RADIOApril 01, 2024

Why Boeing Should NOT Be Blamed for Plane Malfunctions

Is Boeing to blame for all the airplane malfunctions we’ve heard about recently? Or is there another culprit? Glenn recalls a conversation he recently had with a pilot who was tired of the federal government putting all the blame on Boeing. Instead, he argued, it’s the federal inspectors who certify the planes and a lack of pilot training, especially outside of America, that should be called out. But do other pilots agree? Is this yet another example of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg’s accidental or intentional incompetence? Glenn hears from members of his audience who have experience in the aviation industry and their answer was pretty clear …

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Okay. Yesterday, I had a good friend come up to me. And he said to me, Glenn, I can't take the news on Boeing anymore.

And I said, why is that? And he said, well, you know, I was a pilot. And I said, that's right. For American pilots. For years.

He said, yes. So I kind of know something about the airline industry. Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

And he said, aren't all planes that come from Boeing, don't they receive a final check?

Yes. Don't they also receive a final check, from the government, when -- when there is a -- when the plane comes in, and before it flies, do they not certify that, yeah. That plane is -- yeah. Now, whose job would that be.

By the way, when you buy a plane, and the screws are loose, you would think somebody that was signing off, would be held responsible, for I didn't see the screws.

Right? Once a plane comes down, they -- they have to check the plane. And if you saw some loose screws, then that would probably be, you know, the maintenance guy that would be like. Where is the maintenance guy that was supposed to check the screws?

He said, also, we have a minimum requirement sheet.

Like, if the engine falls off, well, we have another one.

So we can still fly it to land it, okay?

He said, it's like a door of a panel falls off, he said, we can still fly the plane.

We can still fly the plane. He said, we have a little checklist. Like if this goes wrong, that's trouble. If a panel falls off, eh, a panel falls off. We just adjust a little bit. We're fine.

STU: I mean, if you're on the ground, you might not be shrugging your shoulders as much. But generally speaking, the plane can keep going.

GLENN: Right. Right. And he said, panels from time to time will fall off. He said, but what I'm thinking is, there's a problem with maintenance, which would be a problem with the unions.

Because nobody has personal pride of ownership anymore.

And he said, so is it maintenance, is it -- is it the -- the press, that is -- is looking at all these things, and don't understand, that there's also an inspector that signs off on the plane.

That's an interesting -- because I believe that brings us back, to Pete Buttigieg.

STU: What a surprise.

GLENN: What a surprise. What a surprise.

STU: So is the theory basically, that Boeing is getting unfair blame on this?

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

It could be -- he's not saying they're innocent.

But he is saying, they're getting way more than their share of blame for this.

STU: Right. It's easy for you to point your fingers at them.

GLENN: Yeah. You got a panel. You have to screw the panel back on. You're inside, and doing something in maintenance with the panel. You've got to screw the panel back on.

STU: Right. They did come with all the descries loose, right? That would be weird.

GLENN: Right. And, you know, you check for screws.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: When you're on the ground, doing maintenance. You kind of give it a once over. And then the inspector looks for those kinds of things.

STU: Right. Now, obviously, part of this is because they had the issues with, you know, the one plane that they brought into -- everyone was using.

Was it -- the Air Max?

Yeah. Yeah. That -- on the -- on the heels of that. Right?

GLENN: But he said. He said, that doesn't make sense to him.

And I didn't -- he started talking, you know, airplane physics. And I don't think there's any physics that actually make a plane fly.

It's too heavy.

STU: Could you even keep your eyes open during this.

GLENN: No. I did.

I just couldn't understand it. He said, Boeing, for more fuel efficiency. He said, they're more powerful engines. And they lifted them. So they didn't suck a bunch of stuff from the ground. Okay?

So they lifted them higher.

He said, and when you go into a steeper incline, he said, that causes -- I don't know what you call it, but a wobble that hits your tail. Okay?

And he said, we've trained for that for 50 years. He said, there's no -- there's no excuse for an American pilot to have any problems with that.

STU: Right. These were foreign incidents.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: Right.

GLENN: Right. So he said, that's not -- that's a training problem. That's not a Boeing problem. That's a training problem.

STU: Hmm.

That's interesting. Well, that's not surprising that an institution would be taken down by the media. You know, maybe with a little bit of undeserved some, at least, undeserved.

GLENN: Maybe. I don't know. I don't know.

I would love to talk -- if you're a pilot. I would love to hear from you.

Does that make sense to you?

GLENN: I want to take some calls from last hour, we were mentioning that had a pilot friend, come into me yesterday. Saying, Glenn, this is not Boeing's fault.

And his name was Ron Boeing. But no, he said, it's not Boeing -- it's not Boeing's fault. He said, I think it's the mechanic's fault. And he explained why.

But I wanted to hear from other airline pilots. This guy was a pilot for I don't even know. Thirty years. Forty years. At American Airlines. And he knew what he was talking about. I couldn't translate what he was talking about. But I wanted to know if there were any pilots that agreed. Whose fault is it?

Is it Boeing?

Is it the FAA.

Pete Buttigieg. Secretary of Transportation. Is it the airline? Is it the mechanics? Michael in Kansas, you're a pilot.

CALLER: That's correct. I am.

GLENN: Okay. Whose fault is it?

CALLER: I'm a retired captain with United.

GLENN: Okay.

CALLER: You know, it's an issue -- I think your American friend was on target. I think it's pretty good too, as far as, I think it's just sloppiness.

I have friends who are retired. Boeing actually.

And they said, you know, sometimes when they would see things wrong, they would raise a flag and say, this or that. And they would kind of ignore it. And they had this whistle-blower a while back, that was found dead in his car.

But there's things -- there's just been some things like that. That -- there's an awful lot about to go. A lot of airplanes out there. There's a lot of, you know, things wearing out. Whether they're newer or not. They're putting a lot of hours on these things. And they do need some good scrutiny. And I think it just falls through the cracks. But I don't think it's Boeing. Whether it's a lack of leadership at the top on the federal end to put the focus in the right place, or exactly what is going on there, but obviously we've got a problem.

GLENN: He was telling me about, what was it? The 777 Max. And he said, hmm, that problem is caused when you are coming up at a sharp angle. He said, it will cause some sort of a wind turbulence on the tail. And he said, in America, we train for that.

CALLER: Right. Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. And I think, like you said, the accidents that have happened, especially like with the -- the 737 Max, I think that was 100 percent training.

GLENN: How come we haven't heard that?

CALLER: Or lack thereof? I don't know. Third world country, we don't want to make them look bad. I don't know.

GLENN: Wow. Instead, we'll blame everything on Boeing, and make it look like Boeing has gone bad.

I mean, everything I've seen from the news, has made Boeing look bad. And it wasn't is, until I started noticing.

No. It's a lot of united planes, that are having a problem.

That made me think. Well, maybe it's the culture at United, or the mechanics on the ground.

CALLER: Well, you know, whether it's actually -- it probably is somewhat of a culture. Whether it's the DEI-type culture, I couldn't honestly say.

But there is a -- there certainly is a culture, that leads you away from, you know, perfection.

GLENN: Yeah, right. Thank you so much, Michael. I appreciate it. In Florida, we go to Robert. Hi, Robert. You're a former airline captain or pilot.

CALLER: Oh, no, no, no, Glenn. Good morning. And, no, I'm a former mechanic out of the Air Force.

GLENN: Ah. Okay.

CALLER: I know this stuff a little bit, and it's the mechanic's fault. It's also the government, and then the airline if you really think about it. That's where you take it that one step further. The FAA issues a license to the mechanic, that if the mechanic does something wrong, it's supposed to be on him as far as getting that license taken away. And if they're not doing that, they're just letting that slide, that's a problem. Like, I wouldn't get on an airplane right now.

GLENN: Yeah. It's an interesting -- it's an interesting time to fly.

STU: Right.

GLENN: We're pretty sure we'll get you there. Where we were on -- you mean, on time?

CALLER: No, we're just pretty sure we will get you there.

STU: Feel great -- I have several flights scheduled next week, and mechanics are calling me up and saying, hey, don't get on flights. Great.

GLENN: Thanks a lot, Robert. Dawn in Tennessee. Hello, Dawn.

CALLER: Hey, Glenn. Yeah, I agree with your previous caller. I'm a retired Air Force mechanic. And that's -- he's correct.

So these guys get airframe and power plant licenses from the FAA. And through a lot of the experience, you know, to get those tickets. To learn how to work on airplanes.

And I -- I agree with them. I think it's complacency.

And I also think it's the airlines, probably trying to get those airplanes back up in the air, as soon as possible.

You know, because they got, you know, routes that they have to fly.

And these guys are probably under pressure to fix those airplanes, as fast as possible.

And quality is slipping through the cracks.

GLENN: So, Don, why is Boeing getting the blame?

CALLER: Well, Boeing, because they're the manufacturer. They're the ones who actually create the airplane.

But as your previous caller said. Once -- once Boeing delivers the airplane to you to United Delta, American, whoever. It's on the airline at this point. I don't know why Boeing is -- I mean, they're the one that's easy to pick on. They're the person that built the airplane. But all those big maintenance hangars at Dallas/Fort Worth for American and Delta and Atlanta. Those are all -- those are all Delta employees.

And they are the ones who are fixing those airplanes. I think when it goes back to the manufacturers. When you have -- is when you have problems that recur. You know, you have trims. If you see the same thing happening over and over and over again. Then you go back and say, okay. We need to do a trend analysis. But these are isolated stuff. The wheels falling off. A door coming loose. Stupid things like that, that's sloppy maintenance, I think, on the mechanic's side. And that's an airline issue, which is what your friend told you.

GLENN: Hmm. Thank you so much, Don. John in Pennsylvania.

Hello, John.

CALLER: Hi, Glenn.

GLENN: Hi. Are you a pilot, a mechanic, what are you?

CALLER: I'm a retired pilot. Retired pilot. Regional airline level, and then I spent my last three and a half years at American Airlines. I'm agreeing with all the other pilots that have spoken. And it basically gets down to the floor of the maintenance hangar, as to the workers that are doing the work.

And these guys are certified. The mechanics are certified. And they go through a certification process, once the work is done. Sign off on the maintenance issues and everything else.

To say it's an airline fault, is true about trying to get the airplanes back and be rushed on that.

GLENN: Right. To blame Boeing, or to blame Boeing. I can't blame Boeing. And the MCAS system, which is what people are talking about.
737 Max.

You know, that's -- that was a system, that the domestic airlines, not just -- none of my airlines ever had any issues with that system. And/or fatalities, associated with it.

GLENN: John, thank you so much.

And it's crazy. That's exactly what my friend said. You know, you thought, how could Boeing design an airline -- an airplane, and have it that far out of whack.

That when you started to lift, it would fail on you.

And my friend said yesterday, that -- that -- that's because they're not trained.

He said, in America, we train.

That is something, he said -- we've been training for 50 years, on that.

And he said, it's not hard to correct. You just have to know. So why is Boeing getting that rap? Remember, they went through the software and everything else. No! It was the pilots weren't trained.

That's nuts. That's nuts. I mean, is somebody trying to kill Boeing?

STU: I mean, and every piece of the administration is echoing this.

We played the Buttigieg clip earlier.

But like, it's all focused on Boeing, and how bad Boeing is.

GLENN: Right, I haven't heard anything about the mechanics. I've heard people bring up United. And I think United is responsible for the mechanics, but you don't hear any of that.

STU: Sure. It's weird, especially because of how vitally important Boeing is to our economy. Like this is not just some little fly-by-night operation. They get taken down, and they are losing ground against their competitors, which there are only a couple.

GLENN: Yes. Let's go to line 11. And Jeff in Michigan. Hello, Jeff.

CALLER: Hello, how are you doing?

GLENN: Very good. How are you?

CALLER: All right. I think it's a multi-blame. Boeing on the design. MCAS is that with the Boeing design. They have an aerospace engineer, in addition to being retired airline pilot.

You go and look at that. The way they designed it. They shortcut stuff to save money.

But once it gets to the airline, and you have things falling off airplanes. Then it becomes a -- a maintenance issue. And that's where the -- you know, the blame lies. But the bottom line is, it's all about money.

MCAS was designed so that they could save money in getting away with introducing a new airplane, as a derivative. Where they didn't get it completely certificated with the new engine. That they would have to raise the airplane up. So they had to put on new gear, maybe a new wing. So they shortcut that. And then in production, you know, with the holes and that they filled up.

With the door plus. That sort of thing.
That's a production issue. Again, saving money. They outsource it.

And so it's not done as well as well as it should be. Once you get to the airlines. There's a very thin line between profit and loss with that.

GLENN: Sure.

CALLER: So they shortcut things to try and get stuff done as well.

GLENN: Is the FAA or -- I don't know.

Is the FAA under secretary of transportation?

I would assume it is.

Is the FAA responsible for certifying any of this stuff?

CALLER: Oh, yeah. The FAA is -- I've worked for -- alpha safety for a long time.

What I call the airline pirates association now for another reason.

They have a schizophrenic mission. They have to promote flying, at the same time they're enforcing rules. So they're kind of getting pulled in two different directions when they're doing this, and if you don't have the proper administrator over it, making sure that they're doing both jobs, then you're under a problem.

GLENN: All right. Jeff, thank you so much.

Doesn't that sound like maybe we wouldn't have the right person, in the federal position of like, hey, got to get the planes up.

But you also have to make sure that they're safe. You know. For some reason, I don't have a lot of confidence in the leadership of this administration.

No.

STU: No?

GLENN: No. I know. This is probably me.

STU: It's fascinating.

This is -- I've been thinking a lot about this. Because I'm mentioning. I'm going on flights next week. I'm working on a documentary for Blaze originals about air traffic control and the changes that have been going on within it.

And they're not comforting. It doesn't -- they're like, hey, can you take a flight, to do this interview? No! I'll drive!

GLENN: Wait. I've done all this research, and it shows that this is really not a good plan. And now you want me to fly there?

STU: Right. No!

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Max Lucado & Glenn Beck: Finding unity in faith

Glenn Beck sits down with beloved pastor and author Max Lucado for a deep conversation about faith, humility, and finding unity in a divided world. Together, they reflect on the importance of principles over politics, why humility opens the door to true dialogue, and how centering life on God brings clarity and peace. Lucado shares stories of faith, the dangers of a “prosperity gospel,” and the powerful reminder that life is not about making a big deal of ourselves, but about making a big deal of God. This uplifting conversation will inspire you to re-center your life, strengthen your faith, and see how humility and love can transform even the most divided times.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Max Lucado HERE

Confronting evil: Bill O'Reilly's insight on Charlie Kirk's enduring legacy

Bill O’Reilly joins Glenn Beck with a powerful prediction about Charlie Kirk’s legacy. Evil tried to destroy his movement, Bill says, but – as his new book, “Confronting Evil,” lays out – evil will just end up destroying itself once more…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Mr. Bill O'Reilly, welcome to the program, how are you, sir?

BILL: Good, Beck, thanks for having me back. I appreciate it. How have you been?

GLENN: Last week was really tough. I know it was tough for you and everybody else.

But, you know -- I haven't -- I haven't seen anything.

BILL: Family okay? All of that?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Family is okay. Family is okay.

BILL: Good question good. That's the most important thing.

GLENN: It is.

So, Bill, what do you make of this whole Charlie Kirk thing. What happened, and where are we headed?

BILL: So my analysis is different for everybody else, and those that know me for so long. About a year ago, I was looking for a topic -- it was a contract to do another book. And I said, you know what's happening in America, and around the world. Was a rise in evil. It takes a year to research and write these books.

And not since the 1930s, had I seen that happen, to this extent. And in the 1930s, of course, you would have Tojo and Hitler and Mussolini and Franco and all these guys. And it led to 100 million dead in World War II. The same thing, not to the extent.

But the same thing was --
GLENN: Yet.
BILL: -- bubbling in the world, and in the United States.

I decided to write a book. The book comes out last Tuesday. And on Wednesday, Putin lobs missiles into Poland.

Ultra dangerous.

And a few hours later, Charlie Kirk is assassinated.

And one of the interviewers said to me last week, your -- your book is haunting. Is haunting.

And I think that's extremely accurate. Because that's what evil does.

And in the United States, we have so many distractions. The social media.

People create around their own lives.

Sports. Whatever it may be. That we look away.

Now, Charlie Kirk was an interesting fellow. Because at a very young age, he was mature enough to understand that he wanted to take a stand in favor of traditional America and Judeo Christian philosophy.

He decided that he wanted to do that.

You know, and when I was 31 or whatever, I was lucky I wasn't in the penitentiary. And I believe you were in the penitentiary.
(laughter)
So he was light years ahead of us.

GLENN: Yes, he was.

BILL: And he put it into motion. All right? Now, most good people, even if you disagree with what Mr. Kirk says on occasion, you admire that. That's the spirit of America. That you have a belief system, that you go out and try to promote that belief system, for the greater good of the country. That's what it is.

That's what Charlie Kirk did.

And he lost his life.

By doing it!

So when you essentially break all of this down. You take the emotion away, all right?

Which I have to do, in my job. You see it as another victory for evil.

But it really isn't.

And this is the ongoing story.

This is the most important story. So when you read my book, Confronting Evil, you'll see that all of these heinous individuals, Putin's on the cover. Mao. Hitler.

Ayatollah Khomeini. And then there are 14 others inside the book. They all destroy themselves.

Evil always destroys itself. But it takes so many people with it. So this shooter destroyed his own family.

And -- and Donald Trump, I talked to him about it last week in Yankee stadium. And Trump is a much different guy than most people think.

GLENN: He is.

JASON: He destroyed his own mother and father and his two brothers.

That's what he did. In addition to the Kirk family!

So evil spreads. Now, if Americans pay attention and come to the conclusion that I just stated, it will be much more difficult for evil to operate openly.

And that's what I think is going to happen.

There's going to be a ferocious backlash against the progressive left in particular.

To stop it, and I believe that is what Mr. Kirk's legacy is going to be.

GLENN: I -- I agree with you on all of these fronts.

I wonder though, you know, it took three, or if you count JFK, four assassinations in the '60s, to confront the evil if you will.

Before people really woke up and said, enough is enough!

And then you have the big Jesus revolution after that.

Is -- I hate to say this. But is -- as far gone as we are, is one assassination enough to wake people up?

JOHN: Some people. Some people will never wake up.

They just don't want to live in the real world, Beck. And it's never been easier to do that with the social media and the phones and the computers.

And you're never going to get them back.

But you don't need them. So let's just be very realistic here on the Glenn Beck show.

Let's run it down.

The corporate media is finished.

In America. It's over.

And you will see that play out the next five years.

Because the corporate media invested so much of its credibility into hating Donald Trump.

And the hate is the key word.

You will find this interesting, Beck. For the first time in ten years, I've been invited to do a major thing on CBS, today.

I will do it GE today. With major Garrett.

GLENN: Wow.

BILL: Now, that only happened because Skydance bought CBS. And Skydance understands the brand CBS is over, and they will have to rehabilitate the whole thing. NBC has not come to that conclusion yet, but it will have to.

And ABC just does the weather. I mean, that's all they care about. Is it snowing in Montana? Okay? The cables are all finished. Even Fox.

Once Trump leaves the stage, there's nowhere for FNC to go. Because they've invested so much in Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump.

So the fact of the matter is, the corporate media is over in America. That takes a huge cudgel out of the hands of the progressive movement.

Because the progressive movement was dependent on the corporate media to advance its cause. That's going to end, Beck.

GLENN: Well, I would hope that you're right.

Let me ask you about --

BILL: When am I wrong?

When am I wrong?

You've known me for 55 years. When have I been wrong?

GLENN: Okay. All right. All right. We're not here to argue things like that.

So tell me about Skydance. Because isn't Skydance Chinese?

BILL: No! It's Ellison. Larry Ellison, the second richest guy in the world. He owns Lanai and Hawaii, the big tech guy and his son is running it.

GLENN: Yeah, okay.

I though Skydance. I thought that was -- you know them.

BILL: Yeah.

And they -- they're not ideological, but they were as appalled as most of us who pay attention at the deterioration of the network presentations.

So --

GLENN: You think that they could.

BILL: 60 Minutes used to be the gold standard.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

BILL: And it just -- it -- you know, you know, I don't know if you watch it anymore.

GLENN: I don't either.

So do you think they can actually turn CBS around, or is it just over?

BILL: I don't know. It's very hard to predict, because so many people now bail. I've got a daughter 26, and a son, 22.

They never, ever watched network television.

And you've got -- it's true. Right?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

They don't watch --

BILL: They're not going to watch The Voice. The dancing with this. The juggling with that. You know, I think they could do a much better job in their news presentations.

GLENN: Yeah. Right.

BILL: Because what they did, is banish people like Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly.

Same voices, with huge followings.

Huge!

All right?

We couldn't get on there.

That's why Colbert got fired. Because Colbert wouldn't -- refused to put on any non-progressive voice, when they were talking about the country.

GLENN: I know.

BILL: Well, it's not -- I'm censoring it.

GLENN: Yeah, but it's not that he was fired because he wouldn't do that. He was fired because that led to horrible ratings. Horrible ratings.

BILL: Yes, it was his defiance.

GLENN: Yes.

BILL: Fallon has terrible ratings and so does Kimmel. But Colbert was in your face, F you, to the people who were signing his paycheck.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

BILL: Look, evil can only exist if the mechanisms of power are behind it.

And that's when you read the front -- I take them one by one. And Putin is the most important chapter by far.

GLENN: Why?

BILL: Because Putin would use nuclear weapon.

He wouldn't. He's a psychopath.

And I'm -- on Thursday night, I got a call from the president's people saying, would I meet the president at Yankee stadium for the 9/11 game?

And I said, when a president calls and asks you to meet them, sure.

GLENN: I'll be there. What time?

BILL: It will take me three days to get into Yankee stadium, on Long Island. But I'll start now.

GLENN: Especially because the president is coming. But go ahead.

BILL: Anyway, that was a very, I think that Mr. Trump values my opinion. And it was -- we did talk about Putin.

And the change in Putin. And I had warned him, that Putin had changed from the first administration, where Trump controlled Putin to some extent.

Now he's out of control. Because that's what always happens.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: It happened with Hitler. It happened with Mao. It happened with the ayatollah. It happened with Stalin. Right now. They get worse and worse and worse and worse. And then they blow up.

And that's where Putin is! But he couldn't do any of that, without the assent of the Russian people. They are allowing him to do this, to kill women and children. A million Russian casualties for what! For what! Okay?

So that's why this book is just in the stratosphere. And I was thinking object, oh. Because people want to understand evil, finally. Finally.

They're taking a hard look at it, and the Charlie Kirk assassination was an impetus to do that.

GLENN: Yeah. And I think it's also an impetus to look at the good side.

I mean, I think Charlie was just not a neutral -- a neutral character. He was a force for good. And for God.

And I think that -- that combination is almost the Martin Luther King combination. Where you have a guy who is speaking up for civil rights.

But then also, speaking up for God. And speaking truth, Scripturally.

And I think that combination still, strangely, I wouldn't have predicted it. But strangely still works here in America, and I think it's changed everything.

Bill, it's always food to talk to you. Thank you so much for being on. I appreciate it.

It's Bill O'Reilly. The name of the book, you don't want to miss. Is confronting evil. And he takes all of these really, really bad guys on. One by one. And shows you, what happens if you don't do something about it. Confronting evil. Bill O'Reilly.

And you can find it at BillO'Reilly.com.

The difference between debate and celebrating death

There’s a big difference between firing someone, like a teacher, for believing children shouldn’t undergo trans surgery and firing a teacher who celebrated the murder of Charlie Kirk. Glenn Beck explains why the latter is NOT “cancel culture.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I got an email from somebody that says, Glenn, in the wake of Charlie's assassination, dozens of teachers, professors and professionals are being suspended or fired for mocking, or even celebrating Charlie Kirk's death.

Critics say conservatives are now being hypocritical because you oppose cancel culture. But is this the same as rose an losing her job over a crude joke. Or is it celebrating murder, and that's something more serious?

For many, this isn't about cancellation it's about trust. If a teacher is entrusted with children or a doctor entrusted with patients, publicly celebrates political violence, have they not yet disqualified themselves from those roles? Words matter. But cheering a death is an action. Is there any consequence for this? Yes. There is.

So let's have that conversation here for a second.

Is every -- is every speech controversy the same?

The answer to that is clearly no.

I mean, we've seen teachers and pastors and doctors and ordinary citizens lose their job now, just for saying they don't believe children under 18 should undergo transgender surgeries. Okay? Lost their job. Chased out.

That opinion, whether you agree or disagree is a moral and medical judgment.

And it is a matter of policy debate. It is speech in the public square.

I have a right to say, you're mutilating children. Okay. You have a right to say, no. We're not. This is the best practices. And then we can get into the silences of it. And we don't shout down the other side.

Okay? Now, on the other hand, you have Charlie Kirk's assassination. And we've seen teachers and professors go online and be celebrate.

Not criticize. Not argue policy. But celebrate that someone was murdered.

Some have gone so far and said, it's not a tragedy. It's a victory. Somebody else, another professor said, you reap what you sow.

Well, let me ask you: Are these two categories of free speech the same?

No! They're not.

Here's the difference. To say, I believe children should not be allowed to have gender surgeries, before 18. That is an attempt, right or wrong. It doesn't matter which side you are.

That is an attempt to protect life. Protect children. And guide society.

It's entering the debate about the role of medicine. The right of parents. And the boundaries of childhood. That's what that is about. To say Charlie Kirk's assassination is a good thing, that's not a debate. That's not even an idea. That's rejoicing in violence. It's glorifying death.

There's no place in a civil society for that kind of stuff. There's not. And it's a difference that actually matters.

You know, our Founders fought for free speech because they believed as Jefferson said, that air can be tolerated where truth is left free to combat it.

So I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, at all. I don't think you do either. I hope you don't. Otherwise, you should go back to read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Error can be tolerated where truth is left to be free to combat it.

But when speech shifts from debating ideas to celebrating death, doesn't that cease to be the pursuit of truth and instead, just become a glorification of evil?

I know where I stand on that one. Where do you stand?

I mean, if you go back and you look at history, in colonial matter -- in colonial America, if you were to go against the parliament and against the king, those words were dangerous. They were called treason. But they were whys. They were arguments about liberty and taxation and the rights of man.

And the Founders risked their lives against the dictator to say those things.

Now, compare that to France in 1793.

You Thomas Paine, one of or -- one of our founder kind of. On the edges of our founders.

He thought that what was happening in France is exactly like the American Revolution.

Washington -- no. It wasn't.

There the crowds. They didn't gather to argue. Okay? They argued to cheer the guillotine they didn't want the battle of ideas.

They wanted blood. They wanted heads to roll.

And roll they did. You know, until the people who were screaming for the heads to roll, shouted for blood, found that their own heads were rolling.

Then they turned around on that one pretty quickly.

Think of Rome.

Cicero begged his countrymen to preserve the republic through reason, law, and debate. Then what happened?

The mob started cheering assassinations.

They rejoiced that enemies were slaughtered.

They were being fed to the lions.

And the republic fell into empire.

And liberty was lost!

Okay. So now let me bring this back to Charlie Kirk here for a second.

If there's a professor that says, I don't believe children should have surgeries before adulthood, is that cancel culture, when they're fired?

Yes! Yes, it is.

Because that is speech this pursuit of truth.

However imperfect, it is speech meant to protect children, not to harm them. You also cannot be fired for saying, I disagree with that.

If you are telling, I disagree with that. And I will do anything to shut you down including assassination! Well, then, that's a different story.

What I teacher says, I'm glad Charlie Kirk is dead, is that cancel culture, if they're fired?

Or is that just society saying, you know, I don't think I can trust my kid to -- to that guy.

Or that woman.

I know, that's not an enlightening mind.

Somebody who delights in political murder.

I don't want them around my children! Scripture weighs in here too.

Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh. Matthew.

What does it reveal about the heart of a teacher who celebrates assassination?

To me, you go back to Scripture. Whoa unto them that call good evil -- evil good and good evil.

A society that will shrug on speech like this, say society that has lost its moral compass.

And I believe we still have a moral compass.

Now, our free speech law doesn't protect both. Absolutely. Under law. Absolutely.

Neither one of them should go to jail.

Neither should be silenced by the state.

But does trust survive both?

Can a parent trust their child to a teacher who is celebrating death?

I think no. I don't think a teacher can be trusted if they think that the children that it's right for children to see strippers in first grade!

I'm sorry. It's beyond reason. You should not be around my children!

But you shouldn't go to jail for that. Don't we, as a society have a right to demand virtue, in positions of authority?

Yes.

But the political class and honestly, the educational class, does everything they can to say, that doesn't matter.

But it does. And we're seeing it now. The line between cancel and culture, the -- the cancellation of people, and the accountability of people in our culture, it's not easy.

Except here. I think it is easy.

Cancel culture is about challenging the orthodoxy. Opinions about faith, morality, biology.
Accountability comes when speech reveals somebody's heart.

Accountability comes when you're like, you are a monster! You are celebrating violence. You're mocking life itself. One is an argument. The other is an abandonment of humanity. The Constitution, so you understand, protects both.

But we as a culture can decide, what kind of voices would shape our children? Heal our sick. Lead our communities?

I'm sorry, if you're in a position of trust, I think it's absolutely right for the culture to say, no!

No. You should not -- because this is not policy debate. This is celebrating death.

You know, our Founders gave us liberty.

And, you know, the big thing was, can you keep it?

Well, how do you keep it? Virtue. Virtue.

Liberty without virtue is suicide!

So if anybody is making this case to you, that this is cancel culture. I just want you to ask them this question.

Which do you want to defend?

Cancel culture that silences debate. Or a culture that still knows the difference between debating ideas and celebrating death.

Which one?

Could passengers have SAVED Iryna Zarutska?

Surveillance footage of the murder of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska in Charlotte, NC, reveals that the other passengers on the train took a long time to help her. Glenn, Stu, and Jason debate whether they were right or wrong to do so.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm -- I'm torn on how I feel about the people on the train.

Because my first instinct is, they did nothing! They did nothing! Then my -- well, sit down and, you know -- you know, you're going to be judged. So be careful on judging others.

What would I have done? What would I want my wife to do in that situation?

STU: Yeah. Are those two different questions, by the way.

GLENN: Yeah, they are.

STU: I think they go far apart from each other. What would I want myself to do. I mean, it's tough to put yourself in a situation. It's very easy to watch a video on the internet and talk about your heroism. Everybody can do that very easily on Twitter. And everybody is.

You know, when you're in a vehicle that doesn't have an exit with a guy who just murdered somebody in front of you, and has a dripping blood off of a knife that's standing 10 feet away from you, 15 feet away from you.

There's probably a different standard there, that we should all kind of consider. And maybe give a little grace to what I saw at least was a woman, sitting across the -- the -- the aisle.

I think there is a difference there. But when you talk about that question. Those two questions are definitive.

You know, I know what I would want myself to do. I would hope I would act in a way that didn't completely embarrass myself afterward.

But I also think, when I'm thinking of my wife. My advice to my wife would not be to jump into the middle of that situation at all costs. She might do that anyway. She actually is a heck of a lot stronger than I am.

But she might do it anyway.

GLENN: How pathetic, but how true.

STU: Yes. But that would not be my advice to her.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Now, maybe once the guy has certainly -- is out of the area. And you don't think the moment you step into that situation. He will turn around and kill you too. Then, of course, obviously. Anything you can do to step in.

Not that there was much anyone on the train could do.

I mean, I don't think there was an outcome change, no matter what anyone on that train did.

Unfortunately.

But would I want her to step in?

Of course. If she felt she was safe, yes.

Think about, you said, your wife. Think about your daughter. Your daughter is on that train, just watching someone else getting murdered like that. Would you advise your daughter to jump into a situation like that?

That girl sitting across the aisle was somebody's daughter. I don't know, man.

JASON: I would. You know, as a dad, would I advise.

Hmm. No.

As a human being, would I hope that my daughter or my wife or that I would get up and at least comfort that woman while she's dying on the floor of a train?

Yeah.

I would hope that my daughter, my son, that I would -- and, you know, I have more confidence in my son or daughter or my wife doing something courageous more than I would.

But, you know, I think I have a more realistic picture of myself than anybody else.

And I'm not sure that -- I'm not sure what I would do in that situation. I know what I would hope I would do. But I also know what I fear I would do. But I would have hoped that I would have gotten up and at least tried to help her. You know, help her up off the floor. At least be there with her, as she's seeing her life, you know, spill out in under a minute.

And that's it other thing we have to keep in mind. This all happened so rapidly.

A minute is -- will seem like a very long period of time in that situation. But it's a very short period of time in real life.

STU: Yeah. You watch the video, Glenn. You know, I don't need the video to -- to change my -- my position on this.

But at his seem like there was a -- someone who did get there, eventually, to help, right? I saw someone seemingly trying to put pressure on her neck.

GLENN: Yeah. And tried to give her CPR.

STU: You know, no hope at that point. How long of a time period would you say that was?

Do you know off the top of your head?

GLENN: I don't know. I don't know. I know that we watched the video that I saw. I haven't seen past 30 seconds after she --

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: -- is down. And, you know, for 30 seconds nothing is happening. You know, that is -- that is not a very long period of time.

STU: Right.

GLENN: In reality.

STU: And especially, I saw the pace he was walking. He certainly can't be -- you know, he may have left the actual train car by 30 seconds to a minute. But he wasn't that far away. Like he was still in visual.

He could still turn around and look and see what's going on at that point. So certainly still a threat is my point. He has not, like, left the area. This is not that type of situation.

You know, I -- look, as you point out, I think if I could be super duper sexist for a moment here, sort of my dividing line might just be men and women.

You know, I don't know if it's that a -- you're not supposed to say that, I suppose these days. But, like, there is a difference there. If I'm a man, you know, I would be -- I would want my son to jump in on that, I suppose. I don't know if he could do anything about it. But you would expect at least a grown man to be able to go in there and do something about it. A woman, you know, I don't know.

Maybe I'm -- I hope --

GLENN: Here's the thing I -- here's the thing that I -- that causes me to say, no. You should have jumped in.

And that is, you know, you've already killed one person on the train. So you've proven that you're a killer. And anybody who would have screamed and got up and was with her, she's dying. She's dying. Get him. Get him.

Then the whole train is responsible for stopping that guy. You know. And if you don't stop him, after he's killed one person, if you're not all as members of that train, if you're not stopping him, you know, the person at the side of that girl would be the least likely to be killed. It would be the ones that are standing you up and trying to stop him from getting back to your daughter or your wife or you.

JASON: There was a -- speaking of men and women and their roles in this. There was a video circling social media yesterday. In Sweden. There was a group of officials up on a stage. And one of the main. I think it was health official woman collapses on stage. Completely passes out.

All the men kind of look away. Or I don't know if they're looking away. Or pretending that they didn't know what was going on. There was another woman standing directly behind the woman passed out.

Immediately springs into action. Jumps on top. Grabs her pant leg. Grabs her shoulder. Spins her over and starts providing care.

What did she have that the other guys did not? Or women?

She was a sheepdog. There is a -- this is my issue. And I completely agree with Stu. I completely agree with you. There's some people that do not respond this way. My issue is the proportion of sheepdogs versus people that don't really know how to act. That is diminishing in western society. And American society.

We see it all the time in these critical actions. I mean, circumstances.

There are men and women, and it's actually a meme. That fantasize about hoards of people coming to attack their home and family. And they sit there and say, I've got it. You guys go. I'm staying behind, while I smoke my cigarette and wait for the hoards to come, because I will sacrifice myself. There are men and women that fantasize of block my highway. Go ahead. Block my highway. I'm going to do something about it. They fantasize about someone holding up -- not a liquor store. A convenience store or something. Because they will step in and do something. My issue now is that proportion of sheepdogs in society is disappearing. Just on statistical fact, there should be one within that train car, and there were none.

STU: Yeah. I mean --

JASON: They did not respond.

STU: We see what happens when they do, with Daniel Penny. Our society tries to vilify them and crush their existence. Now, there weren't that many people on that train. Right?

At least on that car. At least it's limited. I only saw three or four people there, there may have been more. I agree with you, though. Like, you see what happens when we actually do have a really recent example of someone doing exactly what Jason wants and what I would want a guy to do. Especially a marine to step up and stop this from happening. And the man was dragged by our legal system to a position where he nearly had to spend the rest of his life in prison.

I mean, I -- it's insanity. Thankfully, they came to their senses on that one.

GLENN: Well, the difference between that one and this one though is that the guy was threatening. This one, he killed somebody.

STU: Yeah. Right. Well, but -- I think -- but it's the opposite way. The debate with Penny, was should he have recognize that had this person might have just been crazy and not done anything?

Maybe. He hadn't actually acted yet. He was just saying things.

GLENN: Yeah. Well --

STU: He didn't wind up stabbing someone. This is a situation where these people have already seen what this man will do to you, even when you don't do anything to try to stop him. So if this woman, who is, again, looks to be an average American woman.

Across the aisle. Steps in and tries to do something. This guy could easily turn around and just make another pile of dead bodies next to the one that already exists.

And, you know, whether that is an optimal solution for our society, I don't know that that's helpful.

In that situation.