Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Why does Stu think Planned Parenthood should be shut down?

July 14, 2015
Staff

WRITER

There are many, many reasons to shut down Planned Parenthood. First and foremost would be they facilitate the murder of hundreds of thousands of unborn babies each year. They also were caught helping sex slaves figure out how to cheat on taxes. Selling body parts of aborted babies was another strike against.

TheBlaze reports:

A video, titled, “Planned Parenthood Uses Partial-Birth Abortions to Sell Baby Parts,” from the Center for Medical Progress, a group concerned with medical ethics, features comments from Dr. Deborah Nucatola, Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s senior director of medical services, allegedly showing her describing how some doctors carefully conduct abortions that leave fetal body parts in tact.

Get the full story HERE.

Watch the shocking video below, and scroll down for a transcript of the reaction from Tuesday's radio show.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it may contain errors:

PAT: Incredible story with Planned Parenthood. I mean, we know that's an evil organization to begin with, founded by an evil person, Margaret Sanger. Whose goal was to eliminate minorities, especially blacks. Look it up. If you don't know. It's a story. It's true. She was a progressive.

And she was not a good person. And Hillary Clinton is a big, big fan of Margaret Sanger.

STU: Uh-huh.

PAT: And we'll have to play this some other time. But I love what she said when she was asked about that. You know, despite the fact that Margaret Sanger had these genocidal tendencies, how are you such a big fan of her? And she said, well, I'm a fan of Thomas Jefferson too who owned slaves. That's not everything she did. Oh, okay. All right. Good comparison too. Good analogy.

STU: Cooked a good omelet too. He's kind of known for his other work.

PAT: Volkswagen. Good things.

STU: It's amazing. It's not just Hillary, she's a progressive hero. And, you know, it's a right of religious fervor basically at this point to -- if anyone tries to --

PAT: And why? Have you ever wondered why the abortion thing is so critical to them? Why removing babies from the womb is so important to them? There's money in it. There's just a ton of money in it. Planned Parenthood makes a lot of money with it.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: Democrats make a lot of money from Planned Parenthood. There's just money. Follow the trail of the cash. And I think you might have a clue as to what's going on.

STU: And how do you make money off of abortions? Obviously, number one. You're charging the person to do them. You've got -- all sorts of different funding that comes from not only charities, but governmental institutions.

PAT: Yeah, including federal funding now.

STU: Which they, of course, said would never happen. But beyond that, you get a nice collection of body parts of dead fetuses that you can sell.

PAT: Which is great news we're finding out now. I didn't even -- I mean, I wouldn't have even -- would you have thought to guess that that part was going on? That they were selling body parts of aborted fetuses.

STU: It certainly doesn't shock me. I'm not shocked by anything that these people will do. To see the video. The video is done -- excuse me -- Center for Medical Progress and live action news. It's one of these behind the scenes undercover videos. And you have to see the video. The way they're discussing selling these body parts, including, by the way, in the video, you can see an online order form to order a certain amount of livers. A certain amount of hearts.

And to see her discuss this while just nibbling away at a delicious salad at a restaurant, as if it's something you discuss in polite company is quite amazing.

PAT: So these would have to be pretty developed babies.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: To be harvesting organs to sell to people?

STU: I'll give you this quote. I don't think you have this in your audio. Because it's blatantly. She describes partial birth abortion which is illegal. Illegal. You can't do it. This is how she gets around that. She says the federal partial birth abortion plan is a law and laws are up to interpretation. So if I say on day one I do not intend to do this, what ultimately happens doesn't matter. Now, you say, okay, that's a person blatantly going around the law. I mean, she's admitting it on camera. This is not just some employee. Because we've seen it before, where it's some employee working at a center and she's doing something blatantly illegal.

The woman who is saying this is the Senior Director for Medical Services at Planned Parenthood. This is not some low-level person. This is the Senior Director for Medical Services. She is describing in-depth about how --

PAT: At the Planned Parenthood in Bemidji, Minnesota? Like, just the overall Planned Parenthood?

STU: Yeah, a top Planned Parenthood executive. Senior Director for Medical Services is not nobody. She's describing -- she goes into great depth through the videos. We'll go through audio in a second. About how when they kill the child, they crush the head and they'll crush other parts of the body. But they try to avoid the organs because they can sell those. And they go through all this -- all of this rigamarole to make sure that they don't harm those precious organs that could bring in 30 to $100 per specimen.

PAT: Thirty to $100. That's it?

STU: Uh-huh. They talk about cutting off legs and sending them to people. They talk about -- they talk about how much people really want liver. Apparently it's a hot item. Hot commodity on this market. By the way, selling body parts of fetuses is also blatantly illegal. In any rational country. Assuming this video checks out. Which it has been released today. So it's very early on. But no one is denying it's her saying these things. Assuming that this is true. This should shut down the entire organization.

PAT: It should. It won't.

STU: It is -- when you create an online order form. This is not a whimsical person saying, maybe we could sell a couple of these things. You have an online form for illegal activity. They shut down -- what was it -- Silk Road? They shut down these things that sell drugs on the internet. You're selling body parts on the internet. This entire organization should be shut down if this is accurate.

JEFFY: And I got news for you. When you start out the day saying, gee, I'm not going to do that, but you still mean to do it, uh, the police still arrest you.

STU: Yeah. You should know that, Jeffy, better than anybody.

But if you say, look, as long as we said we didn't mean to do a partial birth abortion, but then when it happens, we do one so we can keep the organs. Oopsy. That's the sort of thing that is difficult to prove, unless you have someone, I don't know, who is the Senior Director for Medical Services admitting it on camera.

PAT: Wow.

STU: Should we play some of these clips? It's pretty amazing.

PAT: Yeah.

VOICE: We'll give person specific nodes. An essay. I was like, wow. I didn't even know. Good for them. Yesterday was the first time she said people wanted lungs.

STU: There we go. So she says a lot of people want different parts for different nodes. Yesterday was the first time they asked us for lungs. Wanted some lungs. We sold them lungs.

PAT: Are these --

JEFFY: Who is buying?

PAT: Yeah, is this for implant?

STU: I think medical testing.

PAT: Because you can't take a liver from a baby that's unborn and implant it in a human being. Right? And keep them alive with it, I would think. So it's for testing. I guess research.

STU: Research and whatever else. Who knows. The reason she's telling people this is she believes they're buyers.

PAT: And Glenn asks this question all the time, who have we become? If we tolerate this, if we put up with this, if we don't stand against it, who are we?

JEFFY: We have people shutting down facilities because they have monkeys caged up to test.

PAT: Yeah. You're spraying hair spray in their eyes. Or you get shampoo in their face.

JEFFY: But this is okay? No.

PAT: Of an animal, of a monkey or a rat, and we're shutting down facilities. Yeah, but this is okay, with human beings. Unbelievable.

VOICE: Yeah, liver. Yeah, liver is huge.

VOICE: That's simple. I mean, that's easy. I don't know what they're doing with it. I guess they want muscle.

VOICE: Yeah, a dime a dozen.

PAT: So what essentially was said there. Could you tell?

STU: Yeah. It's livers. People -- livers are the hot thing on the market. And I think that's when he says they're dime a dozen. That's the buyer kind of just egging the whole thing -- at that point, he's just sort of echoing what she's saying. She's flippant. She has a bite of her salad on her fork. She's waving her hands back and forth.

PAT: So they're just at a restaurant, talking about this?

STU: That's all that room noise you hear. And why it's difficult to hear. They transcribe it on the video. I'll post this on StuFacebook.com. Go to my Facebook page. We'll post it in just a second. You have to watch this. This is eight or nine minutes the whole thing. You'll get the point before that. But just to get -- it's worth watching the whole nine minutes. This is a huge organization that Democrats support, that is in the public domain all the time for federal funding. And that are selling livers on the -- on the -- on online order forms. Blatantly against the law. Skirting abortion law. Admitting it on camera with top level executives. This should be the biggest story in the country. Obviously the Iran thing will be big today. But this should be the biggest story in the country. This is a huge deal. Will the media pick up on it at all?

PAT: Here's more.

VOICE: How much of a difference can it actually make if you know what's expected or what we need?

VOICE: It makes a huge difference. I would say a lot of people want liver.

STU: A lot of people want liver.

VOICE: And for that reason, less providers (inaudible).

STU: Okay. Stop for a second. So he's saying, like, what parts can I get? Essentially, the buyer. And she's responding, well, if I know what you want, we can take certain procedures, certain measures to make sure we protect it. So, you know, they will use the ultrasound that they don't want to make anyone have before they abort the child. They will utilize that to make sure they're crushing other parts of the body to kill the child so that they don't crush the liver so they can sell the liver. She's talking about it basically that flippantly, as you can hear. It's hard to pick up. But you can get her tone of voice as she's saying it.

PAT: And they don't want to do the ultrasound. Because 90 percent of women that see the ultrasound don't want to go through with the abortion because they understand what's inside them and it's not just their body at that point, and they know that.

STU: Right. Again, the whole argument of the abortion thing in the first place is that this is a meaningless clump of cells. But, apparently, that meaningless clump of cells has value on the open market, so therefore it's not so meaningless anymore.

PAT: Wow.

VOICE: Forceps. (inaudible) Of the procedures. Calvaria. Calvaria, the head is --

STU: She's talking about the head. She's talking about the calvaria, which is the head. And she's discussing about how they'll reverse the body to be born feet first so that they can get this procedure done, get the organs and still crush the head inside.

PAT: In a partial birth abortion.

STU: Which is blatantly illegal. Which she goes on to admit that she can't do unless she acts like she didn't mean to do it. Like if you go down the road and something goes wrong, you can still theoretically do this under the law, but with the intent in advance, you certainly can't. It's a federal crime.

VOICE: Yeah. Most of the other stuff can come out intact. It's very rare that they have that effect (inaudible).

VOICE: To bring the body cavity out intact and all that?

VOICE: Yeah. Exactly. Then you kind of (inaudible).

STU: So basically. You can't pick up any of that. It's too hard to hear. She's saying, you can get the rest of the body intact. It's worth hearing with the audio, so you know this stuff exists. We're not making this stuff up. She says, at one point, we've been good at getting the heart, lung, and liver because we know, well, we're not going to crush that part. I'm basically going to crush below. I'm going to crush above and see if I can get it all intact.

This is a human body. A live person she is talking about this way.

She goes on to, you know, talk about, you know, the procedures they go through. Specific procedures that they go through to avoid damaging these organs that they can sell. And they have screen shots of the online order form. This --

PAT: It's soul crushing.

STU: It's soul crushing. It's one thing to talk about a bad organization that could potentially hopefully get shut down or at the very at least have trouble because of this. What we're talking about is human people.

PAT: It will be interesting to see if this goes anywhere. It will be interesting to see if anyone talks about this today.

STU: Can there be anymore of an open-and-shut case? This is not one of those things where you're guessing at their intent. She's telling you.

PAT: No. And like you said, it's not some janitor at Planned Parenthood that they caught on an open mic. This is a top-level executive.

STU: Because some of the videos you've seen, oh, well, they're registering voters. Some person registering voters making $9 an hour tells you to break the law. That's one thing. This is one of the executive-level people at Planned Parenthood saying it's their procedure to intentionally avoid partial abortion law.

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.