Disturbing New Story About Trump Fits His Style

The Context

A disturbing article published Sunday in the Daily Mail chronicles a respected BBC journalist's documentary of Donald Trump from years ago. Selena Scott's account of her two weeks with the real-estate mogul echo the modus operandi he's displayed time again --- sweet talking and charming, followed by attacks and slander if he doesn't get his way.

White Leather & Beautiful Things

Ms. Scott described a particularly creepy encounter aboard Trump's private plane: "We were 30,000 feet on Trump's private jet, flying to Florida, when he showed me his white leather double bed. "I like beautiful things," he purred seductively. "That's why I like you so much." This must be the "sweet talking" portion of her experience. Ewww. It might be worth noting that Trump was married to Marla Maples at the time.

When the Shark Bites

Reminiscent of how Trump responded to Megyn Kelly's interview with Vanity Fair, Ms. Scott claims the so-called billionaire did not take lightly to her refusal --- or her documentary which showed him contradicting himself on his business holdings --- describing him as a shark that strikes with speed and vicious intent when it smells blood in the water. "I showed both assertions in my film with many other inconsistencies with the telling soundtrack 'It Ain’t Necessarily So'. Trump went ballistic. Over many years he sent me a series of intimidating letters branding me ‘sleazy, unattractive, obnoxious and boring.’ He said I was ‘totally uptight’, and that I had begged him for a date. In his dreams!"

Enter NBC

You'd think the media would report such a story if they knew, right? Well, they do. It seems NBC is more than aware of Ms. Scott's documentary --- the network purchased the rights to the story. So why haven't they aired it yet?

"I'm telling you, they're setting Hillary Clinton's win up. That's all they're doing," Glenn said Monday on The Glenn Beck Program. "NBC just bought a documentary from the BBC because they feel it's going to be relevant soon. Not relevant now. But relevant as soon as the guy gets the nomination --- if it is Donald Trump."

As Glenn has stated on air numerous times. The media are biding their time, waiting for Trump to win the nomination before revealing the skeletons in his closet. These revelations will be extremely distasteful the the American people, setting up Hillary for a win.

Common Sense Bottom Line

"The same thing is happening that happened with Obama, but for a different reason. They held things back for Obama because they wanted him to win," Glenn said. "They're holding things back from Donald Trump until he gets the nomination, and then they're going to slaughter him. They're going to slaughter him."

 

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

GLENN: There was a disturbing, disturbing article that came out. And it's just like the press to do this. I'm telling you, they're setting Hillary Clinton's win up. That's all they're doing.

NBC just bought a documentary from the BBC because they feel it's going to be relevant soon. Not relevant now. But relevant as soon as the guy gets the nomination, if it is Donald Trump. And his supporters seem to be, you know, like they're all -- they all seem like they're coming out.

And NBC bought this unbelievable documentary about what happened to a woman who is kind of the Diane Sawyer of England. She was the first woman on what they call breakfast shows, the morning shows. She was the 5 o'clock news anchor on the BBC. She now works for Sky News. She's worked for NBC, she's worked for CBS. I just want to read some of this.

Even by extraordinary standards of Donald Trump, this is a creepy shadow, as she says. We were 30,000 feet on Trump's private jet, flying to Florida, when he showed me his white leather double bed. "I like beautiful things," he purred seductively. "That's why I like you so much."

This was just one of the many revealing and excruciating moments during the two weeks I spent with Donald Trump in 1995, while making a 60-minute profile of him for ITV.

Let's see. It's curious -- it is a curious truth about Donald Trump that he believes the more obnoxious he is, the more successful he becomes. Intimidation is a brutal weapon he's used all his life when sweet-talking fails to get his way.

Now, remember what I posted last week. I said, "He first sweet-talks. He tries to charm you into it. Then he starts to brutalize you. He starts to scare you. And then if you don't give up, he takes you out." Remember? I said, "That's who this man is."

So it comes as no surprise to me that this is a tactic that he uses to such an effect in the strangest wooing of American electorate in the nation's history. The more he trashes people in America, the higher his approval ratings. When he insults Mexicans, calls for a ban on Muslims, disrespects women, and declares that he will bomb the crap out of the Islamic State, the cheers go up.

Every time a commentator says he's gone too far, he proves he has found the direct link to the dark heart of the American psyche. As Iowa citizens vote in the first ballot to determine the Republican candidate for the White House, many are asking, "Who is the real Donald Trump? Is he a regular guy who speaks the truth as he sees it, or a bigmouth who appears to think he's the star of a reality TV show?" I think I have a unique perspective. She writes, "Trump is a shark. A shark has no yesterday and no tomorrow, just the next meal, the next victim to be destroyed and consumed. And a shark must keep moving or die. That's Trump. And let me tell you why I feel that."

Now, again, this is a BBC anchor.

I would like to say it would be easy to have been overwhelmed by the tidal wave of flattery and attention I received from Trump when I arrived in New York to make a documentary about the man now dividing America with his rhetoric. Checking into my suite at the exclusive Plaza Hotel, which Trump then owned, overlooking Central Park, I was greeted by a forest of blood red roses, with a tasteful, handwritten note that simply said, "Donald."

Later that day, I went in to meet Trump at his Manhattan office, and his secretary Norma had been well briefed. Although we had never met, she welcomed me as, quote, her dear, dear friend.

She ushered me into his paneled board room, high above the city with magnificent views of the skyline, where I was greeted, not just by Trump, but by a falex (phonetic) of suited male business associates.

"Gentlemen," said Trump, "I'd like you to meet our new partner in the deal, the legendary Selina Scott."

Now, I prided myself on being a pragmatic interviewer, well-versed in the wiles of those seeking to make favorable impressions on the camera. But now I was beginning to feel a little uneasy. As I was paraded before Trump's grinning acolytes, these words began to swim in my head, "Partner in the deal? What did that mean? Did he think that he had won me over and I was somehow incorporated into his publicity department, already wrapped up into his deluded sense of his own wonderfulness?"

Trump was turning on the full wattage of what he perceived to be his irresistible charm to women, but there was a great deal more of his theatricality to come. As viewer of last week's Channel 4 documentary, The Madness of Donald Trump would have seen, the station broadcasted an embarrassing clip of him dancing around me saying, "Isn't she beautiful? She doesn't think she's beautiful, but she's beautiful," as the camera caught me grimacing.

Now, think of this. This is from a British newspaper. The BBC aired this documentary last week. NBC has purchased it. But they're holding it back. Why?

PAT: It's unbelievable.

GLENN: How can the British press -- the same thing is happening that happened with Obama, but for a different reason. They held things back for Obama because they happened him to win. They're holding things back from Donald Trump until he gets the nomination, and then they're going to slaughter him. They're going to slaughter him.

This flattery came shortly after our first meeting and it was swiftly followed by Trump announcing, "She shares with Larry King an ability to charm and cajole you into revealing more than you intended, and she's also a lot better looking."

During the two weeks I spent with Trump, there would be helicopter rides over Manhattan, private jet flights on his lavish oceanside Florida estate, a trophy property once owned by one of the richest women in America. He invited me to a poolside party, boasted about his great skills as a billionaire businessman, and most tellingly, introduced me to the two most important women in his life, his then wife Marla and his mother Mary.

I believe it's not not too fanciful to suggest that the key to understanding Trump is his attitude toward women. As Megyn Kelly, the Fox News host, discovered when she asked him about his attitude to women, where he called women that he doesn't like fat pigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals, the oily smile is replaced with a deep well of hate if he feels he has not emotionally seduced you.

This is true. This is absolutely true

PAT: Oh, yeah. No doubt about it.

GLENN: And Megyn Kelly, this is what's happening to Megyn Kelly. I know. I've been there. My 60-minute documentary exposed how through bluff, bombast, and braggadocio -- how do you say that?

PAT: Braggadocio.

GLENN: -- braggadocio, he had convinced the American business community he was far richer than he was. And that while the rest of his rivals were losers, he knew how to make the US great. This ability to blag people into believing that he was a commercial genius was vividly illustrated in a helicopter ride we took over New York.

Pointing to the Empire State Building, he said he owned it.

I asked, what? All of it?

Yep. 100 percent, he replied.

Later, forgetting that he had told me he wholly owned the building, he told me he owned 50 percent of it, which was greatly reduced. It was the same story with the Trump Taj Mahal Casino in Atlanta City. Wholly owned by me, he said. Are you sure, I asked. Well, maybe 80 percent, he demurred. Are you quite sure, I pressed. He replied, well, actually, it's 50 percent.

I showed both assertions in my film, with other inconsistencies, with the telling soundtrack It Ain't Necessarily So. Well, trump went ballistic. Over the many years, he sent me -- now, this is exactly what Megyn Kelly said is happening. Listen to this.

Over in years he sent me a series of intimidating letters branding me as sleazy, unattractive, obnoxious, and boring. He said I was totally uptight and that I had begged him for a date.

This vicious tirade was often accompanied by a fanzine newspaper cutting, which he purported to show how much money he was making. He scrawled across the top, "Selina, you're a major loser. Dear Selina, I hear your career is going terribly."

JEFFY: This guy, man.

PAT: Sound familiar?

GLENN: This is it.

PAT: You've been through it. Megyn Kelly is going through it.

GLENN: This is everybody who stands against him is going through it. This is his MO. I'm telling you, the guy is very dangerous.

In the meantime --

PAT: It's to the point of almost a psychosis.

GLENN: No, I think he is. I think there's psychosis. There's deep issues here.

This broadside was in stark contrast to the creepy chat-up line he deployed on the Trump jet where he showed me his bedroom. Later in the same plane, he persuaded Ruby Wax to rubbish me on the gray, while she tried to ingratiate herself with him. This harassment only stopped when I threatened to take legal action for stalking.

I return to my shark analogy: When a shark smells blood in the water, it strikes with speed and vicious intent. So with Trump. Any sign of vulnerability is exploited. He only understands when force is met with force.

Now, think of that. This is a guy who is going to be in charge of the nuclear codes.

PAT: Think of that too with Carly Fiorina and how she shut him down. I mean, she just --

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: Hit him in the face in that debate, and he stopped from that point on because he realized he wasn't going to get away with that with her. So when you smack him in the face like any other bully, he skulks off and tries it with someone else.

GLENN: So it's with some amusement that twenty years after I made that film, the giant NBC network in America has asked to buy my channel for interview about Trump, including all of the unused footage.

STU: Gee.

JEFFY: Oh, my gosh.

STU: What are they going to find in there? Times 20,000 documentaries this guy has done with different news people around the world, all the times he's been in front of the camera, all the unused footage. Gee, what are they going to do if this guy gets to the general? They're going to have a staff of 100 people for each one of them, going through all the footage, hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of hours that Donald Trump has forgotten about.

GLENN: Did anybody watch the documentary from Scotland?

STU: You've Been Trumped, or whatever? I actually haven't seen it.

GLENN: You have to watch it. It's unbelievable. He is -- it's this -- it's like this little seaside community, and he wanted to build a golf course. And it's this little seaside community. And first he goes in and he tries to buy all the old ladies flowers, and he's like, "Oh, you're so great. And, hey, can I buy your house?"

PAT: Like with Vera Coking.

JEFFY: Like everyone else.

GLENN: He does the same thing. He wined and dined everybody and said it's going to be great. And I'll find a great place -- I'll buy your house so you can find a really great place to live.

Well, this little seaside community, these are all people that have lived there -- like a lot of them are old ladies that have lived there since World War II. It's their husband -- their family was raised there. And it's a farming community. It's just this little sheep-farming community right on the seaside. It's beautiful.

Well, once they said no, he started trashing them. And saying that they were pigs. They lived like pigs. They were insane. They should be institutionalized. They're just -- they've lost all reason. Just trashed them.

PAT: Oh, man.

GLENN: And it's all on tape. And this documentary shows him saying these things and these little old ladies going, "I don't think I live like a pig."

(laughter)

When America sees this stuff, it's going to be lights out. And if you think the media is not going to play that, you're crazy.

STU: Yeah, and that was the most effective negative about Donald Trump that they tested in the Des Moines Register Poll was his use of eminent domain, taking people's private property for his own personal gain. In fact, they even used it as -- they included for government purposes. So like a -- a road or -- they made it actually more broad than the way that Trump wants to use it, which is specifically he tried to use it for his own personal gain and supported the Kelo decision which was, "Oh, well. Well, then the government can get more tax dollars, so it's okay to take people's private property."

The biggest negative that was tested out of all of them on Donald Trump. People inherently know that that's an absurd stance, that you would be able to take someone's stuff that they own, that they had built their whole lives in this community, and because he wants to build a golf course or a parking lot, that he should be able to come in with the power of the government and take it from them. And he still supports that to this day. It's not an old stance.

JEFFY: Well, what if they live like pigs.

STU: They live like pigs.

PAT: They live like pigs. They need to move.

GLENN: You're right. They should be -- you know what, they should come up and have to stand before a board and explain themselves: Sir or madam, what is it that you have contributed to society? And if they can't explain themselves, then we shouldn't keep them alive. I'm sorry.

Featured Image: Selina Scott, Donald Trump and Marla Maples, circa 1995 (Photo Credit: Unknown)

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.