Related to Jack the Ripper? Serial Killer’s Descendant Takes Terrifying Trip Into History

A descendant of one of America’s first – and most infamous – serial killers has a new book and documentary about H.H. Holmes, a notoriously evil doctor believed to have killed as many as 200 people.

In the History Channel’s “American Ripper,” Jeff Mudgett, Holmes’ great-great-grandson, gathers evidence to support a shocking theory: Holmes was also Britain’s infamous Jack the Ripper. Mudgett detailed his journey to discover his murderous ancestor in his book “Bloodstains.” He joined radio Wednesday to talk about the Jack the Ripper theory as well as how he has coped with being the great-great-grandson of a diabolical serial killer.

“I am fascinated and horrified by your [great-great-grandfather],” Glenn said.

Hanged for his crimes in 1896, Holmes made his fortune through a series of scams, fraudulent marriages and fishy business deals. He built a home in Chicago called “The Castle” that contained an elaborate system of secret passageways, false walls, trapdoors, and a gas tank for piping gas to victims’ rooms. Homes would render his victims unconscious before taking them into secret rooms for horrifying experiments, sometimes selling their bodies as cadavers to medical researchers later.

“My life was turned upside-down,” Mudgett said of discovering he was related to Holmes. “I had to find out what was true and what was legend. And as you know … the more you dig into this story about this evil genius, the more strange it gets.”

The body buried in Holmes’ grave was exhumed by researchers earlier this year to see if the man’s DNA matches that of Holmes’ descendants. While little concrete evidence exists to support the conspiracy theory, it has long been rumored that Holmes was not actually executed and that another man’s body was buried in his place. On Wednesday’s show, Mudgett cast doubt on whether or not Holmes was buried in that grave.

You can watch “hiSTORY: Serial Killer in the White City,” a look at Holmes’ life and horrifying murders, on demand with TheBlaze TV.

GLENN: There is a remarkable story in American history that most people have never heard of. It's America's first real serial killer. His name was H.H. Holmes. We did an episode on this, oh, probably about a year or so ago on H.H. Holmes and the blood that he left behind around the time of the Chicago world's fair. Well, there's been a History Channel show, a series that has been going on called The American Ripper. And it was written by the great-grandson of the serial killer H.H. Holmes. He has a theory that our first serial killer was also Jack the Ripper. And last night, in the series finale, they actually exhumed the body of H.H. Holmes. And he's here to tell us what exactly was found and how that's turning out. And we begin there, right now.

(music)

GLENN: Jeff Mudgett is with us. The great-grandson of H.H. Holmes and the author of the book bloodstains. Bloodstainsthebook.com.

Welcome to the program, Jeff, good to have you.

JEFF: Thank you very much. It's an honor, Glenn.

GLENN: So, Jeff, I've been waiting to talk to you for -- I'm fascinated and horrified by your great grandfather.

At what point in your life did you find out you were related to him?

JEFF: You know, before I answer your question, I wanted to make one comment about your -- your story, your narration about Holmes that I spent the weekend going over. I actually think you captured who Holmes was better than has ever been done before, and I wanted to say bravo.

GLENN: Wow. Thank you.

JEFF: Yeah, and I'm totally, totally from the heart.

I found out when I was 40 years old, my grandfather told the family the horrible secret that he had kept to himself, including my grandmother, about our horrible ancestor.

GLENN: Did that screw with you at all? Were you like, holy cow?

JEFF: I was a successful California lawyer, trial lawyer at the time. I gave that all up. My life was turned upside down. I saved my marriage barely. But I had to find out what was true and what was legend. And, as you know, doing work on Holmes, the more you dig into this story about this evil genius, the more strange it gets.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. Yeah, he is -- it is -- it's so strangely tied to the -- one of the greatest, brightest spots of the -- of the 1800s, the Chicago Expedition. That right down the street, we're seeing these incredible feats of what America is accomplishing. Just a few blocks down, here's this incredible serial killer who built this hotel of horrors.

Can you -- do you want to go into that just a little bit so people understand, who don't know who your great grandfather was?

JEFF: Yeah, yeah. He was, as you so accurately stated, he was America's first, quote, unquote, serial killer and first psychopathic -- they invented those terms for him, he was so horrible.

GLENN: Right.

JEFF: And he invented a -- a building they now call the murder castle, or factory of death. Which, as you noted, from the Ferris wheel, you could see the top of the hotel from the world's fair. And he put up lonely ladies that had come from all over the country to visit this spectacle of the world's fair. And what I try to explain to people, explaining what it must have been like -- I consider him like a lion over the Savannah in Africa, watching the herds of gazelle.

And I think that's the mistake people make, Glenn. They -- they try to consider him, you know, one of the normal serial killers, where you read over and over about. This was a different man. This was different.

GLENN: No. He was -- he was -- I mean, I hate to use this word for him, but he was brilliant. He -- he did stalk his prey. He knew exactly what he was doing.

And so cold and calculated. And the way he built this murder castle, he was -- he would turn people away. Women would come in. And they had -- two women or three women or whatever, a guy would come in, and he would say, "We're all full."

But if you were a woman by yourself, you definitely got a room. And can you describe a little bit about the murder castle and the way he set traps up and viewing stations and -- you know, what was going on there.

JEFF: Yeah. If someone would like to go accurately into the actual architecture of the building, my friend John Borowski wrote a book that I think best describes it.

But you would have a building where someone would walk in the lobby as a normal hotel and be giving a room if the doctor considered her his next victim. They would place her in a room where there were gas vents that he could either render her unconscious or asphyxiate her.

And then his assistants -- and he would send her down a chute to the basement, where he would proceed to work on them in fashions that I -- that I try to explain as our real American Frankenstein.

And people, as you know, Glenn, they deny that thing was possible in America. Well, it was. It was.

GLENN: What do you mean, our American Frankenstein?

JEFF: He would invent methods of surgery on these victims. He would conduct experiments on torture. He actually had a rack where he strapped a young lady to it, tried to impregnate her, so that he could see if he could evolve a taller race of human beings. That's what we're dealing with.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

So can I go back to the first question? Jeff, when you have somebody like that in your gene pool, did you go through periods where you're like, am -- is there any of that in me?

JEFF: Yeah. And I knew I was different, Glenn. I never had -- I never thought of murdering anyone.

But I knew that, you know, I had a temper. I had angers. I had visions that weren't wholesome. I tended to write those off as just normal reactions of an American male. But then when my grandfather told me the secret and I started researching, you know, the hundreds of books written about Holmes, those -- those tendencies I had, I could see -- they had a basis, there was an origin to them.

Now -- now, I dealt with them in choices. He obviously made different choices. And that's what I tried to capture in my book, Bloodstains.

GLENN: So the guys who were -- the people that were helping him in the murder castle, tell me about them.

JEFF: Right. Well, and that's one of the most interesting parts of the whole story that hasn't been captured. He had assistants, law-abiding citizens who he turned into felons, co-murderers, that actually carried on some of his actions, even after he was dead.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

JEFF: And I think that's -- that's one of the things I admired about your synopsis of Holmes, how we need to dig a little deeper into the story.

I -- I think, Glenn, if we studied Holmes more precisely, we might be able to prevent this from happening in the future.

GLENN: Why? Why do you say that?

JEFF: I don't think we understand his mentality. We tend to write it off as a psychosis. Or he's a psychopath. Those terms that we use that mean very little in my opinion.

GLENN: That, again, literally were invented for him.

JEFF: Yeah. Yeah. Because they couldn't describe him.

And this -- this mind of his -- why we want to believe he was sick, quote, unquote, I think it's more towards the evil side of the equation. And that as he said himself, he was born with the devil in him.

GLENN: So he, if I remember, because it's been a while since I did that episode, but if I remember right, he had piercing blue eyes and was quite the charmer.

JEFF: Oh, he had hundreds of mistresses. As you said, three or four wives.

He could seduce almost any woman he laid his eyes on. And these women, while -- besides being seduced, often became parts of his cons around Chicago. And I -- I've often thought of digging a little deeper into the story and writing about the women that fell in love with Holmes. And one of the New York Times' articles at the trial, as the jury came back, rendered him guilty, and the judge determined he was to be put to death, the -- the reporter mentioned that four or five of these women stood up in the jury audience and actually had crocodile tears rolling down their cheeks as he was led off, even when they knew what he was, Glenn.

GLENN: So there's -- there's -- one more thing, before we leave and go into a different chapter, his death -- you just had his body exhumed. And it's fascinating when we get into that.

But also, you have a theory that he is the literal Jack the Ripper over in London. We'll get into that. But let me make one more stop.

He owned several buildings in Chicago. And one of them was a concrete factory. And it never sold any concrete. Why do you think he owned that?

JEFF: I know exactly why he owned that. He used it to dispose of bodies. He would put a body into a block of concrete and dump it into the Chicago river. And as you correctly stated, he never sold any concrete, despite owning a factory which made concrete.

GLENN: How many people do you think doing your research -- because they've never been able to put a number to it. How many in your research do you think he was actually responsible for killing?

JEFF: You know, that's -- that's a question that will go on forever. You have historians say eight, nine, 13. He admitted to 27, although some of those were bound to be still alive after.

I think -- and when you get into his memoirs, Glenn, he lied about everything he said.

GLENN: Yeah.

JEFF: And that's the hard part to take to accuracy and fact. But in my opinion, he killed over 200 -- 200 people.

PAT: Whoa.

GLENN: And how many -- how many people were tortured, and how long did some of those last?

JEFF: I have no idea.

GLENN: Okay. So you start your journey, and it takes you to some pretty amazing places. Places like my great grandfather may not have actually been hung. That may not be his body in the crypt underneath the ground. We'll get to you exhuming the body and what you found, because it's pretty stunning here in a second. But it also took you across the ocean to London. And you found some pretty solid evidence. Nothing rock solid, but some pretty solid circumstantial evidence that Jack the Ripper, who people believed at the time may have been an American, was actually your great grandfather. And we'll talk about it here in a second, when we come back.

GLENN: We are having a -- just a fascinating conversation with Jeff Mudgett. He is the great-grandson of H.H. Holmes, America's first serial killer, who if you do not know who H.H. Holmes is, I'm running the -- the His Story episode that we did over a year ago on H.H. Holmes tonight on TheBlaze, 7:00 p.m. It is bone-chilling, but fascinating.

You've never heard an American story like this one. You can find the book Bloodstains. Bloodstainsthebook.com.

There was an eight-episode title -- show called the American Ripper. And this goes to the great-grandson's theory that maybe my great grandfather was Jack the Ripper.

What made you think of this first, Jeff?

JEFF: Yeah. And, you know, to set it straight right off, Glenn. It's not a maybe to me. He was Jack the Ripper. This is what I used to do for a living. And while I can't conclusively prove it, I don't think there's any doubt that probably cause --

GLENN: If you Google right now and you Google H.H. Holmes and Jack the Ripper, I mean, they could be brothers at least. I mean, they look an awful lot alike.

JEFF: You know, and that's -- exactly, and that was a composite done by the BBC and Scotland Yard who came up with an identical resemblance, and then we also did it on the show.

So I can only -- when I was writing my book, I was contacted by a gentleman named Mark Potts from Pennsylvania, who has been studying Holmes and the Ripper his whole life.

And he gave me some information. I had the initial response that everyone has, Glenn, when a new suspect as to the identity of Jack the Ripper is raised: We all doubt it.

But I started looking into the evidence with an open mind. And lo and behold, I now have zero doubt. I even gave a TED talk about Holmes being Jack the Ripper.

GLENN: Oh, I have to watch that.

JEFF: And we put the audience to a vote. I swore them in as my jury, and we came out with 77 percent guilty.

So --

GLENN: So give me the high-level case here, that he's Jack the Ripper.

JEFF: All right. Here we go.

We've got a 5-foot 7-inch 150-pound, 25 to 35-year-old American doctor with expert anatomical knowledge and surgical skills, whose appearance bears a remarkable resemblance to the composite drawings generated from live eyewitness testimonies.

Our suspect is a proven killer, whose MO matches subsequent JTR-like killings in Chicago and New York. He was a remarkable writer with an intricate knowledge of how major media worked, and his handwriting is a likely match to the Dear Boss and Saucy Jack postcard, which in the opinions of expert English linguists, were written by an American trying to sound English.

I -- that is enough -- if Holmes were alive today, Glenn, we could go down and get a warrant for his arrest to have him stand trial for the murders of Catherine Eddowes and Elizabeth Stride.

GLENN: Do we have any evidence that he was there in England, that he had ever traveled abroad to England? Do we have anything?

JEFF: Yeah, during the show, my co-host, Amaryllis Fox, who was ex-CIA trained, she went down and researched the passenger list and found two or three with -- one with the Holmes' name, which was an alias, which is hard to establish as direct evidence. And then two other aliases that he likely used on the trip back.

We also have a letter from Holmes to his lawyer, stating that he was irritated with London because he could not find his favorite New York newspaper every day.

GLENN: And that letter was referring to the same time when Jack the Ripper was there?

JEFF: No, it's a different time. But we had already established that Holmes had made two or three trips to London in all likelihood.

Glenn, as you know, when you're dealing with Jack the Ripper and 130-year-old crimes, if you and I went back in a time machine, H.G. Wells time machine, and we filmed Holmes murdering one of the victims. We got blood. We had DNA. We brought -- we brought fingerprints back, the Ripperologist would still doubt my theories. And that's something that's hard to get around when you deal with Jack the Ripper.

Also, I think the show had a number of revelations, including the fact that we've now proven that the Dear Boss and Saucy Jack postcard were not hoaxes, as history has stated for over a century.

GLENN: What's an English lancet? And what role did that play in your work?

JEFF: I'm not an expert on surgical tools. I know -- are those dealt with bloodletting of a victim?

GLENN: I'm not sure. It's one of the artifacts that you found during the -- you know, the American Ripper, that linked Jack the Ripper and H.H. Holmes. It was called a lancet. So I don't know.

JEFF: Yeah, the tools you're talking about were found when we went to Indianapolis, the site where Holmes murdered one of his partner's young children. A horrible death. We found -- we had some people come up with a box of Holmes' artifacts. And inside those -- inside that box of these artifacts was a lancet from London which was a surgical tool.

GLENN: Okay. Okay. When we come back, they just dug his body up. And what they found inside the concrete crypt, next.

GLENN: Jeff Mudgett is with us, the great-grandson of H.H. Holmes. He has written a book called Bloodstains. You can find it at Bloodstains the book. His great, great grandfather was America's first serial killer. He was the guy they literally coined the term psychopath for. They didn't know how to describe him. People couldn't get his arms around him. Because he was so evil, beyond anything that really we have -- you know, I haven't thought of this, Jeff, but I know you have. Can you compare him to anyone in American history? I mean, I wouldn't even put him in with Jeffrey Dahmer, he's much more Nazi kind of Mengele kind of guy.

JEFF: Yeah. He gets into the -- into the leaders of history that we consider evil, the Hitlers and those. The only difference is, I don't know if they murdered with their own hands. They made orders for those to do it.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

JEFF: Herman enjoyed murdering himself.

GLENN: When he was a teenager in New York, kids started to disappear. They thought later that he had murdered his best friend by pushing -- I think, if I remember right, pushing him out of a window, and then posed his body and watched him die. And that's what started this whole thing.

JEFF: Yeah. We tried to go back and research his childhood, you know, in New Hampshire. And, quite frankly, we were unable to dig up any direct evidence in order to make a -- you know, a statement regarding when he had first started murdering. Although, the legend from the time, as you state, many people associated with Herman went missing.

GLENN: Yeah. So he first went and he started marrying people. And, you know, they would disappear. He would murder their children. He went to Chicago. He built this house of horrors during the world's fair. And that's really kind of where it became untangled.

You, in your book, Bloodstains, you say that here's the -- not conclusive evidence, but some pretty good circumstantial evidence that he was Jack the Ripper. He comes back from London. He's -- was that before he had started building anything in Chicago, around the same time? Can you line that up for me?

JEFF: Yeah, that was before. And the interesting part about that, Glenn, is Scotland Yard followed him back across the Atlantic and actually researched Ripper-style murders in New York and were interested in similar-style killings in Chicago. But I believe didn't have the budget to continue their investigation.

So what we did on the show was to hire a Chicago detective who tracked down all the murders at the time. And as you stated in your narration, hundreds went missing during that time.

GLENN: Yeah.

JEFF: And lo and behold, as soon as Herman was back in Chicago, Ripper-style killings went through the roof. And then when he was arrested finally, they stopped.

GLENN: And it -- what's -- if you missed -- if you don't know who this guy is, tonight, on TheBlaze at 7:00 p.m., we're rerunning an episode of His Story. It's the story of America's first serial killer. And it is mind-boggling. And you don't want to miss it. I don't recommend you watch it with your children. Maybe your teenagers. But your children -- your little children will be freaked out of their mind. Because it is -- it's an amazing story.

So he's in Chicago. While he's in Chicago, he is actually looking for other places. He actually has a tie to Fort Worth, you know, where our studios are. We're in Dallas/Fort Worth.

He was going to build a second hotel down here, but they -- the Texans kind of caught on to him, right?

JEFF: Yeah, Herman. You're right, he was going to build a second -- a bigger murder castle. Except that Herman's cons were finally catching up with him.

GLENN: Right.

JEFF: His assistants were starting to get jealous of the money that he had that he wasn't sharing with them. They were also beginning to grow scared of the fact that if you crossed Herman, you ended up missing.

GLENN: Yeah.

JEFF: And, you know, that can only go on so long, even with assistants that you consider very loyal. So it caught up with Herman, and he was arrested for, quote, unquote, stealing a horse in Texas.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: So it was actually insurance investigators that eventually nailed him on the murders, right? They were following -- I can't remember exactly. You have to forgive me. It's been a year since I've gone through the story again. But wasn't it an insurance guy who was like, wait a minute. This scam is repeating itself and -- and they seem to be tied to him. Is that right? Is that how he got caught finally?

JEFF: That's absolutely correct. He was the master of insurance fraud. He started out, Glenn, by using skeletons. They would call them resurrectionists. He would dig them up. He would change their facial structure so that they couldn't be identified. And then he would turn them into an insurance company and collect the often as much as 10,000-dollar check.

And he grew tired of the digging up graves in the middle of the night. And he turned to murder more often.

GLENN: So he's arrested.

He goes to prison in Philadelphia. What was his prison time like? Was he -- was he popular? Was he like Jeffrey Dahmer, who eventually was shivved? Was he remorseful? What happened to him in prison?

JEFF: Oh, wonderful question. During the show, we actually interviewed the superintendent of one of the historical prisons in Philadelphia now. And she shocked us by explaining how Holmes ran the show. When he was in prison, he had his jail cell. The doors were open. He had reporters seeing him every day. He had a desk with his clothes hung up on the wall. Much like Al Capone did when he was in prison.

GLENN: So you believe -- if I'm not mistaken, you believe that he was not -- he never paid for his crimes. That he pulled a body double at the end. And it was not him hanging by the neck. There was no -- he was wearing a hood. But I think that's the way they all were hung at the time. Maybe I'm wrong on that. He said that he didn't want an autopsy on his body. That was honored.

And he was buried weirdly. And it was honored as well. Can you take me through what you think actually happened to him?

JEFF: I think you've explained it accurately. I -- and there aren't many that join me in this theory. But I believe he escaped execution and another was buried in his place. And I was hoping with American Ripper, in the final episode last night, that we would be able to answer that question definitively. And, quite frankly, I'm still -- I'm still questioning what we found and how that matches up with the evidence I have that it wasn't Holmes.

GLENN: Okay. So show me -- tell me what you found. You dig him up. He's your great grandfather. You dig him up. You want to have DNA testing.

He was buried in this sarcophagus. This giant, heavy, concrete sarcophagus, which he said, I want to be buried specifically between two plots in the Holy Cross Cemetery, in a concrete encasing. He wanted that because he didn't want anybody to dig up his body and do to him what he had done to others. That's the story. Is that true? And what did you find when you opened -- when you opened the sarcophagus?

JEFF: All right. We had some archeologists and anthropologists from the University of Pennsylvania doing the dig, all scientific. The judge that allowed my request for the exhumation demanded that it be done not as a media circus, but in the interest of history.

So we opened it up. We took his remains to the university, where these archeologists set them all out for us.

And, quite frankly, my first impression of the skeleton, Glenn, was that this wasn't Holmes. This was a strange-looking human being on the table, when all of the reporters had written story after story about what an elegant, handsome man Holmes was, that could seduce the ladies at his trial even.

GLENN: Yeah, but -- I mean, I would imagine he didn't look beautiful after being dead for over 100 years. How do you mean it didn't look right? I mean, what were you noticing?

JEFF: Yeah, the -- well, last night, you could -- the archeologist discussed that the skeleton is too short to be Holmes. And that the bone structure represented this muscular mass, which wasn't Holmes at all.

So they went with dental records, Glenn. Which matched those of the physical given to, quote, unquote, Holmes before the execution by the prison physician. And what I tried to raise over and over again was, that wasn't Holmes who was examined by the physician. And those -- those dental records don't match for a reason. It wasn't him.

As a matter of fact, the physician in his Juma (phonetic) report states, wait a minute. Wait a minute. When he walks into the cell -- his quote is, this isn't the guy in the papers, in the pictures, this isn't him. That's what the physician said, Glenn.

So I tell you what, the mystery hasn't been solved yet.

GLENN: Wow. Have you done a DNA test? Could you not -- I mean, you should be able to see if your DNA is his DNA.

JEFF: The DNA test was done. It was sent to a laboratory in London. They're one of three in the world that can do ancient DNA like we needed.

In my opinion, it's inconclusive. History believes it was conclusive. That's why they ended the show last night as they did.

So I'm going to try to convince them into continuing the series maybe with a two-hour special so that I can sit down with someone like you or maybe Bill O'Reilly. But we need to talk through the evidence piece by piece and see if we can answer it.

GLENN: Well, I'm fascinated by his story. I'd love to help you in any way, even if it is just matching you up with Bill O'Reilly. Because I am fascinated by this story.

The skull still contained brains. Is that unusual for a body this old?

JEFF: One of the scariest moments of my entire life, Glenn. And they didn't show it last night for reasons I tried to get them to explain this morning. At the university, I took the skull in my hand, much like Hamlet, the scene from Hamlet, looked into the eyes. And as I rolled the skull in my hand, it flopped in my hand.

GLENN: Ugh.

JEFF: And I was lucky not to drop it, to break the skull, to tell you the truth. I grabbed the scientist by the collar and pulled her over and said, "Whoa, whoa, whoa. Wait. What's flopping in my hand?" She goes, "There's nothing flopping in your hand."

And I said, "Yes, there is. Here, you try." And it flopped in her hand. She looked inside, his brain was still intact, Glenn, after 120 years.

STU: What?

GLENN: Any idea why?

JEFF: I asked her. She had no idea why.

GLENN: This is bizarre.

JEFF: The Holmes' mystery continues.

PAT: Weird. Wow.

GLENN: You ever feel -- is this a blessing or a curse, for you?

JEFF: You know, I used to think it was a curse, Glenn. But now that I get the opportunity to go on great shows like yours and explain to the world that, if we do this right, we can prevent serial killings in the future, I think it's a blessing.

GLENN: Well, that would be a noble, noble goal and a great thing that would come out of this horror. But I agree with you, he was not -- he was -- he was more than sick. And there was something -- you know, he said he was born with evil in him. I believe that to be true. But there's also something else going on inside of him. And if we can figure out anything that would help others, it would make this sad story and horror story -- American horror story -- at least have a happier ending.

The name of the book is Bloodstains. It's Bloodstainsthebook.com.

You were going to say?

JEFF: You know, think about that brain preserved at the University of Pennsylvania, and 50 years from now, science expanding to the level where we can look into that to see what he actually was.

GLENN: Are they preserving his brain?

JEFF: Yes.

GLENN: Jeff, I would love to meet you sometime. Because you are just fascinating. I'm not sure I would want to have dinner with you. But you are truly a fascinating guy.

Jeff Mudgett, the great-grandson of H.H. Holmes. Thank you so much, sir. Appreciate it.

JEFF: Hey, it's been an honor. And like I say, your narration of the Holmes story is the best I've ever heard.

GLENN: Can I just ask you -- and I don't mean this to pile on compliments. I'm confused. What is it that you thought was different or that we captured that was different?

JEFF: Well, I'll explain it like this, I've read everything that's ever been written about Holmes, Glenn, and the way you described it captured the evilness of this man. It's not another Jeffrey Dahmer. It's not that. It was something more than that. And I think you captured it.

GLENN: Well, thank you very much. I appreciate it, Jeff. Jeff Mudgett. Bloodstains. In the book -- or, Bloodstainsthebook.com is where you can find more information. And tonight, the episode he was just referencing is going to be rebroadcast at 7:00 p.m., only at TheBlaze.com.

1 in 20 Canadians die by MAID—Is this 'compassion'?

Vaughn Ridley / Stringer | Getty Images

Medical assistance in dying isn’t health care. It’s the moment a Western democracy decided some lives aren’t worth saving, and it’s a warning sign we can’t ignore.

Canada loves to lecture America about compassion. Every time a shooting makes the headlines, Canadian commentators cannot wait to discuss how the United States has a “culture of death” because we refuse to regulate guns the way enlightened nations supposedly do.

But north of our border, a very different crisis is unfolding — one that is harder to moralize because it exposes a deeper cultural failure.

A society that no longer recognizes the value of life will not long defend freedom, dignity, or moral order.

The Canadian government is not only permitting death, but it’s also administering, expanding, and redefining it as “medical care.” Medical assistance in dying is no longer a rare, tragic exception. It has become one of the country’s leading causes of death, offered to people whose problems are treatable, whose conditions are survivable, and whose value should never have been in question.

In Canada, MAID is now responsible for nearly 5% of all deaths — 1 out of every 20 citizens. And this is happening in a country that claims the moral high ground over American gun violence. Canada now records more deaths per capita from doctors administering lethal drugs than America records from firearms. Their number is 37.9 deaths per 100,000 people. Ours is 13.7. Yet we are the country supposedly drowning in a “culture of death.”

No lecture from abroad can paper over this fact: Canada has built a system where eliminating suffering increasingly means eliminating the sufferer.

Choosing death over care

One example of what Canada now calls “compassion” is the case of Jolene Bond, a woman suffering from a painful but treatable thyroid condition that causes dangerously high calcium levels, bone deterioration, soft-tissue damage, nausea, and unrelenting pain. Her condition is severe, but it is not terminal. Surgery could help her. And in a functioning medical system, she would have it.

But Jolene lives under socialized medicine. The specialists she needs are either unavailable, overrun with patients, or blocked behind bureaucratic requirements she cannot meet. She cannot get a referral. She cannot get an appointment. She cannot reach the doctor in another province who is qualified to perform the operation. Every pathway to treatment is jammed by paperwork, shortages, and waitlists that stretch into the horizon and beyond.

Yet the Canadian government had something else ready for her — something immediate.

They offered her MAID.

Not help, not relief, not a doctor willing to drive across a provincial line and simply examine her. Instead, Canada offered Jolene a state-approved death. A lethal injection is easier to obtain than a medical referral. Killing her would be easier than treating her. And the system calls that compassion.

Bureaucracy replaces medicine

Jolene’s story is not an outlier. It is the logical outcome of a system that cannot keep its promises. When the machinery of socialized medicine breaks down, the state simply replaces care with a final, irreversible “solution.” A bureaucratic checkbox becomes the last decision of a person’s life.

Canada insists its process is rigorous, humane, and safeguarded. Yet the bureaucracy now reviewing Jolene’s case is not asking how she can receive treatment; it is asking whether she has enough signatures to qualify for a lethal injection. And the debate among Canadian officials is not how to preserve life, but whether she has met the paperwork threshold to end it.

This is the dark inversion that always emerges when the state claims the power to decide when life is no longer worth living. Bureaucracy replaces conscience. Eligibility criteria replace compassion. A panel of physicians replaces the family gathered at a bedside. And eventually, the “right” to die becomes an expectation — especially for those who are poor, elderly, or alone.

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

The logical end of a broken system

We ignore this lesson at our own peril. Canada’s health care system is collapsing under demographic pressure, uncontrolled migration, and the unavoidable math of government-run medicine.

When the system breaks, someone must bear the cost. MAID has become the release valve.

The ideology behind this system is already drifting south. In American medical journals and bioethics conferences, you will hear this same rhetoric. The argument is always dressed in compassion. But underneath, it reduces the value of human life to a calculation: Are you useful? Are you affordable? Are you too much of a burden?

The West was built on a conviction that every human life has inherent value. That truth gave us hospitals before it gave us universities. It gave us charity before it gave us science. It is written into the Declaration of Independence.

Canada’s MAID program reveals what happens when a country lets that foundation erode. Life becomes negotiable, and suffering becomes a justification for elimination.

A society that no longer recognizes the value of life will not long defend freedom, dignity, or moral order. If compassion becomes indistinguishable from convenience, and if medicine becomes indistinguishable from euthanasia, the West will have abandoned the very principles that built it. That is the lesson from our northern neighbor — a warning, not a blueprint.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A Sharia enclave is quietly taking root in America. It's time to wake up.

NOVA SAFO / Staff | Getty Images

Sharia-based projects like the Meadow in Texas show how political Islam grows quietly, counting on Americans to stay silent while an incompatible legal system takes root.

Apolitical system completely incompatible with the Constitution is gaining ground in the United States, and we are pretending it is not happening.

Sharia — the legal and political framework of Islam — is being woven into developments, institutions, and neighborhoods, including a massive project in Texas. And the consequences will be enormous if we continue to look the other way.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

Before we can have an honest debate, we’d better understand what Sharia represents. Sharia is not simply a set of religious rules about prayer or diet. It is a comprehensive legal and political structure that governs marriage, finance, criminal penalties, and civic life. It is a parallel system that claims supremacy wherever it takes hold.

This is where the distinction matters. Many Muslims in America want nothing to do with Sharia governance. They came here precisely because they lived under it. But political Islam — the movement that seeks to implement Sharia as law — is not the same as personal religious belief.

It is a political ideology with global ambitions, much like communism. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently warned that Islamist movements do not seek peaceful coexistence with the West. They seek dominance. History backs him up.

How Sharia arrives

Political Islam does not begin with dramatic declarations. It starts quietly, through enclaves that operate by their own rules. That is why the development once called EPIC City — now rebranded as the Meadow — is so concerning. Early plans framed it as a Muslim-only community built around a mega-mosque and governed by Sharia-compliant financing. After state investigations were conducted, the branding changed, but the underlying intent remained the same.

Developers have openly described practices designed to keep non-Muslims out, using fees and ownership structures to create de facto religious exclusivity. This is not assimilation. It is the construction of a parallel society within a constitutional republic.

The warning from those who have lived under it

Years ago, local imams in Texas told me, without hesitation, that certain Sharia punishments “just work.” They spoke about cutting off hands for theft, stoning adulterers, and maintaining separate standards of testimony for men and women. They insisted it was logical and effective while insisting they would never attempt to implement it in Texas.

But when pressed, they could not explain why a system they consider divinely mandated would suddenly stop applying once someone crossed a border.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

AASHISH KIPHAYET / Contributor | Getty Images

America is vulnerable

Europe is already showing us where this road leads. No-go zones, parallel courts, political intimidation, and clerics preaching supremacy have taken root across major cities.

America’s strength has always come from its melting pot, but assimilation requires boundaries. It requires insisting that the Constitution, not religious law, is the supreme authority on this soil.

Yet we are becoming complacent, even fearful, about saying so. We mistake silence for tolerance. We mistake avoidance for fairness. Meanwhile, political Islam views this hesitation as weakness.

Religious freedom is one of America’s greatest gifts. Muslims may worship freely here, as they should. But political Islam must not be permitted to plant a flag on American soil. The Constitution cannot coexist with a system that denies equal rights, restricts speech, subordinates women, and places clerical authority above civil law.

Wake up before it is too late

Projects like the Meadow are not isolated. They are test runs, footholds, proofs of concept. Political Islam operates with patience. It advances through demographic growth, legal ambiguity, and cultural hesitation — and it counts on Americans being too polite, too distracted, or too afraid to confront it.

We cannot afford that luxury. If we fail to defend the principles that make this country free, we will one day find ourselves asking how a parallel system gained power right in front of us. The answer will be simple: We looked away.

The time to draw boundaries and to speak honestly is now. The time to defend the Constitution as the supreme law of the land is now. Act while there is still time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

The Crisis of Meaning: Searching for truth and purpose

Mario Tama / Staff | Getty Images

Anxiety, anger, and chronic dissatisfaction signal a country searching for meaning. Without truth and purpose, politics becomes a dangerous substitute for identity.

We have built a world overflowing with noise, convenience, and endless choice, yet something essential has slipped out of reach. You can sense it in the restless mood of the country, the anxiety among young people who cannot explain why they feel empty, in the angry confusion that dominates our politics.

We have more wealth than any nation in history, but the heart of the culture feels strangely malnourished. Before we can debate debt or elections, we must confront the reality that we created a world of things, but not a world of purpose.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

What we are living through is not just economic or political dysfunction. It is the vacuum that appears when a civilization mistakes abundance for meaning.

Modern life is stuffed with everything except what the human soul actually needs. We built systems to make life faster, easier, and more efficient — and then wondered why those systems cannot teach our children who they are, why they matter, or what is worth living for.

We tell the next generation to chase success, influence, and wealth, turning childhood into branding. We ask kids what they want to do, not who they want to be. We build a world wired for dopamine rather than dignity, and then we wonder why so many people feel unmoored.

When everything is curated, optimized, and delivered at the push of a button, the question “what is my life for?” gets lost in the static.

The crisis beneath the headlines

It is not just the young who feel this crisis. Every part of our society is straining under the weight of meaninglessness.

Look at the debt cycle — the mathematical fate no civilization has ever escaped once it crosses a threshold that we seem to have already blown by. While ordinary families feel the pressure, our leaders respond with distraction, with denial, or by rewriting the very history that could have warned us.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

We have entered a cultural moment where the noise is so loud that it drowns out the simplest truths. We are living in a country that no longer knows how to hear itself think.

So people go searching. Some drift toward the false promise of socialism, some toward the empty thrill of rebellion. Some simply check out. When a culture forgets what gives life meaning, it becomes vulnerable to every ideology that offers a quick answer.

The quiet return of meaning

And yet, quietly, something else is happening. Beneath the frustration and cynicism, many Americans are recognizing that meaning does not come from what we own, but from what we honor. It does not rise from success, but from virtue. It does not emerge from noise, but from the small, sacred things that modern life has pushed to the margins — the home, the table, the duty you fulfill, the person you help when no one is watching.

The danger is assuming that this rediscovery happens on its own. It does not.

Reorientation requires intention. It requires rebuilding the habits and virtues that once held us together. It requires telling the truth about our history instead of rewriting it to fit today’s narratives. And it requires acknowledging what has been erased: that meaning is inseparable from God’s presence in a nation’s life.

Harold M. Lambert / Contributor | Getty Images

Where renewal begins

We have built a world without stillness, and then we wondered why no one can hear the questions that matter. Those questions remain, whether we acknowledge them or not. They do not disappear just because we drown them in entertainment or noise. They wait for us, and the longer we ignore them, the more disoriented we become.

Meaning is still available. It is found in rebuilding the smallest, most human spaces — the places that cannot be digitized, globalized, or automated. The home. The family. The community.

These are the daily virtues that do not trend on social media, but that hold a civilization upright. If we want to repair this country, we begin there, exactly where every durable civilization has always begun: one virtue at a time, one tradition at a time, one generation at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A break in trust: A NEW Watergate is brewing in plain sight

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

When institutions betray the public’s trust, the country splits, and the spiral is hard to stop.

Something drastic is happening in American life. Headlines that should leave us stunned barely register anymore. Stories that once would have united the country instead dissolve into silence or shrugs.

It is not apathy exactly. It is something deeper — a growing belief that the people in charge either cannot or will not fix what is broken.

When people feel ignored or betrayed, they will align with anyone who appears willing to fight on their behalf.

I call this response the Bubba effect. It describes what happens when institutions lose so much public trust that “Bubba,” the average American minding his own business, finally throws his hands up and says, “Fine. I will handle it myself.” Not because he wants to, but because the system that was supposed to protect him now feels indifferent, corrupt, or openly hostile.

The Bubba effect is not a political movement. It is a survival instinct.

What triggers the Bubba effect

We are watching the triggers unfold in real time. When members of Congress publicly encourage active duty troops to disregard orders from the commander in chief, that is not a political squabble. When a federal judge quietly rewrites the rules so one branch of government can secretly surveil another, that is not normal. That is how republics fall. Yet these stories glided across the news cycle without urgency, without consequence, without explanation.

When the American people see the leadership class shrug, they conclude — correctly — that no one is steering the ship.

This is how the Bubba effect spreads. It is not just individuals resisting authority. It is sheriffs refusing to enforce new policies, school boards ignoring state mandates, entire communities saying, “We do not believe you anymore.” It becomes institutional, cultural, national.

A country cracking from the inside

This effect can be seen in Dearborn, Michigan. In the rise of fringe voices like Nick Fuentes. In the Epstein scandal, where powerful people could not seem to locate a single accountable adult. These stories are different in content but identical in message: The system protects itself, not you.

When people feel ignored or betrayed, they will align with anyone who appears willing to fight on their behalf. That does not mean they suddenly agree with everything that person says. It means they feel abandoned by the institutions that were supposed to be trustworthy.

The Bubba effect is what fills that vacuum.

The dangers of a faithless system

A republic cannot survive without credibility. Congress cannot oversee intelligence agencies if it refuses to discipline its own members. The military cannot remain apolitical if its chain of command becomes optional. The judiciary cannot defend the Constitution while inventing loopholes that erase the separation of powers.

History shows that once a nation militarizes politics, normalizes constitutional shortcuts, or allows government agencies to operate without scrutiny, it does not return to equilibrium peacefully. Something will give.

The question is what — and when.

The responsibility now belongs to us

In a healthy country, this is where the media steps in. This is where universities, pastors, journalists, and cultural leaders pause the outrage machine and explain what is at stake. But today, too many see themselves not as guardians of the republic, but of ideology. Their first loyalty is to narrative, not truth.

The founders never trusted the press more than the public. They trusted citizens who understood their rights, lived their responsibilities, and demanded accountability. That is the antidote to the Bubba effect — not rage, but citizenship.

How to respond without breaking ourselves

Do not riot. Do not withdraw. Do not cheer on destruction just because you dislike the target. That is how nations lose themselves. Instead, demand transparency. Call your representatives. Insist on consequences. Refuse to normalize constitutional violations simply because “everyone does it.” If you expect nothing, you will get nothing.

Do not hand your voice to the loudest warrior simply because he is swinging a bat at the establishment. You do not beat corruption by joining a different version of it. You beat it by modeling the country you want to preserve: principled, accountable, rooted in truth.

Adam Gray / Stringer | Getty Images

Every republic reaches a moment when historians will later say, “That was the warning.” We are living in ours. But warnings are gifts if they are recognized. Institutions bend. People fail. The Constitution can recover — if enough Americans still know and cherish it.

It does not take a majority. Twenty percent of the country — awake, educated, and courageous — can reset the system. It has happened before. It can happen again.

Wake up. Stand up. Demand integrity — from leaders, from institutions, and from yourself. Because the Bubba effect will not end until Americans reclaim the duty that has always belonged to them: preserving the republic for the next generation.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.