When Our Side Lies, We Must Call It Out

May 25, 2016

WRITER

The year was 1781, and British statesman Edmund Burke took to the floor of parliament and said these words:

There are three estates in parliament. The first estate is the clergy. The second is nobility. The third, the common man. But there in the reporter galleries yonder there sits a fourth estate, much more important by far than the rest."

What Burke was saying was really simple: In a democratic society there are institutions like religion, government agencies, unions, political parties. To ensure proper governance and fairness, they come together. They debate. They find agreement. They make new laws and repeal old laws. But Burke was saying right then, and he identified the value of a fourth estate in society, a free and independent press.

The press needs to act as a people's watchdog. They ensure the people retain their access to truth, that we are informed and aware of what the institutions and our leaders --- whether they're clergy, unions or governments --- what our leaders are doing and if our leaders are telling us things that are truthful and consistent. They are the fourth estate. And they are elevated above the government, above unions, above our churches, above our religious figures. They protect us by finding and publishing and exposing the truth, so then we can make an informed decision, so that we the people are not misled and aren't lied to, so our freedom can't be taken from us by con men.

So what happens when the press starts to lie? What happens when they make it their goal not to discover and present the truth, but rather to fulfill a particular political agenda? What happens when the press aligns itself heavily with a single political party and begins to shape stories to support a particular moral ideology? We know because we've seen it.

Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

What happens is this: The truth is lost, and the people begin to trust no one. When the watchdog aligns itself with the wolves, it is the sheep who become the victims. The goal of the majority of the press stopped being about telling the truth around the time of Woodrow Wilson. That's when it became a coordinated effort, the fourth estate merged with the first and second estate.

It was three estates against one. The press stopped being about telling the truth and became about transforming the world, shaping it closer to their heart's desire, about getting certain candidates elected or changing the perception about human morality or our culture. The press developed an agenda that was far beyond fact-finding.

It began about presenting a story that gave readers and viewers a certain perception. It is the reason the Council of Foreign Relations was begun. Facts could be left out if they cricked the agenda. Certain photos or videos would be used or edited to tell the story, the editor, the reporter, or the company owner, or the politician, the government wanted to tell. And in their hearts, they had justified it, because to them, they were making the world a better place because they believed their agenda was right.

They were fighting against evil. They were fighting against deforestation. They were helping put a stop to gun violence. They were reducing alcoholism. Preventing obesity. Trying to put an end to income inequality. So a little lie here, a little omission here, a little snip of a video here or a sound bite --- you just select the right image, and you can create whatever perception you want among the readers.

So what if you have to bend the truth a little bit, if you have to smear a good man's name in the meantime? So what if you have to make people who look like they read the Bible, look like toothless rednecks to prevent gun violence, to save a child, it's worth that the truth be damned. We all know this because we've watched it for 100 years.

It's the job of the press to discover the truth and to present and inform us of the truth, but it hasn't been done in a long time. And without it, you know, because you see it. We become blind. We are lost because we cannot make an informed, rational decision about our future. And no one even looks to the press anymore because people say, "They're all lying." And when everyone is perceived as a liar, then there cannot be any search for truth. The truth becomes irrelevant.

Without a free press actually doing their job, the common man cannot do his job. We cannot protect each other's freedom. We can't act in concert to defend our neighbor's liberty.

We've known for a long time that the mainstream media has leftist bias. Independent watchdog organizations have released study after study showing how that bias impacts the veracity of their stories and their conclusions, how the truth is left behind. And every conservative knows it. We have lamented it for years. We have nicknames for it --- lame stream media, the drive-by media, the left stream media. It's even funny until we have completely lost the truth.

And now we find ourselves in a situation to where nobody is even looking for the truth --- because there is no standard of truth.

What we're lamenting is not just the lost of journalistic integrity. It's not just that they have a left-leaning bias. We have lost access to truth. And now the game has changed almost entirely, as it should have. But it's gone down the same road. In today's media world, the goal is just to sell eyeballs, to get shares, to get clicks. The more sensational the coverage, the more scandalous the story, the more bias you can pack into a story, the better. Throw them the red meat that they want. It's more likely to get shared, more likely to get clicked on. And, therefore, more likely to drive advertising dollars and high CPMs.

Show a polar bear standing alone on a tiny iceberg and write a story about global warming. Millions of shares. Millions of eyeballs. Millions of people all around the world feeling sorry for the polar bears who are going to drown out there in the freezing ocean.

CARMEN JASPERSEN/AFP/Getty Images

Should I mention the polar bear population is increasing dramatically? No, no, no. I say that, it takes away from the goal here, which is to paint a certain picture. To give a certain impression. To get more click-through his and comments. Don't let the truth get in the way of doing good. You may not get a promotion at the Huffington Post. If your story doesn't get clicks and comments, the polar bears, they don't care. So really, who gets hurt?

We know this problem has existed. We know that it's existed in media for probably since the beginning of time. But as a coordinated effort by the progressives --- on both sides of the aisles --- for 100 years.

Quite honestly, the only reason why I have any career and the reason why people know my name is because I was willing to go on radio and go on TV and simply tell the truth, first about me, and then about the truth as I understood it. And audiences were so hungry for it because they couldn't find authenticity anymore in their newspaper or broadcast news channel. They couldn't find somebody who would say what they mean and mean what they said.

Now, if we conservatives and Libertarians and constitutionalists, those of us on the political right, those of us who have seen the rise of leftist bias and willful deceit, if we are to take over the mainstream media and we do the same thing, why would we expect different results? Why would we expect to be able to garner trust?

When the New York Times --- when anybody does it, when Facebook does it --- it has to be called out. Bias is bias. When it's proven, bias is bias. When the Huffington Post does it, we have to call it out. But when our side does it, perhaps it's more important to call it out on ourselves because we don't have this image yet. We're not known as the liars, yet. They think we are. They think we're no different than they are. But I contend we are different than they are. I contend we do have higher values and higher principles. I contend we do have the truth. So when you hear somebody on our side smear to smear, print falsehoods, we need to call it out.

Yesterday, the Drudge Report posted a story about Bill Cosby, formerly facing sexual assault charges, as he should have. He should face that. But what was amazing was Drudge rightfully led with that story, but he also put a picture on top. And so the lead picture was Bill Cosby standing in front of a very young, maybe 10-year-old picture, of Hillary Clinton. So she was in the picture behind Bill Cosby.

How long did it take to find a picture of Bill Cosby that could implicate Hillary Clinton in his rape case? A picture of Bill Cosby in the foreground, with Hillary in focus in the background, completely out of context. How is that any different than the polar bear on the ice cap? How is that any different than the picture of that one polar bear floating there?

Photo: William Thomas Cain/Getty Images

I want you to know, I have no sympathy for Hillary Clinton. She has led the way of smearing the right for decades --- "the vast right-wing conspiracy," a lie to protect herself. There is plenty of very low-hanging fruit that she deserves to be attacked for, but this isn't about her. This is about us.

Do we or do we not hold a higher standard for ourselves? Because if it's wrong when the left-leaning press uses an image that misleads or confounds the truth, if that would have happened and it was a picture of Donald Trump, do you think Drudge would have used that picture? Of course not. He was furthering an agenda. Do you think if you would have had that picture and it was Donald Trump and the New York Times did it, do you think we would be outraged? Of course. Of course we would.

We believe in principles.

Everybody knows how I feel about Ted Cruz and constitutionalists, yet the one charge --- I've heard a lot of charges: I'm a drunk. I'm failing. I'm out of control. I'm crazy. I'm on drugs. I've sold out all my values. I'm not the guy I used to be. I got paid off by Ted Cruz, his super PACs. I've made millions of dollars. I've heard it all. But the one thing I haven't heard is that TheBlaze sold out and became an organ for Ted Cruz.

I believe in principles. The news must be separate from an agenda. That doesn't mean you don't stand for something, but we don't lie. We don't smear. We don't publish stories with iffy sources, no matter how much we want a story to be true. And believe me, there are stories we have wanted to be true. But we must go where the truth leads us. That must be our mission as people, to help others discover the truth, not to be hoodwinked into it. But to question with boldness, even the very existence of God. For if there is a God, he must surely rather honest questioning over blindfolded fear.

So where do we go now? We must go where the truth leads us. It must be the mission to help people discover the truth.

Featured Image: The Glenn Beck Program, May 25, 2016

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.

Glenn's Show Prep

When Our Side Lies, We Must Call It Out

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

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.

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

What Lee actually proposed

The Biden land-grab

American families pay the price

Divide and conquer

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

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

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Establish basic liability laws

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Oppose the state moratorium on AI

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

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.

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

Operation Midnight Hammer

What comes next

Now we pray

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

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.

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

Rising Islamism

Blending the worst ideologies

Call out radicalism