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

The scary implications of Google's relationship with the military

January 14, 2014
Wilson

Writer

Well, what a surprise, Lone Survivor was the number one movie at the box office this weekend. It wasn’t even close, opening with $38.5 million. It was the second biggest January opening ever, and the box office victory exceeded industry expectations. Now, I am shocked that Hollywood wouldn’t see the success of this film coming. They expected $14 million at the box office.

I am shocked that a story about real people in our military who display unparalleled bravery, loyalty, honor, and sacrifice has been largely overlooked by the Hollywood crowd. I am shocked that an industry that feasts on America’s darkest, dirtiest temptations didn’t see this movie coming, didn’t see that audiences are starving for something decent.

This movie is not a success because it’s an action-packed thriller with lots of gratuitous violence and nudity and sex like The Wolf of Wall Street or the next Spiderman. This is number one because despite the odds, some Navy SEALs never quit. Despite knowing what would happen to themselves if they let goat herders free, they chose not to become murderers.

This movie showed us exactly what the men and women in our military really are made of, and it is everything that we hope and dream them to be and quite honestly hope and dream we can be, brave, loyal, honorable, selfless. We want to know that in our own lives we can do that, when our own personal safety or security is threatened, that we would handle it with dignity, honor, and courage.

Marcus and his teammates did just that. I don’t know if you saw the movie this weekend. If you haven’t, you need to, but one detail that you may have overlooked in this movie, when Lieutenant Mike Murphy leaves his cover and ventures out into the open ground to call in air support, he’s getting shot up so badly. He knows he is going to die. He ends the call with “thank you.” We know this happened because Marcus Luttrell heard it happen. It’s in the movie. Watch for it.

That is the kind of men and women that we have raised up through our military; however, I don’t think I’m alone to say I’m a little concerned that the backbone and the system that has generated some of the best and the bravest human beings the planet has ever known in wartime is being torn apart. The very values that build strong character are being systematically dismantled at home and abroad, at home in our own homes but also in our military schools.

The values that brought us no soldier left behind is being replaced by the Benghazi model, which is leave them behind and shut up about it. The heritage of Christianity in the military is under attack. They took Christian ethics out, one of the first things this president did. It’s becoming increasingly more difficult now for soldiers to pray in public and share their faith with others.

Bibles are being banned from Walter Reed Medical Center. Excuse me, what? And some soldiers are being taught that they shouldn’t join Christian groups like the AFA, American Families Association, because they’re a hate group.

I want to make it very clear, I’m not suggesting that you have to be a Christian to be in the military, but what you do have to have is a moral set of standards, and for most people, those moral lines come from God. God gives us moral lines, natural rights, and natural laws that everyone can agree on. When your erase God or nature’s God and nature’s law, and you take them out of the picture, you erase our moral standards, and a society with no moral compass will not last.

Now, I want you to combine what you know about the dissolving of our ethical and moral structures with this new piece of information that came out this weekend. Google has increasingly positioned itself as a key contractor for the U.S. military. So now Google, do no evil, is now part of the industrial complex, working closely with the NSA now for at least six years that we know of, and now they are expanding their ties to the U.S. defense as they have purchased at least eight robotics companies that we know of with the sole purpose of supplying the U.S. military with these things.

Okay, robots that are humanoid, humanoid robots, that’s good. Did anybody see, did you guys see the Star Wars where Emperor Palpatine was like yes, just as I have foreseen? Oh, there they are. Look, the humanoid robots. A giant technology company ingratiating itself and engraining itself into the U.S. military, maybe it’s just me, but I don’t think that probably ends very well.

Have we seen the movies? Do you remember Terminator? There’s another one. See, he comes back, says where is John Connor? Yeah, I don’t believe in time travel, wish I did, but nobody’s going to come in from the future and say where is John Connor’s mother? If you’re John Connor’s mother, please teach him what the future is. It’s not good.

Eisenhower, I think this is the last speech that any president gave us that actually really truly told the truth. Here is a general who then became president, and in the 1950s, he warned us. He’s the man who came out and coined the phrase that you’re about to hear.

VIDEO

President Eisenhower: In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.

 

We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Glenn Oh, sorry, I lost him, something about alert. I’m all about using robots and machines and drones when we can. I’m more than happy to watch a drone get blown out of the sky over one of our pilots. I’m more than happy to see a robot blown up trying to defuse a bomb rather than one of our troops, but does anybody think we should be looking for the line?

The technology isn’t quite there yet, but it will be. We will have self driven tanks, self driven Jeeps, and full-sized humanoid robot soldiers sweeping cities all around the globe and rooting out “the enemy.” That doesn’t sound good. Let’s just start here on the least insane of the scenarios. Can we really expect robots to make split-second life-and-death decisions?

Oh, and then there’s this part, the information aspect of Google. They can track nearly 2 billion people worldwide. They’re tracking you. One billion people use Google search engines, maps, YouTube. Half a billion use Gmail. Their potential for intelligence gathering is limitless and should be breathtaking. They recognize that. The military recognizes that. When will America recognize that?

When Google went down a few months ago, 40% of the world’s Internet traffic was halted, 40% all around the globe because of one company. Where were the calls that that company is out of control and too big? I remember the calls for the Bell system to be broken apart. They weren’t mapping our brains and our DNA.

I don’t know about you, but I love the robot thing. I love the diffusing bombs. I love the drones, kind of. But I like the fact that we’re taking troops out of harm’s way, but down the road seems a little frightening. It’s far more insidious than an Arnold Schwarzenegger movie. There was another movie this weekend that is resembling reality. It’s called Her. It’s a romantic comedy about a guy who falls in love with a girl, except the girl isn’t really a girl. It’s a computer program. It’s a computer with a female voice, basically like dating Siri on your iPhone, except she’s everywhere. Watch.

Yeah, except Theodore is a little spooky. He’s dating a chick that isn’t there. There is also a trilogy of books out. I started reading right after Christmas Divergent. I went to read Insurgent after, and now I’m on the third one. I don’t know, it’s Detergent or whatever. But it’s written by a 26-year-old girl. It’s brilliant. But I’m about halfway through now on book number three. Wait until you get to book number three. Hello, Google genome project.

Technology is advancing at a rapid pace, and yet, morality and ethics are afterthoughts. We’re excited about discovery and advancement, you know? We’re in fact so excited that we don’t even take the time to discuss or debate the moral dilemmas and implications of new technology. Sure, we’re still in control of technology now, but does there come a time when we’re not? Who will be the one that says turn it off? When do things go wrong?

I don’t see anyone at Google or in the government or anyone at the forefront of technology boom that is contemplating the ethics and morality issues. Now that is a truly scary thought that doesn’t come in a movie.

We wanted to get a couple of people on today that are experts:

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

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?

Do you think the Gen Z support for Trump is an opportunity for conservatives to win them over with anti-establishment reforms that preserve liberty?

Americans expose Supreme Court’s flag ruling as a failed relic

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

In a nation where the Stars and Stripes symbolize the blood-soaked sacrifices of our heroes, President Trump's executive order to crack down on flag desecration amid violent protests has ignited fierce debate. But in a recent poll, Glenn asked the tough question: Can Trump protect the Flag without TRAMPLING free speech? Glenn asked, and you answered—thousands weighed in on this pressing clash between free speech and sacred symbols.

The results paint a picture of resounding distrust toward institutional leniency. A staggering 85% of respondents support banning the burning of American flags when it incites violence or disturbs the peace, a bold rejection of the chaos we've seen from George Floyd riots to pro-Palestinian torchings. Meanwhile, 90% insist that protections for burning other flags—like Pride or foreign banners—should not be treated the same as Old Glory under the First Amendment, exposing the hypocrisy in equating our nation's emblem with fleeting symbols. And 82% believe the Supreme Court's Texas v. Johnson ruling, shielding flag burning as "symbolic speech," should not stand without revision—can the official story survive such resounding doubt from everyday Americans weary of government inaction?

Your verdict sends a thunderous message: In this divided era, the flag demands defense against those who exploit freedoms to sow disorder, without trampling the liberties it represents. It's a catastrophic failure of the establishment to ignore this groundswell.

Want to make your voice heard? Check out more polls HERE.

Labor Day EXPOSED: The Marxist roots you weren’t told about

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

During your time off this holiday, remember the man who started it: Peter J. McGuire, a racist Marxist who co-founded America’s first socialist party.

Labor Day didn’t begin as a noble tribute to American workers. It began as a negotiation with ideological terrorists.

In the late 1800s, factory and mine conditions were brutal. Workers endured 12-to-15-hour days, often seven days a week, in filthy, dangerous environments. Wages were low, injuries went uncompensated, and benefits didn’t exist. Out of desperation, Americans turned to labor unions. Basic protections had to be fought for because none were guaranteed.

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

That era marked a seismic shift — much like today. The Industrial Revolution, like our current digital and political upheaval, left millions behind. And wherever people get left behind, Marxists see an opening.

A revolutionary wedge

This was Marxism’s moment.

Economic suffering created fertile ground for revolutionary agitation. Marxists, socialists, and anarchists stepped in to stoke class resentment. Their goal was to turn the downtrodden into a revolutionary class, tear down the existing system, and redistribute wealth by force.

Among the most influential agitators was Peter J. McGuire, a devout Irish Marxist from New York. In 1874, he co-founded the Social Democratic Workingmens Party of North America, the first Marxist political party in the United States. He was also a vice president of the American Federation of Labor, which would become the most powerful union in America.

McGuire’s mission wasn’t hidden. He wanted to transform the U.S. into a socialist nation through labor unions.

That mission soon found a useful symbol.

In the 1880s, labor leaders in Toronto invited McGuire to attend their annual labor festival. Inspired, he returned to New York and launched a similar parade on Sept. 5 — chosen because it fell halfway between Independence Day and Thanksgiving.

The first parade drew over 30,000 marchers who skipped work to hear speeches about eight-hour workdays and the alleged promise of Marxism. The parade caught on across the country.

Negotiating with radicals

By 1894, Labor Day had been adopted by 30 states. But the federal government had yet to make it a national holiday. A major strike changed everything.

In Pullman, Illinois, home of the Pullman railroad car company, tensions exploded. The economy tanked. George Pullman laid off hundreds of workers and slashed wages for those who remained — yet refused to lower the rent on company-owned homes.

That injustice opened the door for Marxist agitators to mobilize.

Sympathetic railroad workers joined the strike. Riots broke out. Hundreds of railcars were torched. Mail service was disrupted. The nation’s rail system ground to a halt.

President Grover Cleveland — under pressure in a midterm election year — panicked. He sent 12,000 federal troops to Chicago. Two strikers were killed in the resulting clashes.

With the crisis spiraling and Democrats desperate to avoid political fallout, Cleveland struck a deal. Within six days of breaking the strike, Congress rushed through legislation making Labor Day a federal holiday.

It was the first of many concessions Democrats would make to organized labor in exchange for political power.

What we really celebrated

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

Kean Collection / Staff | Getty Images

What we celebrated was a Canadian idea, brought to America by the founder of the American Socialist Party, endorsed by racially exclusionary unions, and made law by a president and Congress eager to save face.

It was the first of many bones thrown by the Democratic Party to union power brokers. And it marked the beginning of a long, costly compromise with ideologues who wanted to dismantle the American way of life — from the inside out.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.