Glenn Beck: Meet the New Radicals





Watch Glenn Beck weekdays at 5p & 2a ET on Fox News Channel

Last week I showed you the left's playbook, the manifesto from the Weather Underground. These guys exemplified what it means to be a '60s radical: They'd do whatever it took to overthrow America and — in their words — "institute communism and a dictator."

And they really believed the ends justified the means. They bombed the home of the judge in a Black Panther trial with "kill the pigs" written in graffiti. They bombed the New York City Police Department headquarters. They conducted sniper attacks on Cambridge Police headquarters and robbed a Brinks armored car, killing two cops in the process.

I could go on and on.

Back then, most of these radicals were part of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), now they occupy positions of power. Wade Radthke, former SDS member, founded ACORN and SEIU. Andy Stern, another SDS member and former president of SEIU and is on President Obama’s Fiscal Responsibility Commission. Jeff Jones, former SDS member, is now a member of the Apollo Alliance and helped write the stimulus bill. Then, of course, there is the president's "spiritual adviser," Jim Wallis, another former SDS member.

If you missed it, you should really go back and watch. The evidence is quite overwhelming. You’ll see this radical thought is commonplace with the powers in and around the current administration.

The only argument the left could resort to over the weekend was, Oh, that happened a long time ago. OK, but they never admitted to any turning points or any change in belief, which helps explain why in 2006, a group of students "worked with members of the old SDS" to re-launch the organization.

Hmm. I guess that Cass Sunstein would like to retract his assessment that he feels "very uncomfortable with their past, but neither of them is thought of as horrible types now — so far as most of us know, they are legitimate members of the community."

Hey Watchdogs, I need your help because this bothers me. Two years before the election of Barack Obama, all of these well-laid plans suddenly pop up? Where did the funding in 2006 for SDS come from? They claim that the new SDS has over 150 chapters at schools around the country, whose aim is to "build a radical multi-issue organization" and their rally cry is to "take back our schools, our communities, and our nation — and we are going to win, because millions of people are stronger than millions of dollars. This is the fight of our life!"

The fight of our life? Somewhere, Nancy Pelosi must be crying, because not only is this the violent rhetoric from the '60s, but it's coming straight from those who actually blew stuff up.

So, what is the "new" SDS — founded by the old SDS — up to currently?

Well, they were just in Arizona protesting the new immigration bill. The media will have you believe that these protesters are regular, everyday citizens who have just had enough with all the racism from Republicans and conservatives. But that doesn't seem to be the case. Radicals from the new SDS and SEIU were bussed in from out of state to protest. There were eventually 122 arrests.

You'd think the folks in Arizona would be the most upset, wouldn't you? After all, they're the ones whose kids will be scooped up while eating ice cream or when dad gets a parking ticket. But in Arizona, support for the law is upwards of 60 percent.

Did you see the picture on Drudge Report over the weekend of the protester running around waving the Mexican flag? Why would someone who just loves America so much, who just wants to live here because they love the good ole U.S. of A, be waving a Mexican flag? Unless in defiance. No, he's waving it because, as we showed you last week, with radicals it's always about "the oppressed."

The new SDS says "oppressed people are at the forefront of movements for liberation... we must be grounded in the work of combating systems of white supremacy, patriarchy, capitalism, imperialism, heterosexism, transphobia, and the many other forms of oppression thoughtfully and strategically."

Here's a picture from this weekend of a protestor holding a Cuban flag with Che's face on it. Gosh, where have I seen that before? Oh, that's right — SDS in the 1960s.

Here's another picture from the protests: A guy with the Nazi symbol in the place where the stars in the American flag are. You'd think that Andy Stern could get them to stop with the swastikas, right? I remember the media constantly calling on the Tea Parties to rein in the crowd. What about this? I haven't heard anyone calling these radicals out.

That's the kind of thing that makes Fox News unique and gets us in trouble at the same time. We are telling you the full truth. And when someone has an agenda, they only want to hear some of the truth..

Here's an oldie but goodie: You remember the old Perry Mason? The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God? Remember that? Is there anyone out there who can say that now? Now it's the ends justify the means. Truth? Hey, as far as anyone knows they are good people.

Is that OK with you?

Once again you aren't getting the full truth from the media or just about anyone on what these Arizona immigration law protests are all about. No one will tell you that those who were arrested were new SDS radicals who were influenced by old SDS and current SEIU radicals.

If this were 1995, I'd dismiss these clowns as just that. But times have changed. This isn't an isolated group of people. The Weather Underground manifesto shows their hand: "We will only reach the high school kids who are in motion by being in the schoolyards, hangouts and on the streets on an everyday basis."

The new SDS is shouting "Arrest Arpaio." Hmm, sounds familiar. Oh yeah, from the 1960s: "We want to smash cops, and build a new life."

So we have the past and we have the present. Now, can we see the future? Yes, we can. But for that we go to Greece.

Remember the little book by the Invisible Committee of Revolutionaries? You're seeing it in Greece now, it's hitting the streets. They can't afford the entitlements and the unions don't want to let go. So they're burning cars and blowing stuff up, clashing with the police.

Most people in America don't realize what they are up against. This is not just a movement with big government tendencies. It's radical revolutionaries who believe so strongly that America is evil, that capitalism and the free market are evil, that they will stop at nothing to end the perceived "oppression."

If you want to see what this looks like when the radicals really gear up, look no further than Greece.

The Guardian is reporting on the rise of a group called the Sect of Revolutionaries. They've been described as "more murderous, dangerous, capable and nihilistic than ever before." They've now declared that "tourists should learn that Greece is no longer a safe haven of capitalism."


And they have promised to set up attacks on police, businessmen, prison guards, the "corrupt" media and, for the first time, tourists. They've also claimed responsibility in the murder of an investigative journalist, who was shot dead at his home in front of his pregnant wife.

The ends justify the means.

There are crazies on both sides of the aisle — left, right, up down and in the middle. But one side has an orchestrated history of terror and violence and it's starting to rear its ugly head again.

No one on TV has preached more that violence is not the answer than me. But when I do, the leftists say, Hmm, why would you have to say that unless your crazy listeners weren't one push away from a shooting spree? I say it for the same reason Martin Luther King said it. For the same reason the left said it with their MAP for social movements. It's a human condition when your back is against the wall, you want to push back. As soon as anyone does that, not only is it just plain wrong, but you also destroy the movement. You lose.

But I also say it because I've seen the record. SEIU has a history of violence against the tea parties: beating a black man, biting off a finger, physical intimidation.

SDS has a history of violence from the '60s with the Weather Underground. And the same SDS members have started a new SDS and on their first visible outing they have arrests while shouting at the "pigs."

I challenge SEIU to have their members sign a pledge of nonviolence and actually mean it. I'd have a hard time taking that seriously, since SDS and SEIU members believe in Saul Alinsky who taught that the ends justify the means.

The throwing of water bottles at cops in Arizona is just the tip of the iceberg. We've seen what these radical groups did in the past: They got violent. Now it’s the same radicals teaching our kids how to do the same.

Don't disregard the warning signs.

— Watch Glenn Beck weekdays at 5p & 2a ET on Fox News Channel

I think we can all agree, both on the Left and the Right, that children who have been caught up in illegal immigration is an awful situation. But apparently what no one can agree on is when it matters to them. This past weekend, it suddenly — and even a little magically — began to matter to the Left. Seemingly out of nowhere, they all collectively realized this was a problem and all rushed to blame the Trump administration.

RELATED: These 3 things need to happen before we can fix our border problem

Here's Rachel Maddow yesterday:

I seem to remember getting mocked by the Left for showing emotion on TV, but I'll give her a pass here. This is an emotional situation. But this is what I can't give her a pass on: where the heck was this outrage and emotion back in 2014? Because the same situation going on today — that stuff Maddow and the rest of the Left have only just now woken up to — was going on back in July 2014! And it was arguably worse back then.

I practically begged and pleaded for people to wake up to what was going on. We had to shed light on how our immigration system was being manipulated by people breaking our laws, and they were using kids as pawns to get it done. But unlike the gusto the Left is using now to report this story, let's take a look at what Rachel Maddow thought was more important back in 2014.

On July 1, 2014, Maddow opened her show with a riveting monologue on how President Obama was hosting a World Cup viewing party. That's hard-hitting stuff right there.

On July 2, 2014, Maddow actually acknowledged kids were at the border, but she referenced Health and Human Services only briefly and completely rushed through what was actually happening to these kids. She made a vague statement about a "policy" stating where kids were being taken after their arrival. She also blamed Congress for not acting.

See any difference in reporting there from today? That "policy" she referenced has suddenly become Trump's "new" policy, and it isn't Congress's fault… it's all on the President.

She goes on throughout the week.

On July 7, 2014, her top story was something on the Koch brothers. Immigration was only briefly mentioned at the end of the show. This trend continued all the way through the week. I went to the border on July 19. Did she cover it? Nope. In fact, she didn't mention kids at the border for the rest of the month. NOT AT ALL.

Do you care about immigrant kids who have been caught in the middle of a broken immigration system or not?

Make up your minds. Is this an important issue or not? Do you care about immigrant kids who have been caught in the middle of a broken immigration system or not? Do you even care to fix it, or is this what it looks like — just another phony, addicted-to-outrage political stunt?

UPDATE: Here's how this discussion went on radio. Watch the video below.

Glenn gives Rachel Maddow the benefit of the doubt

Rachel Maddow broke down in tears live on her MSNBC show over border crisis.

Progressives think the Obamas are a gift to the world. But their gift is apparently more of the metaphorical kind. It doesn't extend to helpful, tangible things like saving taxpayers money. Illinois has approved $224 million to pay for street and transportation upgrades around the planned site of the Obama Presidential Center. The catch is that Illinois taxpayers will have to cover $200 million of that cost. For a presidential museum.

Eight years of multiplying the national debt wasn't enough for Barack Obama. Old fleecing habits die hard. What's another $200 million here and there, especially for something as important as an Obama tribute center?

RELATED: Want to cure millennials' financial woes? Reform the payroll tax.

That's all well and good except Illinois can't even fund its pension system. The state has a $137 billion funding shortfall. That means every person in Illinois owes $11,000 for pensions, and there is no plan to fix the mess. Unless Illinois progressives have discovered a new kind of math, this doesn't really add up. You can't fund pensions, but you're going to figure out a way to milk the public for another $200 million to help cover the cost of a library?

It's hard to imagine who in their right mind would think this will be money well spent. Well, except for maybe Chicago Mayor and former Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel who said, "The state's… investment in infrastructure improvements near the Obama Center on the South Side of Chicago is money well spent."

Some presidential overreach lasts longer than others.

The spending has already been signed into law, even though the Obama library has not received construction approval yet. Part of the holdup is that the proposed site is on public land in historic Jackson Park. That doesn't seem very progressive of the Obamas, but, you know, for certain presidents, you go above and beyond. It's just what you do. Some presidential overreach lasts longer than others.

Here's the thing about taxing the peasants so the king can build a fancy monument to himself – it's wrong. And completely unnecessary. The Obamas have the richest friends on the planet who could fund this project in their sleep. If the world simply must have a tricked-out Obama museum, then let private citizens take out their wallets voluntarily.

As the Mercury Museum proved this weekend, it is possible to build an exhibit with amazing artifacts that attracts a ton of visitors – and it cost taxpayers approximately zero dollars.

'The fool builds walls': China blasts Trump over tariffs

NICOLAS ASFOURI/AFP/Getty Images

I can picture it now: Thousands of years ago, Qin Shi Huang, the first emperor of China, standing before hordes of his followers, in the Qin Dynasty, with a bright red bamboo hat on, and chanting, "Build that wall!"

It took a couple centuries to build the thing, but it got built. And it has been carefully maintained over the last 2,000 years, but, today, the Great Wall of China is so massive that astronauts can see it during good weather conditions from the lower part of low Earth orbit. The wall boasts over 3,000 miles of towers and brick embankments, with over 1,200 miles of natural defensive barriers. It's worth mentioning that the Chinese government is also exceptionally good at imposing digital walls, so much so that China ranks worst in the world for internet freedom.

RELATED: Trump is following through on his campaign promises. Here are the top 10.

So it's a little strange to hear an editorial run by a major news network in China criticized President Trump for his proposal to build a large wall along the southern border of America.

"Following the path of expanding and opening up is China's best response to the trade dispute between China and the United States, and is also the responsibility that major countries should have to the world," the author wrote. "The wise man builds bridges, the fool builds walls."

Similarly, the Pope told reporters in 2016, "A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not the gospel."

Don't throw stones at people who want to build walls when you live in place surrounded by walls.

If you've been to the Vatican, you know that it is surrounded by enormous walls. The same goes for all the celebrities who live in heavily walled compounds—a safety measure—but who have also vehemently criticized President Trump's plans to build a wall.

You know the adage: "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones at other people's glass houses." Perhaps the phrase needs an update: Don't throw stones at people who want to build walls when you live in place surrounded by walls.

An immaculate Nazi doctor hovers over newborn. He probes and sneers at it. "Take it away," he says. This is the very real process that Nazi doctors undertook during the era of Nazi Germany: Nazi eugenics, the studious, sterile search to find children who would define a pure breed for the German lineage. The Übermensch.

RELATED: Glenn responds to advocates of aborting Down syndrome babies: 'No better than Nazi Germans'

During a speech to a delegation of Italy's Family Association in Rome on Saturday, Pope Francis referred to this cruel Nazi practice, which he used as a comparison to the increasingly popular process throughout Europe of "ending" birth defects, by offering abortions to women who have babies with chromosomal defects.

Here are two passages from the Pope's remarks:

I have heard that it's fashionable, or at least usual, that when in the first months of pregnancy they do studies to see if the child is healthy or has something, the first offer is: let's send it away.

And:

I say this with pain. In the last century the whole world was scandalized about what the Nazis did to purify the race. Today we do the same, but now with white gloves.

When CNN got the quote, and it shocked them so much that they had to verify the quote with the Vatican—in other words, it didn't fit the usual narrative.

It didn't fit the usual narrative.

The Pope also addressed claims that he has dedicated himself to LGBTQ causes:

Today, it is hard to say this, we speak of "diversified" families: different types of families. It is true that the word "family" is an analogical word, because we speak of the "family" of stars, family" of trees, "family" of animals ... it is an analogical word. But the human family in the image of God, man and woman, is the only one. It is the only one. A man and woman can be non-believers: but if they love each other and unite in marriage, they are in the image of God even if they don't believe.

The media have largely seen Pope Francis as the cool Pope, as the Obama of Catholicism. It'll be interesting to see how abruptly and severely that perspective changes.