The real Khashoggi IS NOT who the media claims

October 22, 2018

TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP/Getty Images

CEO/Founder

I want to talk a little bit about this back and forth with Saudi Arabia. It's important that we get this right and we don't make this about American politics. We should make this about American interests, but not American politics. Right now people are saying, I can't believe Donald Trump would do that. But, George Bush, Bill Clinton, the second George Bush, all the way back to FDR, have been in bed with the Saudis.

I don't like this. I think we're in bed with really bad people. I was asked once if a rattlesnake made a bad pet. The answer is, no. It's a perfectly fine pet. As long as you always remember it is a rattlesnake and not a little puppy dog. It's a rattlesnake. It's not a bad pet. Just don't pet it and don't try to fashion a leash around its neck or take it for a walk. It ain't going to do it.

RELATED: Here's what audio allegedly reveals about murdered, dismembered Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi

So how do we handle Saudi Arabia? Well, it should be the same way we handle Turkey. But we're not. Because we're looking at Saudi Arabia and Turkey with American eyes.

Stop it.

These are both Islamic states. Now they're warring with each other. Why? Because one is Muslim Brotherhood and one is a Wahhabiist. They don't like each other. They want death for everybody in the other state. Turkey wants the regime of Saudi Arabia stopped because they're Muslim Brotherhood.

We're being put in the middle of a fight between two Islamists; both of them want the caliphate.

And Saudi Arabia wants Turkey stopped because they're Wahhabiists. We're being put in the middle of a fight between two Islamists; both of them want the caliphate. Both of them want Islamic rule. Both of them want to rule with jihad. And they also want to rule with Sharia law. We don't. We don't want either of those.

So now, let's put this into perspective. Saudi Arabia, horrible place. Horrible, horrible, horrible place. They execute kids. As long as you've shown any kind of signs of purity, you're tried as an adult. They execute through beheading. There was a woman who was raped. Gang raped by seven men. Not sure if one of them was Supreme Court justice Kavanaugh yet. But a Saudi woman was gang raped by seven men.

Those men each got between two and nine years in prison. However, she received six months in prison, and 200 lashings with a whip because she was in the car without her husband. And then she dared to take her story to the media. These are the kind of people that we're dealing with. The crown prince? You and I are not going to like this guy. You can say, oh, look at what he's doing. He's making it easier for women to drive. Sure. Sure. Sure. He's still a Wahhabiist. Let's look at what both sides in this country have done.

We are currently fighting a proxy war with Saudi Arabia. We are involved in their war in Yemen. Did you even know that? President Trump announced 110 billion-dollar arms deal with Saudi Arabia, last year. It was President Obama that vetoed a bill that allowed families of 9/11 victims to sue the Saudi government. So both sides — everybody is in protecting these guys. When the crown prince came here to America, he met with Donald Trump. Oh my gosh. But he also met with Oprah Winfrey, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson (for some unknown reason), Barack Obama, John Kerry, Condoleezza Rice, Michael Bloomberg, Thomas Friedman from the New York Times, Bill Gates, Madeleine Albright, Jeffrey Goldberg, Tim Cook, Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, Alan Gasher from Harvard, and Jeff Bezos. So they all met with him. Let's not pretend we don't know who this guy is.

Now, the guy who went missing — he's a reporter for the Washington Post. Is he, or does he have a point of view that Washington happens to like about Saudi Arabia? And that is, the Muslim Brotherhood perspective. So if you remember, the Muslim Brotherhood was founded in the 1920s, in Egypt. The only reason for its being was to reject the West and establish global Sharia law.

They exported this organization all over the Middle East. Anti-Semitism towards Jews; their biggest and most effective tool at harnessing the Arab rage. Muslim Brotherhood; they're the ones who invented modern day jihadism. They're the ones who inspired obstacles and the other founding members of al-Qaeda. To any administration member from the Obama administration, you cannot call them a largely secular organization. Just read their motto:

The Koran [is] our Constitution. Jihad our plan. And death for the sake of Allah, the lot of these of our wishes.

They're not primarily a sect similar organization. The industry of death. And they mean that in a good way. In their own words:

To a nation that protects the industry of death and which knows how to die nobly, God gives proud life in this world.

Okay. That doesn't sound secular. Doesn't sound like someone we should be in bed with. But the Muslim Brotherhood ran up against what we found as a problem. That was one of them, the kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Because it was backed by the West. Many of these kingdoms in the Middle East have been backed by the West. Jordan will be next. Anyone who stands in their way, they had to destroy. These are democracies, so how are we going to do it?

Well, the Muslim Brotherhood decided to switch tactics and weaponize democracy. Enter the Arab spring. The Arab spring praised by everyone. We told you their goal is a caliphate. Well, it never materialized. Did it? Not there. It materialized from the chain of events, with ISIS. Well, you were talking about the Muslim Brotherhood. Right. And what happened to the Muslim Brotherhood? Did they just choose not to do a caliphate? Oh, no, no. They were overthrown. The Muslim Brotherhood still wants their caliphate. So now you have two of our allies, Turkey; Muslim Brotherhood, the Saudis; Wahhabiists, who are both chasing the exact same dream.

The Muslim Brotherhood decided to switch tactics and weaponize democracy.

A Middle East and a world dominated by Sharia law. Both of them using jihadism as a means to their ends. So Khashoggi, you're calling him today, now we look at him. He is a guy who is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. I want to say this; no one deserves this kind of death. This is not to excuse the Saudis. They're bad guys. But so is Turkey. And so was he. Everybody here says he's a Saudi progressive fighting for democracy. No. No. No. No. He was fighting for the Muslim Brotherhood. In the 1980s and '90s, he was one of the king's main allies.

He edited several Saudi newspapers. He was basically Winston Smith sitting in the Saudi version of the ministry of truth, editing out all thought crime. Making sure that there was never anything hostile said about Wahhabiism or the king. During this time, he scored several interviews with al-Qaeda as they were fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. Saudi intelligence employed him to be the middleman between Bin Laden but in 2003 he fell out of favor with the Saudi royals. He had allowed to be published an article critical to the Wahhabiist movement. Why did he do that? Because he's a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. And they were at odds with the Wahhabiists.

Khashoggi was cast aside. And that's when the Western media fell in love with him. An active member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Not a smear or a conspiracy theory. In his own word:.

Yes, I joined the Muslim Brotherhood organization, and I was not alone.

His Muslim Brotherhood friends and clerics were all imprisoned in Saudi Arabia, during the Arab spring. He got out. He came to the US. He established a political party while in exile called "Democracies for the Arab World Now" party.

The liberals, the progressives and the press loved him because they heard the word democracy. It's the Muslim Brotherhood plan to subvert democracy by turning it against itself. He wanted to establish Sharia law in the region. He was also a wicked anti-Semite, who wrote, outside the context of history and logic, that Jews will have to die by force. Israel is outside the context of history and logic so we're going to have to kill all of them. This is not a smear campaign. When you hear somebody say that, you make sure you ask them, where are you doing your homework? Where are you getting that? Why is it a smear campaign to say he was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood?

He was clear in his own words.

So why is that a smear campaign? I thought the Muslim Brotherhood was largely secular. Ask people. How much do you know about the founding of the Muslim Brotherhood? How much do you really know about what this man really wrote? This man wrote that it was a mistake to think that you could have any kind of state in the Middle East without some form of Islamist. Now, that's different, remember, than Islam. An Islamist believes you have to use Sharia law.

That's the concept — wow does it sounds like the Muslim Brotherhood. That's our Constitution. That is our law. Sharia law. So let's just begin to tell each other the truth.

And here's the truth: Turkey is not a friend of ours. Turkey is in with the Muslim Brotherhood. Saudi Arabia is a huge exporter of Wahhabism and has done it here in the United States. Has spent money building mosques that are very dangerous, here in the United States. It's true. They killed him. Could be. Probably. Seems like it. I don't trust the Muslim Brotherhood in Turkey. But I also don't trust those guys. One of them killed him. Probably Saudi Arabia. Did he deserve it? No.

Does he deserve to be called a freedom fighter? Only by either really uneducated progressives, or just liars.

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

THE FACTS - Who was Jamal Khashoggi and what ties did he have to the Muslim Brotherhood?youtu.be

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.

Could China OWN our National Parks?

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.