Why is government doing everything it can to destroy individual sovereignty?

If there is one thing that we have learned through the course of all of human history is sticking our big, fat nose in other people’s business always works.  And number two, best path to peace, strongly worded letter or like the UN or something like that or maybe a meaningful walk and chat on the beach, a.k.a. diplomacy.

That’s why the president was in San Francisco yesterday, the home of peace, to tout his diplomatic efforts in the Middle East.  Here he is:

VIDEO

President Obama:  We’re testing diplomacy.  We’re not resorting immediately to military conflict.

He looks almost like Patton there, doesn’t he, with the big flag?  We’re testing?  There’s no reason to test diplomacy.  The history of peace through diplomacy speaks for itself.  Adolf Hitler when he called off his plans for world domination after a pleasant phone conversation with Neville Chamberlain worked out really well, or the Iranian Revolution being averted when a sweet-talking Jimmy Carter formed an unlikely friendship with the Shah of Iran.

And of course we all saw the movie with William Wallace.  He gave a great speech about Scotland’s freedom on the battlefield, and that I think was what softened King Edward’s heart, and instead of a bloody battle, our history books celebrate the great piece picnics at Stirling Bridge and Falkirk that secured Scotland’s freedom, I think.

So don’t believe all of those peace through strength nut jobs.  It’s all about diplomacy.  The New York Times I read today, and I about had an aneurysm.  They’re very excited about the president’s new strategy.  They say in The New York Times, watch this, “It also reflects a broader scaling back of the use of American muscle…,” remember that, “…not least in the Middle East…,” remember that, “…as well as a willingness…,” you’re going to love this one, “…to deal with foreign governments as they are rather than push for new leaders the better embody American values.”

I wish any of that were true, any of that.  None of that is true.  A willingness to deal with other governments as they are?  We should ask some of those governments.  I tell you what, Tiffany, can you get Muammar Gaddafi on the phone?  Oh, crap, that’s right, Muammar Gaddafi, what was it Hillary said?

VIDEO

Hillary Clinton:  We saw, he died.

That’s right, can’t ask him, we killed him.  That’s right, I remember.  So maybe we’ll just go – Tiffany, get somebody from Assad’s regime on the phone in Syria.  Oh no, Assad, currently the president is trying to drum up support to go and bomb the snot out of him, and we’re giving aid and weapons to jihadis to overthrow him.

Well, maybe we could get Mubarak on the phone.  I mean, no, he’s on trial.  Well, maybe he has a phone in the jail, because after all, the Obama administration helped incite a violent revolution against him.  Boy, that sounds kind of more muscle-ish than scaling back to me, which is weird, because it also doesn’t sound like we get along with anybody either.

Let me make it really, really clear.  I think scaling back our military in the Middle East is probably a really good idea, not the worst one I’ve heard.  In fact, I would say that the whole progressive idea that started with Teddy Roosevelt to spread democracy around the world is one of the worst ideas ever.  I may have been sluggish enough to go, “Yeah, well everybody loves us,” 15 years ago.  Hello?  Have we not spent enough treasure and blood around the world?  Has the last decade not taught us anything?

We have to be a strong, non-isolationist, noninterventionist kind of country, strong.  Here’s what I mean by that: You come over, you fly some planes into our buildings, we bomb the bat snot out of you and go home.  We kill the bad guys who did it and go home.  What are we still doing in Afghanistan?  I believe, I for one, maybe not you, it is well past time to announce that this progressive idea, be it from John McCain or George Bush, Bill Clinton or Barack Obama, that we need to nation build and be the world’s policeman is dead and possibly the worst idea America has ever had.

But let me take you back to sugarplum fairy pop land of The New York Times.  They go from the front page into this.  Let me take you to Saudi Arabia, because for a guy, a president who’s hooked on diplomacy, doesn’t it seem like our president is converting all of our friends into enemies?  Not that I was ever a big fan of George W. Bush taking the long strolls at his Crawford ranch holding hands with the Saudi princes.  Boy, I don’t miss those days.  That was creepy.

But you also have to be a realist, and before you start cutting off your friends and making them enemies, you might want to look at your own situation here.  For instance, energy prices are up 42 percent in a decade.  Okay, well maybe we should start exploring for our own, because getting into bed with these guys isn’t good.  And now that it’s up 42 percent, it doesn’t seem wise to really disconnect from the cheapest source of oil in the world, unless you have something to replace it with.  It’s also our second highest source of foreign oil.

So does this make sense to you?  It doesn’t me, but it does to The New York Times, because here’s their rationale, and I love it:  “At the same time, new sources of oil have made the Saudis less essential.”  Same time, new sources of oil made the Saudis…what new sources of oil?  I mean, serious question, anybody on the set, anybody know of a new source of oil that we’ve had?

It’s not Canada.  Keystone pipeline went up.  President blocked that one.  More drilling permits in the gulf?  No, huh uh.  Alaska?  No, huh uh.  Where is this magical fount of oil that has sprouted up?  Have little oil rigs just started to grow in the west lawn in place of the first lady’s veggie garden?  I’m not really sure.

America, I want us to break up with the Saudis.  I want Israel to take care of itself.  I want to be out of the business of everybody else.  But not standing with the only person that understands capitalism in the entire region while pissing off the Saudis really doesn’t seem like good news, you know?  Breaking up with Israel, not so much.  Our overseas policies matter, especially when your policies here don’t match.

You want to break up with the rest of the world, fine, but you have to be self-sufficient.  We’re cutting ourselves off from energy suppliers while at the same time diminishing our own access to affordable allergy.  Hello?  Hello?  Hello?  Oh yeah, but we’re going to go green.  Stop with the green nonsense.  Maybe someday, not today.  Another green company that the president invested your money in just went bankrupt, cost you $139 million.  Why are we doing this?  If green energy is so needed, the free market will figure it out.

Okay, so we have no money left.  We’re really whittling down our friends.  We have no oil.  We have no sufficient source of energy to fill in the gap because we’re closing the coal plants.  We won’t drill for oil, and we won’t build a pipeline.  That sounds like energy shortage.  When that comes, oh, and it will, remember this day.

And so what does that mean for you?  Well, when you are not self-sufficient, you are a slave to whomever holds the bag of food or the bag of black gold.  Our sovereignty as a nation will be put aside in order to survive.  Why do you think we take the lead painted toys from China, and we don’t say anything?  Because our hands are tied.  We need their money.

But here’s the good news, national sovereignty begins with personal sovereignty.  This is the secret of America, the more independent you are, the stronger the nation becomes.  If we as people can self-sustain during an energy shortage, a cash shortage, a food shortage, a health care shortage, then you really can tell people like China and Saudi Arabia to go take their oil and shove it.

But that’s another policy that doesn’t matter because this administration is not encouraging people to be self-sufficient.  We are not helping people go into business.  We don’t advise people to store food, save money, protect yourself, get a gun.  No, those people get mocked.  Instead, Progressives have been campaigning to take all of those responsibilities away from you.

Now wait a minute, if our national sovereignty begins with personal sovereignty, I think you just figure something out.  The secret lies with each individual.  I don’t know what your idea is.  It might stink, but it might be the one that saves us.  I don’t know what your solution is.  I don’t even know the problem you’re working on trying to solve, but you’ll figure it out.

Governments make it worse.  I contend that our government knows where the real source of power comes from.  I mean, how do you miss it?  It’s in big huge block letters in our founding documents, “We the people.”  That’s where the power comes from, the individual American, and that’s why they’re doing everything they can to hobble you.  Look at the attacks on individual sovereignty in our nation.

Last night, we told you about how hospitals are taking custody of your children because the doctors say they know better than you.  So you lose your child, and they can just do that and then issue a gag order so you can’t say anything?  Los Angeles is now considering a ban on feeding the homeless.  Let’s figure this one out.  This is great, from the land of equality.

Listen to this: “If you give out free food on the street with no other services to deal with the collateral damage, you get hundreds of people beginning to squat…,” I love this.  Remember, this is California.  They’re the bighearted people.  “…They’re living in my bushes, and they’re living in my next door neighbor’s crawlspaces.  We have a neighborhood which now seems like a mental ward.”  I just don’t want these people around me.  Well, I’m blown away by your compassion.

This is bogus compassion.  It always is.  Government compassion and progressive compassion is bogus.  The argument sure sounds familiar.  It’s a familiar argument, don’t feed the animals.  Ooh, are animals in cages?  Well, people are animals too, you know?  How about school choice, are we moving towards freedom with the government?  As that thing is collapsing, are they encouraging you?  No, in fact, just the opposite.

They’ve got Common Core, and then off to the side, a really important story that nobody’s paying attention to is the president, his silence on the German family who we’ve had on this program who were granted access to the United States and then denied asylum after they fled Germany because they weren’t allowed to teach their kids in their own home.

Here is an update on that story.  The Supreme Court now has ordered today the administration to respond to the family’s appeal, but I can guarantee you what they’re going to say.  They’re going to say no, send them back.  We’ll give asylum to anyone but not these people.  Why?  Because then the government will be on record saying you have an inherent God-given right to raise your children and teach them the way you see fit.  Government can’t have that.

You now have to purchase a product in order to be considered law-abiding.  Catholic and other religious health care institutions are forced to violate their own beliefs and provide birth control and abortions.  An update on this one too, Supreme Court’s going to take another look at that issue.

From the level that you set your thermostat at to the gas mileage on your cars to the fat content in foods, not being allowed to fish in order to eat unless you have a permit, individual sovereignty is all but dead.  And people are becoming more dependent, and many people like it that way.  We are going the way of Greece, and I have to tell you, we did, and you can find it if you’re a member of TheBlaze.  You can go find it and watch this episode.  I think it was like 40 minutes.  It was six hours on the ground in Greece.

I flew out in the middle of the night, and I just talked to the cab drivers, and I talked to the people on the street.  I watched what was happening.  Things in Greece are getting so bad now that they’re actually inflicting themselves with HIV in order to receive government benefits.  Here’s what it was like about 24 months ago in Greece.

VIDEO

Glenn:  And what does this say?

Male:  It says that we don’t have to live like slaves.  Communism is the revolutionary movement of the ongoing period.  Revolution now.  Let’s produce life and not those things that strangle life.  Let’s not produce those things that strangle life.

Glenn:  Communism is the answer?

Male:  Yes.  It’s the revolutionary movement of the ongoing period.

Glenn:  And the people that are on the street are not drunk.  They’re high, bad heroin highs that we’re seeing on the streets.

Look, it’s a disease in the West, and it kills the human spirit, being a slave to someone else, waiting for the handout, waiting for the government.  It reduces you to a compliant robot unable to think or choose for yourself.  If you have not read this, I just reread this a couple weeks ago.  It’s Anthem by Ayn Rand.  You know, she asked Walt Disney to make this into a movie, and I want to make this into one.

She wanted it to be made into a cartoon, and I want to make it into a cartoon because it’s right.  It’s right.  This is the collective takes over.  You become a robot.  You forget about yourself entirely.  This is why they want to regulate your guns, because they can’t have you stand up.  They can’t.

You know, we put out a book this week, this book.  I don’t care if you go to the bookstore and read this one chapter on Athens, Georgia.  In fact, let me find which chapter it is.  I’m sorry, Athens, Tennessee, I keep saying that.  Battle of Athens is chapter 10, and the Battle of Athens, tomorrow…I’ve sent everybody home from the studios.  So many people are traveling that I’m just going to come in and do the show myself tomorrow.  And I might read this chapter to you.

And I’ve got some things I want to share with you tomorrow on the radio.  It will be a very different radio show.  But the Battle of Athens is happening again.  What happened in Tennessee is happening all over our country, and this gives you the antidote.  It shows you when you rise up and say enough, enough, you do everything right, everything, but they have to make you dependent.

See, the people that tried to take over Athens, Tennessee, the fascists there, they were criminals.  They made everybody dependent, but they forgot one thing, soldiers were returning home from war.  You can’t be dependent on anything or anyone.  To the best of your ability, if you’re not independent now, you’ve got to strive for it.  If you have it, empower someone else so they can achieve it.

This is the era that the American revolutionaries dreamt of.  I’m convinced of it.  They weren’t pining for 1776.  They envisioned a day when man could live a self-reliant life free from all tyranny.  This is it.  The Internet gives us that.  With technology, you don’t have to be chained to your own town.  You don’t have to be chained to somebody else to be a buyer or a distributor.  You don’t even have to go to work and be stuck at one location or a desk or bound by a schedule.

The sky is the limit now for the first time in human history, unless we allow others to put us in a box and close the lid.  There is one uniting principle, and I think George Washington and Thomas Paine shared it.  Now, those who are atheists will say that George Washington was a deist.  I don’t believe that.  I’ve read too much of his words and his letters.

And Christians will say that Thomas Paine wasn’t really an atheist.  They’re wrong.  I’ve read too much of his stuff.  The guy was an early precursor to a Marxist.  But they came together.  If it wasn’t for the two of them, revolution wouldn’t have happened.  They came and found something in common, sovereignty for the individual, maximum personal responsibility, maximum liberty.  When you strip everything else down, I think that’s where most people are, I hope, at least 30% of this country.

And so when you find the religious people that will not oppress and force conformity, will not say my way or the highway or not just playing some game because they believe in the church ruling everybody’s life, and when you find Libertarians who are not anarchists who believe in some government just to be able to protect and defend property and won’t oppress and say none of that religion stuff, when you can get together where common sense and freedom live, where people believe in maximum freedom and maximum personal responsibility, games over.  It’s over.

When you can get to a point where a guy like me, really very religious, and a guy like Penn Jillette, really not religious, can live in the same space, we could be neighbors, and we could be happy neighbors, how do you beat that?  How could Penn Jillette be somebody who hates all people with religion and has a secret plan to put everybody in religion out of business, when I’m one of his good friends?  How could I be a fascist when my good friend is a self-described narco-capitalist?  Something doesn’t compute.

That’s the box that everybody wants to put you in.  Don’t.  Break those molds.  When religious people and nonreligious people can get along, when Ayn Rand and small government Christians can get along, we find the balance, and we understand that the secret is self-regulation.  When we can work together with people we disagree with on some pretty big principles but still have enough points in common to tether ourselves to those principles, and those principles free mankind, it is game over.

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

  Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

  

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

   USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

   Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

 

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.