Save the NRA: The Solid Case Against Grover Norquist

April 25, 2016

Writer

Message From Glenn:

At the beginning of my speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), I mentioned Dr. Zuhdi Jasser was voted onto the Board of the American Conservative Union (ACU) which runs CPAC. This change will help ensure supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood are removed from the ACU. As you know, there is an effort underway at the National Rifle Association (NRA) to do the same thing. I have tremendous respect for Former Army Green Beret officer and Pastor Stu Weber for being man enough to take this on by submitting the original petition to remove Grover Norquist from the Board of the NRA. To change the world, it starts with one person. It's time to vote Grover Norquist off the board of the NRA. Not because I ask you to, but because you read the information below and decide it is the right thing to do. We must stand to defend our institutions. Support the NRA and support the brave men and women — like Stu Weber — who step forward to change the world.

DOWNLOAD THE BALLOT

Important Ballot in NRA Magazines

Current issues of NRA Magazines include two important ballots: one to elect board members and one to recall an association official. Don’t ignore either, but pay particular attention to the latter. Our long-term national security depends on your voting “YES” on this ballot and delivering it before May 1.

Recall of Association Official Ballot — Due Before May 1

Who is the “official” on this important recall ballot? His name is Grover Norquist, and he’s a 15-year Board Member of the National Rifle Association (NRA). Additionally, Mr. Norquist sits on the Board of the American Conservative Union, the nation’s oldest and largest conservative grassroots organization. Mr. Norquist is the founder and president of Americans for Tax Reform and co-founder of the Islamic Free Market Institute.

Why Recall Grover Norquist?

While Mr. Norquist’s efforts on trying to reduce taxes are admirable, his co-founding of the Islamic Free Market Institute and its connections to highly suspect individuals are puzzling at best, very dangerous at worst.

Mr. Norquist has well-documented associations with radical Islamists, including Abdurahman Alamoudi who is serving a 23-year prison term on terrorism charges. Mr. Norquist’s Islamic Institute received two $10,000 contributions in 1999 drawn from the personal bank account of Alamoudi. But that’s only scratching the surface of Mr. Norquist’s connections to radical Islam.

The Center for Security Policy laid out a 101-page document that explicitly details Mr. Norquist’s history with Islamists directly connected to the Muslim Brotherhood.

This document is signed by ten influential national security practitioners, including:

• Bush ’43 Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey

• Clinton Director of Central Intelligence R. James Woolsey

• Former Congressman Allen West

• Former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy

• Former Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet Admiral James A. “Ace” Lyons

• Former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Lieutenant General William G. Boykin

• Former Pentagon Inspector General Joseph E. Schmitz

Additionally, former Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet Admiral James A. “Ace” Lyons wrote an open letter published in March 2016 issues of NRA publications urging NRA members to give serious consideration to recalling Mr. Norquist’s Board position.

VOTE “YES” BEFORE MAY 1 TO RECALL GROVER NORQUIST

The Muslim Brotherhood: The Enemy Within

Why wage a bloody jihad on the greatest Western nation when you can slowly destroy it from within, using the shields of religious freedom and political correctness? It’s called “civilization jihad,” and it’s the secretly stated mission of the Muslim Brotherhood.

This form of warfare includes cultural subversion, the co-opting of senior leaders, influence operations and propaganda, and other means of insinuating Sharia Law into Western societies. Many Brotherhood leaders advocate patience in promoting their goals. Back in 1995, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, told the Toledo, Ohio Muslim Arab Youth Association convention, “We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through the sword, but through dawah (Islamic renewal and outreach).” The prime practitioners of this stealthy form of jihad are the ostensibly “non-violent” Muslim Brotherhood and their front groups and affiliates.

A strategic plan dated May 22, 1991, entitled “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group [Muslim Brotherhood] in North America,” was discovered by the FBI in 2004. The “Memorandum” describes the role of the Muslim Brotherhood in North America:

The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan [the Muslim Brotherhood in Arabic] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions.

Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny...

Sounding the Alarm

For years, respected security and military officials within the U.S. have sounded the alarm regarding Grover Norquist's troubling ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Those warnings, for the most part, have fallen on deaf ears.

Since Paul Revere’s midnight ride, the precedent has been set for American patriots to sound the alarm at threats to our liberty and way of life. After learning of Mr. Norquist’s connections to Islamists and his participation on the NRA board — an organization of which Glenn is a lifetime member — Glenn began speaking out about it.

In March 2015, Glenn announced on air he would resign his membership in the NRA if Mr. Norquist remained a member of the Board, prompting hundreds of listeners to call the NRA. The organization subsequently opened an ethics investigation into Mr. Norquist. Later that same month, Mr. Norquist joined Glenn on air to defend himself against accusations that he is an agent of influence for radical Islamists. In the contentious interview, Glenn hammered Mr. Norquist on his connections to known terrorists.

VOTE “YES” BEFORE MAY 1 TO RECALL GROVER NORQUIST

Hearing No

Mr. Stuart Weber, an NRA member, sponsored the original petition to remove Mr. Norquist from the Board. A Hearing Committee appointed to review the petition ultimately voted against it, citing three reasons for voting “No” to removing Mr. Norquist (see below why these reasons are wholly unacceptable). Interestingly, Mr. Weber was unable to attend the hearing, as he was given very short notice. Based on NRA bylaws, Mr. Weber had no input on the hearing date.

The Solid Case Against Grover Norquist

Reason #1: The Truth Is Ageless

The Hearing Committee based its decision on “old charges” that have gone stale. Since when does the truth have an expiration date? Pursuing truth and exposing nefarious — or at the very least suspect — intentions should be a constant, never-ending effort. The Hearing Committee is not a court of law, and there should not be a statute of limitations. Further, when Mr. Weber filed the petition, the board never declared the ‘staleness’ rule — it was only after the fact.

The charges against Mr. Norquist do not fade away because of other people’s delay in recognizing their seriousness. Moreover, the stated tactic of the Muslim Brotherhood to patiently and slowly wage their “civilization jihad” indicates their willingness to spend years, even decades reaching their goal. Shouldn’t Americans commit an equal amount of time to exposing the truth and protecting liberty?

Reason #2: The Facts Are Overwhelming

The Hearing Committee based its decision on a “lack of factual support.” Nothing could be further from the truth. The Center for Security Policy prepared Agent of Influence, a 101-page document with 87 Statements of Fact signed by 10 influential security experts at the highest levels of government. The Statement of Facts establishes that:

• Islamist enemies of the United States, led by the Muslim Brotherhood, are engaged in a concerted effort to destroy this country and impose their supremacist doctrine of Sharia worldwide.

• Muslim Brotherhood front groups and operatives have targeted, among others, the Republican Party and conservative movement.

• Leaders of organizations identified by the federal government as Muslim Brotherhood fronts—and, in some cases, tied to terrorists—were involved in influence operations targeting the GOP and conservatives during the late 1990s and some or all of the decade that followed. Such leaders included, notably: Abdurahman Alamoudi, Sami al-Arian, Nihad Awad and Khaled Saffuri.

• Over the past fifteen years, Grover Norquist has had personal, professional and/or organizational associations with each of these Muslim Brotherhood operatives.

• Norquist’s connections, organizations and personal efforts have enabled the influence operations of Islamists, including those of Iran.

The Hearing Committee, which had full access to the dossier of information with 87 supporting facts, was unable to define who is right or wrong in its Process Overview. But it seems, based on its decision, the Committee was reviewing for a criminal prosecution which requires evidence beyond reasonable doubt, rather than the much less exacting preponderance of the evidence standard. Regardless of right or wrong, there is overwhelming evidence to call into question Mr. Norquist’s associations and the appropriateness of his position on the Board of the NRA.

Reason #3: Distractions

The Hearing Committee based its decision on the petition not rising to the level of being a “distraction to the NRA.” On the contrary, Mr. Weber’s original petition states the very presence of Mr. Norquist on the NRA board presents a distraction the NRA cannot tolerate, particularly during a heated and contested election season. All available NRA resources in time, staff and money must be invested to advance the candidates who hold similar principles.

Reason #4: Jury of Your Peers

The Hearing Committee was put into an unenviable position: Voting on the outing of a long-term board member, possibly a friend, and frankly, a powerful person within the GOP establishment. While members of the Hearing Committee did their best under the circumstances, those close affiliations — direct or indirect, implicit or explicit — undoubtedly impacted the outcome.

Power to the People

The Hearing Committee’s vote is nothing more than a recommendation. NRA members have the power to rise up and vote “YES” to remove Grover Norquist.

By using the recall ballot in current NRA magazines, NRA lifetime members — or yearly members in good standing for five consecutive years — are eligible to vote on this critical decision. Should eligible members need a copy of the ballot, they are encouraged to contact the NRA.

In the event members have already cast their vote, but feel moved to vote differently based on the information provided here, they can request the NRA void their original vote and issue them a new ballot.

The evidence gathered by The Center for Security Policy is overwhelming and can lead to only one conclusion: Grover Norquist has engaged in conduct on behalf of jihadists and their associates that is incompatible with service in a leadership role with the NRA or any other conservative organization.

VOTE “YES” BEFORE MAY 1 TO RECALL GROVER NORQUIST

Featured Image: Caption:WASHINGTON, DC - MARCH 05: Grover Norquist, President, Americans for Tax Reform, visits 'SiriusXM Patriot Forum with Grover Norquist' at SiriusXM Studio on March 5, 2013 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Leigh Vogel/Getty Images)

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.