Off The Record with Roma Downey

Over the last several months, Glenn has emphasized the importance of bringing together individuals who share the same goals and unifying principles so that we can learn from one another. GlennBeck.com is working to fulfill that goal by sitting down with some of the most interesting minds to give you an inside look at who they are and what they are working on.

Last month, Emmy award winning actress and producer Roma Downey spoke with GlennBeck.com assistant editor Meg Storm about her childhood growing up in war torn Ireland, the lack of Christian content coming out of Hollywood, and why people are responding so strongly to The Bible and Son of God.

Below is a transcript of the interview:

Hi, Roma! How are you?

Great! I am in Houston today.

How nice! I am actually in New York, but Glenn is down in Dallas.

Are you freezing in New York?

(Laughs) We are. We have a lot of snow on the ground right now.

Well, be safe!

Thank you! Before we dive into the Son of God questions, I just wanted to ask you a few things about your background. Were you always interested in the entertainment industry?

When I was in high school, I thought I might be an artist. I was very good at drawing and painting. I have always been someone who expresses themselves in an artistic way. I grew up in Northern Ireland. I grew up during the war. There weren’t a whole lot of opportunities to act. The local cinema had been burnt down, and the theater company had been blown up. My growing up wasn’t exactly conducive to figuring out that’s what I wanted to do. But once I started college and got involved in drama, it was clear that I loved that as a form of expression. I have had a great and enjoyable acting career, and now I am enjoying a great second act in my career as a producer.

How did you get your start in the industry – you said it was in college?

Yes, I came up through the theater. I came out of drama college and started working in the professional theater. I did a play with the Abbey Theater, which is Ireland’s national theater company. We brought that play to America. My dream had been to appear on Broadway, which I was able to do – I think it was 1990 or 1991 in a show called The Circle at the Ambassador Theater on 49th Street in New York City. And I also had the opportunity to work at the New York Shakespeare Festival with the Roundabout Theater Company. I had a classical training with Shakespeare, Shaw, Chekov, and so on.

And then I found myself getting cast in roles for television. I moved to Los Angeles on the heels of a mini-series I was in. I starred as Jackie Kennedy in a series called A Woman Named Jackie, which went on to win the Emmy that year. I was just in Los Angeles a few years when I cast to play the angel in Touched by an Angel.

How did you and Mark first meet?

We met just a little over 10 years ago now. We met in Malibu. I was having a manicure/pedicure. My husband was having a haircut. Our eyes met in the mirror – not once, not twice, but three times. And on the third time, having been caught looking over at him, I swore I would not look back. And he left – he took off in his car. We didn’t speak. When I was paying my bill, I was very discreetly trying to ask the receptionist who he was. And she said, "Oh isn’t that interesting that you are asking me who he was because he just asked me who you were!"

Oh my goodness!

So anyway, a few days later he got my phone number and called. And I guess the rest, as they say, is history.

That is such a great story – especially on Valentine’s Day! You were talking about how you have an extensive theater background and TV and movies and now you are behind the camera as well. Do you enjoy doing all of it equally?

Yes, I do. You know for many years, when I was starring on Touched by an Angel, I produced on a number of television movies for CBS. I have always enjoyed the aspect of bringing something together and multitasking in that way.

In the case of The Bible series and now Son of God, it has been a combination of what I love to do and what I believe. To be able to do that with the person I love has just really been a blessing. It has been the most challenging work and the most rewarding work. It was quite an undertaking to realize our Bible as a television series. We knew that came with a huge responsibility to bring the scripture to the screen – one that we took very seriously. We worked with scholars and theologians and faith leaders to refine the story, to tell the story accurately, to make sure that we brought the story to life and always kept true to the story of the book.

With Son of God, there is such an excitement and buzz growing. It opens on February 28, and we have been traveling across the country seeing a movement growing. Churches, I think, see what a resource the film is to visually bring the gospels to the screen. Jesus hasn’t been on the big screen in 10 years. That was Passion of the Christ, which only showed three days in Jesus’ life where Son of God is the narrative of Jesus’ life from the nativity and our Christmas story right through to his death but then his resurrection and ascension. The movie goes right through to the Commission. And I think the churches are seeing what a beautiful gift it is. They are stepping up and buying out the multiplexes around the country and giving the seats to their communities and youth groups and so on. So it has been very encouraging to be here in the middle of the south of the country and see what is happening.

You saw the great success of The Bible miniseries last year. Do you think there is such a void in the industry for content like this? Do you think people are really responding because there aren’t other options?

I think that’s true. I also think it speaks to a greater surge that people have. They are hungry for God and hungry for hope. When we first started working on The Bible series, I know that many in our industry thought we were fools, that nobody would show up, that nobody would be that interested in seeing Bible stories on the screen. Of course, we now know that one hundred million people showed up. The Bible series continued to ripple around the world with such success in countries that are surprising like Hong Kong and Australia – places that you might not think would have a huge interest or appetite for faith filled stories.

I think that part of our intention always was – it’s not enough to have good intentions, to bring the stories to the screen. We knew the stories had to be brought with excellent production value and told in a way that would be gritty and compelling and engaging and emotionally connecting. Ultimately, I think it was that that people responded to. Yes, they are good stories. But they are good stories well told.

So you filmed Son of God around the same time you filmed the first season of The Bible?

Oh, yes, absolutely! Every Friday night we would screen footage over there in Morocco. We had an editor on location with us. We would invite our cleaning team, our stars – everybody who worked on the movie had an open invitation to come to these screenings. It gave us an opportunity to see the work from the week that we had just completed, and it allowed everyone to feel like they were part of the team.

At one of these screenings, the Jesus narrative began to unfold, I turned to Mark and said, “Wow, Mark. This is really good. I wish we could be making a film.” And he said, “Well, why don’t we? Let’s shoot additional footage and have the editors start putting something together.” So it took about a year to get the movie edited. We had additional footage. We had a reedited form of the series footage. We have been able to present it in this cinematic way – in this stand-alone theatrical experience. And it is so different. It is so beautiful and impactful.

The feedback we are getting is people are enjoying the larger than life experience. They are enjoying seeing it in community with others. And you really get to see the scale of it and the full epic, sweeping stories with visual effects, special effects. It’s moving. It’s inspiration. And at the same time it’s this deeply personal, intimate love story. People are being profoundly moved by it.

I have seen some clips, and it so incredibly powerful the way you were able to translate these stories that have become so familiar because they are so iconic. But then to see them told in such a way is really something special.

The characters of the disciples – we wanted to cast them as a youthful group, as a dynamic group. They didn’t know they were in the Bible. They were just real guys living their lives. They didn’t even know that Jesus really was the Son of God until he rose. I think it’s the telling of the story in a very human way, in a very relatable way to people. The story is asking them to consider the stories in a new way. It’s a fresh telling. I think the movie will really touch people hearts.

I recently read that The Bible was picked up for a second season, this time on NBC. Is that correct?

Yes, we are doing a mini-series for NBC. We have a green light for 12 hours – for the first 12 hours. And it’s called A.D. The story will reset at the crucifixion and tell the story of the 11 disciples and the fear and the danger and the hope of those dark days when Jesus had died and then the beginnings of the early church.

We are currently working on those scripts, and we plan to be filming that new series back in Morocco by the end of this year, with the hope that it will be on television in the fall of 2015. So we will have had The Bible on TV in 2013, Son of God in theaters in 2014, and A.D. on television in 2015.

It’s been exciting and creative days for us. We must be the noisiest Christians in Hollywood!

That’s wonderful. Well, I look forward to seeing it. Thank you so much for time, Roma! It was a pleasure speaking with you.

We appreciate your help in getting the word out to everybody that Son of God is coming in English and in Spanish too. Thanks, Meg. Bye, bye.

Son of God is now in theaters nationwide. Watch the trailer of the film below:

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.