Hostage crisis in Sydney just another example of Glenn’s predictions coming true

Monday morning, a radical Iranian cleric burst into a café in Sydney, Australia,holding approximately a dozen people hostage at gunpoint for 16 hours. The standoff ended with two hostages dead and the cleric killed by commandos who raided the cafe. Sadly, the whole tragedy is just the latest example of Glenn's "crazy caliphate" prediction coming true. The world is becoming destabilized, radicalism is destabilizing the world, and we are seeing the fruits of revolution grow. Glenn welcomed TheBlaze's National Security Expert Buck Sexton to the program Monday night to discuss this story and the oft-ignored threat of radical Islam.

Glenn: It’s finally over. Early Monday morning, a radical Iranian cleric — who would’ve seen this? — burst into a café and held approximately a dozen people hostage at gunpoint for 16 hours. Two hostages are now dead. The cleric, darn it, was killed when commandos raided the café this morning. The Prime Minister took an interesting politically correct route and said that he was shocked. Watch.

VIDEO

Prime Minister Abbott: It is profoundly shocking that innocent people should be held hostage by an armed person claiming political motivation.

Glenn: Alrighty, an armed person claiming political motivation…I would say that’s the result of being on the bottom of the earth when all of your blood is rushing to your head, but we are this stupid as well. The guy was a radical cleric. He was holding up a store directly across the street from a television news network. He forced hostages to hold a black jihad flag with Arabic writing, not the Islamic State flag, but on his list of demands was a demand, can you get me an ISIS flag?

He posted this hostage video on YouTube:

VIDEO

W: One is to send an ISIS flag as soon as possible, and one hostage will be released; to please broadcast on all media that this is an attack on Australia by the Islamic State.

Glenn: By the Islamic State, so I guess yes, technically the cleric was an armed person with political motivations, but it seems to be just a little bit of wishful ignorance given Australia’s jihad problem already which we’ll talk about here in a second.

Hundreds of Australians are fighting for the Islamic State, including this guy, whose idea of a father-son bonding involved tweeting photos of his son holding severed human heads. Australian Islamic State radicals called for the beheading of random Australians. ISIS named Australia one of their main targets and encouraged attacks, lone wolf attacks. “Every Muslim should get out of his house, find a crusader, and kill him. It is important that the killing becomes attributed to patrons of the Islamic State who have obeyed its leadership. ‘Rely upon Allah and stab the crusader’ should be the battle cry for all Islamic State patrons.”

This is what they’re saying to do, but Sydney police say this is an isolated incident, nothing to worry about. That doesn’t make any sense at all. Obviously Australia is taking the jihad problem seriously. They have fought back with tough crackdowns and raids on homegrown terrorists. Jihadists are getting more and more organized in the country, and the government knows it. Why? What is happening?

Do you remember when we talked about the Arab Spring when I was at FOX? We have to go back to what should be the most important thing I ever did at FOX. I didn’t do anything more important than this. I told you radicals, Islamists, Communists, and Socialists would work together against Israel. Has it been done? Yes. Work together against capitalism? Yes. Work together to overturn stability.

Then I added part two. Protests would become then contagious. They would cascade. Have we seen that? Yes. They swept to the Middle East? Yes. Begin to destabilize Europe? Yes. And the rest of the world? Yes. That’s what we’re seeing, the fruits of that revolution.

Radicals are rising up, and we can expect to see more of this type of action. Yes, this particular terrorist attack in Sydney was one guy. Yes, he was an amateur, letting hostages go, letting them use their cell phones, not having the right flag, which was bizarre. It’s easy to dismiss him as a lone wolf, but here’s the point, there’s more than one wolf, and when you have a bunch of lone wolves, they all belong to a pack.

ISIS cannot easily transport militants from one country to the next, so they’ve done the next best thing, they inspire radicalism abroad and let individuals carry out attacks in their name. It’s the perfect system.

Glenn: We have TheBlaze national security editor, Buck Sexton, with us now from our newsroom in New York. Buck, what am I missing here?

Buck: Glenn, you’re not missing anything. I mean, the tie-in to the Islamic State is pretty clear when you have an individual who saying he’s doing this in the name of that entity, and so I think that the debate that’s happening right now as to whether he received a specific exhortation to do this or he just decided to act on previous instructions isn’t really particularly meaningful.

Glenn: Does it matter?

Buck: It doesn’t matter at all. This is exactly what the Islamic State wants, and we can see that the Australians, while they have gotten aggressive, there were hundreds of police officers involved in raids back in September, it’s not enough. They’re not going to catch everyone. We saw a few casualties from this attack. There could’ve been a lot more casualties, Glenn, quite honestly, and I think that the Australians have recognized that this problem is going to continue on. We’re not even counting possible returnees from the main fronts in Iraq and Syria. These are people that are already in Australia.

Glenn: Okay, so we didn’t talk about his criminal record. The guy is not a nobody. What do you have to do to be deported in Australia? Explain his criminal record.

Buck: I want to know what you have to do to be put in prison for a long time in Australia, because he is charged with dozens of different sexual crimes, various assaults, and also on top of that is a suspect, allegedly stabbed or was involved in a stabbing death of his ex-wife and lit her on fire and left her body in the stairwell of an apartment building. So he was a very bad guy with all sorts of outstanding incredibly serious criminal charges before he decided to seize a number of hostages and execute some of them when the assault actually happened today. So I think that’s actually where the Australian government is vulnerable to some real criticism. How was this guy still walking around on the streets?

By the way, Glenn, you can still rifle through his Twitter account which makes it quite clear that he thinks people should join the Islamic State, he hates Australia, and he wants to wage jihad, so he was literally advertising this.

Glenn: Tell me the difference between that guy and an Islamic jihad guy, I mean, somebody who’s with Al Qaeda or the Islamic State. It doesn’t matter. He is following their instructions. He’s doing what they ask. He’s doing their bidding. What’s the difference?

Buck: There is no difference. It’s just a command-and-control discussion that doesn’t really mean anything, Glenn, except for the possibility of follow-on attacks, so if he did receive, for example, a direct order from the Islamic State. And by the way, in those September raids in Australia, there was a direct connection. There was an Islamic State member who was Australian who was saying get involved in this strike. They wanted to behead a random civilian in Australia, and that was one of the plots that was disrupted, but the only reason you’d want to know this, Glenn, is in case there are others who may have received similar instructions.

So for investigative purposes, it could be necessary, but for ideological purposes, no, all we need to know is that this was in solidarity with the Islamic State, and there are more of these lone wolves or self-radicalized individuals out there.

Glenn: So is there a reason, Buck, at all that we excuse our politicians, not just in Australia, but here too, that we excuse our politicians? I read the statement, you know, from the Prime Minister, and he said well, you know, it’s just a lone wolf, and we don’t want to give them everything that they want. That is exactly what they wanted. In their order, they said rise up, make sure you give credit to ISIS, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Is there a reason why we can all just say okay, they don’t want to give ISIS more power, or is that just bull crap?

Buck: No, Glenn, I think that the acting on the instructions here is very much the game plan from the Islamic State’s point of view, and I think the government, the Australian government, is always taking this position of well, you know, this happened this one time, and we need to have these stricter security policies, but let’s not jump to any conclusions. And when you have a guy who’s saying please get me an Islamic State flag so I can really put their signature on this thing, you’re not jumping to a conclusion, you’re just making one. And the Australian government seems to be falling into the same trap that we have here.

Remember, after Fort Hood, we had a general saying, we had a general, a four-star, saying that he hoped diversity wasn’t a casualty, and this was after we had a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. You have Australians already speaking out about how they’re so concerned about a backlash. The backlash never happens here. No one’s worried about an individual or rather about a society deciding to pick on one individual for this.

We’re worried about a society that’s under assault from extremist elements that are working in a systemic fashion over time to try to undermine the very freedoms the Australians enjoy, and the same thing with us here at home. That’s the real concern, not the possibility of there being some sort of an overreach if we just call it what it is. We all know what it is.

Glenn: So we’re going to be launching a show with Buck here soon, and I went up to New York last week, and I started talking to him about showing that basically I would want his show to pretty much center around that chalkboard — radical Islamists, Communists, Socialists, work together against Israel, together against capitalism, together to overturn stability, the protests become contagious, they cascade, sweep the Middle East, begin to destabilize Europe and the rest of the world, and show you those connections, because it’s not just happening here in the United States. It’s happening all over the world, and anybody who thinks that it’s a lone wolf, what’s the difference?

I was at a mall, Buck, this weekend, and I went Christmas shopping. And I’m at a Belk store. Al Sharpton did not call for this no justice, no peace. I’m sure Al Sharpton wasn’t there, but a group of local people got into the mall. They carried the signs, and they were doing no justice, no peace. It’s the same story, is it not? Is that a lone wolf, or is that connected?

Buck: Well, the broader ideology, Glenn, does have an impact, and revolutionary ideology, which we should be clear, global jihad is a revolutionary ideology. It’s based upon individuals and groups around the world acting to overturn existing societies to create a totalitarian Islamic theocracy around the world, so it’s very much a revolutionary ideology, and the whole purpose of it is to be spread, is to be spread through fear, through violence, and through intimidation, and we see various iterations of revolutionary ideology here at home as well.

I walked into a protest also trying to just buy Christmas presents for my family, and I couldn’t believe the things that are being said. They’re talking about racist, murdering cops walking around in the streets. No surprise here, Glenn, we’ve already had now a number of serious assaults against police officers in the city from these protesters. They’re planning to do another big one tomorrow night.

Now, we can either believe that this is all just them venting, letting off some steam, and they don’t actually, none of them, even the hardcore elements among them don’t believe this is going to mean anything, or you can think that they’re actually trying to push for some kind of a real inciting event and a transformation of society. I think the hardliners would say it’s the latter in a moment of honesty, and I’ve heard them say that, so I wouldn’t be surprised if we see some pretty outrageous stuff from them the weeks ahead.

Glenn: Buck, thank you very much. I appreciate your time.

Buck: Thanks, Glenn.

Silent genocide exposed: Are christians being wiped out in 2025?

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.