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

He was over 400 pounds. She may have saved his life with some harsh words

April 02, 2015
Staff

WRITER

Brian Flemming was an alcoholic, massively obese, and wasting away. When his online friend in the UK, Jackie Eastman, figured out what he was going through, she went into a rage. She just unloaded on him and reprimanded him for wasting his life -- and it actually worked. Glenn has fascinating conversation with Brian and Jackie on radio today.

GLENN: So Jackie, the life coach, is with us today. Hi, Jackie.

JACKIE: Hi.

GLENN: How are you?

JACKIE: I'm good. I think he is on the line somewhere. He's supposed to be anyway. So he's around.

GLENN: He dropped out. We'll try to conference him back in.

So, Jackie, you're in England.

JACKIE: That's right.

GLENN: What time is it over there?

JACKIE: Just 4 o'clock in the afternoon.

GLENN: All right. So I'm so glad to talk to you. We were talking to Brian yesterday. And he said that he was on the phone with you -- I asked him, what was the pivot point, what changed? He said he was on the phone with a friend in England, she pretty much balled me out. Can you tell me what happened?

JACKIE: I certainly can. He probably told you. We started off. We met randomly through an internet game and then progressed to Facebook as friends. You know, we had a bit of banter going. And it was during the Facebook chats that we were having that I -- I basically was discussing my health. And he basically let me know that he had been -- or, he was at that point an alcoholic and massively obese and depressive as well.

I guess there was something going on because he would fall into these periods of muddling (phonetic) in self-pity. That was the alcohol. I could see his character change. So even through the writing we were doing, I thought, something is not right here. And so I told him, I have health problems myself. I have myotonic dystrophy, which is a form of muscle dystrophy, which is a multi-systemic -- it can affect all your body. You have to have lots of checks and whatnot. A lot of health problems. So I just hit the roof when I found out that this guy at the time, 30 years old, was just sitting on his backside eating fast food, you know, doing nothing with his life. I won't tell you what I said exactly. But I just went into a rage and just said sort your life out basically.

PAT: He said there were a few words that you might have thrown in there that we couldn't repeat on the radio.

GLENN: And we thought that was maybe because they were from a different country.

JACKIE: Of course. You might hear sailors using those words.

GLENN: So it was really just your -- your rage that you wanted to be healthy. He had it, and he was wasting it.

JACKIE: Exactly. The point I made to him -- and I had a friend who died of cancer who was very positive. Wanted to live. And she'd say, what can I do? I know I'm dying, and I want to live. So having experienced that and losing her as a friend and then seeing Brian, you know, who has everything to live for potentially, given health at birth and just completely destroying it, it sounded criminal. I just went into a rage with him.

GLENN: So when you did this, I'm sure you didn't think this out. When you did this, did you think you would be friends with him? Or was this such a rage that you thought, I don't care if I'm friends with you anymore?

JACKIE: The interesting thing, the internet, I know it gets a lot of bad press. But actually, in this particular instance, I felt I could be frank with him. And, you know, see just a fleeting friendship. I mean, we progressed to Facebook friends. So I was -- I wasn't actually trying to balance losing him as a friend because it was almost a transitory friendship anyway. Actually it isn't. Obviously now we're very close, and we're still deeply in touch. But, you know, at the time, I just felt I had nothing to lose. I thought, this guy is going to die. That was my fear. I thought, he will die. Obesity is a much bigger problem in the US than it is in the UK. That said, it's getting worse here. But I eventually found out he was. I didn't know exactly how big he was at the time. I look at the pictures now and he protected me from those pictures and images until he started to lose the weight. And I thought, I don't know how he was alive frankly.

GLENN: He is on the phone now. Brian. Hi, Brian.

BRIAN: Hi, guys.

GLENN: We're just talking behind your back.

BRIAN: Oh, that's all right.

GLENN: Yeah. So you told us yesterday that this -- this was the pivot point for you. Did you -- did you fear for losing your friend or what was it exactly that she said that changed you?

BRIAN: She put it into perspective for me. You know, I've been so self-centered and just so self-involved. You know, I didn't see past my own nose. And she really just put it into perspective. You know, made me realize -- she was saying, there are thousands of people out there fighting for their lives. You know, what are you doing? Just something that -- just the way she said it and the language she used. Like I said, which we can't repeat, was effective enough to get me to quit drinking. It was October 13th, 2012, I just quit drinking that night, and I never looked back since.

PAT: That's incredible willpower. Hardly anybody can do it cold turkey on their own like that and never look back. That had to be tough. You had to have gone through withdrawal for a while.

BRIAN: Yeah. It took me about two weeks to get over it. There were nights I didn't sleep. When I did sleep, I was sleeping for 12, 14 hours. Had cold sweats. Shaking. All kinds of things.

GLENN: Jackie, were you -- were you there through that with him? Jackie.

JACKIE: Yeah, because of the time difference, it actually kind of worked quite well. I'm a bit of an insomniac to be quite honest. You know, in the kind of dead at night, sort of the middle of the night, Michigan time, I was, you know, getting up for work. I mean, I was around. So I could be there for him. Yeah. So I was just keeping him occupied, busy, and distracted. Not for me. I've never been an alcoholic. I mean, I have an addictive personality, but not with alcohol or substances. And so I was -- I was conscious, so I didn't know how to help him and just distract him and just keep him in focused on me and getting -- and the message that I can start feeding him. That was bad terminology. When I said feeding him, I meant I was trying to get through to him.

GLENN: So, Brian, Jackie saved your life. And I believe that when something like that happens, you have to pass it on. And you -- you have. Whether you've thought of it that way or not, you have. With Team 383.

BRIAN: Yes, it's been amazing. We first created a Facebook group. Just wanted to share our story. And people just started joining. And it kind of grew like crazy. And all of a sudden now we have over 11,000 members, you know, from all over the world. And there's people from all walks of life. There are people that are starting their weight loss journey. People that have already completed it. And they're just going on there to support other people. And we've kind of created and cultivated a community of support. And kind of acceptance. And there's no judgment there whatsoever. And just been a fantastic opportunity to be able to reach back and help other people.

GLENN: Jackie, what do you do for a living?

JACKIE: I'm a civil servant. So I work for the government.

GLENN: Oh. Sorry for that.

[laughter]

BRIAN: About as descriptive as she can get.

GLENN: Yeah. What is it that you guys plan to do now? Is this -- is this -- is there a plan to have this grow into something that is -- is business? Is this -- what is this? Where do you go from here?

BRIAN: That's a good question. We don't know where it will go from here. Right now it's just a fantastic support group. It's great. It's gotten to the point where we had our members who were asking for T-shirts with the Team 383 name on it. So we've had T-shirts made. We've been sending those out to people. You know, Jackie and I have been mentoring about 150 individuals. We send out videos to them every weekend. And kind of helping them out with certain things asked for. Kind of -- you know, exercise videos and just kind of seeing how I cook my food and things like that. We've actually reached out to five individuals that we're helping one-on-one. And we talk to them on Skype every weekend. We kind of coach them through their weight loss issues. And it's been a great experience. We've been doing it for ten weeks now and it's been going really well.

JACKIE: I think to add to that, it's certainly -- it feels like a full-time job. I do it in my spare time. So, you know, it's something that possibly we would look into doing -- certainly Brian, you know, as a business possibly going forward at some point. But the whole focus would be on helping people. I mean, there's clearly a demand. What we're finding is -- what's been interesting to me because, you know, I have never done any of this before. I, actually to be honest, I've had yo-yo problems with dieting all my life. You wouldn't think I'm overweight at all if you saw me necessarily. But I have a mental state, I have terrible problems with food and so on. So I'm able to bring that to the party. But --

GLENN: Can I ask --

JACKIE: It has shown to me that people buffer themselves against the world by fat basically. And we've got people on there with all sorts of problems. It's nonjudgmental. Everyone is welcome. You know, every creed. Religion. People in the group are disabled. You know, lesbian, straight, gay, transgender. Whatever. Everyone is welcome in the group. And we really try to do it in a safe and supportive environment. And some of the problems that people have that they're sharing on there. It's a closed group. So it's a safe environment. I mean, it breaks your heart when you hear the stories. But you kind of understand why people build this cocoon around themselves with eating. So we're trying to deal with that. And actually the support from others in the group is actually helping.

GLENN: Can I ask what your addiction -- you said you had addiction problems, but it wasn't food-based or substance-based.

JACKIE: Mine was with food. I have an obsessive personality. I get obsessed with things. Fortunately, I haven't put myself in a situation where alcohol or substances or anything like that has been a problem. But food, I've always had a problem with food. And I recognize that I have that issue in me. And I recognize it in other people as well.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: So hard to relate to this as television personalities obviously are really attractive.

[laughter]

PAT: So, so incredibly hot.

GLENN: Jackie, you would be laughing if you had signed on or had a television access in England to us. Because we -- we're not the most attractive men. Let's put it that way.

JACKIE: Just for radio, eh?

STU: 3,000 pounds of men, you're talking to right now.

JACKIE: I'm sure you're gorgeous.

GLENN: Each. Oh, my gosh, you couldn't imagine. Jackie, thank you so much. I appreciate it. Brian, all my best.

BRIAN: Thanks for having us on. We appreciate it.

JACKIE: Thanks, bye.

GLENN: Thank you. Buh-bye. All right. You bet.

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

  Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

  

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

   USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

   Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

 

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.