Glenn's emotional message to Israel: Forgive us, for we know not what we do

On Tuesday, the Federal Aviation Administration temporarily banned all U.S. airlines from flying to and from Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv, Israel. The ban followed reports a Hamas rocket infiltrated Israeli airspace and landed near the airport.

As TheBlaze reported, the FAA’s notice “was issued in response to a rocket strike which landed approximately 1 mile from Ben Gurion International Airport” Tuesday morning, the agency said in a statement. The ban will remain in place “for a period of up to 24 hours.”

The moratorium has come under fire from many who believe the FAA’s action signifies a “win” for Hamas. Former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg was one of the vocal detractors who went so far as to board a Tel Aviv-bound El Al flight Tuesday night to protest the FAA’s decision.

"This evening I will be flying on El Al to Tel Aviv to show solidarity with the Israeli people and to demonstrate that it is safe to fly in and out of Israel," Bloomberg said. "Ben Gurion is the best protected airport in the world and El Al flights have been regularly flying in and out of it safely. The flight restrictions are a mistake that hands Hamas an undeserved victory and should be lifted immediately. I strongly urge the FAA to reverse course and permit US airlines to fly to Israel."

On radio this morning, Glenn issued a harsh condemnation of the FAA and the Obama Administration for empowering Hamas via this decision. As he explained, the flight moratorium offers Hamas a rare victory in this two-week-old bloody conflict, while choking Israel. Glenn reiterated his personal support of Israel and its right to defend itself.

Below is an edited transcript of the monologue:

I want to talk about what the FAA and the Obama Administration did. They gave a win to Hamas. I want you to listen to this and understand. Without an investigation, there was a rocket landed a mile away from the airport in Tel Aviv. They didn't report that it landed on a house. How about we start with that one? You're always talking about how the rockets of Israel are landing on houses. How about the rocket from Hamas? It didn't land in an open field. It landed on a house. But it was a mile away from the airport. And, immediately, the federal government shuts down all American planes going to Tel Aviv and Israel and Ben Gurion airport.

I know this for a fact: If you stop the airlines from going to Tel Aviv, you're choking Israel to death. This was a 24-hour suspension without any kind of investigation at all. What they are doing is they are sending Israel a message. And let me just ask you: Do you believe that if American airliners feet it was unsafe to fly into Israel, they would make that call? Shouldn't the airlines be the one, without my pressure, to say, ‘I don't want to fly in there because I don't feel safe’? Wouldn't they do that? El Al is one of the safest airlines in the world and Ben Gurion Airport is one of the safest airports in the world. Israel is not like Boston.

That's not to say, God forbid, something couldn’t happen. But Israel knows, especially now, that if an airliner was about to be shot out of the sky, it would be horrible for their country as well as ours. You might say that's counterintuitive. ‘Glenn, that would make Hamas look bad.’ Really? Let's think this through.

Who would the media blame? Would the media blame Hamas or would the media blame Israel? I contend that already the media would have blamed Israel, but now that there's been an FAA moratorium, and the FAA is saying, ‘Hey, we're a little concerned about planes flying into Israel.’ What have they done? They have just set Israel up. So if, God forbid, something does happen, Israel would get the blame because the President and everybody else would say, ‘See, they should have known better.’ That's where it starts. Have you heard anyone talking about how Hamas should stop?

Instead, we're stopping people from flying, while we are lecturing the people who are trying to stop the people with the rockets. We are equating violence with violence. I heard the argument yesterday. I think it's great. As if somebody who is trying to stop a rapist, that their violence is equal to the violence of the rapist. No, no. That's not the way it works.

Could I ask you a question? Would JFK airport or Newark airport, if they were being bombed, would we have planes flying in there? ‘Yeah, Canadian Airlines, keep flying into Newark.’ Or would we say, ‘No, we know better?’ Would we have more compassion and say, ‘We don't want 300 dead people burning up like in Ukraine. Would we want that? Would we want our international flights from our biggest allies, especially knowing that even our biggest ally will put the blame on us and not the separatists? This is a direct attack on Israel by our country and by the FAA, and all in the name of safety.

America, answer a few questions: Do you think the FAA and the DHS know how to keep our airports safe? Do you think our airports are safer than they were on 9/11? I would be hard-pressed to find anyone to say yes. There are a lot of trappings. But do you really believe you are safer than you were on 9/11? Do you really believe this government – a government that didn't know that a country in revolution was being taken over by Muslim extremists in Libya would be unsafe for an ambassador to fly into and go to a lightly guarded non-embassy in the heart of terrorist town on the anniversary of 9/11? This government didn't see that one coming. You really believe they know what's happening in the air space halfway around the world of another country? Do you really believe that they're better to judge it than that other country?

If I hadn't seen the anti-Israel actions, the fruit of this government's labor in the last six years, I would say to you, ‘They've got to know something that we don't know, but I don't.’ But, especially seeing that this President continually says, and I quote, ‘I get the news only TV, just like you did,’ I can't give him credit he knows something that I don't know. Even if he does, his very intelligence organizations were the ones that said that whole attack on 9/11, by Muslim extremists, was a video. That had nothing to do with extremism. Why would we listen to those advisors?

So a message to Israel. Israel, hear me clearly: As an American citizen, I don't represent all Americans. I don't even come close to representing all Americans. I represent me. I'm sorry. I am really sorry. I am sorry to the Ukrainians as well. We have violated our oath to you to be your friends. We're not going to come over and fight your wars, but, Israel, you don't need anybody to fight your wars. You seem to do a mighty good job on your own.

Here's what I can offer: My prayers and my support. And I wish my country would support you, but don't think that our country is our government. It's not. Our country is set up unlike any other country in the world, even yours. Our country is ‘we, the people.’ And there's a good number of ‘we, the people,’ a lot of people that – Republican, Democrat, independent, left, right – support you. We support our right to exist. We support your right as a Jew to live unmolested. We support your right to live in a state.

Everybody is saying we need to have the UN try to come up with a solution. Everybody says we have to have the UN. What does the UN say? Well, why are all these people asking what the UN says? Because we have to have a global governance. We have to have a global community come together and agree on a solution. Well, the UN came up with a solution. You should be the most legitimate state ever created. Your borders should be the most legitimate of all time because all those people who say we have to go to UN should be reminded that it was the UN that created your borders in the first place. It was the UN and this beloved global body that put you in that space.

You're just trying to live by the rules the world and that global body set up. You have a right to defend yourself. And dare I say it, none of us would have put up with this as long as you have. If Canada had in its charter that their goal was to destroy the United States of America and kill every American, as Hamas has in her charter, that they want to wipe Israel and all the Jews off the face of the earth, this is a no-brainer. You can't sit at a negotiating table when your ‘whys’ are different. Why does Israel want peace? Because we just want to live as neighbors side-by-side and just get along so we can raise our children. Why does Hamas want peace? Well, because it furthers my goal to wipe them off the face of the earth and kill all the Jews. There is no peace there.

I know that Jon Stewart and everyone else can make a joke of that. That's what they do. We are here to talk about adults. If this were happening to us or any other country, we would have bombed that country into the Stone Age. Be it right or wrong, that's what most of us would have done. Maybe you have an Israeli exceptionalism, because your Israeli exceptionalism would come from the same source, the God of Abraham Isaac, and Jacob that teaches us to be good the one another. Our best way to serve God is to serve our fellow man. And maybe that's why our rage would have bombed Canada into the Stone Age, but I've never seen Israel act out in rage. Boy, you have had reason. But you don't. You understood, when you took the Temple Mount, that God does not want bloodshed. You understood the sacred nature of that land, and so when you could have taken the Temple Mount, you didn't because you know that bloodshed is not always the answer.

Hear me, Israel. Sometimes, unfortunately, bloodshed is the only option left to a peace-loving people. I feel for the Palestinian people. I have met Palestinian people. We have working for us Palestinians. There's a difference between those who have been rapped up in hatred. That's not Palestinian. I feel for the Palestinian people and their children. I believe you do too, but you know and the rest of the world refuses to face that they are being lied to by their clerics and politicians. Unfortunately, in many ways, we are too. It isn't hard to figure out who the bad guys are in this, when people are handing out sweets and candy and celebrating in the streets when there's a kidnapping of a soldier, a kidnapping of anybody. I would say the same thing about you. That's despicable. They did the same thing to us, but too many Americans have forgotten. They did exactly the same thing when our World Trade Center came down and all humans on the planet were sorrowful. All humans on the planet mourned with us and stood with us. They, the Palestinians, were handing out sweets and candy in the streets, exactly the way they are doing it to you now.

The Palestinians have to stop the insanity themselves. Until they do, you have to protect yourselves. We pray for a peace and we pray for the end of bloodshed as quickly as possible, but don't let us pull the rug from underneath you. Remain standing – even when your closest allies won't stand with you – unflinched in your hour of need. But know this: Many Americans and many all over the world still stand with you. And we will stand with you to the end.

While charity helped you build hospitals that take in friends and foe, our charity, Mercury One, has done the same. We have helped you build those hospitals, and, today, we are launching another initiative. We are going to help your military as well. We are sending supplies for your military – for you sons and daughters – who have been called into action and need flashlights, need blankets, need tents. Mercury One will deliver them. Quite honestly, I am thinking about delivering them myself this weekend.

While your sons and daughters are fighting, we refuse to stand by and let them be in need. While they are protecting the only land the Jews has ever owned and the only land ever to be created not only by the United Nations but by the only global authority I recognize – the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Israel, you are not alone. God speed. God bless. And forgive us, for we know not what we do.

Shocking Christian massacres unveiled

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?  

Should Starbase become its own city?  

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.