Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Trump's Security Issues: Media Conflation or Real Conflict?

December 27, 2016
Ted Tuttle

Editor

In for Glenn Beck, John Cardillo spoke with former NYPD Chief of Intelligence Edmund Hartnett on Monday, covering implications about Donald Trump's private security force conflicting with the U.S. Secret Service.

Cardillo's guest seemed to think this was nothing more than the media doing what the media does best.

"Good security is done almost like the umpire in the baseball game. If it's done right, you don't even see the guy. You don't even hear from the guy," Hartnett said. "So, anything I see being blown up by media like Politico or Salon is ridiculous."

Listen to the segment or read the transcript below.

JOHN: As a former law enforcement guy, when people get stories about security wrong, it's a pet peeve. It irks me. And there's a story in Politico from Ken Vogel. Now, Ken Vogel, you remember this guy, he was the reporter in the WikiLeaks emails, who was sending his stories to the DNC for edit and approval.

So anything this guy writes, I take with a grain of salt. And the story is entitled, Trump private security force playing with fire. And the implication is that Donald Trump is disregarding the Secret Service and fielding his own security force, which is kind of ridiculous. But I wanted to bring somebody in to talk about this, who intimately understands the dynamic of the Secret Service's interaction with private security teams and local police. Very good friend of mine is joining me.

Edmund Hartnett. Ed was chief of intelligence. The NYPD's chief of intelligence on 9/11 went on to be the police commissioner of Yonkers, New York, and is now a global private security expert. He's an expert on terror and global security. Really my go-to guy. Commissioner, thanks for being here. Good morning.

EDMUND: Good morning, John. Merry Christmas to you and your family.

JOHN: Merry Christmas. Long overdue this call.

So there's this article, and basically the implication is that Donald Trump has this private security force that's getting in the way of the Secret Service. I read it differently. Maybe you and I have unique perspectives on this, some of these guys -- one is a retired NYPD guy who left the job in 1999. He's a Navy veteran. He -- I'm sorry -- worked for Trump since '99.

And these guys to me have really just become Donald Trump's aides and body men. They're not interfering with the Secret Service. The rallies I've been to, it seems, like a well choreographed, well oiled machine where they're all working very effectively together.

Now, when you were chief of intelligence -- I'm sure most listeners don't know, but the NYPD intelligence division, is the unit that liaises with the Secret Service, when the president or the first family is in New York City. So you have intimate experience dealing with the private security teams and the staffs of presidents of the United States.

Tell us a little bit about this. Am I downplaying this, or is this a genuine concern?

EDMUND: To me, John, it's not a genuine concern. Anything I've seen, anything I've heard from people I know in the business, in the public sector and the private sector side, describes Donald Trump's security team relationship with the Secret Service as seamless coordination.

The guy we always see on TV with the president-elect, Pete Shiller (phonetic), is the gentleman you referenced. He's retired NYPD. Retired Navy officer. Consummate professional. Everything I've seen and heard about him -- he does not get away. Good security is done. Almost like the umpire in the baseball game.

If it's done right, you don't even see the guy. You don't even hear from the guy. So anything I see being blown up by like Politico or by Salon.com, where they're referring to the president-elect's security team as this private mercenary army, I think, is one of the quotes, is ridiculous. They don't seem to refer to Jay-Z and Beyonce as having a private mercenary army, but they probably have just as much security as Donald Trump does.

JOHN: Maybe more. I mean, we saw that Ivanka Trump and her husband were harassed on a JetBlue flight. They didn't have a phalanx of security officers around them.

And in addition to now being a part of the first family, they're a wealthy couple who could certainly afford it.

If anything, it seems the Trump family was just trying to live a pretty normal life, before being elected. Look, he's a famous guy. And he lives opulently. But with the way the kids, his children and the grandchildren were trying to operate, it seems like they didn't have these armies of security around them, like you so accurately say, Ed. We see celebrities have, with their motorcades.

You know, I read a story. Chris Pine, the actor who is in the Star Wars movies. He plays Kirk. Jeff Bezos had a role on the set of the new film. And Chris Pine didn't know who he was. But he said, "Well, Jeff Bezos is the CEO of Amazon." But he said, "Well, I knew he was someone important when he showed up with like 25 SUVs and a security army." And he said, "You know, the heads of the studios didn't that have."

So you make a great point. So tell us a little bit -- because I know people are interested in this.

How -- for example, Donald Trump is going to be spending a lot of time in New York City. The president-elect is going to be there. It's his second home. His wife and young son are staying there. What's the NYPD's role going to be in all of this? How are they going to interact with the Secret Service and at the same time effectively police the rest of the city?

EDMUND: Again, having firsthand experience, John, nobody -- no place in the country is the relationship between Secret Service and the local police stronger than it is in New York City. Because of -- of the nature of the city and the United Nations being there and every dictator, king, president, ruler, prime minister comes to New York City, sometimes a few times a year -- so that -- that role -- that coordination between the Secret Service and the NYPD is outstanding. It's exemplary. It can't be matched anywhere else in the country.

So the NYPD will coordinate with the Secret Service for everything that involves the Trump family, if there are private security officers involved -- we've had it many times. Again, dignitaries, where they come with their people. It will be seamless.

When the president is sworn in, he will be the -- his security will be run by the Secret Service. They will liaise with his private security people. They'll tap into their knowledge and expertise because they'll need it.

But security for the president of the United States and his immediate family will be run and coordinated by the Secret Service in DC in New York City and wherever the president goes.

JOHN: I'm speaking with Edmund Hartnett, former chief of intelligence of the New York City Police Department and Yonkers police commissioner. Also, very good personal friend of mine. You're always my go-to guy on these issues. You're the most knowledgeable guy on this. And you stay very current.

Let's talk a little bit about the upcoming New Years holiday. Now, we've got the president-elect from New York City. Most of his family living in New York City. We've got New Year's Eve in New York City, arguably the largest gathering of people in the world every year.

Without disclosing operational security, I always want to have the listeners understand what goes into the security protocols. But at the same time, these are always careful segments for me. Because I never want to tell too much of how we do what we do. But insofar as you can tell through your experience, what is NYPD going to do to both protect the family of the president-elect and safeguard the city on New Years Eve, as they would if the president-elect's family didn't live in New York?

EDMUND: Well, first, the planning that goes into this stuff is incredible. It's mind-boggling. They don't just take out last year's folder, dust it off, and set the plan in place. These plans are made months ahead of time. These plans were made with contingencies with either Clinton winning or Mr. Trump winning. So planning those, like I said, is incredible. They'll also tap into anything that's going on in the world right now, no matter where it is. It could be areas of the country we're not familiar with. But there's something happening there. Some hot spot there and maybe there's some connection now to New York City, trust me, the NYPD and their federal partners will be all over it.

The planning that goes into a regular New Years Eve, if there is such a thing, Times Square detail, the -- the -- the back flips that people have to do to get into the pen alone, the screening that goes on overtly and covertly, is incredible. You can't rule out anything. You can't rule out some lone wolf trying to do something.

On the investigative side even, they're looking at various people that may or may not cause problems. And they want to know exactly where they are at any given moment. So, again, the planning that goes into it is incredible. I think people that want to go to New Years Eve should go and have a good time, be safe. But obviously, look around for anything suspicious. But I think it's going to be a great New Year's, as always. And I know I'm prejudiced. But nobody does it as well as the NYPD.

JOHN: No. I happen to agree. And we might get flamed for that. But I don't think it's because it's our alma mater. I think it's out of necessity, right? Out of necessity and sheer size. We've got New York City and all its landmarks. We've got the New York City stock exchange or the hub of banking and finance for the world. The exact targets that terrorists want to hit. They want to destroy capitalism. You're going to hit New York, you're going to hit London. And the NYPD, being the largest, being the most robust, well-funded agency out there. They really didn't have a choice, but to be thrust into the role they were.

And I think with Edmund Hartnett, former chief of intelligence of the NYPD -- and I've got a question for you that might be depressing this holiday season. But I've been talking a lot today about global security, terror, lone wolfs.

What's the situation that keeps you awake at night? You're now with the private firm, Brozlin Rist (phonetic), from -- by another good friend of ours. You guys have state-of-the-art intelligence on the private side. You've seen it up close and personal. You have the highest levels of security clearance. you know how this stuff works. What's the one thing that keeps you awake at night in terms of a terror threat in the United States as we sit here today, December 26th, 2016?

EDMUND: You know, we always talk about various things: Suicide bombers, explosive laden vehicles, and Mumbai-style mass shooting instances.

All of that stuff always concerns me. Kind of a subset of that to me is a group that cannot be cracked, that cannot be infiltrated. And I use an example -- and I hate them, but I use them as an example.

I have brothers in Boston, in the Boston Marathon bombing. You know it's your brother. You know your brother is not an informant. You know your bother's not been flipped. You know your brother is not an undercover FBI agent.

When you get a group like that, that just can't be infiltrated, to me, that's the one -- that's the thing that makes me most fearful, that you get two guys or three guys, family members that have grown up, that have maybe even done bad acts together -- if you've seen someone kill someone, say for example, five years earlier, you pretty much know that that guy is good. He's a good member of your team. He's not been turned. He's not been infiltrated. He's not an agent.

So you get that kind of hard-core group that just can't be cracked. That's what probably concerns me the most. And that kind of group can do a bomb attack. They can do a Mumbai-style attack. They can do the explosive laden vehicle or the truck driver thing like we've seen in Nice and in Berlin.

JOHN: So it really does come down to, for average Americans, if you see something, say something. If that family next door seems to be doing something nefarious, call 911.

I mean, really, American citizens are our best eyes and ears. Because those asymmetrical, low tech attacks that don't require chatter because their family members are friends. I agree with you. They scare me to death. And it really is up to American citizens to tip off law enforcement in the intelligence community, correct?

EDMUND: I think -- and I think hopefully we're seeing society getting away from that a bit. San Bernardino, which resulted in many people getting killed, I think people after that, they wish they had called.

If they had seen something suspicious with that married couple, and they wished they had called. But they didn't want to be branded as bigots. They didn't want to be branded as being prejudiced. I think we're slowly but surely having people come out of that dangerous political correctness that we've seen.

JOHN: You know, I hope you're right. I tend to agree with you, Ed, as I tend to. I hope you're right. You have a great new year, my friend. We're going to be speaking very, very soon. I'm going to have you on air with me often, in 2017. Have a great one.

EDMUND: You're doing a great job. Thanks, John.

JOHN: Thanks. And with Edmund Hartnett. And really is a world expert on this. Former chief of intelligence on 9/11. I'll let him tell his 9/11 story one day. It is absolutely -- absolutely captivating. Real American hero. Understated. Unsung American hero.

Featured Image: Scott Olson/Getty Images

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.