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

Riaz Patel: I Am Really Frustrated With Liberals Right Now

January 20, 2017
Staff

WRITER

Alert the media. There is alive today at least one liberal more interested in facts than identity politics, in people than labels. TV producer and humanitarian Riaz Patel joined Glenn on Friday to continue their discussion about bringing people together and healing the divide.

"I'm not interested in the politics space, but I'm interested in the humanity space," Patel said. "When you know people who have lives and situations that are completely different from yours that voted for Trump for very specific reasons, for their family's welfare, you tell me how you can hate them once you meet them and see their home that slipped off the foundation ten years ago, but they can't afford to move. That is the humanity that's out there if people can get past the labels. And that's what we have to do."

GLENN: Welcome to the program. We're bringing in Riaz Patel who you might remember is the guy before the election went to Alaska on his own dime. How would you describe yourself politically?

 

RIAZ: I would say -- well, funny I was Democrat. Democrat liberal, but I'm understanding a whole segment of America I didn't understand before.

GLENN: Right. And you've kind of done what we've done before. Unchained yourself from the label of liberal or Democrat, and you want to end the hatred and the black and white of everything; right?

RIAZ: It's too black and white. That's where media plays, and that's what my profession is. I come from media. And, to me, when you're talking about the safe space, it really is a direct product of what the media has done for two years.

GLENN: Let's talk about the safe space. We just heard in Ohio and also Connecticut. They're bringing in grief counselors today for the teachers and for the children who might be experiencing any kind of discomfort with Donald Trump being the president.

 

RIAZ: It's less about the discomfort and more about for two years, you were taught that there was nothing positive about this man. That it was like electing Hitler. For two years. There was not one positive thing he said. Now, I am not a Trump supporter. That being said if you're unfair and uneven about news, why are you vilifying? So the result of him winning created this panic that we elected a monster. And that's the direct product of how the media portrayed him for two years.

GLENN: Hang on just a second. That is a different way of looking at it, isn't it? I just associated that with the progressive Namby Pamby I never tied the media and said it is the way he's been portrayed. It actually helps me validate their feelings.

RIAZ: We know this because when you talk to families on the democratic side that I've talked to, the children are unable to get their heads around it. Because in their homes, through their TVs, and to their phones, this monster was running for president against Hillary Clinton. And then when the monster won, they don't know what to do. And I remember on the night of the election, every single parent I know said how do I explain this in the morning to my kids? And I thought why don't they think it's a presidential election? Why don't -- why do they think that humanity is at stake? And I remember being on a parenting panel and a woman said to me "My daughter was at a neighbor's house, and they were discussing politics, and she came home at 2:00 a.m. because she felt unsafe." And everyone said congratulations for teaching your daughter to remove herself out of an unsafe situations. And I sat on a parenting panel as the only male and said, "A little bit shame on you. How long have you known these neighbors?" And she said about a decade.

 

Why would your daughter ever feel unsafe in a house for someone she has known for a decade? That is the media. The conflict-driven entertainment of reality seeped in, which obviously Donald Trump came from. They taught him how to do this, seeped into every aspect for the past two years of election coverage. It became a reality show. If you saw the CNN ads where they looked like these fighters. It literally looked like a heavy weight fight. The conflict-driven set up of this whole election made it that Hillary had to within win. Had to win. It was the only right choice. Right and wrong. And wrong won. How do you explain to the kids at Ohio state that wrong one? Because you don't understand the other side.

 

When I went to Alaska, I found the other side, and it's very hard to hate people when they're looking at you saying I hate people for eight long years. And people going to the march, and it was down right mean.

An amazing woman that wrote for Muslims specifically --

 

GLENN: By the way, so people know, Riaz is Muslim Pakistani immigrant. You've lived here how long?

 

RIAZ: Most of my life.

 

GLENN: Okay. And gay man who is married and has an adopted child. So there is no more boxes you can check.

 

RIAZ: No.

 

GLENN: For people that we are not supposed to get along with.

 

RIAZ: I have them all. You have the whole system with me. We don't need to collect the cards. I've got them all.

GLENN: And we had dinner last night. Our family joined Riaz last night for dinner. And what was nice was beforehand, we had a meeting and a bunch of people from the office. And the president of my company is a Jew and obviously he wears the yarmulke and everything else. And here's a Muslim man and Jewish man, and we're all joking together, and we're joking -- he's joking about the Jew building a settlement. Comes over and is, like, don't build a settlement over here. And the Jew is, like, fill a bag of nails and blow me up, and we were all laughing about it.

RIAZ: You have to.

GLENN: Because we were joking about the stereotypes that have kept us apart.

 

RIAZ: Yes. Yes. and, to me, the only way to live with these labels is to make it funny. When I'm around those labels, those labels are too important. I believe honestly important. This Facebook post was the meanest thing I've seen. They said they got on the bus to DC with all of these Trump supporters with all of these white women. And I thought you're on a march about women's rights and literally on a Facebook thread like mean girls attacking a group of white girls who got on the van. How is this a new era of celebration when even the women, the feminists are attacking the other women? And they'll say, well, women don't support each other.

 

Well, you're not supporting the women on that van right now. I was literally -- it was after we had dinner. I was utterly shocked. And I think they really need to wake up.

 

GLENN: So, Riaz, I get a lot of mail from people who say "What you're trying to do is not going to work. Nobody is interested in getting along. The left will never change, and I mean, I'm disappointed in my own side.

 

RIAZ: Uh-huh.

 

GLENN: But I will tell you I get very frustrated and tired at times of going on and talking to people in the press and saying "Look, I understand how you feel." Do you understand how I feel?

 

And they don't have any care to even think about it.

 

RIAZ: Because they think they know what's best for you.

 

GLENN: Correct?

 

RIAZ: And this is something I'm really trying to get people -- again, I'm not interested in the politics space, but I'm interested in the humanity space. When you know people who have lives and situations that are completely different from yours that voted for trump for very specific reasons for their family's welfare, you tell me how you can hate them once you meet them and see their home that slipped off the foundation ten years ago. But they can't afford to move. That is the humanity that's out there if people can get past the labels. And that's what we have to do. We have to do.

GLENN: So how do we talk to somebody, Riaz, that is, you know, encouraging their kids to -- well, let's put it this way. Do you know -- who is the -- he's ABC -- George Stephanopoulos. I read an article without anybody saying, like, "This is weird. This is dangerous."

 

George Stephanopoulos' young, like, 12-year-old daughter has had to sleep in bed with them at night for, like, the week after the election because they were so upset.

 

RIAZ: Yeah.

 

PAT: Scared, I believe is the word they used.

 

GLENN: And my thought is what the hell is being said in that home by a quote objective reporter that makes your 12-year-old sleep in bed with you at night because they're afraid?

 

RIAZ: I would love to know that families and children who didn't live off of a two-year diet of liberal doomsday with trump, if they are as traumatized and scared. Even the ones who lost. Just to know.

 

GLENN: You met my kids last night.

 

RIAZ: Uh-huh.

 

GLENN: My kids -- I mean, everybody -- every liberal would say my kids of course have had a steady diet of fear mongering. Did you think --

 

RIAZ: No. Not at all. Because there's the discussions you have in the world and then the humanity at home. I don't think we can say your beliefs are wrong. It doesn't work for either side. To me, it's here's what you don't know about me. Here's what you don't know about my life. Here's the way to start the conversation. If I go attack your beliefs, we're not going to end up anywhere. We're going to dig another two years or longer.

 

To me, here's what you don't know about my life. And that's the way to understand why somebody voted differently. Why somebody believes differently. Why did you make the choices you make? And then beliefs. You're a deadlock. There's no way around that. And so, to me, it's here's what you don't know about me. As much as you want what's best interest for me, this is me. Why don't I tell you what's in best interest for me? And I think that's the way you begin the conversation is this is what you don't know about me. And everyone can do it on both sides. I think the two-year diet of conflict and rage that came from reality TV -- look, we all watch what most of us watch. If people don't want to watch conflict, it will be there as much. So my hope is after this election, we've reached conflict saturation with media. And that people I believe -- I believe your viewers right now they're driving a pickup truck or Tesla, it doesn't matter. They want this to stop. The inauguration day to me is the day we breathe and move on.

 

So I am hopeful because now this constant yelling about the election is gone. There will be constant yelling, but at least we can move on with our lives, and we know what the truth is for four years.

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.