Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

'I don't think Matthew is a fan': Glenn responds to writer bashing his newest bestseller

September 18, 2015
Staff

WRITER

Glenn thanked his audience on radio Friday for helping spread the word about something nobody in Washington seems to understand or care about — the difference between a Muslim and an Islamist.

Islam_final_hirez

In his newest book, It IS About Islam, which has topped The New York Times bestseller list for the past three weeks, Glenn drew on quotes from the Koran and the hadith, as well as from leaders of ISIS, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood to expose the true origins of Islamic extremism.

"You need to know the difference between a Muslim and an Islamist," Glenn said.

He went on.

"As I was thinking about this the other day, and I got the call that we were number one on The New York Times list again, I thought to myself, 'Hmm, isn't it weird that the leftists in America is so quiet on a book that's number one?'"

That was before Glenn found a Salon article written by Matthew Pulver, entitled "Glenn Beck’s terrifying new book: 300 pages of Islamophobia dressed up as scholarship."

"When I finished with the article, I started to realize, 'I don't think Matthew is a fan,'" Glenn said.

Glenn proceeded to set the record straight on every false claim brought up in Pulver's article.

Listen to the entertaining radio segment here, or read the full transcript below.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors.

GLENN: I want to thank you for making -- I think this is the third week in a row that we're number one for It Is About Islam.

This is the exposing of the truth about ISIS, al-Qaeda, Iran, and the caliphate, and it is important for you to understand it because nobody in Washington seems to understand it or seems to care. And there is a difference between a Muslim and an Islamist. And you need to know the difference between Muslim and Islamist.

And as I was thinking about this the other day, and I got the call that we were number one on the New York Times list again. I thought to myself, "Hmm, isn't it weird that the leftists in America is so quiet on a book that's number one?"

It kind of makes me and my security detail a little nervous. Why are they so quiet about this? Usually I -- I mean, they should have tried to put me out of business by now. Called me all kinds of horrible names.

PAT: Death threats. All kinds of fun things.

GLENN: All kinds of fun things. But then I found Matthew Pulver's gem, if I can call it -- truly wonderful. Just terrific.

PAT: It's a special article.

GLENN: It's a special article. Terrific.

STU: Is it phenomenal?

GLENN: Yeah, it is phenomenal. And this comes from Salon. And the headline is Glenn Beck's terrifying new book. Three hundred pages of Islamophobia dressed up as scholarship.

Now, it's interesting that he used Islamophobia Because I show you the root of the word "Islamophobia" in the book, where it came from, who started it, why they're doing it.

And he executes it perfectly. If he'd read the book, he would see exactly how he fits right perfectly into the game. But when I finished with the article, I -- I started to realize, "I don't think Matthew is a fan."

(laughter)

GLENN: Really.

PAT: I got that impression too.

GLENN: Did you read the article too?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Weird. And it starts out subtle. It starts out with: Glenn Beck would like to tell you about Islam. Sure, he's a walking conspiracy generator who has been wrong, nearly every time he parts his lips. Which is a lot -- I mean, that seems strong.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: But he gives me a couple of examples. He writes: Wrong about Obama's SS-like civilian national security force, which is interesting that he put civilian national security force in quotations because it's such a crazy quote. You've got to quote -- you have to put that quote in there because --

PAT: Then you know --

GLENN: Civilian -- how crazy.

PAT: He was actually quoting you.

GLENN: No. Actually, no. He was actually quoting, not me, but Barack Obama.

OBAMA: We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.

GLENN: Okay. So never had an explanation on that. And I have mused a few times on, "What the hell is that?"

Now we can argue all day over what he was talking about. But I can't be wrong about Obama's civilian national security force because he's the one who said they were going to build it. So I don't know what it is. But he continues and he says: Beck was wrong about Obama's FEMA camps, which is really an interesting one. We heard the rumors about the FEMA camps. And then we wanted to find out if there was anything about the FEMA camps. Is there any truth to that rumor at all? Have my staff, you know, go and do the work. Get on TV and say, hey, I just want to tell you, at 5 o'clock today, we're going to tell you the truth about FEMA camps. Let me tell you about FEMA camps. There's no FEMA camps. They don't exist.

STU: You didn't by any chance use your own resources and send cameramen to the actual location to show that --

GLENN: Of course not.

STU: You didn't invite someone from popular mechanics to disprove --

GLENN: No. To disprove the existence of -- yeah, that's exactly what I did.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: So then he says: Beck was wrong about Obama using the Postal Service as an evil spy network.

STU: I don't remember that show.

PAT: What?

GLENN: Okay. I don't remember that one. It's hard to say that I was wrong about something that I never even heard of, let alone promoted. But maybe I said it. I mean, I've said a million things times 1,000 over the last few years. The Postal Service being used as an evil spy network seems really stupid because, I mean, you know, you've got all the phone companies being used as a spy network. So why -- why would you go to the Postal Service? But, you know, I don't know what the story was. It might have made me say something like that.

PAT: You didn't.

GLENN: Are you sure?

PAT: Yeah. I've never --

GLENN: Well, anyway, he got the phone companies using as a spy network. I know that I've said under George W. Bush, I didn't like the fact that he was calling for people to spy on their neighbors and call us if you see something, call DHS. But hang on just a second. He actually said that, and Barack Obama tried to institute it through the White House. If your neighbor says something, you let us know at whitehouse.gov. So Post Office, I don't remember. But the other stuff was actually being done or was seriously debated. So if he's okay with the NSA monitoring of all email and phone conversations and saving up of all of that information. Okay.

Then he wraps up his slanderous -- sorry, what did I say? Then he wraps up his slanderous nonsensical accusations with this, quote: And the seemingly countless, breathless alarm warnings over the years.

The breathless alarm warnings over the years.

Now, he doesn't print this out. But I'm going to give you some of these warnings that's so breathless and nonsensical that I don't even know why I would say -- for instance, in 1999 when I said, quote, there would be blood and bodies in the streets of New York if we don't pay attention to Osama bin Laden. He means what he says. End quote.

In 2006, '7, and '8, when I warned people to get their money out of the stock market because there was a housing crash that was coming and it would be bad.

The breathless, alarmist warnings like encouraging the uprising in Egypt would lead to a destabilizing of Europe and the Middle East. And the destabilization would spread throughout the Middle East, and a caliphate would be established and then it would spread to Europe and destabilize all of Europe.

Or probably I was out of breath when I warned that Greece was about to collapse. That Germany wouldn't be willing to continue to lend Greece the money. That was crazy. Or my breathless warnings when I said Nazis will come back and you will find them in Greece, and you will find them, Nazis and fascists all over Europe. I was out of breath when I said that because that was a long sentence. Or the breathless alarmist when I said the fed would print money and then they would print more money. And then they wouldn't be able to stop printing more money. Or when I said that Russia would lead the world into a plan to dedollarize the rest of the world. And that China would stop buying our debt. That was breathless and alarmist. Because I remember them telling us, that China needs us. They will never do that. Or when I said that progressives would become so bold that they would admit finally, yeah, you know what, we are socialists because this capitalist thing doesn't work. So, yeah, there's nothing wrong with being a socialist.

Now, that warning is crazy too because isn't an avowed socialist leading the party in at least two primary states right now? Just wanted to point that out.

So I don't know Matthew Pulver at all, but he apparently has such blind rage, that he obviously didn't bother checking into a single fact. And the people at Salon are so sloppy and such hacks, that it doesn't -- they don't lose any sleep at night because that's what they do for a living. The hatred is so complete that this author finds himself enraged with the phrase "all lives matter." Now, I want you to think about that. All lives matter enrages you. He writes, all lives matter concludes the book as if Christian nationalism throughout needed a final splash of racism.

PAT: Jeez.

GLENN: Could I ask, when did the proclamation that all lives matter become racist? Because all, at least in my book, includes white, black, brown, yellow, red. All includes all. If I tell my kids, pick up all of your toys, if they only pick a few of their toys, I'm kind of pissed off at them. And I ask them, do you understand that I just said, pick up all of your toys? All means all. But maybe -- maybe it would have had a point if I concluded in my book that some lives matter or a few lives matter. Or only American lives matter. But I said all lives matter.

Then he goes into this. In a nice symmetry between the final white reactionary note recalls the scene on which the book opens. The Thomas Jefferson prophetically consulting the Koran before he became, quote, the first American president to go to war with Islamic radicals, end quote.

In the 1801 war with North American Barbary States, essentially the United States' first foreign war, Beck shocks his reader with a revelation by the Barbary ambassador in 1786 to Jefferson and his eventual presidential predecessor John Adams. The Islamic Barbary armies used Koranic scripture to permit the enslavement of a portion of enemies captured in battle.

Enslaving Americans, Africans doing that? But that's the wrong way around. And relying on pro-slavery scripture that isn't the Bible? Beck is so eager to construct a narrative in which Islamic hordes have always pounded the innocent American gates. Casually he overlooks the horror of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, of which Jefferson was no small beneficiary in the biblical means of its defense.

Now, Matthew, I have to tell you, I didn't -- what is it, casually overlook the horror of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. It's just, this isn't a book about the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade and its horrors. If you want a book about that, one that's been on the market for a long time is Roots. Great story. Not exactly true. It didn't actually happen to Alex Haley's family.

PAT: Still riveting.

GLENN: Still riveting and still basically true

STU: Why would you think Salon needed it to be true?

GLENN: You're right. You're right.

So he doesn't dispute the facts. He doesn't allege that I'm wrong about going to war in 1801 against Muslim pirates. He just thinks that I should talk about something else.

Throughout the rest of the article, Pulver vents obvious disdain and lack of understanding for both me, Christianity, and the Bible. And did I mention his disdain for me? And he doesn't cite a single fact that's inaccurate. This writer could apparently get past the fact that it is about Islam, rather than just some person or some group. But, see, that's the whole point of the book. It's not a nice -- I hate to boil it down to something so simple. It is about Islam, as we painstakingly documented in the book. The persons and the group get their ideology from the Koran and the Hadith, which we checked and rechecked with leading scholars and imams in the Middle East to verify that every word we said was true. Which is why I said and stand by, it is about Islam. An important book. One that you will not find anywhere else. But we're done mincing words. The truth has to be told. Available in bookstores everywhere. It Is About Islam.

A Sharia enclave is quietly taking root in America. It's time to wake up.

NOVA SAFO / Staff | Getty Images

Sharia-based projects like the Meadow in Texas show how political Islam grows quietly, counting on Americans to stay silent while an incompatible legal system takes root.

Apolitical system completely incompatible with the Constitution is gaining ground in the United States, and we are pretending it is not happening.

Sharia — the legal and political framework of Islam — is being woven into developments, institutions, and neighborhoods, including a massive project in Texas. And the consequences will be enormous if we continue to look the other way.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

Before we can have an honest debate, we’d better understand what Sharia represents. Sharia is not simply a set of religious rules about prayer or diet. It is a comprehensive legal and political structure that governs marriage, finance, criminal penalties, and civic life. It is a parallel system that claims supremacy wherever it takes hold.

This is where the distinction matters. Many Muslims in America want nothing to do with Sharia governance. They came here precisely because they lived under it. But political Islam — the movement that seeks to implement Sharia as law — is not the same as personal religious belief.

It is a political ideology with global ambitions, much like communism. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently warned that Islamist movements do not seek peaceful coexistence with the West. They seek dominance. History backs him up.

How Sharia arrives

Political Islam does not begin with dramatic declarations. It starts quietly, through enclaves that operate by their own rules. That is why the development once called EPIC City — now rebranded as the Meadow — is so concerning. Early plans framed it as a Muslim-only community built around a mega-mosque and governed by Sharia-compliant financing. After state investigations were conducted, the branding changed, but the underlying intent remained the same.

Developers have openly described practices designed to keep non-Muslims out, using fees and ownership structures to create de facto religious exclusivity. This is not assimilation. It is the construction of a parallel society within a constitutional republic.

The warning from those who have lived under it

Years ago, local imams in Texas told me, without hesitation, that certain Sharia punishments “just work.” They spoke about cutting off hands for theft, stoning adulterers, and maintaining separate standards of testimony for men and women. They insisted it was logical and effective while insisting they would never attempt to implement it in Texas.

But when pressed, they could not explain why a system they consider divinely mandated would suddenly stop applying once someone crossed a border.

This is the contradiction at the heart of political Islam: It claims universal authority while insisting its harshest rules will never be enforced here. That promise does not stand up to scrutiny. It never has.

AASHISH KIPHAYET / Contributor | Getty Images

America is vulnerable

Europe is already showing us where this road leads. No-go zones, parallel courts, political intimidation, and clerics preaching supremacy have taken root across major cities.

America’s strength has always come from its melting pot, but assimilation requires boundaries. It requires insisting that the Constitution, not religious law, is the supreme authority on this soil.

Yet we are becoming complacent, even fearful, about saying so. We mistake silence for tolerance. We mistake avoidance for fairness. Meanwhile, political Islam views this hesitation as weakness.

Religious freedom is one of America’s greatest gifts. Muslims may worship freely here, as they should. But political Islam must not be permitted to plant a flag on American soil. The Constitution cannot coexist with a system that denies equal rights, restricts speech, subordinates women, and places clerical authority above civil law.

Wake up before it is too late

Projects like the Meadow are not isolated. They are test runs, footholds, proofs of concept. Political Islam operates with patience. It advances through demographic growth, legal ambiguity, and cultural hesitation — and it counts on Americans being too polite, too distracted, or too afraid to confront it.

We cannot afford that luxury. If we fail to defend the principles that make this country free, we will one day find ourselves asking how a parallel system gained power right in front of us. The answer will be simple: We looked away.

The time to draw boundaries and to speak honestly is now. The time to defend the Constitution as the supreme law of the land is now. Act while there is still time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

The Crisis of Meaning: Searching for truth and purpose

Mario Tama / Staff | Getty Images

Anxiety, anger, and chronic dissatisfaction signal a country searching for meaning. Without truth and purpose, politics becomes a dangerous substitute for identity.

We have built a world overflowing with noise, convenience, and endless choice, yet something essential has slipped out of reach. You can sense it in the restless mood of the country, the anxiety among young people who cannot explain why they feel empty, in the angry confusion that dominates our politics.

We have more wealth than any nation in history, but the heart of the culture feels strangely malnourished. Before we can debate debt or elections, we must confront the reality that we created a world of things, but not a world of purpose.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

What we are living through is not just economic or political dysfunction. It is the vacuum that appears when a civilization mistakes abundance for meaning.

Modern life is stuffed with everything except what the human soul actually needs. We built systems to make life faster, easier, and more efficient — and then wondered why those systems cannot teach our children who they are, why they matter, or what is worth living for.

We tell the next generation to chase success, influence, and wealth, turning childhood into branding. We ask kids what they want to do, not who they want to be. We build a world wired for dopamine rather than dignity, and then we wonder why so many people feel unmoored.

When everything is curated, optimized, and delivered at the push of a button, the question “what is my life for?” gets lost in the static.

The crisis beneath the headlines

It is not just the young who feel this crisis. Every part of our society is straining under the weight of meaninglessness.

Look at the debt cycle — the mathematical fate no civilization has ever escaped once it crosses a threshold that we seem to have already blown by. While ordinary families feel the pressure, our leaders respond with distraction, with denial, or by rewriting the very history that could have warned us.

You cannot survive a crisis you refuse to name, and you cannot rebuild a world whose foundations you no longer understand.

We have entered a cultural moment where the noise is so loud that it drowns out the simplest truths. We are living in a country that no longer knows how to hear itself think.

So people go searching. Some drift toward the false promise of socialism, some toward the empty thrill of rebellion. Some simply check out. When a culture forgets what gives life meaning, it becomes vulnerable to every ideology that offers a quick answer.

The quiet return of meaning

And yet, quietly, something else is happening. Beneath the frustration and cynicism, many Americans are recognizing that meaning does not come from what we own, but from what we honor. It does not rise from success, but from virtue. It does not emerge from noise, but from the small, sacred things that modern life has pushed to the margins — the home, the table, the duty you fulfill, the person you help when no one is watching.

The danger is assuming that this rediscovery happens on its own. It does not.

Reorientation requires intention. It requires rebuilding the habits and virtues that once held us together. It requires telling the truth about our history instead of rewriting it to fit today’s narratives. And it requires acknowledging what has been erased: that meaning is inseparable from God’s presence in a nation’s life.

Harold M. Lambert / Contributor | Getty Images

Where renewal begins

We have built a world without stillness, and then we wondered why no one can hear the questions that matter. Those questions remain, whether we acknowledge them or not. They do not disappear just because we drown them in entertainment or noise. They wait for us, and the longer we ignore them, the more disoriented we become.

Meaning is still available. It is found in rebuilding the smallest, most human spaces — the places that cannot be digitized, globalized, or automated. The home. The family. The community.

These are the daily virtues that do not trend on social media, but that hold a civilization upright. If we want to repair this country, we begin there, exactly where every durable civilization has always begun: one virtue at a time, one tradition at a time, one generation at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

A break in trust: A NEW Watergate is brewing in plain sight

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

When institutions betray the public’s trust, the country splits, and the spiral is hard to stop.

Something drastic is happening in American life. Headlines that should leave us stunned barely register anymore. Stories that once would have united the country instead dissolve into silence or shrugs.

It is not apathy exactly. It is something deeper — a growing belief that the people in charge either cannot or will not fix what is broken.

When people feel ignored or betrayed, they will align with anyone who appears willing to fight on their behalf.

I call this response the Bubba effect. It describes what happens when institutions lose so much public trust that “Bubba,” the average American minding his own business, finally throws his hands up and says, “Fine. I will handle it myself.” Not because he wants to, but because the system that was supposed to protect him now feels indifferent, corrupt, or openly hostile.

The Bubba effect is not a political movement. It is a survival instinct.

What triggers the Bubba effect

We are watching the triggers unfold in real time. When members of Congress publicly encourage active duty troops to disregard orders from the commander in chief, that is not a political squabble. When a federal judge quietly rewrites the rules so one branch of government can secretly surveil another, that is not normal. That is how republics fall. Yet these stories glided across the news cycle without urgency, without consequence, without explanation.

When the American people see the leadership class shrug, they conclude — correctly — that no one is steering the ship.

This is how the Bubba effect spreads. It is not just individuals resisting authority. It is sheriffs refusing to enforce new policies, school boards ignoring state mandates, entire communities saying, “We do not believe you anymore.” It becomes institutional, cultural, national.

A country cracking from the inside

This effect can be seen in Dearborn, Michigan. In the rise of fringe voices like Nick Fuentes. In the Epstein scandal, where powerful people could not seem to locate a single accountable adult. These stories are different in content but identical in message: The system protects itself, not you.

When people feel ignored or betrayed, they will align with anyone who appears willing to fight on their behalf. That does not mean they suddenly agree with everything that person says. It means they feel abandoned by the institutions that were supposed to be trustworthy.

The Bubba effect is what fills that vacuum.

The dangers of a faithless system

A republic cannot survive without credibility. Congress cannot oversee intelligence agencies if it refuses to discipline its own members. The military cannot remain apolitical if its chain of command becomes optional. The judiciary cannot defend the Constitution while inventing loopholes that erase the separation of powers.

History shows that once a nation militarizes politics, normalizes constitutional shortcuts, or allows government agencies to operate without scrutiny, it does not return to equilibrium peacefully. Something will give.

The question is what — and when.

The responsibility now belongs to us

In a healthy country, this is where the media steps in. This is where universities, pastors, journalists, and cultural leaders pause the outrage machine and explain what is at stake. But today, too many see themselves not as guardians of the republic, but of ideology. Their first loyalty is to narrative, not truth.

The founders never trusted the press more than the public. They trusted citizens who understood their rights, lived their responsibilities, and demanded accountability. That is the antidote to the Bubba effect — not rage, but citizenship.

How to respond without breaking ourselves

Do not riot. Do not withdraw. Do not cheer on destruction just because you dislike the target. That is how nations lose themselves. Instead, demand transparency. Call your representatives. Insist on consequences. Refuse to normalize constitutional violations simply because “everyone does it.” If you expect nothing, you will get nothing.

Do not hand your voice to the loudest warrior simply because he is swinging a bat at the establishment. You do not beat corruption by joining a different version of it. You beat it by modeling the country you want to preserve: principled, accountable, rooted in truth.

Adam Gray / Stringer | Getty Images

Every republic reaches a moment when historians will later say, “That was the warning.” We are living in ours. But warnings are gifts if they are recognized. Institutions bend. People fail. The Constitution can recover — if enough Americans still know and cherish it.

It does not take a majority. Twenty percent of the country — awake, educated, and courageous — can reset the system. It has happened before. It can happen again.

Wake up. Stand up. Demand integrity — from leaders, from institutions, and from yourself. Because the Bubba effect will not end until Americans reclaim the duty that has always belonged to them: preserving the republic for the next generation.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Warning: Stop letting TikTok activists think for you

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Bad-faith attacks on Israel and AIPAC warp every debate. Real answers emerge only when people set aside scripts and ask what serves America’s long-term interests.

The search for truth has always required something very much in short supply these days: honesty. Not performative questions, not scripted outrage, not whatever happens to be trending on TikTok, but real curiosity.

Some issues, often focused on foreign aid, AIPAC, or Israel, have become hotbeds of debate and disagreement. Before we jump into those debates, however, we must return to a simpler, more important issue: honest questioning. Without it, nothing in these debates matters.

Ask questions because you want the truth, not because you want a target.

The phrase “just asking questions” has re-entered the zeitgeist, and that’s fine. We should always question power. But too many of those questions feel preloaded with someone else’s answer. If the goal is truth, then the questions should come from a sincere desire to understand, not from a hunt for a villain.

Honest desire for truth is the only foundation that can support a real conversation about these issues.

Truth-seeking is real work

Right now, plenty of people are not seeking the truth at all. They are repeating something they heard from a politician on cable news or from a stranger on TikTok who has never opened a history book. That is not a search for answers. That is simply outsourcing your own thought.

If you want the truth, you need to work for it. You cannot treat the world like a Marvel movie where the good guy appears in a cape and the villain hisses on command. Real life does not give you a neat script with the moral wrapped up in two hours.

But that is how people are approaching politics now. They want the oppressed and the oppressor, the heroic underdog and the cartoon villain. They embrace this fantastical framing because it is easier than wrestling with reality.

This framing took root in the 1960s when the left rebuilt its worldview around colonizers and the colonized. Overnight, Zionism was recast as imperialism. Suddenly, every conflict had to fit the same script. Today’s young activists are just recycling the same narrative with updated graphics. Everything becomes a morality play. No nuance, no context, just the comforting clarity of heroes and villains.

Bad-faith questions

This same mindset is fueling the sudden obsession with Israel, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in particular. You hear it from members of Congress and activists alike: AIPAC pulls the strings, AIPAC controls the government, AIPAC should register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The questions are dramatic, but are they being asked in good faith?

FARA is clear. The standard is whether an individual or group acts under the direction or control of a foreign government. AIPAC simply does not qualify.

Here is a detail conveniently left out of these arguments: Dozens of domestic organizations — Armenian, Cuban, Irish, Turkish — lobby Congress on behalf of other countries. None of them registers under FARA because — like AIPAC — they are independent, domestic organizations.

If someone has a sincere problem with the structure of foreign lobbying, fair enough. Let us have that conversation. But singling out AIPAC alone is not a search for truth. It is bias dressed up as bravery.

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

If someone wants to question foreign aid to Israel, fine. Let’s have that debate. But let’s ask the right questions. The issue is not the size of the package but whether the aid advances our interests. What does the United States gain? Does the investment strengthen our position in the region? How does it compare to what we give other nations? And do we examine those countries with the same intensity?

The real target

These questions reflect good-faith scrutiny. But narrowing the entire argument to one country or one dollar amount misses the larger problem. If someone objects to the way America handles foreign aid, the target is not Israel. The target is the system itself — an entrenched bureaucracy, poor transparency, and decades-old commitments that have never been re-examined. Those problems run through programs around the world.

If you want answers, you need to broaden the lens. You have to be willing to put aside the movie script and confront reality. You have to hold yourself to a simple rule: Ask questions because you want the truth, not because you want a target.

That is the only way this country ever gets clarity on foreign aid, influence, alliances, and our place in the world. Questioning is not just allowed. It is essential. But only if it is honest.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.