like we didn't know horses were used in law enforcement. I mean, these people are from the big cities, remember, that is actually where you see more of these horses used in law enforcement. It's not something new, if you've been in New York or major cities in the U.S., and they act like it's some backwoods-y thing. The truth is, if you live in the country, if you live even in the suburbs, it might be unlikely that you've got police on horse back there. But if you live in the city, you know, you know this is normal, because of crowd control. It's one way one person can become bigger than being one person. They've got height, they've got advantages, you've got the strength of the horse, and again, they don't like the way the picture was used.

No one was being whipped. They're under tremendous stress at the border. The fact is that worse things haven't happened I think is actually speaks so much to those people who are working on the border right now. But Joe Biden, when we come back from this break, it's the toughest, roughest Joe Biden that we've seen when it's attacking our own law enforcement.

It's not tough Joe when it's attacking, when it's the Afghan withdrawal, or even the terror attack that occurred there that killed 13 troops. No, it's when he can take this position, the holier than thou position, against our heavily strained and understaffed, as we know, border patrol and ICE agents in this specific area. We're banning all horses at the border. Well, they don't want to border anyways. So the fact that they're going to limit, take away more tools from our border patrol agents, it's not shocking. But the way that they come into it, the anger and defiance that Joe Biden brings to this. It's like this is the issue that wakes him up from his slumber is so he can attack other American law enforcement officials.

This is what gets them going and what gets them excited as a party. So we come back to the break, we'll get into that as well. 1-800-684-3110. If you want to talk to us on air, that's 1-800-684-3110. Let me encourage you to go to ACLJ.org. So much great content there and information.

We can't get to all of it on the show every day. It's at ACLJ.org. We'll be right back. The challenges facing Americans are substantial at a time when our values, our freedoms, our constitutional rights are under attack. It's more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines protecting your freedoms, defending your rights in courts, in Congress and in the public arena.

And we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line, we could not do our work without your support. We remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms. That remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side.

If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life-changing work. Become a member today, ACLJ.org.

Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, playing parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life.

Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. Welcome back to Secula. I want to take this call first and we're going to get into what's going on at the border. But to talk about in the Middle East first, Jonathan in Washington, a state online one.

Hey, Jonathan, welcome to Secula. You're on the air. Thank you.

Thank you for taking the call. Please forgive my lack of information. But nonetheless, here's my question. Due to the present administration's foreign policy, particularly with recent vote on the Iron Dome and with what we're doing or not doing in Afghanistan, what is this doing to other nations and their responses to us in the Middle East? To be more specific, is there any indication of what our foreign policy has done to Egypt or Saudi Arabia and how they think of us now? Has there been any response from them or is there any indication of what our foreign policy, our relationship is now with big people in the Middle East?

That's a good question. First of all, those countries that you mentioned, I think you could basically say it's for most of those countries other than Iran, are going to be very careful about what they say about the United States. So you're not going to see them criticizing publicly the administration. It's too important of a relationship, especially the Saudis, for the Egyptians as well. Remember the Abraham Accords?

I think what Jonathan speaks to is this kind of silence. We saw the vote on the Iron Dome, but we didn't see a strong statement of the White House. We don't really know where those peace accords stand because for those to be enacted, the U.S. had to continue to take more steps to encourage the relationship. And if those countries, I think right now they're trying to do it basically on their own.

They really are. And they are confused and they are baffled, not just by the rhetoric of the Biden administration, but by their actions as well. Very little has been said by the Biden administration about the progress that has made. More progress than has ever been made as far as bringing Israel and the Arab countries there closer and closer together. The Abraham Accords is almost as if they did not happen.

And because of the Abraham Accords and the work that was done previously, there was so much hope, not just in Israel, but among the Arab nations that actually peace was going to come. They're remaking the Middle East so that the enemy, the real enemy is recognized, and that is Iran and its proxy terror groups. But as far as actions go to the caller, one of the things that has concerned me the most over the last three weeks is that in the middle of all of this, it was the Biden administration who now is withdrawing the missile defense systems that we supply to Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has been attacked repeatedly by missiles provided by Iran to the Houthi rebels in Yemen. They've been firing on the civilian populations in Saudi Arabia. Our missile defense systems is what the Saudis use to defend themselves. And again, it's just like the Iron Dome. It's not an offensive weapon.

It's a defensive weapon. And two weeks ago, the Biden administration informed the Saudis they're taking those missile defense systems out. It is really insane, and it makes no sense politically, but I think it's undermining and causing a lot of consternation, not just on the part of Israel, but on the part of the Gulf states and all of our Arab allies, that we really have a close relationship prior to the Biden administration coming into office. And they retreat. I mean, the issue, Thanh, is that they will retreat. If they're not getting the kind of support from the United States, these countries can go the wrong way very quickly if they're not getting it. Because if they say that, hey, by taking these positive steps, whether it was the countries that did recognize Israel or the Saudis who made unbelievable steps for them in the sense that they opened up their airspace to civilian travel from the Israelis, which allows those flights to go back and forth from Israel to the UAE, it seemed like they were right on the line of establishing the public economic relationship with Israel, too. But it's not that these countries can't turn bad very quickly either.

Their leadership, I give them a lot of credit for what they've done, but these are not angels that we're dealing with. Yeah, they're new alliances, Jordan. I mean, those new relationships have to be cultivated. You have to continue to demonstrate to them that the alliance is worth having.

So I 100 percent agree with you that they could go the other way. And I would go even a step further, Jordan. I mean, along with the concern that Wes has and the one that you just raised, I have a tremendous concern about our more stable, long-term, trustworthy, seems like rock-solid allies. I mean, are they going to look at this and look at what we've done to Israel and say, well, if that's how the United States treats their allies, why do I want to be an ally with them?

I mean, Jordan, I think that's a real concern. Now, it may take a little bit further to get to that step, and I hope that we will write course before that. But you've got to ask the question. You have to demonstrate a reason for another nation to want to be your ally. And if this is how you treat your allies, I'm not sure that reason is going to be there.

Let me go. I want to switch gears now because I think this is very important. It's all about kind of the tone set by the administration. But we heard from President Biden yesterday and we heard this defiance, anger. Was it at the Taliban cutting off people's hands or public executions of women? No, it was at our border patrol agents, his own border patrol agents. He's the commander in chief, that they work and report to him through the executive branch.

Take a listen by six. You said on the campaign trail that you were going to restore the moral standing of the U.S., that you were going to immediately end Trump's assault on the dignity of immigrant communities. Given what we saw at the border this week, have you failed in that promise? And this is happening under your watch. Do you take responsibility for the chaos that's unfolding?

Of course I take responsibility. I'm President, but it was horrible what to see, as you saw. To see people treated like they did, horses running over people being strapped. It's outrageous. I promise you, those people will pay.

Pay? That's not a system of, Harry doesn't sound to be like a regular system of justice, courts, wrongdoing. It sounds like a thug.

And he's like an enemy. That's like how you would respond to Iranian action. Or terrorists. They will pay for what they did. Not your own border patrol.

I think you're precisely correct. So the border patrol is entitled to due process under the law, rather than a rush to judgment by a President who has demonstrated his incompetence on a wide scale. So he is prepared to impose immense consequences and punishment on the border patrol, while failing to hold anyone accountable for the debacle in Afghanistan, for the disastrous withdrawal, for the bombings that killed Americans, and for the mistaken drone attack which killed at least 10 civilians in Afghanistan.

Those are huge errors. No one has yet been held accountable. But Joe Biden, in a rush to judgment, and in a desire to basically placate his left wing base, is now rushing to judgment on border patrol agents who are doing what? They are defending the rule of law. They are defending the sovereignty of the United States. He could learn a lesson from the border patrol officers. He needs to defend the sovereignty of the United States, but he's unprepared to do so. Keep in mind that the border patrol was protecting the sovereignty of the United States from individuals who got on a bus, most of them in Brazil, and they took a chartered bus to the US border. They set up camp in the United States against our own law, and yet who is Joe Biden blaming? He is blaming the border patrol. He ought to look himself in the mirror occasionally, because that's where the blame belongs. He doubled down.

He doubled down on this attack, continued, fight seven. There will be an investigation underway now, and there will be consequences. There will be consequences. It's an embarrassment, but it's beyond an embarrassment. It's dangerous. It's wrong. It sends the wrong message around the world. It sends the wrong message at home.

It's simply not who we are. I guess Afghanistan, not embarrassing. The fact that we have allowed a humanitarian crisis at our border as the most powerful country in the world, and 70,000 Haitians now there in tent cities, that's not embarrassing. What's embarrassing is the way a photo turned out.

They didn't like the angle of the photo. Remember, first it was the guy had a whip. It wasn't a whip. It's the reins. Then it was, is he doing something with the reins?

He shouldn't be. These people are trying to break the law by trying to enter our country illegally. They're trying to stop them, and some of that involves conflict and involves hand-to-hand conflict. But the horses were not used to push into people.

They did not step on people. Part of the reason they used the reins the way they did was to keep the horse from trampling on the person, yet still use the horse to block people from crossing the border. The White House is using a single episode, which they misinterpreted, but they're using that episode to scapegoat law enforcement and the CBP in order to deflect criticism, as Harry said, from their abject failure on immigration and what's happening at the border. So he's piling on against his own officers. A federal judge, and the mistakes just continue, a federal judge last month ordered them to reinstate the Remain in Mexico policy. The Biden administration, rather than do that, which would help fix this, they're actually appealing that ruling.

He seems to think that he knows better than his own CBP, and he knows better than the federal judiciary, and he knows better than the states along the border, even though he refuses to visit the border. Alright folks, we come back. The Democrat move today to codify Roe vs. Wade.

They are trying to move this way. The vote passed. It passed the House of Representatives.

Let me tell you, the Senate, you get a little nervous when you look at the makeup, not just of the Democrats of the Senate, 50-50, but some of the Republicans as well. So we're going to talk about that with Than and kind of where that stands when we come back. Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice to defend the right to life. We created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe vs. Wade 40 years later, a play on parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life.

Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. The challenges facing Americans are substantial at a time when our values, our freedoms, our constitutional rights are under attack. It's more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines protecting your freedoms, defending your rights in courts, in Congress, and in the public arena. And we have an exceptional track record of success.

But here's the bottom line. We could not do our work without your support. We remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms.

That remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work.

Become a member today. ACLJ.org. We got through a lot of information today, but one thing I did not want to miss in the final segment of the broadcast of the week is what's happened in, so we just talked about the Iron Dome funding, but another piece of legislation that did pass the House of Representatives, in light of all the legal challenges. So you have the case out of Mississippi, scheduled for oral argument at the Supreme Court.

It sets on the merits. That is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade. We've talked about our work that we're doing in South Dakota and representing the governor of South Dakota and the state of South Dakota on a piece of legislation there on informed consent when it comes to abortion. And of course in Texas, where abortion is effectively a medical abortion, so not abortion by pill, but medical abortion has effectively been halted because of laws in place there, and the Supreme Court did not step in to issue an injunction there. Again, it hasn't gone to the merits, those cases, but again, the left now, sensing that, has made a push to put into law, which I think is an important reminder for everybody, abortion is not in the law in the United States.

It's not like Congress said, this is what's going to be legal until this point. It's judicially created so far, but Democrats in the House have now passed legislation to codify Roe v. Wade, but it goes even further than the Supreme Court ever has in what it would allow. Yeah, and actually that point that you're just making, Jordan, is one that I made just recently on ACLJ.org. Life is winning in the United States of America. The fact that this is a judicially created right has meant that the debate on abortion has been raging across the country and in various states, and there have been different laws passed in different states, different restrictions, and over the course of time, Jordan, the case for life has been winning as science and technology have shown us, literally, we can see it with our eyes more and more, the humanity that exists inside the womb, and because of that, more mothers than ever are choosing life when presented with that technology. Jordan, the abortion lobby in Washington, D.C., knows this.

They see this. They see their hold on the debate starting to slip, and so they're trying to call off the debate. That's what's happening here with this bill in the House of Representatives. They want to call it the Women's Health Protection Act, but really, Jordan, you're right. It's a codification of Roe v. Wade. It is a prohibition on any restriction, any limitation, or any regulatory control on abortion all the way to delivery.

So we talked about it in an earlier segment of the broadcast. This is not just about defense of the preborn life. It is certainly that, Jordan, but it's also about the defense of the life and the health of the mother. If a state says, look, we've had women who bleed to death after abortions, it's gruesome to talk about, Jordan, but it's true. Women die after abortions, and if a state is trying to act to protect that mother, to protect that woman, and says an abortion clinic has to have the ability to admit that woman to a hospital, Jordan, this piece of legislation that the House of Representatives passed this morning, it would prohibit the state from enacting that regulation in its state. It would call off the debate. It would recognize that life is winning and say, we're not going to allow you to debate it anymore. This, to me, again, the fact that they are moving this way, and they've got the votes to do in the House, I think, Stan, the second question is, in the Senate, I know that they don't have the votes yet, but I do get concerned about a handful of Republican senators who have been more favorable to Planned Parenthood and some of the other groups, not always taking an affirmative stance, but at least not taking a pro-life position. What does that kind of make up there right now?

Yeah, you're correct to ask that question, Jordan. I mean, you start with the 50-50 Senate. You've got two Republicans, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, who are sort of self-stated, pro-choice Republicans. But on this bill, interestingly enough, now, I want to see the vote actually be cast before I bank on this, but Susan Collins says that it goes too far. She has said that she will not support this bill if and when it is called up for a vote in the United States Senate.

Lisa Murkowski says she is still looking at it. Now, you do have two Democrats who, again, claim to be pro-life. Again, sometimes when the rubber meets the road, their votes aren't there.

That's Bob Casey from Pennsylvania and Joe Manchin from West Virginia. We don't have on the record avowed statements about how they will vote on this piece of legislation. But again, Jordan, we've talked about this a lot, but people have to remember, all of this dovetails into that debate about whether or not they would abandon the legislative filibuster. If they did, and it only took 50 votes, any two of those four senators deciding they would vote it could move it through the United States Senate.

I don't think that's going to happen, Jordan, but this is one of those that is just way too critical to assume. You have to continue to focus on both what would get it to the floor and then how those four senators would vote. Yeah, so don't just, you know, we're very focused on the legal battle, but also the legislative battle, because I think they're starting to sense that they might start losing these legal battles, so they've got to try and rush and try to change the law, which those are votes they didn't really want to take in the past either.

But of course, they're gung ho about it. I think that, you know, Wes, on this issue, I think that they've lost a lot of people. To take the radical position is not the position where most Americans are, and I think if they push a little bit further on this, and the courts back us up a little bit on our position too, uniquely the pro-life position may be the mainstream position of the United States, which it hasn't become yet. Yeah, and they are forcing the issue, and hopefully that might be the conclusion of all this.

So much of what the Democratic leadership are standing for in the House of Representatives, in particular and somewhat in the Senate, is a stand, you know, so often what they state seems unpatriotic and un-American, and it's often filled with misguided indignation, but this is a moral issue, and the Democratic leadership seems to be energized to abandon some of the moral values and the moral issues that really are part and parcel of who we are as Americans for the last 245 years, and this is just but one example of trying to go in and to codify something that is a moral issue that most Americans feel at some point it is an immoral thing to do. This is, to me, just kind of sum up today, I think that, listen, on the pro-life position we're going to keep moving forward and battling this out in the courts, and I'm proud to say that these states are willing to fight it out in courts with us, to take these radical, this radical agenda on, we just can't lose sight of what might be happening legislatively when, again, it's not all, two Republicans were talking about the Senate, which we have to watch very carefully, but, you know, these numbers, 50-50, it's past the House. I think that, again, this is the time period where we have to make sure that the gains that we're making in court, because it's all been judicially created, don't disappear overnight because of some action by Congress. We're going to watch that very closely. We're going to watch what's happening at the border.

We've got the FOIA on that. At any moment the courts should come down and start moving that forward, because it's, again, these policies that have led to the images that we see at the border are not the Trump policies. We talked about that with Secretary Pompeo earlier today. I want you to remember that, because it seems like this is where the administration is trying to double down and kind of regather some unity amongst the Democrat Party, is to go after their own border patrol, just like they would go after the police. Now it's the border patrol because of the way a photo from Al Jazeera, that's who was the reporter who took that photo, or the photo journalist sold it to, to Al Jazeera, and so out of context they're all ready to put our border patrol, who, by the way, I think are right on the edge of walking away from their jobs because of the lack of support they get from Washington, D.C., both policy-wise and financially. But remember, the policies that create the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan, that create the humanitarian crisis at our border, are the Biden policies. The American people get that.

Don't believe the political hype. We will talk to you on Monday here on Secular. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines protecting your freedoms, defending your rights, in courts, in Congress, and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work. Become a member today. ACLJ.org.