What We Should Have Done 10 Years Ago to Prevent World War III

If the US gets hit with strategically placed EMPs, it's lights out permanently for the whole country. Would it be worth $2 billion to protect America's power grid?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: Two things -- two things happened over the weekend. Remember, what did Russia say after we put the virus and it came out that we were the ones that put the virus in Iran that stopped all their centrifuges?

PAT: I don't remember.

GLENN: You don't remember?

PAT: Uh-uh.

GLENN: He said, at the time, the next war will be fought with ones and zeros. It will not be -- it's not going to be fought --

PAT: This is what Russia said.

GLENN: This is what Russia said. It's not going to be fought with missiles. The next one is going to be fought with ones and zeros. Shortly after that, he came out and said, World War III is already underway. People just don't realize it yet.

PAT: Hmm.

GLENN: Now, he said that about two years ago. And so what happened about two years ago? He started ramping up all of these -- all of these hackers.

And so we're being fought with ones and zeros. And -- and he said, at the time, that we gave the world permission to now fight this way.

So when we did it -- now, if we did it a second time, we're emboldening the world to fight with ones and zeros. Which is very bad for us. We lose that war.

Russians are used to not having anything in their supermarket. Russians are used to being cold in the winter.

Chinese, you turn off their grid, not that many -- I mean, those in Hong Kong, et cetera, et cetera. But the mass does not die. You shut off our electricity and our grid, and 90 percent of us die in the first year alone.

Remember, because of our medication, you shut down medicine, how many of us are -- how many of us are alive today that shouldn't be alive because of blood pressure medication, because of diabetes medication? They die elsewhere.

PAT: Yeah, yeah.

GLENN: Here they don't die. So 90 percent of us will be dead in the first year.

Now, the reason why I bring this up is because the United States did two things on Friday. The Pentagon announced two things. One -- and how long have we been asking for this? We started asking for this under George W. Bush

PAT: A long time, yeah.

GLENN: And nobody would pay attention to it.

PAT: Because we were told -- and it was a ridiculously low number. Relatively speaking.

GLENN: $2 billion. $2 billion.

PAT: Yeah, $2 billion to protect our infrastructure from an EMP.

GLENN: So to protect our infrastructure from an EMP --

PAT: Even if it's 20 billion or 200 billion, you do it, right?

JEFFY: Right!

GLENN: You do it.

So it was like $2 billion. Now, this is when we first started talking about it, so I don't know what it is now. But the number we heard was $2 billion, to protect the power grid from an EMP.

PAT: Because it's not that difficult really.

GLENN: Correct. All you have to do is put Faraday cages around the -- around the important structures that doesn't let an electronic pulse hit. And when you're talking about electronic pulse, just think of Oceans 11, except the power never comes back on. It fries all computer chips.

PAT: Yeah, it's not directed at just one casino. It's the whole country. And it's permanent.

GLENN: It's the whole -- yeah, right. And so it takes about three nuclear missiles. You have to hit them at the right altitude. But you don't worry about the radiation. It's not -- they're not trying to explode a missile on the ground. They're trying to explode it up -- I can't remember what the altitude is. But you would look up one day, and you'll see a giant explosion way above you. And you're not going to be burned up in the fire. You don't have to worry about any of that.

If you ever see that happen, don't go to the television, turn it on, or radio to listen to what happened. Because anything with a -- with a silicon chip in it is gone forever.

So take three of them placed strategically over the United States to knock out all of the United States, parts of Canada, and parts of Mexico.

Kills 90 percent. Friday, the United States announced that we are now going to protect our critical infrastructure and our power grid against an EMP. But also, cyber attack.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Those are both things we should have done ten years ago.

JEFFY: Uh-huh.

PAT: Easily.

GLENN: It's good. But it makes me -- it makes me say, we know that we are now engaged in World War III. We understand now. And we're not telling the American people. What Putin said is true.

STU: We should also point out that one of the ways we're preparing for an EMP is by storing fat cells.

GLENN: Not just the fat cells. The fat itself.

STU: Right. And so what you do, while things are fine, if you take in more calories than you burn, those calories will be stored on your body. And that's why we're doing this.

PAT: My doctor said I'm set until 2034.

STU: 2034.

GLENN: My doctor said I might live forever.

JEFFY: 2034, standing --

GLENN: Yeah.

(chuckling)

I can work out every day to 2034 and still just be feasting on myself.

On the radio program Thursday, Glenn Beck sat down with chief researcher Jason Buttrill to go over two bombshell developments that have recently come to light regarding former Vice President Joe Biden's role in the 2016 dismissal of Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

"Wow! Two huge stories dropped within about 24 hours of each other," Jason began. He went on to explain that a court ruling in Ukraine has just prompted an "actual criminal investigation against Joe Biden in Ukraine."

This stunning development coincided with the release of leaked phone conversations, which took place in late 2015 and early 2016, allegedly among then-Vice President Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Ukraine's former President Petro Poroshenko.

One of the audiotapes seems to confirm allegations of a quid pro quo between Biden and Poroshenko, with the later admitting that he asked Shokin to resign despite having no evidence of him "doing anything wrong" in exchange for a $1 billion loan guarantee.

"Poroshenko said, 'despite the fact that we didn't have any corruption charges on [Shokin], and we don't have any information about him doing something wrong, I asked him to resign,'" Jason explained. "But none of the Western media is pointing this out."

Watch the video below for more details:


Listen to the released audiotapes in full here.

Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

A recently declassified email, written by former National Security Adviser Susan Rice and sent herself on the day of President Donald Trump's inauguration, reveals the players involved in the origins of the Trump-Russia probe and "unmasking" of then-incoming National Security Adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn.

Rice's email details a meeting in the Oval Office on Jan 5, 2017, which included herself, former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former Vice President Joe Biden, and former President Barack Obama. Acting Director of National Intelligence, Richard Grenell, fully declassified the email recently amid President Trump's repeated references to "Obamagate" and claims that Obama "used his last weeks in office to target incoming officials and sabotage the new administration."

On Glenn Beck's Wednesday night special, Glenn broke down the details of Rice's email and discussed what they reveal about the Obama administration officials involved in the Russia investigation's origins.

Watch the video clip below:

Fellow BlazeTV host, Mark Levin, joined Glenn Beck on his exclusive Friday episode of "GlennTV" to discuss why the declassified list of Obama administration officials who were aware of the details of Gen. Michael Flynn's wiretapped phone calls are so significant.

Glenn argued that Obama built a covert bureaucracy to "transform America" for a long time to come, and Gen. Flynn was targeted because he happened to know "where the bodies were buried", making him a threat to Obama's "secret legacy."

Levin agreed, noting the "shocking extent of the police state tactics" by the Obama administration. He recalled several scandalous happenings during Obama's "scandal free presidency," which nobody seems to remember.

Watch the video below for more:


Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Colleges and universities should be home to a lively and open debate about questions both current and timeless, independent from a political bias or rules that stifle speech. Unfortunately for students, speaking out about personal beliefs or challenging political dogma can be a dangerous undertaking. I experienced this firsthand as an undergraduate, and I'm fighting that trend now as an adjunct professor.

In 2013, Glenn Beck was one of the most listened to radio personalities in the world. For a college senior with hopes of working on policy and media, a job working for Glenn was a ticket to big things. I needed a foot in the door and hoped to tap into the alumni network at the small liberal arts school where I was an undergrad. When I met with a career services specialist in early March 2013 about possible alumni connections to Glenn Beck, she disdainfully told me: "Why would you want to work for someone like him?" That was the beginning and end of our conversation.

I was floored by her response, and sent an email to the school complaining that her behavior was inappropriate. Her personal opinions, political or otherwise, I argued, shouldn't play a role in the decision to help students.

That isn't the kind of response a student should hear when seeking guidance and help in kick starting their career. Regardless of the position, a career specialist or professors' opinion or belief shouldn't be a factor in whether the student deserves access to the alumni network and schools' resources.

Now, seven years later, I work full time for a law firm and part time as an adjunct teaching business to undergraduate students. The culture at colleges and universities seems to have gotten even worse, unfortunately, since I was an undergrad.

College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions.

I never want to see a student told they shouldn't pursue their goals, regardless of their personal or political beliefs. College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions. I never got access to the alumni network or schools' resources from the career services office.

Lucky for students in 2020, there are several legal organizations that help students protect their rights when an issue goes beyond what can be handled by an undergraduate facing tremendous pressure from a powerful academic institution. Organizations like Speech First and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), for instance, are resources I wish I knew about at the time.

When I experienced mistreatment from my college, I spoke up and challenged the behavior by emailing the administration and explaining what happened. I received a letter from the career services specialist apologizing for the "unprofessional comment."

What she described in that apology as a "momentary lapse of good judgement" was anything but momentary. It was indicative of the larger battle for ideas that has been happening on college campuses across the country. In the past seven years, the pressure, mistreatment and oppression of free expression have only increased. Even right now, some are raising concerns that campus administrations are using the COVID-19 pandemic to limit free speech even further. Social distancing guidelines and crowd size may both be used to limit or refuse controversial speakers.

Students often feel pressure to conform to a college or university's wishes. If they don't, they could be expelled, fail a class or experience other retribution. The college holds all the cards. On most campuses, the burden of proof for guilt in student conduct hearings is "more likely than not," making it very difficult for students to stand up for their rights without legal help.

As an adjunct professor, every student who comes to me for help in finding purpose gets my full support and my active help — even if the students' goals run counter to mine. But I have learned something crucial in my time in this role: It's not the job of an educator to dictate a student's purpose in life. I'm meant to help them achieve their dreams, no matter what.

Conner Drigotas is the Director of Communications and Development at a national law firm and is a Young Voices contributor.