Creator of Trump vs. CNN Meme Offers Apology We All Need to Hear

Welcome to the new normal, another day, another Presidential tweet story. A Redditor who created the video clip of Trump going WWF on a guy with CNN logo superimposed on his face was tracked down by CNN and he's now offering an apology. The mea culpa doesn't fit with the typical media narrative but there is a message he shares that is important for everyone to hear.

Trolling is addictive and what you say actually means something even when you mean nothing.

"Now listen to what the guy said who made the original and was accused of this and did some really bad things. Look what he said: 'Your self-worth does not come from this. It's addictive. Think of the other people on the receiving end, before you say really horrible things that you know you don't mean. Because it's real,'" Glenn said on radio Wednesday.

For good or evil, there is a powerful message for our society.

"Your voice is more powerful than you ever could imagine. And man's individual voice is more powerful than it's ever been since the creation of the earth and Adam first woke up," Glenn said.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: All right. So CNN finds the guy who made that video of Trump in the WWF fight from years ago. And -- and -- and they ask him, okay. So what's up, dude?

Because he posted, wow, can't believe the president retweeted this.

Well, you go to his Reddit file, and you see that he has done horrible, horrible things. Really anti-Semitic. Really bad.

And this is the part of the story that doesn't make sense to me. Because the usual way for the mainstream media to handle this is you see a guy who is posting anti-Semitic stuff. You do nothing. You just assume he's a conservative. And you go for him. And it doesn't matter what the truth is. And, I mean, I don't know how you can post anti-Semitic stuff and the truth be good, but you just never give him a break in the mainstream media ever.

They -- they do everything they can to connect decent, innocent people to those kinds of thoughts, when they don't exist.

Here's a guy where it does exist. He apologizes. And they're like, okay. Well, we accept his apology.

I don't understand that. Because the way I look at the media, they are only in for the president's blood, at every step of the way. And so it doesn't -- something is not right on this story. Or something has changed that I find hard to believe. But maybe.

So what do we get out of this? Well, I want you to read what he posted yesterday. I think this is something that we should all read to our kids at dinner tonight. I'll share it, when we come back.

(OUT AT 9:31AM)

GLENN: I just can't get over the feeling that something is not right with this -- with this story, this HanAholeSolo story from Reddit.

STU: The internet makes every story interesting because you have to read their stupid screen names.

GLENN: I know. I know.

This -- this guy was up on Reddit and filed all kinds of anti-Semitic stuff. And then he's the guy who apparently did a version of the -- the tweet the president sent out. And it's the one where the president is -- it's old footage of Donald Trump at a wrestling match, and he throws a guy down on the ground and just beats the snot out of him. It's a wrestling thing.

And -- and this guy superimposed the CNN logo over the face of the guy the president is beating.

Well, he gets up -- he sees the president has tweeted it. And he thinks it's his. And he's like, oh, my gosh, that's great. And he's happy.

But then when the media gets a hold of it and says, look at the violence, the guy isn't happy. He's like, you know what, that's not mine. That was somebody else's. Somebody else took my original tweet and then added sound effects and music behind it or audio.

STU: Initially, he was happy.

GLENN: Yeah, initially he was happy.

STU: Then he turned around.

GLENN: Then he turned around. Yes.

STU: It's important.

GLENN: Now, this is the part that I think we can actually use to help our own children. But some of this is really interesting.

First of all -- this is his apology now: First of all, I'd like to apologize to the members of the Reddit community for getting this site and this sub embroiled in a controversy that should never have happened. I would also like to apologize for the posts made that were racist, bigoted, and anti-Semitic. I am in no way that person. I love and accept people of all walks of life, and I've done so for my entire life.

Huh. Okay.

I am not the person that the media portrays me to be in real life. I was trolling and posting things to get a reaction from the subs on Reddit and never meant any of the hateful things I said in these posts. I would never support any kind of violence or actions against others, simply for what they believe in, their religion, or their lifestyle they choose to have, nor would I carry out any violence against anyone based upon that or support anybody who did.

Do you believe that?

STU: You know, it's -- it's weird coming from someone who would post that kind of trash on the internet. But, I mean, it reads I think in an authentic way, does it not?

JEFFY: Yeah.

STU: You know, someone who --

GLENN: I think there's a lot of people -- I think there's a lot of people -- I know I have responded kindly to people who are just trolls. And not so much anymore. But there were times when they would be like, "Oh, man, I was just kidding."

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And it was really -- people do try just to get a reaction.

STU: Totally, and I think it's a way for people to feel alive. And it says a hell of a lot about our society.

GLENN: It says a lot.

The meme was created purely as satire, he continues to write. It was not meant to be a call to violence against CNN or any other news affiliation. I had no idea anyone would take it and put sound to it and then put it up on the president's Twitter feed.

That's the question. Who did that?

It was a prank, nothing more. What the president's feed showed was not the original post posted here, but loaded up somewhere else and sounded added to it and then sent out to Twitter.

I think this is why they're accepting the apology. They're giving him credit to bring this to closer to the president.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Because who did that? Did the president have somebody do that?

I think this is why this is being accepted. Because it makes no sense to me. Something's wrong. Something's wrong.

And only because -- and I want to take people at face value. But you need more than one time of letting somebody go of something like this.

JEFFY: Well, there has to be a first time.

GLENN: There does. There does. There does.

It was a prank, nothing more. I thought it was the original post that was made, and that's why I took credit for it. I have the highest respect for the journalistic community. And they put their lives on the line every day with jobs that they do, reporting the news.

Okay.

PAT: They do?

STU: In war zones.

PAT: I mean, war correspondence maybe. But that's a pretty small percentage.

STU: Yes. An exaggeration of the --

PAT: Yes. Yes. They're not the military.

GLENN: To people that troll -- now, this is the part -- this is the part that I think is important to read to your family, to sit down and talk about, was this right -- play the video. Was this right? Was this right of the president to post it? Was it right for somebody who made it? Was the media's reaction right?

PAT: No.

GLENN: And just -- just talk to -- just talk to your kids about the difference between right and wrong. Because our kids look at the internet as a game.

To people who troll on the internet for fun, he writes, consider your words and the actions conveyed in your message and who it might upset or anger. Put yourself in their shoes before you post it.

I mean, I remember saying things, doing things, and then, you know, a friend of the family or somebody else would say, "Hey -- that I didn't know what was standing there -- what would your mother say about that?" And you would immediately freeze and go, "Yes, sir." That's as bad as it got for us, was just saying it to four or five of our stupid friends and getting caught.

It's totally different now. What this guy said got somehow or another to the president of the United States.

Put yourself in their shoes before you post it. If you have a problem with trolling it -- if you have a problem with trolling, it is an addiction just like any other addiction someone can have to something. And don't be embarrassed to ask for help.

That's powerful to say to your kids. And that goes to all of the studies that we're reading about now, that talk about the hits that you get in your head every time somebody likes what you've said.

STU: Studies and South Park episodes. Both -- both scientific genres are speaking about --

GLENN: Yes. I believe the South Park episode actually more.

Trolling is nothing more than bullying a wide audience. Don't feed your own self-worth based upon inflicting suffering upon others online, just because you're behind a keyboard.

I think that's a tremendous story.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: It's a good apology. I -- I just -- I can't help, but think that this has been blown way out of proportion. I mean, you know, it's Trump doing a wrestling move on somebody with CNN on their face. It wasn't really CNN.

STU: What? No, it said it right on his face.

PAT: He didn't really do this. Nothing happened in real life. It's just a dumb little, what? Five-second video?

STU: Yes.

PAT: It's just -- it's so out of proportion. We've just lost all connection with proportion now.

GLENN: No, because we've lost all connection with decorum. We've -- I mean, guys if Barack Obama would have done that with a teabag over a guy's head, we would have gone crazy, and the media would have said nothing. We would have gone crazy. We would have. We would have.

PAT: Hmm.

GLENN: Yes, we would have.

STU: Yeah. Probably.

GLENN: If Barack Obama would have tweeted out something like that, and he had like a 9/12 Project and a Tea Party --

STU: I can -- I can imagine.

GLENN: Can you imagine? We would have gone crazy. We went crazy when he said, you know, and the car is in the ditch. And a bunch of Teabaggers, we're not going to let them drive. You'll put us in the ditch.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: A more exact example would be Fox News. Would we have gone crazy if it was Fox?

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

PAT: Maybe.

GLENN: Yes. Yes, we would have.

PAT: He trashed Fox all the time.

STU: And we went crazy. And we went crazy.

PAT: And it was him. Literally him, not just the president retweeting him. It was him saying Fox was --

GLENN: I know. I know.

PAT: So...

GLENN: But we had a problem with it.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: Yeah. That's --

GLENN: We had a real problem with it. And so it's not that this is a big deal. It's -- honestly, yesterday -- I should share this. I wrote something on Facebook, and it started with this premise, that the older I get, the less I hate things. You know, when you're a kid, you hate stuff. And your mom is always like, oh, no. You don't hate. You hate the actions that -- no, I hate the person, Mom. I hate them.

No, you hate their actions and the things that they do.

The older I get, the less I hate. The more I realize that things really, really matter, or they don't matter at all.

And the reason why this was going through my head yesterday was this tweet doesn't matter at all. It doesn't matter at all.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: We're reading into it what we want to read into it. And we are reading into -- or, we are looking at a presidency that this -- this happens -- Bush was the last real president that tried to represent both sides. He tried to represent both sides.

He never was, well, tell them to go to hell. He did say that about -- you're either with us or against us, it came to conquering al-Qaeda and evil. But I'm okay with that one, but some people weren't. But he never went out -- I mean, he met with Cindy Sheehan and everything else. The president did not reach out to the right.

PAT: He didn't meet with her eight times. So...

GLENN: Right. So he never -- President Obama never reached out to the Tea Party heads, tried to really talk to the people.

PAT: Nope. No.

GLENN: Instead, you know, the IRS and Teabaggers and all this stuff. And this president has just upped that game. So we're just seeing -- we're just seeing an evolution of the presidency that I don't like. I didn't like it in the last one. I don't like it in this one. Some people don't mind it in this one because of what happened in the last one. Some people are minding it in this one because they didn't see it happening in the last one.

We saw it in both. I don't like it in either. I think that's a good place to be.

But it doesn't matter. What matters are the little things.

You know, when I -- when I wrote that yesterday, I don't hate, there are just things that matter and don't. And it's funny because a lot of the stuff that the media focuses on, really, it doesn't matter to me. The things that matter are the things I used to hate when I was a kid. Sitting down at the dinner table and having dinner every night. I was always like, I got to go. I got to go. I got another thing. I got practice. I have this. I have that. I've got to go.

I hated sitting down at dinner. I I had a --

PAT: What kind of practice did you have? Like violin? What sort of practice did you have to get to?

JEFFY: I had the same question.

STU: Pinochle. Pinochle. Was it -- what kind of --

GLENN: Theater and choir. Yes.

PAT: Theater. All right.

GLENN: There are other kinds of practices, you know.

JEFFY: Well, that's why we were asking.

STU: He was just trying to clarify.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: So, anyway, had to go do stuff. Now, that's one of the most important things ever. It's just -- and I don't hate practice. I don't hate other things that you have to do. I just really love this. I just really love this. And I found meaning in the small things.

Which brings me to how I read this about Donald Trump and about CNN, you know, holding this guy hostage or whatever the hell is going on.

I don't care. That story, they can have it. They -- go further that story all you want. Here's what really needs to -- you need to know: The last paragraph of this three-paragraph apology, is one we should all be sitting down with our kids tonight and saying, here's news. I don't know what that means.

I mean, does any of this make you feel like it's right?

Now listen to what the guy said who made the original and was accused of this and did some really bad things. Look what he said.

Your self-worth does not come from this. It's addictive. Think of the other people on the receiving end, before you say really horrible things that you know you don't mean. Because it's real. Your voice -- just think of this lesson.

His voice, unbeknownst to him, made it to the president's desk. Don't tell me that you can't be heard in today's society.

Your voice is more powerful than you ever could imagine. And man's individual voice is more powerful than it's ever been since the creation of the earth and Adam first woke up.

Faith, family, and freedom—The forgotten core of conservatism

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

Conservatism is not about rage or nostalgia. It’s about moral clarity, national renewal, and guarding the principles that built America’s freedom.

Our movement is at a crossroads, and the question before us is simple: What does it mean to be a conservative in America today?

For years, we have been told what we are against — against the left, against wokeism, against decline. But opposition alone does not define a movement, and it certainly does not define a moral vision.

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

The media, as usual, are eager to supply their own answer. The New York Times recently suggested that Nick Fuentes represents the “future” of conservatism. That’s nonsense — a distortion of both truth and tradition. Fuentes and those like him do not represent American conservatism. They represent its counterfeit.

Real conservatism is not rage. It is reverence. It does not treat the past as a museum, but as a teacher. America’s founders asked us to preserve their principles and improve upon their practice. That means understanding what we are conserving — a living covenant, not a relic.

Conservatism as stewardship

In 2025, conservatism means stewardship — of a nation, a culture, and a moral inheritance too precious to abandon. To conserve is not to freeze history. It is to stand guard over what is essential. We are custodians of an experiment in liberty that rests on the belief that rights come not from kings or Congress, but from the Creator.

That belief built this country. It will be what saves it. The Constitution is a covenant between generations. Conservatism is the duty to keep that covenant alive — to preserve what works, correct what fails, and pass on both wisdom and freedom to those who come next.

Economics, culture, and morality are inseparable. Debt is not only fiscal; it is moral. Spending what belongs to the unborn is theft. Dependence is not compassion; it is weakness parading as virtue. A society that trades responsibility for comfort teaches citizens how to live as slaves.

Freedom without virtue is not freedom; it is chaos. A culture that mocks faith cannot defend liberty, and a nation that rejects truth cannot sustain justice. Conservatism must again become the moral compass of a disoriented people, reminding America that liberty survives only when anchored to virtue.

Rebuilding what is broken

We cannot define ourselves by what we oppose. We must build families, communities, and institutions that endure. Government is broken because education is broken, and education is broken because we abandoned the formation of the mind and the soul. The work ahead is competence, not cynicism.

Conservatives should embrace innovation and technology while rejecting the chaos of Silicon Valley. Progress must not come at the expense of principle. Technology must strengthen people, not replace them. Artificial intelligence should remain a servant, never a master. The true strength of a nation is not measured by data or bureaucracy, but by the quiet webs of family, faith, and service that hold communities together. When Washington falters — and it will — those neighborhoods must stand.

Eric Lee / Stringer | Getty Images

This is the real work of conservatism: to conserve what is good and true and to reform what has decayed. It is not about slogans; it is about stewardship — the patient labor of building a civilization that remembers what it stands for.

A creed for the rising generation

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

For the rising generation, conservatism cannot be nostalgia. It must be more than a memory of 9/11 or admiration for a Reagan era they never lived through. Many young Americans did not experience those moments — and they should not have to in order to grasp the lessons they taught and the truths they embodied. The next chapter is not about preserving relics but renewing purpose. It must speak to conviction, not cynicism; to moral clarity, not despair.

Young people are searching for meaning in a culture that mocks truth and empties life of purpose. Conservatism should be the moral compass that reminds them freedom is responsibility and that faith, family, and moral courage remain the surest rebellions against hopelessness.

To be a conservative in 2025 is to defend the enduring principles of American liberty while stewarding the culture, the economy, and the spirit of a free people. It is to stand for truth when truth is unfashionable and to guard moral order when the world celebrates chaos.

We are not merely holding the torch. We are relighting it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck: Here's what's WRONG with conservatism today

Getty Images / Handout | Getty Images

What does it mean to be a conservative in 2025? Glenn offers guidance on what conservatives need to do to ensure the conservative movement doesn't fade into oblivion. We have to get back to PRINCIPLES, not policies.

To be a conservative in 2025 means to STAND

  • for Stewardship, protecting the wisdom of our Founders;
  • for Truth, defending objective reality in an age of illusion;
  • for Accountability, living within our means as individuals and as a nation;
  • for Neighborhood, rebuilding family, faith, and local community;
  • and for Duty, carrying freedom forward to the next generation.

A conservative doesn’t cling to the past — he stands guard over the principles that make the future possible.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm so tired of being against everything. Saying what we're not.

It's time that we start saying what we are. And it's hard, because we're changing. It's different to be a conservative, today, than it was, you know, years ago.

And part of that is just coming from hard knocks. School of hard knocks. We've learned a lot of lessons on things we thought we were for. No, no, no.

But conservatives. To be a conservative, it shouldn't be about policies. It's really about principles. And that's why we've lost our way. Because we've lost our principles. And it's easy. Because the world got easy. And now the world is changing so rapidly. The boundaries between truth and illusion are blurred second by second. Machines now think. Currencies falter. Families fractured. And nations, all over the world, have forgotten who they are.

So what does it mean to be a conservative now, in 2025, '26. For a lot of people, it means opposing the left. That's -- that's a reaction. That's not renewal.

That's a reaction. It can't mean also worshiping the past, as if the past were perfect. The founders never asked for that.

They asked that we would preserve the principles and perfect their practice. They knew it was imperfect. To make a more perfect nation.

Is what we're supposed to be doing.

2025, '26 being a conservative has to mean stewardship.

The stewardship of a nation, of a civilization.

Of a moral inheritance. That is too precious to abandon.

What does it mean to conserve? To conserve something doesn't mean to stand still.

It means to stand guard. It means to defend what the Founders designed. The separation of powers. The rule of law.

The belief that our rights come not from kings or from Congress, but from the creator himself.
This is a system that was not built for ease. It was built for endurance, and it will endure if we only teach it again!

The problem is, we only teach it like it's a museum piece. You know, it's not a museum piece. It's not an old dusty document. It's a living covenant between the dead, the living and the unborn.

So this chapter of -- of conservatism. Must confront reality. Economic reality.

Global reality.

And moral reality.

It's not enough just to be against something. Or chant tax cuts or free markets.

We have to ask -- we have to start with simple questions like freedom, yes. But freedom for what?

Freedom for economic sovereignty. Your right to produce and to innovate. To build without asking Beijing's permission. That's a moral issue now.

Another moral issue: Debt! It's -- it's generational theft. We're spending money from generations we won't even meet.

And dependence. Another moral issue. It's a national weakness.

People cannot stand up for themselves. They can't make it themselves. And we're encouraging them to sit down, shut up, and don't think.

And the conservative who can't connect with fiscal prudence, and connect fiscal prudence to moral duty, you're not a conservative at all.

Being a conservative today, means you have to rebuild an economy that serves liberty, not one that serves -- survives by debt, and then there's the soul of the nation.

We are living through a time period. An age of dislocation. Where our families are fractured.

Our faith is almost gone.

Meaning is evaporating so fast. Nobody knows what meaning of life is. That's why everybody is killing themselves. They have no meaning in life. And why they don't have any meaning, is truth itself is mocked and blurred and replaced by nothing, but lies and noise.

If you want to be a conservative, then you have to be to become the moral compass that reminds a lost people, liberty cannot survive without virtue.

That freedom untethered from moral order is nothing, but chaos!

And that no app, no algorithm, no ideology is ever going to fill the void, where meaning used to live!

To be a conservative, moving forward, we cannot just be about policies.

We have to defend the sacred, the unseen, the moral architecture, that gives people an identity. So how do you do that? Well, we have to rebuild competence. We have to restore institutions that actually work. Just in the last hour, this monologue on what we're facing now, because we can't open the government.

Why can't we open the government?

Because government is broken. Why does nobody care? Because education is broken.

We have to reclaim education, not as propaganda, but as the formation of the mind and the soul. Conservatives have to champion innovation.

Not to imitate Silicon Valley's chaos, but to harness technology in defense of human dignity. Don't be afraid of AI.

Know what it is. Know it's a tool. It's a tool to strengthen people. As long as you always remember it's a tool. Otherwise, you will lose your humanity to it!

That's a conservative principle. To be a conservative, we have to restore local strength. Our families are the basic building blocks, our schools, our churches, and our charities. Not some big, distant NGO that was started by the Tides Foundation, but actual local charities, where you see people working. A web of voluntary institutions that held us together at one point. Because when Washington fails, and it will, it already has, the neighborhood has to stand.

Charlie Kirk was doing one thing that people on our side were not doing. Speaking to the young.

But not in nostalgia.

Not in -- you know, Reagan, Reagan, Reagan.

In purpose. They don't remember. They don't remember who Dick Cheney was.

I was listening to Fox news this morning, talking about Dick Cheney. And there was somebody there that I know was not even born when Dick Cheney. When the World Trade Center came down.

They weren't even born. They were telling me about Dick Cheney.

And I was like, come on. Come on. Come on.

If you don't remember who Dick Cheney was, how are you going to remember 9/11. How will you remember who Reagan was.

That just says, that's an old man's creed. No, it's not.

It's the ultimate timeless rebellion against tyranny in all of its forms. Yes, and even the tyranny of despair, which is eating people alive!

We need to redefine ourselves. Because we have changed, and that's a good thing. The creed for a generation, that will decide the fate of the republic, is what we need to find.

A conservative in 2025, '26.

Is somebody who protects the enduring principles of American liberty and self-government.

While actively stewarding the institutions. The culture. The economy of this nation!

For those who are alive and yet to be unborn.

We have to be a group of people that we're not anchored in the past. Or in rage! But in reason. And morality. Realism. And hope for the future.

We're the stewards! We're the ones that have to relight the torch, not just hold it. We didn't -- we didn't build this Torch. We didn't make this Torch. We're the keepers of the flame, but we are honor-bound to pass that forward, and conservatives are viewed as people who just live in the past. We're not here to merely conserve the past, but to renew it. To sort it. What worked, what didn't work. We're the ones to say to the world, there's still such a thing as truth. There's still such a thing as virtue. You can deny it all you want.

But the pain will only get worse. There's still such a thing as America!

And if now is not the time to renew America. When is that time?

If you're not the person. If we're not the generation to actively stand and redefine and defend, then who is that person?

We are -- we are supposed to preserve what works.

That -- you know, I was writing something this morning.

I was making notes on this. A constitutionalist is for restraint. A progressive, if you will, for lack of a better term, is for more power.

Progressives want the government to have more power.

Conservatives are for more restraint.

But the -- for the American eagle to fly, we must have both wings.

And one can't be stronger than the other.

We as a conservative, are supposed to look and say, no. Don't look at that. The past teaches us this, this, and this. So don't do that.

We can't do that. But there are these things that we were doing in the past, that we have to jettison. And maybe the other side has a good idea on what should replace that. But we're the ones who are supposed to say, no, but remember the framework.

They're -- they can dream all they want.
They can come up with all these utopias and everything else, and we can go, "That's a great idea."

But how do we make it work with this framework? Because that's our job. The point of this is, it takes both. It takes both.

We have to have the customs and the moral order. And the practices that have stood the test of time, in trial.

We -- we're in an amazing, amazing time. Amazing time.

We live at a time now, where anything -- literally anything is possible!

I don't want to be against stuff. I want to be for the future. I want to be for a rich, dynamic future. One where we are part of changing the world for the better!

Where more people are lifted out of poverty, more people are given the freedom to choose, whatever it is that they want to choose, as their own government and everything.

I don't want to force it down anybody's throat.

We -- I am so excited to be a shining city on the hill again.

We have that opportunity, right in front of us!

But not in we get bogged down in hatred, in division.

Not if we get bogged down into being against something.

We must be for something!

I know what I'm for.

Do you?

From Pharaoh to Hamas: The same spirit of evil, new disguise

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.