Staff Reports
The latest spectacle from the Middle East features Ismail Haniyeh, the recently departed “political chief” of Hamas, being lauded by Iranian state media for his prior exploits against Israel. Just hours after an airstrike sent him off to the great jihad in the sky, Iranian outlets sang his praises, citing his significant role in driving Israeli forces to the “brink of extinction.” As if the celebration by Iran’s leadership of Haniyeh’s demise isn’t enough, one could ponder what the world could have achieved without the Iranian regime’s ongoing support of terror.
This hilarious dramatization unfolded after Haniyeh was seen cuddling up to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and somehow managing a private chit-chat with Ayatollah Khamenei just a day prior to his untimely encounter with a projectile. Hamas, a Sunni jihadist terror outfit funded predominantly by Iran, has carved out a neat little niche in the global terrorism business. Estimates suggest that Iran contributes a staggering $100 million annually to support their operations, which raises the question: Does the U.S. still consider Iran a partner in peace?
If that killer is a "martyr" then so was Hitler because the similarity is so obvious.
Iran Praises Genocidal Hamas Chief for Furthering ‘Extinction‘ of Israel, Vows Revenge https://t.co/AdyibYsprk via @BreitbartNews
— Jon Tarr (@JonTarr17) July 31, 2024
Following the strike that took out Haniyeh, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps did what any good terrorist organization would do: they confirmed the hit and blamed it all on “Zionists.” They conveniently overlooked the fact that Haniyeh had an approximate net worth of $4 billion, a fortune amassed while engaging in political antics. This didn’t stop Iranian officials from calling out the supposed injustice while waving the banner of victimhood as they usually do.
While the Israeli government remained tight-lipped about the airstrike, the leftist media in the U.S. was predictably quick to deny any American involvement. Not too surprising, considering the current administration’s knack for appeasement. After all, who wants to admit the obvious—that ridding the world of terrorist leaders is a good thing? Meanwhile, PressTV shinily described Haniyeh as a martyr, celebrating his impeccable record of terrorist operations and familial sacrifices in the name of jihad, conveniently neglecting to mention the trail of blood left behind.
Khamenei, undeterred by the notion of losing a prized minion, proclaimed that this event would set the stage for substantial retaliation. The irony in his call for revenge is as thick as a slice of Iranian propaganda, given that Hamas had just spent several weeks engaging in a savage attack that resulted in the deaths of 1,200 Israelis. The October 7 invasion of Israel—codenamed “Al-Aqsa Flood”—was reportedly a flashpoint in a terror campaign that could only be described as wholly barbaric. Khamenei’s claims of a “cowardly assassination” provide an entertaining juxtaposition to the unspeakable violence Hamas perpetrated.
As Haniyeh’s death raises a thumb war among Iranian leaders and their propaganda machine, the broader question remains: How long will Western nations ignore the clear and present danger posed by regimes that openly support terrorism? One can only hope there are some foreign policy strategists keeping score, as the humanitarian crisis escalates while whining about a perceived Israeli overreaction. The adventures of Hamas and its backers create a politically explosive cocktail that beckons for firm international accountability, whether it ever arrives or not.
