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

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

“I don’t like 1% of what he’s done!” Pat and Stu lose it on Trump caller

July 13, 2015
Staff

WRITER

For some reason, a lot of callers have been big Donald Trump fans. Despite having laid out policy after policy from Trump that show him to be left of most Democrats on issues like immigration, many people called into the show today trying to say he was going to be tough on the border. Stu literally couldn’t take it, and nearly exploded on one caller who didn’t seem to grasp just how progressive The Donald’s politics are.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it may contain errors:

PAT: Donald Trump. Donald Trump. Trump. Trump. Trump. It's amazing how obsessed they are with him. 239 times in one 24-hour period. That's more than ten times per hour. That's a lot of Donald Trump. And this is why we talk about him and try to put this into perspective. His candidacy into perspective. Because he is -- as we've mentioned sucking all the oxygen out of this campaign. That's all anyone is talking about. Certainly CNN is.

STU: Well, I was on Twitter in the break. And someone wrote, it's about time to move on the beat on Donald Trump. When he's first? When he gets to eighth place, I'll start considering it. When he drops out of the race, I'll consider it. When we have a Republican Party that has a bunch of good options selecting a person who donated to his competitor, who donated to the person running for the Democrats multiple times.

PAT: How do you defend that?

STU: A guy who said he was Obama's biggest cheerleader?

PAT: Yeah.

STU: How can that -- I'm not going to move on from that. Screw that. That's a terrible idea.

PAT: A guy who was a Democrat as recently as 2009.

STU: '9. Not 1969.

PAT: A Democrat.

STU: 2009. I'm not going to move on when he's in first place.

JEFFY: And you commenting on the Twitter point, Stu. Last month, on Twitter, according to topsy.com, Donald Trump led the pack with almost 2 million mentions.

STU: And who is second?

JEFFY: Jeb Bush with 338,000.

STU: Seriously.

PAT: 2 million.

JEFFY: 800,000. Almost --

STU: But basically six times as many mentions as any other candidate. You think I'll shut up about him now? This is the most important time to be running our mouth about Donald Trump. Because this is not a guy -- it's not just that if he were the nominee he would definitely lose, he has higher negatives in both parties than pretty much any other candidate.

PAT: Oh, yeah.

STU: He would definitely lose. He would definitely -- absolutely with 100 percent certainty if he was the candidate, Hillary Clinton would be handed the nomination. I mean, you would definitely -- that's not even part of the argument for me. If you have a principled guy that goes in there and loses, I can deal with that. I can live with myself if I voted for a guy who actually believes in things that are -- you know, that have some sense -- some foundation in freedom and liberty.

But when you have a guy like Donald Trump out there. He doesn't even believe these things. It's one thing if you have a candidate that is bad that at least believes in principle. This guy is the exact opposite. He doesn't believe in it. He's not a good candidate. He has no good features. This is not a guy who, well, I can see why people like him. He's just louder than everyone else.

PAT: And as tough as he is on immigration supposedly, which he's getting all the publicity about now, he's an amnesty guy. He wants amnesty. How tough is that on illegal immigration? I want a path to citizenship. I want the amnesty thing. Oh, that's -- that's tough. Well, he's tough because he's said that some of them are not good people that come across the border. And he keeps talking about building a wall between the US and Mexico. Well, first of all, you're not going to be able to build a wall between the US and Mexico. We can't even get a fence. We can't even get a fence that was mandated by law.

STU: But every one of these candidates says they'll be tough on border security.

PAT: Every one of them. Even the Democrats will say that. Oh, we'll secure the border. That's first and foremost.

STU: And for those of you that says, well, he'll do it. When he's criticizing Mitt Romney that he's too conservative on the border. As of 2012. It's inexplicable. It's an inexplicable time. At least Herman Cain was a guy that came around and people didn't know much about.

PAT: But he had conservative principles.

STU: Yeah. But Donald Trump is constantly on the record as a leftist. He's a guy who said universal health care is a birthright. This is not Barack Obama. It's considerably to the left of Barack Obama. That policy is -- it's -- he's praising Canadian health care. Canadian health care. You think this guy is a G.O.P. candidate? I don't even want him as a Democratic nominee. I would be disappointed, with the exception of he would be very beatable, but if he was the guy and we had a possibility of him being president as a Democrat, I would be disappointed.

PAT: And yet Jim in Colorado likes him. Hi, Jim, you're on the Glenn Beck Program with Pat and Stu.

CALLER: Oh, great lead-in, fellows.

STU: Sorry. I didn't mean to rant that long about that. I apologize.

CALLER: Well, you know what, you probably added 10 more new fans for him for every second you stay on it.

STU: I don't see how. I understand that. Hold on one second, Jim. Before you go on from that point. It's a point I hear a lot. And I understand that. And I think that's part of the reflexive sort of response to Trump. Which is, they see him being attacked, and therefore like him more. Which I understand from the media. If it was just CNN saying he was an evil right-winger, I would get it. It's not that. All over the conservative space are people who will say, wait a minute. This guy is not bad because he's outspoken. Not boughs he's going to make us lose. But bad because he believes in liberal policies. He's not a conservative. And that complaint I don't understand running away from if you consider yourself conservative.

PAT: What do you like about him?

CALLER: I understand only leftists are allowed to evolve. I do understand that.

STU: From 2012?

CALLER: I'm going to try to help you understand where Trumpmania is coming from.

PAT: Okay. Let's hear it.

CALLER: We've had several people in the last 15 years that speak the truth. Speak what we want to hear. Let's go to Allen West to Herman Cain to Sarah Palin. What happens to them? The leftist media, the G.O.P. establishment, they attack, attack, and attack until they're gone. You're not going to be able to do that with Trump. Trump right now, and you can go back 16 years, you and MSNBC and CNN can play --

STU: How are we getting lumped in with these people?

CALLER: Sixteen years ago.

STU: 2012 is not 16 years ago!

CALLER: Okay. 2012.

STU: 2015. March of 2015 is not 16 years ago. I cannot accept this.

CALLER: He evolved on gay marriage in six months.

STU: Oh, and you're going to praise that as a characteristic in a president you want?

CALLER: No, no, I'm not. But no one is giving him a hard time about it.

STU: I am. You are. You won't do it for Trump. You'll do it for Hillary Clinton. But you won't do it for Trump. It's insanity.

PAT: It's inconceivable. I just don't -- it's inconceivable from a conservative, Jim. Jim, let me ask you this, okay.

You like him because he speaks truth. What truth is he speaking? Help me out with that, give me the incredible policies that Donald Trump has that he is stalwart on.

CALLER: Let me tell you. We can sit hear and listen to the three-second soundbites.

PAT: No. Just give me the truth that he's speaking that you were responding to.

CALLER: I am. I'm trying.

STU: Go for it.

PAT: The truth.

CALLER: We can listen to the three-second soundbites --

PAT: No. I know what we can do. But just tell me the truth that he's speaking.

CALLER: Of Republican candidates saying we're going to build a wall. We can sit there and listen to a three-second sound bite. And then they have to go the moderate route and they never mention it again. Donald Trump gets stuff done.

PAT: What stuff does he get done?

STU: Bankrupting casinos? What does he get done?

PAT: He built a few buildings.

STU: You know how he gets it done? Eminent domain. He steals people's properties, their private property, and gets giant casinos built. Congratulations for using the government that way.

CALLER: Okay. No one is going to like 100 percent of what --

PAT: I don't like 1 percent of what he does!

STU: All right. Can you hold on? I want more from Jim.

PAT: Hang on. That's unreal. I can't take it.

STU: I don't get it. We're up against a break. We need to come back, Jim. There has to be something there. There has to be a rational thought there somewhere.

PAT: He loves the fact that he's talking about building a wall and he'll keep talking about that. He's an amnesty guy!

STU: That's what I was saying. He hasn't evolved on that. That's his current policy.

RFK Jr.’s war on Big Pharma: Uncovering the truth behind rising autism and ADHD

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Our children are sick, and Big Pharma claims to be the cure, but is RFK Jr. closer to proving they are the disease?

For years, neurological disorders in our children have been on the rise. One in nine children in the U.S. has been diagnosed with ADHD, and between 2016 and 2022, more than one million kids were told they suffer from the disorder. Similarly, autism diagnoses have increased by 175 percent over the past decade. RFK Jr. pledged to investigate the rising rates of neurological disorders as Secretary of Health and Human Services, and this week, he announced a major initiative.

Earlier this week, RFK Jr. announced that the HHS has embarked on a massive testing and research effort to uncover the root causes of autism and the sharp spike in recent diagnoses. The HHS Secretary vowed that the results will be available by September of this year, leaving many skeptical about the study's rigor. Conversely, some speculate that the HHS may have unpublished studies revealing critical insights into these disorders, just waiting to see the light of day.

Glenn brought up a recent article by the Daily Wire referencing a New York Times piece in which experts questioned the legitimacy of ADHD diagnoses. Glenn agreed and suggested that people are just wired differently; they learn, work, and study differently, and the cookie-cutter, one-size-fits-all school system simply fails to accommodate everyone.

New York Times' ADHD Admission

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Earlier this week, the New York Times published an article that made a shocking admission: there are no concrete biological markers for ADHD. The clinical definition of ADHD is no longer supported by the evidence, and there are no physical, genetic, or chemical identifiers for the disorder, nor is there any real way to test for it. The paper also admitted that people diagnosed with ADHD would suddenly find that they no longer had any symptoms after a change of environment, profession, or field of study. This suggests that "ADHD" might simply be a matter of interests and skills, not a chronic brain sickness.

The most horrifying implication of this admission is that millions of people, including children, have been prescribed heavy mind-altering drugs for years for a disorder that lacks real evidence of its very existence. These drugs are serious business and include products such as Adderall, Ritalin, and Desoxyn. All of these drugs are considered "Schedule II," which is a drug classification that puts them on the same level as cocaine, PCP, and fentanyl. Notably, Desoxyn is chemically identical to methamphetamine, differing only in its production in regulated laboratories rather than illegal settings.

Worse yet, studies show that these medications, like Desoxyn, often provide no long-term benefits. Testing demonstrated that in the short term, there were some positive effects, but after 36 months, there was no discernible difference in symptoms between people who were medicated and those who were not. For decades, we have been giving our children hardcore drugs with no evidence of them working or even that the disorder exists.

RFK Jr's Autism Study

Alex Wong / Staff | Getty Images

Autism rates are on the rise, and RFK Jr. is going to get to the bottom of it. In the year 2000, approximately one in 150 children was diagnosed with autism, but only 20 years later, the rate had increased to one in 36. While some claim that this is simply due to more accurate testing, RFK Jr. doesn't buy it and is determined to discover what is the underlying cause. He is an outspoken critic of vaccines, asserting that the true scope of their side effects has been buried by greed and corruption to sell more vaccines.

RFK Jr. doesn't plan on stopping at vaccines. Similar to ADHD, RFK Jr. suspects other environmental factors could increase of autism or exacerbate symptoms. Factors like diet, water quality, air pollution, and parenting approaches are all under investigation. It's time to bring clarity to the neurological disorders that plague our nation, cut through the corruption, and reveal the healing truth.

Neurological Intervention

WIN MCNAMEE / Contributor | Getty Images

Big Pharma has been all too happy to sit back and watch as the rate of neurological disorders climbs, adding to the ever-growing list of permanent patients who are led to believe that their only choice is to shell out endless money for treatments, prescriptions, and doctor visits. Rather than encouraging lifestyle changes to improve our well-being, they push ongoing medication and costly treatments.

All RFK Jr. is doing is asking questions, and yet the backlash from the "experts" is so immense that one can't help but wonder what they could be hiding. Both Glenn and RFK Jr. have their suspicions of Big Pharma, and the upcoming HHS study might be one of the most important steps to making America healthy again.

Why do planes keep crashing?

STR / Contributor | Getty Images

Last week, two more serious air travel incidents occurred, adding to the mounting number of aviation disasters this year. Is flying safe?

Over the past year, the number of aviation disasters that have been blasted across the media has been steadily rising, with February alone having a half dozen incidents. It begs the question: Is air travel becoming more dangerous? Or has the media just increased its coverage of a "normal" amount of crashes?

If you look at the data, it suggests that flying has been—and remains—safe. The number of accidents and fatalities has been steadily decreasing year over year and remains a small percentage of total flights. In 2024, out of the approximate 16 million flights recorded by the Federal Aviation Administration in the U.S. every year, there were 1,150 accidents resulting in 304 fatalities, meaning that the average flight in America has a 0.007% chance of an accident. In addition, the National Transportation Safety Board records a decrease in both fatal and non-fatal aviation accidents when compared to 2024. By this time last year, there were already 399 crashes and accidents, while this year has only clocked in 271.

That being said, Sean Duffy, Trump's new transportation secretary, admitted that America's air traffic control system needs an overhaul. Duffy pointed toward dated air traffic control equipment, overregulation, and radical DEI as the culprits behind many recent aviation accidents.

But what do the crashes suggest? We've gathered details about the major aviation accidents this year so you can decide for yourself why planes keep crashing:

American Airlines Blackhawk collision over D.C.

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

In one of the deadliest U.S. aviation accidents in the last decade, an American Airlines plane collided with a Black Hawk helicopter over the Potomac River in Washington, D.C. The American Airlines flight was approaching Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport carrying 60 passengers and four crew when it collided midair with the Army helicopter, crewed by three, killing all 67 people involved.

The exact cause behind the mid-air collision is still under investigation, but it is believed that the Black Hawk was up too high and outside of its designated flight path. A report from the New York Times suggests that the air control tower at the Ronald Regan Washington Airport has suffered years of understaffing, which seems to be a result of DEI hiring practices. Investigators are piecing through the wreckage, and the exact cause of the crash is still unknown.

Medevac explosion in Philadelphia

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

On the night of Friday, March 31st, a medevac plane with six people on board crashed into a Philadelphia neighborhood, killing everyone on board, along with one man on the ground. The small jet departed from Northeast Philadelphia Airport at 6 pm, and according to the FAA, it crashed less than a minute later after reaching an elevation of 1,650 feet. The ensuing explosion cast a massive fireball into the sky and wounded 19 people on the ground, killing one.

The six people on board the jet were Mexican nationals, including a mother and her sick daughter who was receiving treatment from Shriners Children’s Hospital in northeast Philadelphia. As of now, there is no official cause of the crash, but much of the plane has been recovered, and the incident is being investigated.

Alaskan flight disappearance outside of Nome

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

At approximately 3:16 pm, on Thursday, February 6th, a small commuter plane working for Bering Air, carrying 10 passengers, took off from the town of Unalakeet, Alaska, destined for the nearby town of Nome. After a few hours, Nome lost contact with the small plane as weather conditions worsened. The following day, the Coast Guard discovered the remains of the plane, all 10 occupants were dead.

The wreckage of the aircraft, along with the remains of the passengers and crew, have been recovered and are under investigation. While there has been no official explanation given for the crash, the poor weather is believed to be a major contributing factor.

Small jet collision in Scottsdale

Gabe Ginsberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The pilot of a small jet died after the aircraft crashed into a larger plane in Scottsdale, Arizona, on Monday, February 10th. The owner of the jet that crashed was Vince Neil, the frontman of the heavy metal band Mötley Crüe, but Neil was not on board at the time of the accident. The jet had just landed in Scottsdale, where it appeared to veer out of control and smash into a parked Gulfstream at high speed. The plane was carrying four people: two pilots and two passengers. One of the pilots was killed, and the other three were seriously injured. There was only one person aboard the Gulfstream at the time of the crash, they suffered injuries but refused treatment.

It is believed that the landing gear failed upon landing, which caused the jet to skitter out of control and smash into the parked plane.

Delta crash in Toronto

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

On Monday, February 17th, a Delta aircraft flipped while landing and slid upside down across the runway while ablaze at Toronto Pearson International Airport. Fortunately, all 80 people aboard survived, and only three people suffered critical (though not life-threatening) injuries. First responders were quickly on the scene, extinguishing the fires and assisting the grateful survivors out of the wreckage.

The crash is believed to have been caused in part by the extreme weather in Toronto, which included a powerful crosswind and potential ice on the runway. It is also suspected that the landing gear failed to deploy properly, causing the plane to flip in the severe wind.

Small plane collision north of Tucson

aviation-images.com / Contributor | Getty Images

On Wednesday, February 19th, yet another small plane crash occurred in the skies above Arizona. Two small aircraft collided midair near Tusosn, Arizona at Marana Regional Airport. There were two people in each of the small planes, two of which from the same aircraft died, while the other two managed to walk away with little injury.

Marana Regional Airport is an uncontrolled field, which means there is no active air traffic control present on site. Instead, pilots rely on communication with each other through a "Common Traffic Advisory Frequency" (CTAF) to safely take off and land.

Hudson helicopter crash

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A helicopter tour out of New York City took a tragic turn on Thursday, April 10th, when the Bell 206 broke apart mid-flight and plunged into the Hudson River. All six people aboard perished in the crash, which included the pilot and a tourist family of five.

New York Helicopter Tours, the operator of the flight, announced it would cease operations following the accident. The decision comes amid scrutiny of the company’s safety record, which includes a prior emergency water landing and another incident where a helicopter was forced to land shortly after takeoff due to mechanical issues. The cause of the crash remains under investigation.

Upstate New York family tragedy

Billie Weiss/Boston Red Sox / Contributor | Getty Images

Days after the tragic Hudson crash, a small private plane carrying an NCAA athlete crashed in upstate New York, killing all six passengers. On Saturday, April 12, 2025, Karenna Groff, a former MIT soccer player and 2022 Woman of the Year, was aboard her father's Mitsubishi MU-2B with her parents, boyfriend, brother, and his partner when the plane went down in a muddy field in Copake, New York.

The aircraft was reportedly in good condition, and Michael Groff, Karenna's father, was an experienced pilot. While the official cause of the crash has not been determined, low visibility at the time of the incident is suspected to have been a contributing factor.

The recent string of aviation incidents underscores a troubling trend in air travel safety, raising urgent questions about the systems and policies governing the industry. While data suggests flying remains statistically safe, the alarming frequency of crashes, near misses, and systemic issues like outdated technology and questionable hiring practices cannot be ignored. BlazeTV's own Stu Burguiere did a deep dive into the recent crashes in the Blaze Originals documentary, Countdown to the Next Aviation Disaster, uncovering the truth behind the FAA’s shift toward DEI hiring and its impact on aviation safety. Featuring exclusive interviews with former air traffic controllers, lawyers, and Robert Poole—the inventor of TSA PreCheck—this documentary exposes how the Biden-Harris administration’s policies, under Pete Buttigieg’s leadership, have contributed to making air travel more dangerous than ever.

Did Democrats just betray fair elections? The SAVE Act controversy explained

DOMINIC GWINN / Contributor | Getty Images

One of President Trump’s key campaign promises, the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, faces fierce opposition from Democrats in the Senate.

The SAVE Act recently passed Congress for the second time and is now headed to the Senate. This voter security bill mandates proof of U.S. citizenship for all federal elections. It garnered unanimous Republican support in Congress but was backed by only four Democrats, consistent with last year’s Senate rejection of the bill.

Glenn has repeatedly emphasized the urgency of securing our elections, warning that without reform in the next four years, free and fair elections may become a thing of the past. However, the SAVE Act faces significant hurdles. Republicans lack the Senate votes to overcome a filibuster, meaning the bill’s fate hinges on bipartisan support—something Democrats have been reluctant to offer.

So, what exactly does the SAVE Act do? Why are Democrats opposing it? And how can you help ensure its passage?

What the SAVE Act Entails

Stefan Zaklin / Stringer | Getty Images

The SAVE Act is straightforward: it requires voters to provide proof of U.S. citizenship before casting a ballot in federal elections. This measure responds to reports of voter fraud, including allegations of noncitizens, such as illegal immigrants, voting in past presidential elections. Acceptable forms of identification include a REAL ID, U.S. passport, military ID, birth certificate, or other specified documents.

Additionally, the bill mandates that states remove noncitizens from voter rolls and lists of eligible voters. It also establishes criminal penalties for officials who fail to comply with these new guidelines.

Democrats’ Opposition to the SAVE Act

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Democrats have strongly criticized the SAVE Act, arguing it discriminates against women, transgender individuals, and minorities. They claim that people who have changed their names—such as women after marriage or transgender individuals—may struggle to vote if their current ID doesn’t match their birth certificate. However, the bill allows multiple forms of identification beyond birth certificates, meaning affected individuals can use updated IDs like a REAL ID or passport.

The argument that minorities are disproportionately harmed is slightly more substantiated. A recent survey showed that 93 percent of voting-age Black Americans, 94 percent of voting-age Hispanics, and 95 percent of voting-age Native Americans have valid photo IDs, compared to 97% of voting-age whites and 98 percent of voting-age Asians. However, in 2024, only about 58 percent of the voting-age population cast ballots—a trend that has been consistent for decades. There’s little evidence that Americans are prevented from voting due to a lack of ID. Instead of opposing the bill, a more constructive approach would be to assist the small percentage of Americans without IDs in obtaining proper documentation.

How You Can Make a Difference

Melissa Sue Gerrits / Stringer | Getty Images

The stakes couldn’t be higher—free and fair elections are the cornerstone of our democracy. Conservatives must rally to ensure the SAVE Act becomes law. Contact your Senators to express your support for the bill and highlight its importance in safeguarding electoral integrity. Grassroots efforts, such as sharing accurate information about the SAVE Act on social media or discussing it with friends and family, can amplify its visibility. Local advocacy groups may also offer opportunities to organize or participate in campaigns that pressure lawmakers to act. Every voice counts, and collective action could tip the scales in favor of this critical legislation.

Glenn unveils CIA’s grim Dire Wolf conspiracy

"Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."

-Ian Malcolm, Jurassic Park

The monstrous Dire Wolf, extinct for 10,000 years, has returned. This larger, ancient wolf species—popularized by HBO’s Game of Thrones—was resurrected by Colossal Laboratories, a Dallas-based bioscience company. Colossal utilized both preserved ancient Dire Wolf DNA and modern gray wolf DNA combined with some clever gene-crafting and a healthy pinch of hubris to create three approximations of the ancient canine.

While the wolves posed for a photoshoot alongside Game of Thrones props and its creator, Colossal’s broader plans remain unclear. However, what Glenn recently uncovered about the company is far more monstrous than the wolves will ever be. Glenn revealed that the CIA, through a nonprofit group known as In-Q-Tel, is funding Colossal's endeavors to bring back all sorts of extinct beasts. With the recently released JFK Files exposing the CIA’s unchecked power, Glenn warns of the dangerous potential behind this genetic manipulation—and the rogue agency’s possible motives.

Here are the top three most horrifying uses the CIA could have for this technology:

Dual-Use Technology

Xinhua News Agency / Contributor | Getty Images

Colossal and other biotech firms advertise a variety of "civilian" uses for bioengineered beasts, including research subjects, exotic zoos, and even climate restoration. As dubious as those uses are, Glenn revealed that the CIA could be cooking up something much worse. Gene-editing tools like CRISPR are inherently dual-purpose and easily adaptable for military use. As one of Colossal’s major investors, the CIA gains prime access to cutting-edge biotech, likely eyeing its potential for warfare.

Frankenstein’s Spy Lab

Like AI, one can only guess at the maximum capabilities of this gene-editing technology. On air, Glenn speculated about bioengineered resilient organisms, animals with tweaked senses designed for espionage or combat in areas inaccessible to drones or humans. Playing God to create new weapons of war sounds right up the CIA's alley.

Even worse than man-made mutant mutts, Glenn pointed out that these augmentations are by no means limited to animals. We could see (or rather, hear unverified rumors of) the rise of the next generation of super soldier projects. Human experimentation is not outside of the CIA's scope (think MKUltra), and genetically or chemically augmented humans have been a pipe dream for many a clandestine organization for decades. Is there anything more horrifying than an agency with as little oversight as the CIA in control of something as powerful and potentially devastating as gene-augmentation?

Eco-Warfare Unleashed

MARCELO MANERA / Contributor | Getty Images

Why attack a single target when you could attack an entire ecosystem instead?

Anyone who has had to deal with the destructive effects of fire ants knows how dangerous an invasive species can be to the human, plant, and animal inhabitants of any given region. Now imagine genetically engineered Dire Wolves or Woolly Mammoths unleashed by the CIA to cripple an enemy’s agriculture or environment. Such a weapon could inflict irreparable damage from a distance. Even the mere threat of eco-warfare might serve as a deterrent, though its unpredictability could reshape the world in ways we can’t control or repair.