Three Things You Need to Know - September 5, 2017

Kim Jong Un's Nuclear Selfies

40 minutes. That’s how long New Yorkers would have before a nuclear missile from North Korea detonated. Hundreds of thousands dead in a matter of seconds. Thermal radiation would then spread past Yonkers in the north, and as far south as Staten Island. A large portion of New York City --- the greatest city in the world --- effectively wiped off the map.

On Sunday, North Korea claimed to have this capability. As we were packing up minivans and setting out on Labor Day weekend road trips, Kim Jong Un was taking selfies next to a miniaturized nuclear warhead. A poster display could be seen in the background, showing the warhead neatly inside the tip of an ICBM.

Hours later, a 6.3 magnitude earthquake was felt as far away as China. Windows rattled in buildings on the Chinese border. It was not only North Korea’s sixth nuclear test, it was the most powerful and significant one so far.

For years, the entire world underestimated North Korea’s nuclear program. Today, it’s accelerating at a frightening rate. The power of the bomb tested on Sunday far surpassed that of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Make no mistake, this bomb was a city-killer. That’s the power Kim Jong Un appears to now wield.

So what’s next? Could it be an oil embargo? This is what brought Kim Jong Un’s father to the table back in the 90s. But will it work for the son? Or might he consider an oil embargo an act of war just like Japan did during WWII. The attack on Pearl Harbor came soon after.

Remember the robotic voice of Joshua in the 1980’s movie Wargames? "Shall we play a game?" Kim Jong Un and President Trump are locked in their own game of nuclear chicken. Who will blink first? In Wargames, it took a computer to teach the humans that --- in some games --- "the only winning move is not to play."

That was a movie. Unfortunately, this is our life.

Behind the Holiday: Labor Day

That cookout you enjoyed on your day off yesterday --- what exactly were you celebrating? Do you know the complicated backstory of Labor Day? It involves Canada, Marxism, a union strike, riots, death and one of the sleaziest presidents in U.S. history.

In late 1800s America, labor unions gained traction to combat terrible working conditions in the factories and mines that fueled the Second Industrial Revolution. In many cases, unions were vital in helping workers deal with 12-hour work-days, 7-day work-weeks, no compensation for on-the-job injuries, low wages, no benefits, inadequate breaks and filthy, dangerous work spaces.

Generally, the Second Industrial Revolution helped widen the gulf between the wealthy and poor classes. This is the Marxist/socialist sweet spot --- manipulating the sense of unfairness that the poor worker feels. Their strategy is turning downtrodden workers into revolutionaries who will level the playing field by redistributing wealth.

Factory working conditions in America gave Marxists a foot in the door --- this is where guys like Peter J. McGuire come in. McGuire was an Irish Catholic from New York City and a devoted Marxist. In 1874, McGuire co-founded the Social Democratic Workingmen’s Party of North America --- the first Marxist political party in the U.S. He also co-founded the American Federation of Labor, which became the most powerful labor union in the country. McGuire’s goal was to convert America to socialism through labor unions.

In 1882, labor officials in Toronto invited McGuire to attend the labor festival that had been a fixture in Canada for a decade. McGuire ate it up. He scrambled back to New York City to organize a similar American labor march.

McGuire chose September 5th, since it roughly fell halfway between Independence Day and Thanksgiving. The Labor celebration was a hit --- 30,000-plus marchers skipped work for a day of picnics, speeches demanding an 8-hour workday and a parade through New York City.

The Labor march became an annual event and caught on around the country --- a way for laborers to demonstrate that Labor Lives Matter, well, as long as you weren’t black or Asian which disqualified you from joining the AFL. Five years after it started, Labor Day was an official holiday in 30 states.

Then in 1894, a pivotal strike occurred in Pullman, Illinois that made Labor Day a permanent fixture on our national calendar.

Because of an economic downturn, George Pullman’s Palace Car Company (which made luxury train sleeping cars) had to lay off hundreds of employees. For those that remained, Pullman lowered wages without lowering rent for the company houses where most employees lived. Marxist labor leaders couldn’t let Pullman, the evil capitalist, get away with this. They had to shut him down. So workers went on strike and sympathetic railroad workers around the country joined in.

The strike quickly turned violent. Rioters set hundreds of train cars ablaze. The unrest crippled the railroad business and interrupted delivery of U.S. Mail, which prompted President Grover Cleveland to send 12,000 troops to Chicago to break the strike. Troops and strikers exchanged fire and at least two strikers were killed.

President Cleveland’s unpopular response to the crisis was not good for Democrats in a mid-term election year. Congress rammed through a bill to make Labor Day a Federal holiday as a way to appease labor unions across the country. President Cleveland signed the bill just six days after the Pullman Strike was broken. Marxist terrorists had torched railroads and trains across the country and the President gave them the gift of Labor Day.

So, Labor Day was a Canadian idea, copied in America by the Marxist founder of the American Socialist Party, that was made a Federal holiday by a Congress and President trying to save face during an election year. It was the first of countless bones the Democratic Party would throw to labor unions over the next century.

By the way, remember Peter J. McGuire? The Marxist, racist, anti-immigrant, co-founder of the American Socialist Party, the AFL and our annual Labor Day celebration? In 1901 he was arrested for embezzling union funds. I guess for some people, socialism moves too slowly in redistributing the wealth.

And for the record, there is a statue honoring Peter J. McGuire in Pennsauken, New Jersey. It has an inscription in Latin that translates, "Labor conquers all."

Hurricane Harvey Update

Scavengers are stealing from flood victims in Houston.

We’ve seen the best of humanity during the rescue phase of Hurricane Harvey --- now the worst of humanity is rearing its head. Unreal, the idea of people returning to their ravaged homes, sifting through what’s left of their possessions, putting things in the yard to dry out, only to have thieves rob them.

This is rare so far in Houston compared to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. But it’s a reminder how much still hangs in the balance for southeast Texas.

On Sunday, Houston mayor Sylvester Turner said, “I’m encouraging people: Get up, and let’s get going.” It’s the same can-do spirit conveyed in a Washington Post story with the headline, “Texans’ do-it-ourselves rescue effort defines Hurricane Harvey.”

This has been a big part of the Hurricane Harvey narrative so far – Texan resilience and independence. Neighbors having each other’s backs. But can this same do-it-yourself ethic continue through the rebuilding effort?

Current damage estimates are between $150-180 billion. Can Texas, a state with no income tax, be a model for a different kind of recovery effort, on its own, through innovative private/public partnership, without waiting for the Federal money truck to back up to Houston?

Remember all the FEMA debit card abuses and swindles after Hurricane Katrina? Federal money dumps are not an efficient solution. Besides, FEMA is still $25 billion in debt from Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy. The federal government cannot afford this.

This is a perfect chance for President Trump, the businessman, to outline a different path for rebuilding – more private donations, less federal aid. Trump was in the real estate and construction business – this is his wheelhouse. This is an opportunity for him to lead in a unique and better way on a responsible rebuilding of Houston.

MORE 3 THINGS

Silent genocide exposed: Are christians being wiped out in 2025?

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?  

Should Starbase become its own city?  

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.