Important health warning for those experiencing the 'worst headache of your life'

Glenn told the story of Lisa Colagrossi, a well-known reporter in New York, who passed away last year from a ruptured brain aneurysm. Her husband, Todd Crawford joined Glenn on radio to discuss the condition, which is apparently just as prevalent as breast cancer and ALS, but practically unknown.

"The only way you find out about a brain aneurysm, whether you have one, is you rupture and die like my wife did," Crawford said. "Or you go in for another unrelated medical procedure that requires a CAT scan or MRA and the test results come back and say, 'oh, by the way, you have a brain aneurysm.'"

Crawford started a foundation in honor of his wife, LisasLegacy7.org, to promote awareness, education, research and support groups for brain aneurysm initiatives. As its first major initiative, the foundation recently launched a fund-raising campaign called the Lucky Seven Challenge.

"Number seven was Lisa's lucky number," Crawford said. "We're encouraging and making an appeal to everyone in the country to log on to LisasLegacy7.org, make a donation in an amount that has the number 7 in it. Just a minimum of $7. And then take to social media and nominate seven other friends to do the same thing."

Listen to the touching and informative conversation below.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors.

GLENN: I want to introduce you to somebody. And I just -- I just want to explain just one day, just one day in your life how many times have you heard your wife or your husband say, "Oh, I got the worst headache in my life?" And you just take that in stride. Worse headache of my life. I know I've had the worst headache of my life too. And after she says it a few times, you say, "You know what, we should get that checked. But it's not a priority because it's just the stress of life. All the things are going on. You're not sleepings well, everything else. Just, I'll get to that tomorrow." Lisa Colagrossi, she was a reporter for WABC in New York. TV. And we've seen her a million times. If you've lived in the New York area, you'd recognize her face in a heartbeat. She goes to work one morning. She covers a fire. She's on her way home, and her son texts her from his school. And she texts him back. And little hearts and smiley faces.

He doesn't know. But that's one of the last things she does because she has a brain aneurysm. Her husband gets a call. He knows she's not going to make it. The kids never speak to their mom again. They have her on life support until everybody can be there to say their last goodbyes and turn the machine off.

This is a horror story. But I want to introduce to you Todd Crawford. His sons Davis and Evan are here. We had them on TV last night. And they told the story. And they're here for a reason. Because this is more prevalent and more likely to happen than you think. How are you, Todd?

TODD: Okay. Thanks.

GLENN: You said that, "Hey, honey, we should have this checked." And she thought it was just a really bad headache.

TODD: She knew it was the worst headache of her life. I mean, that's the way she would describe it. She would walk through the door twice three times a week for a period of about five weeks, leading up to her rupture the morning of March 19th and said, "My head is absolutely killing me. I have the worst headache of my life." And that's the way that everybody describes it the same way. They write that on the emergency room hospital charts, ER doctors do. WHOL because that's the exact same way everybody describes it.

PAT: So had she gone in, they could have detected that and prevented it?

TODD: Yeah. So, I mean, had we known then what we know now, I would have grabbed her by the arm and insisted that we go to the ER and have a CAT scan or MRA, which is a version of an MRI, done. And at that point, because her rupture was underway which is why she was experiencing these God awful headaches, it probably would have required an open brain surgery, craniotomy. There are less invasive procedures if you diagnose it and get it before it ruptures. But there's -- there's a good chance she would not have been able to resume her career either way.

PAT: What is it that ruptures? A vessel?

TODD: It's a good question. A brain aneurysm is a thinner of one of the walls of a blood vessel in the brain.

PAT: Okay.

TODD: As a result of the blood flow pounding over that weakening spot over time so that eventually the wall balloons out and the pressure keeps pounding against it until a rupture occurs.

PAT: So with a MRA, it's not hard to detect. They can spot that --

TODD: MRA or CAT scan. But, you know, insurance doesn't cover MRAs or CAT scans for this.

GLENN: Why?

TODD: There are no routine scans like breast cancer because of the numbers. Because nobody knows about it.

GLENN: Okay. But the numbers. Hang on. Let's get into the numbers. And this is the reason why I've invited you on radio is because there's a lot of people -- I don't mean to be callous, but there's a lot of people who die of a lot of different things and we feel bad about all of these. This one, actually, is really important for people to know. Because the numbers, there are more people that are affected by this than breast cancer.

TODD: So here's what we know today. There are 6 million people walking around with a brain aneurysm today.

GLENN: That we literally know of. That's not a guess. Literally have been diagnosed with.

TODD: That's have been diagnosed. We know about them. Of those 6 million, there will be 30- to 40,000 ruptures a year. And of those 30- to 40,000 ruptures, 50 percent are instantly fatal, and of the 50 percent who survive, two-thirds of them will walk around with a major neurological deficit the rest of their life. I got a note last night of a father in Georgia whose daughter-in-law experienced a rupture, has had two surgeries and she's now in a vegetative state. So this is -- and women and African-Americans are 50 percent more likely to develop brain aneurysms than anybody else. Don't know why because there's no research. There's no money being thrown at this to study it. So based on what we know, it's just as prevalent as breast cancer and ALS. And the only way you find out about a brain aneurysm, whether you have one, is you rupture and die like my wife did. Or you go in for another unrelated medical procedure that requires a CAT scan or MRA and the test results come back and say, oh, by the way, you have a brain aneurysm. So I guarantee that 6 million number is more like 12 to 15 million. Guarantee it.

PAT: All those people have it and nobody is studying it. How is that possible? Why? Why is there no money being spent on this?

GLENN: When he says no money, I want you to understand, the NIH and our government spends less than a million dollars. Less than a million dollars.

PAT: Gee.

GLENN: Now, think of that. It's bigger than breast cancer. Less than a million dollars.

TODD: Breast cancer receives by -- from the NIH every year, $6 million a year. ALS receives over 70 million. NIH appropriates over 20 million each for headaches and migraines to study those. By the way, neither one of those have ever killed anybody. Brain aneurysms, about a million dollars a year.

STU: If they do detect it, what can they do to treat it?

TODD: What they can do depends on various conditions and criteria. But there are two procedures that if they feel it needs to be treated, that are much less invasive, where they'll go up through your thigh, into the brain, and they will insert either a coil or a stent, much like a artery in the heart, to block the flow of blood and prevent it from further weakening the wall of the aneurysm itself. So that's -- you're not talking -- it is -- you're not talking about a cure here for this disease. Unlike breast cancer or heart disease. What you're talking about at best is the management of it.

GLENN: Well, there's not even really a cure of breast cancer. Until you wipe out cancer, I don't think that taking your breasts off is a cure. That's not -- you know, that's just slowing things down.

TODD: Right.

GLENN: Sometimes you can get away with, that's it. But, you know, that's what we're doing really with all medicines is just slowing things down, unless you're talking about things like polio, which we have cured.

So, first of all, what do you do for a living?

TODD: Well, I was in finance. But once Lisa passed away, I resigned from my position and have dedicated myself to this cause out of my -- out of the unconditional love that we shared for one another, our faith, and our two boys. To show them that -- how to address adversity head-on. And my mission is to create a parent organization in this country that represents this disease to save other lives. It's too late for their mom and my wife. But we can save countless lives of others across the country and around the world if we have support and raise awareness throughout the country.

GLENN: I wish I would have met your wife. Because just by looking at your eyes yesterday in the interview and again today, you're an exceptional man. Your kids are exceptional. And that's not easy to do in media, in New York, to keep faith and to keep yourself ground. She was a remarkable woman.

TODD: She was the best. I mean, absolutely amazing. And you can't get a sense for how incredible of a woman she was unless you were either married to her or you were one of her sons. And words just don't describe. And her faith meant a great deal to her and was deepening. And the void is huge. There's no question about that. And we're in the process of putting the pieces back together and trying to figure out what our new normal looks like and just adjusting to that.

GLENN: Yeah. Okay. So tell me -- we only have a couple of minutes. Tell me how people can get involved and helped.

TODD: So we've created the Lisa Colagrossi Foundation, which can be found at LisasLegacySeven.org. And we hope that that will become the largest private funder of brain aneurysm initiatives around the country in the areas of awareness, education, research, and support groups. And the foundation's first major initiative, we launched the first ever national fund-raising campaign a couple weeks ago called the Lucky Seven Challenge. Number seven was Lisa's lucky number. It happened to be the station she worked at in New York, ABC 7. And the Lucky Seven Challenge is a very simple concept. We're encouraging and making an appeal to everyone in the country to log on to LisasLegacySeven.org, make a donation in an amount that has the number 7 in it. Just a minimum of $7. And then take to social media and nominate seven other friends to do the same thing. It's that simple. If we just get 1 million -- find 1 million people in this country who love God, who have a good heart, who want to get involved with a cause where just a little can make a very big difference, we just need them to donate $7, we'll hit our goal. $7 million in the next seven months. Very aggressive, never been tried before, but God willing, we'll get there.

GLENN: LisasLegacySeven.org. I have a very good friend of mine who -- who wanted me to donate money to a hospital. And I said to him, "I'll do that if you'll do me a favor, and that is teach me how to be charitable. Teach me how to be a more charitable man." And he said, "I'll make that deal. Here's the first lesson, you have to care about all of it." He was at a cancer center. And he said, "You can't just care about cancer. You can't just care about breast cancer or brain cancer. You can't just care about the people that you're trying to save in the Middle East. You can't care about the kids that are being shot in the streets of Chicago. You can't care about people with brain aneurysms. You have to care about all of them." And for $7, that's an easy way. You have seven friends give $7. That's the price of a Starbucks cup of coffee. You have seven friends that this story will touch that you could get them to donate just $7. I want you to go to LisasLegacySeven.org. The number seven. If you would like to hashtag this, it's #lucky7. Take the lucky seven challenge. LisasLegacySeven.org. Thank you so much.

TODD: Thank you. God bless.

GLENN: God bless you.

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.