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

Does NBC's 'Emerald City' Feature the First Transgender Kid Hero?

April 03, 2017
Staff

WRITER

NBC's Emerald City is based on the L. Frank Baum Oz books, which inspired the movie classic The Wizard Of Oz. The TV new series features different versions of beloved characters like Dorothy and The Scarecrow, as well as Tip, a young boy. Tip is a character from the original books who is ultimately revealed as the long-lost Princess Ozma, heir to the throne.

"This kid has been kept by a witch, locked in this room forever, and escaped. She kept giving him this medicine, otherwise, he would die. She was protecting him because he is not a he. He's a she," Glenn said Monday on radio.

In the last episode, the newly transformed Tip wears a dress and says, "I feel like a boy inside. I don't want to be a girl. You don't know the struggle."

While it's unlikely Baum was writing a book about transgendered people, Ozma works pretty well to promote the agenda --- and apparently the network was happy to oblige.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: Anybody watch the show Emerald City?

PAT: No.

STU: No.

GLENN: So Emerald City, the end of the season --

STU: What is this?

GLENN: NBC show. So at the end of the season, they had Ozma, who is this princess, okay? She's been lost. Well, you find out that Ozma --

PAT: Is this the spoiler alert for people --

GLENN: Yeah, spoiler alert. Well, I mean, we're going to talk about stuff. We're going to talk about life from time to time. It's an NBC show. And it doesn't really wreck anything.

This kid who has been kept by a witch, locked in this room forever, and escaped. And she kept giving him this medicine. Otherwise, he would die.

She was protecting him because he is not a he. He's a she. So in the last two episodes --

PAT: Oh.

GLENN: She's he -- he is wearing a dress, and he's like, "I feel like a boy inside. I don't want to be a girl. You don't know the struggle."

PAT: Oh, boy.

GLENN: I think it's the first kid trans hero of network television. And notice, nobody is really talking about it.

PAT: No. Nobody cares anymore.

[break]

GLENN: You know what's -- you know what's strange to me is how we have gone from a country 15 years ago and you can look at some of this and say, "This is really good." And some of it, not so good.

We are a country that has such tolerance, that while we are at war with Islam, we need -- and we are Islamists. While we're at war with Islamists, we elect a guy named Barack Obama.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: That it just -- we know the difference.

PAT: Barack Hussein Obama.

GLENN: Yeah, Barack Hussein Obama. We know the difference. It's not like, oh, my gosh. Look at -- they all have slant eyes. Quick, let's put them in internment camps. We're not that people anymore.

PAT: No.

GLENN: We've gone from a country that 15 years ago it was a big deal to have Ellen have a kiss on her show.

JEFFY: Yeah.

GLENN: First lesbian kiss.

Now -- right? Wasn't it, Stu?

STU: Wasn't it Roseanne had the first --

JEFFY: I was just going to say, I think Roseanne did have the first one. But Ellen was --

STU: She was the first openly gay character, I think. That like --

JEFFY: It was a big deal.

GLENN: Was it?

STU: First openly gay character that had her own shoe, I think, was the -- she had some barrier --

GLENN: No, there was some --

JEFFY: She did have the big kiss.

GLENN: I remember -- because I remember there was a show that was important.

JEFFY: That was over the top, yes.

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: And I don't remember what it was.

STU: That was her coming out, wasn't it?

GLENN: I don't remember. But I remember it was a big deal. And even then, I don't think America had a problem with that episode. America had a problem with the agenda, that it just became the agenda, you know what I mean?

PAT: Right.

And what is it, 98 percent of all shows now feature homosexual encounters? I mean, it feels like that. It feels like that.

GLENN: Especially if you watch the BBC, it's almost every show.

JEFFY: Oh, yeah.

GLENN: And I was just telling you about, Oz, I don't know if this is where they're going. But you can't not see the parallels of what we're talking about. Here's something that we are still discussing, transgendered bathrooms.

And, by the way, for anybody who says that, you know, it's not a problem -- did you guys hear the woman from Disneyland. She went to Disneyland.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: She said I was off to the side waiting with the two boys when I noticed a man walk into the restroom.

My first thought was, oh, crap, he's walked into the wrong restroom by mistake. He took a few more steps. At which point, he would definitely notice all the women lined up, and he kept walking.

My next thought was, maybe he's looking for his wife or his child. They had been in there for a while.

But he didn't call out any names or look around. He just stood there off to the side and leaned against the wall. At this point, I'm like WTF.

(chuckling)

GLENN: There is definitely a very large burly man in a Lakers' jersey who just walked in here. Am I the only one seeing this?

I surveyed the room, and I saw roughly 12 women and children in tow, staring at him with the exact same look on their faces. Everyone was visibly uncomfortable.

We were all trading looks and motioning with our eyes over to him. Like, what's had he doing in here? Every single one of us was silent. This is why I wrote this blog.

PAT: I mean, think of that. You're supposed to be okay with that. Right?

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: They're haters now. They're made to feel like you're not supposed to say anything. And that's what she kind of goes through here.

GLENN: She says, if this had been five years ago, you bet your ass every woman in here would have been like, what are you doing in here? But in 2017, the mood has shifted. We've been culturally bullied into silence.

PAT: Yep.

GLENN: Women were mid-changing their baby's diapers on changing tables. I could see them shifting to block his view, but they remained silent. I stayed silent. We all did.

Every woman who exited a stall and immediately zeroed in on him said nothing. And why? Because and I'm sure all others were scared of the, what if. What if I say something and he identifies as a woman? And then I come off as the intolerant one in the happiest place on earth.

STU: And I got news for you, in local news reports and national news reports, that would follow. You would be presented that way.

JEFFY: Yes, you would.

GLENN: Yep. Yep.

PAT: And, again, this guy is not identifying -- he's not saying anything about being a woman. He's just being a guy leering at women in the bathroom.

STU: And knowing he can now get away with it.

PAT: Which is what we said would be the problem the whole time.

STU: Yep.

GLENN: An older lady said to me out loud, what is he doing in here? I'm ashamed to admit I silently shrugged and mouthed, I don't know. She immediately walked out. I saw two other people leave with their children.

This is why -- and this is why pushing for laws to allow anyone to use the bathroom, whatever they identify with is absurd and dangerous. Before 2017, we shared the ladies' room with transgendered people, and we either didn't know, or we never said anything because we knew we weren't in danger. It's something you didn't talk about. You just pee and leave.

But the making of a capital case out of it, literally inviting anyone into a female safe space, the government has put women and children at risk for peeping Toms, rapists, pedophiles, drunks, and vagrants. Predators already capitalize and count on women's reluctance to fight back or speak out. Now it's worse because if you do speak up, you'll be labeled transphobic, and the predators know it. She goes on. This is quite an amazing thing.

She goes on. She was for -- she was for, you know, tolerance and everything else.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: She now has experienced for herself. The moral of the story is speak up, ladies. If a man walks into the bathroom, don't stop and think about it. Start yelling, get out, while dialing 911. Take whatever criticism any loon wants to throw at you. Your life and the lives of your children are worth more than public opinion.

JEFFY: Good luck.

PAT: And, again, that happened at Disneyland. Disneyland.

GLENN: So here's what -- and isn't Disneyland the place to go if you're a pedophile? You go by yourself.

STU: I will say, it's not in their advertisements, if that's true. That is not their slogan.

GLENN: No. It's not.

STU: The place to go if you're a pedophile!

GLENN: You know they hang out where there's children.

STU: Well, of course.

GLENN: Just leering at children.

STU: Of course.

GLENN: I mean, it only makes sense.

GLENN: The thing is -- remember when I went over to Auschwitz and I met with the woman, Paulina, she's the -- I know. I'm the only person who can make --

STU: We're joking about a ridiculous Disney slogan. You brought it to Auschwitz in 12 seconds. You're the only person in America who could do this.

GLENN: That's the charm of this show. That's why we are where we are. So, anyway, I brought this -- we met this woman named Paulina. I've told this story a million times. What did she say?

She's a woman who saved the Christians from the Germans.

PAT: She just didn't go off the cliff with the rest of the people.

GLENN: Right. That makes more sense to me now than ever before.

PAT: Yeah. She said, "The righteous didn't suddenly become righteous. We just didn't go off the cliff with the rest of humanity." Meaning, we just stood in place. We just continued to do the things we always would have done. Which is her point.

PAT: And we did something. They hid Jews. We can do something. All you have to do is speak up and say, "Get out of here. Get out. Get out of this bathroom."

JEFFY: Well, the people are speaking up a little bit with their money though because according to Marvel, their sales have been struggling. They've been wanting to sell more comics. And while feminists and progressive activists pushed for more diversity in comics, minority and female heroes, Dan Gabriel, senior vice president of sales, Marvel's core fan base just wasn't interested.

PAT: How about that? How about that?

GLENN: I will tell you this, I talk to Raphe all the time about going to get comic books. And let's get into comic books. Won't do it. Don't know where a local comic bookstore is even in Dallas. But want to go to a comic bookstore and get all the old ones. I don't want the new ones.

Just, I'm not interested. I'm not interested.

JEFFY: Yeah, he said we saw the sales of any character that was diverse, any character that was new, our female characters, anything that was not a core Marvel character --

GLENN: Nothing.

JEFFY: -- no sales.

STU: Not interested. Well, because they don't -- no one minds having a different character, having diversity. It's when it feels forced that people reject it.

GLENN: It's an agenda.

STU: When you're trying to make -- you know what, as a comic book, I'm going there -- if I'm going to read comic books, I'm going there to be entertained, be part of the story. You're not going there to be lectured by people about who you're supposed to accept and not accept.

GLENN: For instance -- for instance, didn't have a problem with Ozma from the Wizard of Oz because I don't know if that's the story or if they were trying to make it a political point.

Now, my radar is up on political point, so I thought -- I just assume, this is a political point. Stop it.

However, it might just be that that's logical, if he was -- if she was transformed by a motion into a girl. However, I just don't think that this is -- I mean, five years ago, ten years ago, that story line wouldn't have stuck out at all. You would be like, oh, wow. Yeah, that would suck. You see yourself -- right? But now, is NBC -- and it's NBC, that's another reason. Is NBC now telling us, oh, yes, the planet is on fire. You have to do something about the planet. And the progressive way of life is absolutely the right way of life. And, oh, look, here's this poor little character who is a kid who sees him -- sees herself as a him.

I mean...

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: Well, it goes to your point -- we talked about this with Beauty and the Beast. Is that everyone was like, oh, there could be a gay character. The story is about bestiality.

JEFFY: Right.

GLENN: Right.

STU: We're all fine with the bestiality story for decades. But it's like, wait a minute. You're starting to see these things because a lot of times it is about agenda. I think it was NBC that aired it a few weeks ago. And I don't know, it was some mini-series about the struggle of gay Americans and something. And, look, there's been -- there are amazing stories in this world. I'm glad they're told. The one about World War II --

GLENN: Turing.

STU: Yeah, Alan Turing, that just came out. I mean, I'm glad these stories are coming out.

However, they just represent it in such a bizarre way. Like, they had this one conversation between like a son and his dad. And I just happened to flip it on. And the son is like, Dad, I want you to know that I'm gay.

No, you will not be gay! I have raised you in a way and you will not tell anyone that you're gay. And it's like, all right. How preachy do we have to be here?

JEFFY: Right.

STU: Like, I get that there have been these -- I get it. I understand. These networks, however, seem to have this idea that if we can tell these stories in the most overt way possible --

JEFFY: Yeah, they do.

STU: Try to make every person who has ever gone to church an alien, then we've accomplished our duty for the week. I mean, that is -- there's got to be some balance there between these two positions.

JEFFY: Remember when you went to Auschwitz?

(chuckling)

GLENN: Shut up, Jeffy.

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.