TSA Agent: We’re not safe

March 11, 2013

Writer

An expose on the TSA confirms what we already knew instinctively: we are not safe. When the supervisors are most concerned about whether or not their screeners are chewing gum (a big no no apparently) you know we’ve got issues. Not only that but felons are getting jobs at the TSA. Brilliant.

More on this story at TheBlaze.

Transcript of the segment from radio is below:

GLENN: All right. Let me go to the story up on TheBlaze. A former Newark TSA agent tells us the obvious: We're not safe. If you've ever flown in or out of Newark, New Jersey, you know that. This is not going to come as a shock to you. But if you've never been to Newark, hey, congratulations on that. That's a very good thing. But if you've never been to Newark, I swear to you I have been where the person, they check your driver's license and this even they don't even look up to match your face on the license. They don't do it. They never look up.

PAT: You'll put the bag through the machine and nobody even looks at the monitor. Nobody's even looking at it.

GLENN: Okay, so ‑‑

PAT: They are talking to each other.

GLENN: This is an expose, the employees, this is from a former TSA employee. There are those employees who could never keep a job in the private sector who are working at the TSA in Newark. I wouldn't trust them to walk my dog, and these are the people that Janet Napolitano says ‑‑ she constantly says these are the first class, first line of defense in the war on terror. If that's true, you're dead if you fly out of Newark, New Jersey. I mean, I almost ‑‑ but I just wanted to get through. I almost had a ‑‑ I almost had a scene because I'm standing at this, you know, check‑in line and I had flown in and out of Newark over and over again and where they check your ID, right behind them is a plate glass window and it looks to the skyline of New York where the World Trade Centers would have been. And so you're ‑‑ and this woman didn't even look at my face. And I about snapped. I about snapped. And the guy standing next to me said, don't do it. Don't do it. Don't do it. Because he could feel it coming. And what I wanted to say was, "Turn around for me. Don't even look at my face. Just turn around and see that place right in the skyline where the buildings should have been? Could you at least look at someone's face as they're going through? What is the point of looking at their driver's license if you're not matching it with the person who just handed it to you?" But they're $15 an hour employees. And in Newark, New Jersey, who's living on $15 an hour?

PAT: Guy tells the story about one screener who didn't come to work for four weeks. Just didn't show up for four weeks. When he finally reappeared, he asked for another week off. The answer was no, you just took four weeks off. So what did he do? He took another week off and still didn't get fire.

GLENN: Well, they can't replace them.

PAT: They can't replace them.

GLENN: Who's going to work there? Do you know how low your self‑esteem would be if you had any ‑‑ you know what one of the big things with the TSA guys, according to this, according with the supervisors, according to a former TSA employee in Newark, one of the big things that drives the employers nuts is gum‑chewing. And so they go and they check the employee: Are you chewing gum? And they had one guy ‑‑ this TSA employee said, "I witnessed the boss coming over and saying, "Open up your mouth. Open it up." It's a mint, jack. It's a mint. "Open it up. I want to see it." And made him open up and show him that it was a mint and not gum. I mean, that's what you are worried about: Gum‑chewing? It's a pretty nasty, pretty nasty look at the bottom of the barrel.

STU: Yeah, Marsha Blackburn, the congresswoman, released a TSA report of the 50 most dangerous officers. I mean, there's ‑‑ we're talking offenses like rape, you know ‑‑

GLENN: Oh, this is the one from last week where they were ‑‑

STU: I think this is.

GLENN: Yeah, last week where they're talking about how they are employing now former criminals.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Felons. Felons. Not misdemeanors. Felons are getting a job at the TSA. That's exactly what I want to do. I want to put felons, I want to give them a badge and have them ‑‑ I mean, because they can ‑‑ they are beyond reproach. There's no way, there's no way, you know, a bunch of ex‑felons are going to, you know, take money making $15 an hour, take money and let somebody on the plane with something nefarious. No way.

STU: And this is the problem. There's a lot of good TSA employees and they do a lot of good things but you have people ‑‑ when you have the government or union running these things, you get people who are convicted of child pornography and keep their jobs. Private businesses don't allow that.

GLENN: Yep.

STU: They get rid of you when you do crap like that. When you steal from passengers, they get rid of you. When you're through the government, it's such a process to do that, it becomes completely inefficient and you have lists like the 50 most dangerous officers.

GLENN: Well, you know what? The cities that don't have ‑‑ do we have a list, Jeffy? Can you stop looking at your cancer screening? Do you have breast cancer?

STU: No.

GLENN: Seriously maybe you have breast cancer.

JEFFY: No, I felt for lumps this morning. I'm good.

GLENN: Did you? Good. Could you look, could you look at the cities that have said we don't want TSA?

STU: San Francisco's one of them.

GLENN: San Francisco is one of them.

STU: You know, you'd think of all places San Francisco would love the government intervention but even they have opted out of it. You can opt out.

GLENN: No, no, people who like government intervention are generally those, those people that want government intervention elsewhere but not for them.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: They will accept everybody else, but we're smart enough to live on our own. Did you hear, if you are ‑‑ if you're a federal worker or if you have any kind of, you know, retirement plan, if you're a teacher or a cop or anything else, what's the one city you want to live in? Because they're giving I think double the amount to the, actually putting it into the kitty. Everybody else, nobody's getting ‑‑ they are not putting anything into your kitty now anymore. You're not getting your healthcare. You're not getting your retirement benefits, gang. I got news for ya. It doesn't work. The system doesn't work. It won't happen. Because there are too many people on retirement and not enough people coming up. They need like 12‑to‑1 and we're already down to, like, 8‑to‑1 and another five years it will be down to 4‑to‑1. You just can't afford all the retirement. And so what they've been trying to do is, "Hey, put all this money in for investment because then it will grow." But nobody's putting the money in for investment anymore except for one city. And it makes sense: Washington, D.C. If you work in Washington D.C., you have the best chance of getting your retirement. Now, why is that? Well, you want the people in Washington D.C., you want the Feds to be fat and happy. That's why they make more money, almost double. When you include the benefits, almost double the amount of money that you make is made by a federal worker. Almost double. And it is ‑‑ it's shockingly horrifying that these are our public servants. But if you're trying to get somebody who is loyal to the money and will work through anything and will fight the hardest to make sure there's no cuts, you want the federal workers to be the ones. Keep growing that base fatter and fatter and fatter and make sure the ones who impose all the laws, the ones who really are the ones who enforce it, make sure it's enforced, make sure they have their retirement covered. Everybody else, you're on your own.

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep