"Time is of the essence": Why it is critical you understand the threat posed by ISIS before it is too late

September 22, 2014

Writer

There is a growing evil in the Middle East, as ISIS continues to expand their campaign of terror in Syria, Iraq, and beyond. People are dying and the threat to America is very real, and yet the larger population is just now starting to wake up to the possibility of a jihadist caliphate. Jay Sekulow joined Glenn to discuss the history of ISIS that no one knows, and the scary tactics they are using to spread their radical ideology across the region.

GLENN: One of the bravest guys out there, and I think a guy who has done more good for this nation and for our values and really kind of an unsung hero to most Americans is Jay Sekulow, an ACLJ attorney, has a new e-book out called Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore, that really explains who those guys are and where they came from. Jay is on the phone with us now. How are you?

JAY: Thanks for having me.

GLENN: The president referred to those guys as a JV team, but they aren't a JV team and the president should have known they weren't a JV team a long time ago.

JAY: Right, because ISIS, did not come out of no wrote. They were part of -- they were AQI, al-Qaeda in Iraq. We have been tracking them for about two years through our office in Jerusalem. What happened was, Osama bin Laden and his lietuenats were so repulsed, if you can believe that, by the tactics of ISIS that they threw them out, and then eventually what happened was Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi declared himself the Caliph, set up the caliphate, and now goes by Caliph Ibrahim. Although, the President says this is not a war with Islam, tell that to Caliph Ibrahim and 40,000 of his soldiers.

The thing that's so significant here, what's so brazen about the president saying that this was the JV team, in actually, it is the exact opposite. This is now and has been for at least over a year and half, a standing army. They are not hiding in caves. They are not in the shadows. They are a standing, moving army that is bent on control of the what they call the Levant, the greater Middle East, which includes Israel, by the way, and they also have expectations, much broader than that, including here. So this idea this was the JV team was absurd in the beginning. We wrote Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore when I was at Oxford this summer, teaching on this topic, and I'll tell you what happened there.

One of the guys, professors, very leftist center, believes everybody can work it out, when it came to ISIS, though, [he] said this. This is a guy that said crush them. That was in July. It took the president until now to -- I call him the reluctant commander in chief, but this is a group that lethality is much more significant than al-Qaeda's ever was.

GLENN: So here's a thing. A lot of people -- the word Nazi is thrown around for a lot of things, and usually, it's just the seeds, usually it's like this is where -- this is how the Nazis began. This is the tactics the Nazis used at the very beginning. But these guys are actually very Nazi-like already, and unlike the Nazis that used to hide it, these guys aren't hiding it at all. They are way out in the open.

JAY: That's correct. Like I had 2o0 of my family members -- my grandparents' generation, my great aunts and uncles in Germany and Poland, wiped out in the Holocaust, so I am reluctant to use this analogy. I use it for three reasons. Number one, you just said it. The tactics are more brazen and open, not as lethality is not there yet, but potential lethality much greater. That's number one.

GLENN: Wait. Why do you say that?

JAY: Because they have something that the Nazis didn't have, because technology wasn't there. They have uranium. Uranium, a radioactive material, can create a dirty bomb or worse. So you could have this increased lethality. They don't have the mechanics of the Nazis yet, but look at their goals.

They are marking Christians in Iraq with a Nazarene, an N, which is the Arabic N, for Nazarene. Why are they doing that? It's the same tactic. Identify the people you want to destroy. Exactly what the Nazis did. Number three, they have clearly stated their position. They are not trying to create the superior race as the Nazis did. It is the superior religion, or in the name of religion. The same techniques same tactics, lethality is not as mechanical yet, but potentiality greater.

Like you said, they are open and brazen on this. We point it out in the book, you can't look at, Glenn, ISIS in just a vacuum. If you look at a map, you have ISIS coming from the east going west towards Israel. Then you have Hamas coming from the west towards Israel.

This is the great conflict here. So Hamas, ISIS, same groups, different leadership, same techniques, ISIS, bigger. But if you put the number of standing troops with ISIS together with the standing troops of Hamas, you are approaching 60,000 troops. I'm calling them troops because they are an army. That is bigger than a lot of armies in the greater Middle East right now. This is unbelievable what could happen here.

GLENN: Here's where I'm really concerned, Jay, is they are very, very smart. They are going after openly, the west. They are using Sykes–Picot -- I mean, these really not dummies. They know their history, they know the history of the Middle East, far better than anybody else, and they are using the same kind of things. They are using Sykes–Picot, which goes back to Word War I. That's exactly what the Nazis did, using all the stuff that we in the League of Nations did after World War I and they had this grievance that they said and this is why we have to go get them. This is why we have all these problems, and these guys will actually be able to unite much of the Middle East for a long time, and unlike the Nazis, who had to hide what they were doing to the Jews and what they were doing to the Christians and the homosexuals, they had to hide those things to stop the shock and horror of their own population. These guys, it will actually work to their advantage to do it out in the open.

JAY: That's because it's their recruiting tool. When we see the things in the West, these beheadings, we are horrified, but what we need to understand and we point this out in the book, we are horrified, but that's their recruiting tool. That is what attracting U.S. citizens to join ISIS. The British have more jihadist Muslims that are now part -- Muslims of a -- English citizens, U.K., that are fighting for ISIS and fight for Her Majesty's Army. This is the Royal Army. So what's happened --

GLENN: Say that again. Say that stat again.

JAY: There are more Muslims fighting for ISIS from the U.K. than are fighting for Her Majesty's Armed Forces.

PAT: How many is that? Over 1,000 now?

JAY: Well, first report was over 500. I'm sure it's over 1,000 now. Let -- Turkey is the entry point for these soldiers. NATO ally. Our NATO ally is letting them through and arming them. The Turks do not want a strong Kurdistan. They don't want stong Kurds because it creates a problem for them on their border. So Glenn, you remember mentioning the Sykes–Picot. This is their retribution for Sykes–Picot and their retribution for the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. This is their reestablishment of the caliphate, which is reestablishing the jihadist empire. this is the mode and method in which they are doing it. The fact of the matter is -- then you have the president funding the moderate rebels. Who they are, I don't know yet. I would like them to come forward, but the concern is, the potential damage to the United States is great. We wrote this book while I was at Oxford. It is out now on Amazon, Barnes and Nobel and Apple iBooks, but it comes out in paperback in a couple weeks.

You have been sounding the alarm on this. The problem is, we've got to get the country understanding who the enemy is, because this is different than al Qaeda.

GLENN: What's amazing, the president won't do it. I did a special -- we are doing "For the Record" on ISIS, as you know, thank you for your help -- a special this week. Last week I did a special on Sykes–Picot and once you understand Sykes–Picot, ISIS just made a video, the end of Sykes–Picot. So it's clear. All you have to do is listen to these guys.

Let me go here. You remember when I first started talking about the reestablishment of the caliphate, and you know -- you

watched it, how many people -- everybody said I was insane, to the point that I thought, maybe I am. This can't be. This can't be, because nobody will talk about this. Why was I so alone on that, Jay? Why were the people, like you, who knew what was happening, where we were headed, why were we so alone?

JAY: Well, because people thought you, me, other -- the few of us that were talking about this, we were the extremists. We over-analyzed the data. I remember somebody said about what you were doing, what I was doing, that we were making assumptions that are not in reality. You had the head of the NSA saying that terrorism is a state of mind. So this whole world view -- this passes in my view, it passes Republican, Democrat. This is a world view, well, they can't be that evil. They really can't be that bad. They can't be that jihadist, but they are.

And the problem is, if you look at where they start and where they have gone, in this two and a half years or so they have been active, it's pretty amazing. They are out in the open, not hiding what they are doing. Bragging about it.

GLENN: We are talking to Jay Sekulow. He is putting out an e-book now, because time is of the essence. It is coming out as paperback in a couple weeks, but time is of the essence. You need to know who we are facing. I believe they are here already, but Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore.

You talk about everybody wanted to believe that these guys weren't as bad, et cetera, but the president now comes out and says 'okay, I know I called them a JV team, I know I said nothing to worry about, they are not worse than al-Qaeda', but the same advisors that allowed him to say those things, they are the ones advising us now, they are the ones still in the State Department, still the ones in the Pentagon, the NSA and CIA. He hasn't changed anybody. If I'm the President of the United States and I have gotten it this wrong, I fire those people and say no hard feelings, guys. It was great. We had a great run, but I've got to start talking to the people who saw this one coming over the horizon. Is there anything that gives you any confidence that we are at all meaning what we say, that we have a clue at all anywhere, at any level?

JAY: No, because we pick the wrong side on every issue in the Middle East since the president's been in office. And you said -- what you just said is profound. That is the president had a narrative for the Middle East. It started with that speech in Cairo, where he says we are not a Jewish nation, we are a nation of principles. Whatever -- nation of citizens, whatever that means. The Nazis were a nation of citizens, so that's a ridiculous analogy, but he made this ridiculous analogy. None of it came out like he thought. Instead of changing your approach, this president basically doubles down on it. I'm listening to Samantha Powers and Susan Rice and these people at the NSA, and you are saying 'how come we know more than they do!'

GLENN: Can I ask you a question. Feel free not to answer this. Because this is me thinking out loud. Whenever I think

out loud, I get in trouble and everybody else around me --

PAT: We recommend that you don't --

GLENN: Just this think out. The president said two weeks ago that he wanted to organize the Middle East. That was his plan, to organize the Middle East. You know Sykes–Picot, I know Sykes–Picot, the Middle East knows Sykes–Picot. The Middle East believes this was the great -- the real tragedy, and quite honestly, the west behaved like barbarians. We lied. So we were wrong. Now that being said, he wants to right the wrongs of the past. What does -- what is ISIL and everybody else want to do? They've got to reorganize the Middle East. You have to get rid of all these dictators. So once you do that, then the whole meaning behind Sykes–Picot falls apart and you can't control that section of the world at all.

JAY: That's why they initially changed their name from ISIS -- to ISIL, which was the Levant, the greater Middle East. I don't think that's far-fetched -

GLENN: I'm not there yet. Hang on. So here's the president. He comes out. He's been for all those things that have destabilized the Middle East. Give George Bush a piece of this, too, but destabilize the Middle East. Then he goes in to Libya. Then he says he wants Assad. Assad is really the last real big pin to fall before you bet to people like Jordan. So we are arming these people, who are not going to fight ISIS. They are going to fight Assad. Are we got just helping them, by running arms to these rebels?

JAY: Glenn, I'm not only going to not distance myself from your comment, I think you're dead on. I have said this, I think Assad is a bad guy. He is bad. Does anybody believe that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, his war name, nom de guerre, does anyone believe the Caliph Ibrahim is better than Assad? I doubt it. No one does. If we were going to -- I'm not saying to do this, but you'd be better off funding Assad's army to take these guys out than you would be -- because listen, they are not throwing up Sykes–Picot just to make a historical point. They believe they were wrong, severely wrong. They were double handed, and they are trying to correct it. They blame us, so that puts the United States squarely in our -- in their sights.

GLENN: You are fantastic. We'll take to you again, have you on the show and Wednesday, 'For the Record', we have more details on the rise of ISIS and ISIL, at 8:00, Blaze TV. The new book, it is out as an ebook for urgent purposes. Please read this: Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore, by Jay Sekulow. Keep it up. Thank you so much.

JAY: Thanks.

Shocking Christian massacres unveiled

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

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

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

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

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

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

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

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

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

Should Starbase become its own city?

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

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

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

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

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

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

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

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

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

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

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

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

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

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

Glenn's Show Prep