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

NBC Covers North Korea for the Winter Olympics as If Everything’s Normal

January 24, 2018
Staff

WRITER

North Korea is infamous for human rights abuses, and leader Kim Jong Un has been threatening the U.S. and other countries with nuclear war. So of course, NBC decided it was necessary to cover the hermit regime’s involvement in the upcoming Olympic Games.

NBC’s Lester Holt reported that he was treated “with respect” in North Korea and showed a ski slope where North Koreans seemed to be enjoying the winter day. On today’s show, Glenn and Stu couldn’t believe the upbeat coverage that North Korea gets when so many defectors have revealed to the world what’s really going on inside the country.

Watch the clip here and tell us your thoughts in the comment section below.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: So NBC has been given rare access inside of North Korea. So we've got American news cameras finally able to show the truth about what life is like inside this -- this hermit kingdom. And, wow, look what they've exposed so far.

VOICE: This is the bunny slope at a very modern ski resort here in North Korea. We have been treated with respect here. So many impressions. One is that how colorful a city it is. You can see the building. So many hues of green and yellow and red. One of the early impressions I've had here is how hardy the North Korean people are.

GLENN: Wow. Wow. You got a modern ski resort.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: You have colorful buildings. And the people are hardy. Now, I'm hoping that NBC is going to go further, and that's -- they're only saying those things because they have a gun to their head. I mean, where is the journalism there?

You're the -- you know what, I am the only person from the West that's been allowed to -- to stand in front of these buildings. You know, you might want to mention that you're only allowed to go where your guards will allow you to go. You know, anything that might point out the -- the oppressive nature of the state, instead of regurgitating all of the state's narrative.

NBC, I don't even know what you're doing. I mean, why go on report on anything at all? If you can't tell the truth, why go there? At what point does your work become propaganda for a ruthless dictator?

Now, I'm -- I'm counting on NBC having some sort of a follow-up. But then, why would you go in the first place, because you'll never go again? I don't understand what you were trying to -- what you've traded for this rare access. Because you've traded your credibility. What did you get out of it? Doing a stand-up at North Korea had to sound cool, especially when the State Department just last week said, do not go to North Korea. And if you do, make sure your will and your estate is in order.

So I guess maybe it would be cool. But would we have done this before? I mean, if NBC was terrified of offending Kim Jong-un by doing their actual job? Why didn't they just stand Lester Holt in front of a green screen with some cool-looking B-roll and say, yep. This is the ski slope that was probably built by slaves.

Why not?

In 1944, there was a guy named Kurt Gerron. He was -- he was probably one of the most famous movie actors of Germany before the war. He was Jewish. And his story is long and intense. And we have -- we have covered it, on -- his story on TheBlaze TV. And if you get a chance, watch it. Download -- you know, watch it on demand now. The story of Kurt Gerron. It is truly remarkable. But here's a guy who, in the end, compromised and was commissioned by the Nazis to make a film, taking a concentration camp, and turning that concentration camp into a Jewish paradise.

And the movie is out. And you should watch it. You can watch it on YouTube. It's terrifying, when you know the truth. The movie is the furor gives the city to the Jews. And it showed the Jews laughing and playing and enjoying life. But when the cameras weren't rolling, they were all being tortured. They were murdered. In fact, everybody in that film was dead within a month in the ovens of Auschwitz, in the gas chambers of Auschwitz.

Every single person.

You don't go to the town of Auschwitz and say, you know, look at this beautiful little town. Look at how colorful it is, when you know that there are concentration camps down the street.

NBC News, you are dangerously close to Gerron's movie. Evil exists when good men do nothing. What did you get out of that, that you can show to the world, this is what this regime is like?

Showing the colorful buildings and the sturdiness and the stockiness of the people. My gosh, they're well-built, because they're so well-fed.

Showing their colorful buildings does nothing. Those buildings were built by slaves. Darkness reigns when people -- and especially the media fail to speak up.

(music)

STU: I think what you wanted to say was democracy dies in darkness.

GLENN: Maybe. Something like that. You should write that down.

STU: Yeah. Look, if there's a gun pointed to your head, I'll excuse your crappy reporting until you get home. But you're right, there needs to be some sort of follow-up on this.

GLENN: No. There needs to be a discrediting of this. And I don't see how that's a win for NBC.

STU: Yeah. What's the point of going over there? You know, it's hard to understand. Especially because it's kind of put into this context of the Olympics.

And, you know, we were just talking to Scott Hamilton, and he won a gold medal in Sarajevo, 1984, in the middle of the Cold War. You know, that same sort of tension seems to at least be discussed when they talk about North and South Korea right now, though they've had some bizarre coming together over the Olympics.

GLENN: Really bizarre. I don't know why.

STU: But to go over to North Korea and talk about their colorful buildings and their sturdy people.

GLENN: Do you remember the Cold War?

STU: Yeah, I mean, I obviously remember it ending in Rocky 4.

GLENN: Okay. That wasn't the point. But I remember during the Olympics -- and maybe this is foggy memory, or, you know, revisionism. I don't think it is.

I seem to remember, before we would go over -- if we would ever go to, you know, Sarajevo. If we would ever go to some place that was, you know, ruthless and we'd ever discuss the Soviet Union or any of those countries, it was always, always, this is a brutal place. We're only allowed to show you the things that we can show you. This is what they tell us. They tell us that these buildings, being so colorful, are, you know, one of the pride and joy of the people, who they also tell us are very stocky.

That is the way you can do that. When he says, I was really struck by the hardiness of the people -- the hardiness of the people?

STU: I don't know what that is.

GLENN: What the hell is that? And that is -- that sounds like something a propaganda minister would give you to infer that you are -- you're full. You're well-fed. You're hardy.

STU: Yeah, exactly. There are times in the report, where he says -- Lester Holt says, we're going to a very modern ski resort. And this is a place the regime really wanted to make sure that we saw. He said something like that.

And it's like, well, okay. He's kind of hinting there, that he understands that this is part of a propaganda mission. And any time you go on a trip like that, you -- you should expect some of that. And it doesn't mean you don't necessarily take the trip.

I mean, you know, we -- we've had some discussions about --

GLENN: Syria.

STU: Syria. And going to Syria. And interviewing --

GLENN: Yeah. We've been asked by the Assad regime, how many times, to go over and -- and interview Assad. And we have had real discussions on that. We knew that if we go over, when we're there, we'd only be able to see what he wanted us to see. And we'd only say the things that we'd be okay with. And we would be able to push him maybe a little. But it's Assad. And we've turned it down because we haven't felt comfortable doing the -- the bidding.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Even though we think we would be able to have a perspective and a look at what's happening in Syria that would be different than anyone else on talk radio. We decided against it because of that one show or two shows that would have come from Syria. We didn't want to carry that regime's water at all.

STU: Right. And, you know, you wouldn't do it if you had to.

You know, you would never agree to carry someone's water like that, obviously. The only reason to do it is to go over there and get whatever you can and say, this is what we think is really happening. Here's what we saw. Here's what they wanted us to see. And you have to be honest about that. And we'll see if NBC can kind of do that on the other side of this trip.

But that's an important -- it's an important part of it. You have to do that.

GLENN: If you come back and you have hidden camera stuff that shows you stuff -- if you have, even first person. But there's no way. It's like we talked about with Assad. There's no way we're going -- because we're going to be with them the whole time. You know, if you read anything about Hitler, there would be streets -- you know, he would go into towns in Poland or whatever, and it would be just desolation. It would be horrible. But the street he was on had flowers and cheers and flags and everything else.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Well, that's what you're going to see when you go over there, because they are in total control. So do you do it?

And if so, why? What do you get in return? What does humanity get from making North Korea look like -- oh, well, it's not so bad. I mean, it's got a ski resort. And look, the buildings are pretty colorful. It's like Miami.

(music)

STU: The sad thing that I suspect is, what humanity is going to get out of it is access for NBC during the Olympics. They're going to get some -- and that's not a worthwhile cause to do such a thing. I mean, we saw that with -- you know, Michael Moore did this in his movie with Cuba, where he glorified them and tried to make his points that way. That's not a trade you want to make.

GLENN: Venezuela, look at how many people in Hollywood went and did propaganda for Hugo Chavez, and look -- if you can find it in the mainstream media or from anybody in Hollywood, look at the misery that that has caused.

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.