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

O'Reilly Discusses 'Killing the Rising Sun' and Censored Japanese Atrocities

September 16, 2016
Lori Hanes

Writer

Bill O'Reilly, host of The O'Reilly Factor on Fox News, joined The Glenn Beck Program on Thursday to talk about his latest book in the Killing series, Killing the Rising Sun: How America Vanquished World War II Japan. The sixth book in the massively popular series sold 103,000 copies its very first day of release.

Read below or listen to the full segment for answers to these scintillating questions:

• Did Glenn take it easy on O'Reilly or make his life a living hell?

• Does O'Reilly have a brown, blue or black belt in karate?

• Did Glenn actually read Killing the Rising Sun?

• What horrific atrocities did the Japanese commit that compare to the Nazis and ISIS?

• Why was dropping the atomic bomb the compassionate way to end the war?

• Which living presidents would or would not have dropped the bomb, according to O'Reilly?

• Will O'Reilly's next book be Killing Harambe?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN: Let's bring, the one, the only, the legend, the man, Mr. Bill O'Reilly.

BILL: Beck, is that ABBA singing your little theme song there? I thought they were retired.

GLENN: No.

PAT: First thing out of his mouth, right?

GLENN: I mean, right out of the chute.

BILL: I was getting on my dancing machine on here.

GLENN: Look what happens. Right out of the chute.

So, Bill, let me ask you this.

BILL: Sure.

GLENN: I have been threatened by Sean Hannity using his karate on me.

BILL: Yeah.

GLENN: Do you have a brown belt or a blue belt or a black belt?

BILL: Only in intellectual prowess.

GLENN: Okay. So there's no threats coming your way?

BILL: Never, Beck. You know, you're my pal. Why would I do that?

GLENN: Well, let's not exaggerate.

(laughter)

GLENN: So Bill is off killing someone else. A new book. This one is Killing the Rising Sun. He's run out of people to kill. Now he's killing an entire nation of people.

PAT: Wow. Wow.

GLENN: The hatred never stops with Bill O'Reilly.

BILL: Yeah, I know.

GLENN: The book is Killing of the Rising Sun: How America Vanquished World War II Japan.

So, Bill, what's in here that, you know, makes it worth reading?

BILL: Well, first of all, when the book was released on Tuesday, the first day out, it sold 103,000 copies.

GLENN: A lot of stupid people. Why -- what's in it?

BILL: You said a lot of stupid people?

GLENN: I mean, why -- I mean, what's in there?

BILL: Come on.

GLENN: I mean, you can get -- you know, I know the power of Bill O'Reilly. He hypnotizes you. He looks --

BILL: Look, this is the sixth book in the series. If they weren't any good, believe me, 100,000 people wouldn't be buying them the first day.

Your question about what you learn is a good one because history has been kind of trampled by boring people who just recite things that they've been told.

GLENN: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

BILL: This one puts you on Iwo Jima, Saipan, and Hiroshima. You, the reader, will experience what happened there. And that's the formula that makes the Killing book successful, is that it's just not a resuscitation of facts. It's drama and real people.

And our research centers around Marines and soldiers and Naval people who wrote letters, not pinheads and, you know, who did all this research about -- you know, talking to this one and that one. We got down with the folks.

And one of the compelling stories that I know you'll enjoy once you get around to having someone read the book to you --

GLENN: No.

BILL: -- is how a woman survived Hiroshima by being three minutes late to her job. And that's the kind of stuff we have.

GLENN: Well, I read that story because I did read the book.

BILL: Did you really?

GLENN: No, I'm lying completely.

BILL: Not completely.

GLENN: Right. But I thought I'd give it a shot here for a second.

No, Bill, here's the thing that I really like your perspective on. What is -- why do we not know who the Japanese really were?

BILL: Because it's not politically correct --

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: But when did that --

BILL: -- for the public school education system to actually tell the urchins the truth about their country.

GLENN: So, but when did that -- when did that happen? Because World War II, you were about 70.

BILL: Yeah.

GLENN: So what --

(chuckling)

-- when did -- did we know during World War II that they were slaughtering 20 million Chinese, that they were, you know, having games of butchery? Did we know those things at the time?

BILL: Yeah, it was reported in the Chinese atrocities in the '30s, the major newspapers in America did report that the Japanese went in and murdered people, raped women, you know, en masse. That was recorded.

But then when World War II started, unlike the European theater where there was a lot of American reporters, there were very few in the Pacific theater. It was, number one, too dangerous to drop them on the islands. And, number two, MacArthur who was in charge of the Pacific theater as you know, didn't want the American public to see what kind of horror was unfolding on these islands because there were no prisoners on either side. Nobody took prisoners.

So they did not want that reported. And therefore, there was a news blackout. And to this day, people really don't know what happened and how Japan was defeated, which is why I wrote the book.

GLENN: Yeah. We've done an interview on the book before, and a much more serious one than this. But I can't take another 15 minutes of you being serious.

(chuckling)

But you and I did an interview. And I did an episode that's going to air soon on the show that I do called The Vault, where we're talking about World War II and the Japanese. And I don't know if you're aware of Unit 731. Bill, are you aware of that?

BILL: No, I am not.

GLENN: Okay. This is unbelievable. Unit 731, we're doing the same kinds of things that the nasty Nazi doctors were doing. They were -- they were doing live vivisections.

BILL: This is the Japanese?

GLENN: The Japanese were doing it.

BILL: Right. Right. Right.

GLENN: We excused all of them. And said, "Hey, in exchange for the research, we won't try you." I'm just puzzled by why we don't look at the communists and their atrocities. We don't look at the Japanese and their atrocities. But we focus all on the German and then we call our --

PAT: Us.

GLENN: Us saving the world from those nightmares, atrocities.

BILL: Look, the problem with the reportage after Japan was defeated is that there was censorship. There was censorship in the European theater. But the European theater was so in-your-face when they liberated the concentration camps and then Hitler was this evil icon -- they didn't have that in Japan. MacArthur was sympathetic to the Japanese people. He had a long history with his father of dealing with them.

So he didn't want to crush them like Patton did. He wanted to defeat them. And, by the way, MacArthur was against dropping the atom bomb because he wanted to invade and get the glory of the victory himself.

GLENN: And just to prove to you that I did read the book, you talk about him being in Manila at the time. You want to describe that?

BILL: Right. Well, MacArthur was not a battlefield commander, per se. He stayed behind the lines and was a glory hound. Not like -- it was totally the opposite for Patton, but MacArthur was a good tactician.

I mean, I think Nimitz was probably better. But the combination of the Army and Navy commanders, you know, put the Japanese on the defensive from the beginning.

However, the question is: Why were we leaning towards the Japanese? There's two reasons why the United States, Harry Truman, and MacArthur didn't punish them the way the Germans were punished.

Number one, the Japanese people pretty much cooperated. They didn't give us a hard time. They surrendered. And once it was over, it was over.

Number two, we did execute Tojo and a number of other war criminals, but there wasn't that hunt that there was for the SS. Because, again, they were so demonized -- the concentration camps were so overwhelmingly emotional, that the authorities had to do that. And Patton got in trouble because he didn't really want to go in and take apart the German society.

But in Japan, MacArthur got away with pretty much leaving the status quo. Hirohito actually kept his job as emperor. They didn't remove him. He didn't have any power, but they didn't want any trouble with the Japanese. They wanted them to fall into line.

GLENN: Yeah. And they actually thought -- because the peasants were so convinced that they were winning, that after that last bomb, they actually thought that there was a chance that the peasants would take over the military and continue the war. We didn't know until the very last minute.

BILL: Well, they weren't going to surrender. There's no doubt about that. The Japanese were not going to surrender. And if anybody thinks they were, then you're just a fool. Because even after Hiroshima, they didn't surrender. And they were arming children, women --

GLENN: Right. Yeah, last man --

BILL: Even though Tokyo was destroyed literally by conventional bombing, that still didn't break the Japanese spirit. There still wasn't a coup d'etat against Hirohito. There was an attempt, but it was fought back.

GLENN: Do you think this was -- do you think history is against America or against atomic weapons or both? Because the firebombing -- hang on just a second.

BILL: Go ahead.

GLENN: The firebombing in Tokyo --

PAT: Killed more people.

GLENN: Killed many more people.

BILL: Yeah.

GLENN: And a group of homeless the size of Chicago came out of that city. A hundred twenty-five miles was destroyed by firebombing, and yet you don't hear that.

BILL: No. Because the other bomb is such a specter.

GLENN: Right.

PAT: Uh-huh.

BILL: That people lock into that. And, by the way, when you're hearing North Korea testing and Iranian nukes, the nuclear weapons we have today are 100,000 times more powerful than the atom bomb.

So when you read Killing the Rising Sun and you're imagining the horror that took place there, I mean, it's unspeakable what would happen now if they ever drop these things.

But you basically have -- the reason why I wrote this book was because of Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Obama's former pastor, when he said after 9/11, justifying the attack, that America's chickens have come home to roost because we dropped the bombs on Japan.

That so offended me. I was so appalled, I said, "You know what, some day I'm going to write a book and correct the record on this." And that's how that book got on the board.

GLENN: I will tell you, Bill, it is a fantastic book. And what you've done with the presidents afterwards -- you've gone back to the living presidents. And Bill Clinton wouldn't participate and neither would Barack Obama. But the other ones would participate.

BILL: Right.

GLENN: And you asked them, "Would you have done it?" And you don't believe that Bill Clinton answered that because he doesn't want to have to answer to the left. Doesn't want controversy now.

BILL: Right. You know, I asked five living presidents to give me a personal letter whether they would have supported Truman and dropped the bomb. The two Bushes and Jimmy Carter did. And they all said they would have dropped the atom bomb. Obama did not. Just speculation, just on my part, just speculation, I just don't think he would have dropped it.

GLENN: No.

PAT: I don't either.

GLENN: I don't either.

JEFFY: No way.

PAT: Do you think Bill Clinton would have?

BILL: Yes. But I didn't -- you absolutely hit it. Clinton didn't want to, you know, raise any controversy on the left by saying that. And so he passed.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: You know, it is -- and you point this out in the book -- it was the compassionate thing to do. Millions would have died on both sides. Millions.

BILL: Yes. No doubt.

PAT: Didn't they estimate 4 million Japanese -- four million Japanese were saved by a non-invasion?

BILL: Yeah. Because they were -- you have to understand the mindset. It was a lot like the Nazi mindset.

GLENN: More like ISIS, I think.

BILL: Well, it's the same thing. I always say ISIS is the Hitler-lite. I mean, that's what they are. There's no difference between the Third Reich and the SS and all that and ISIS. There's no difference.

But the mindset is, look, we're willing to give our life for the emperor, Hirohito, living god. And wait until you see this guy. When you read the book, what Hirohito is really like -- and this is the living god? I mean, it's worse than Henry VIII, founding a religion in England. I mean, come on.

GLENN: No. It's pretty nuts.

STU: Bill, you bring up the Nazi side of this. And, you know, Hitler thought, as we're losing -- as we're retreating, I want the bridges blown up. I want all of our infrastructure destroyed so the enemy doesn't get a hold of it.

And there were people there, like Albert Speer, who said, "Hey, wait a minute I'm not going to do that," and defied his orders at the last minute, even with all that dedication. Were there people like that on the Japanese side?

BILL: Not that we know of. Because it was -- the Japanese secret police were more effective than the Gestapo. And if there were any dissenters, they were beheaded immediately.

GLENN: It was bad.

BILL: You know, that society was so tight and so closed.

But one of the interesting parts about Killing the Rising Sun is the reason that FDR fast-tracked the atom bomb research in New Mexico was because Hitler was doing it. And they feared -- they being the American authorities, they feared the Third Reich would get this bomb. And, of course, if they had gotten it, they would have used it. And that's why Hitler was allowed to hang on by his generals. Because his generals knew that they had these super weapons in development. And that would turn the thing around, which is why they fought harder than they might have.

But the Japanese were a different story. The Japanese were so fanatical and so crazy that they were going to die for the emperor because that's their code, Bushido, you know, you have to die for the emperor. And they were. And that includes little kids, women, everybody.

GLENN: Bill, always good to have you on. And, well, no, it's not. But this time, it was good to have you on. And I appreciate it.

BILL: You know, I really appreciate you having me on your fine program, and I want you to do me one favor. Will you do one favor?

GLENN: Thanks, brother. I'll try.

BILL: All right. Say hello to ABBA for me. I really am a big fan.

GLENN: All right. Bill O'Reilly.

STU: So you actually did read the book this time?

GLENN: Not one word of it. Not one word. And I didn't want to break my record of Bill O'Reilly books at this point.

PAT: It sounds great. It sounds great.

GLENN: Oh, it is. It is. I've read enough of it. And he was on with me. We're doing a deal on The Vault, where he's a guest on The Vault. And we're talking about this. And I have artifacts that he had never seen. We took him out. We have 8,000 artifacts, historic artifacts in The Vault. And next week is the premiere episode. Next Wednesday on TheBlaze TV.

And in an upcoming episode, we talk about this. And when you hear who the Japanese were -- you've never heard these stories before.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: You've never heard them before. And there's -- if you knew them, there would be no -- not a second of thought about, should we have dropped the bomb? And one reason -- he wrote this book. The other reason why -- it's the same reason I'm doing, like, The Vault and His Story. I'm doing these two shows because your kids are going to go into class, and they're going to have to -- they'll be asked this question. The only thing on Common Core is about the United States dropping the bomb. That's all they included in the Common Core tests for World War II.

PAT: And no context.

GLENN: No context at all.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Your kids have to have context. And they will not find it in schoolbooks. So Bill O'Reilly's book and also The Vault that's on Wednesdays on TheBlaze TV.

PAT: And get this one. Because Bill is running out of dead people to kill. So...

GLENN: Oh, no. His next thing -- I don't know. Who is he going to be killing next? What country? What continent?

JEFFY: Milky Way.

PAT: He's killed all the people, now he's killing entire countries. It will have to be the planet.

GLENN: The death ray -- the death star of books.

STU: I believe he's going to be killing Harambe. That is the next book.

JEFFY: Oh, nice.

GLENN: All of a sudden we're all going to say, "I feel like there were millions of voices that just cried out." Yeah, Bill O'Reilly just published another book.

Featured Image:

Top THREE reasons we NEED the Panama Canal

Justin Sullivan / Staff | Getty Images

Is Trump seriously planning a military conquest of the Panama Canal?

In the weeks leading up to the inauguration, Donald Trump launched the Panama Canal into the national spotlight. The canal is one of the most important passages in the world, and its continued operation has been critical for both the U.S. military and economy since its construction.

Since America relinquished sovereignty of the canal, China has asserted its authority in the region. The Chinese Communist Party has been growing its influence in Panama and neighboring Latin American countries, convincing them to join their "Belt and Road Initiative," an effort to poise China as the main economic power in developing nations across the world. Panama in particular is quickly becoming a Chinese puppet state. There are currently over 200,000 Chinese living in Panama, a Chinese company runs two of the canal's five major ports, and another Chinese company provides telecommunication service for a large portion of the canal. The government of Panama has even gone as far as cutting diplomatic ties with Taiwan.

It's clear that the Panama Canal is under serious threat of falling into Chinese hands, but President Trump doesn't intend to let them move in. Here are the top three reasons we need the Panama Canal:

1. The canal was built by the U.S.

Hulton Archive / Stringer | Getty Images

Without the United States, neither Panama nor the Panama Canal would exist. In 1903, after Colombia refused to allow the U.S. to build a canal across the isthmus of Panama, President Teddy Roosevelt devised a controversial plan. He supported a Panamanian independence movement, which swiftly overthrew the local Colombian government. Meanwhile, he stationed a U.S. warship off the coast, preventing Colombia from sending military forces to retake Panama.

The moment Panama declared its independence, the U.S. recognized it and struck a deal with the new government: the U.S. would control the Canal Zone, while Panama would receive $10 million and an annual payment of $250,000. Construction of the canal took over a decade, cost $375 million, and resulted in thousands of American casualties, making it the most expensive U.S. construction project of its time.

Fast forward to 1964 when tensions between the U.S. and Panama over the canal erupted into a riot. President Lyndon B. Johnson decided it was time to transfer control of the canal to Panama. However, this proved more complicated than expected. In 1968, General Omar Torrijos, a known ally of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, seized control of Panama in a coup. Negotiations over the Canal stalled, as many Americans opposed giving such an important asset to a controversial figure. It wasn’t until 1999, following the deployment of 27,000 U.S. troops to facilitate yet another change in power, that the Canal was officially handed over to Panama.

2. The canal is vital for the U.S. economy

IVAN PISARENKO / Contributor | Getty Images

The U.S. relies heavily on the Panama Canal for commercial shipping. Between 13 and 14 thousand ships use the Panama Canal every year, which is roughly 40 percent of the global cargo ship traffic. Additionally, 72 percent of ships traversing the canal are either heading toward or leaving a U.S. port.

The time ships save using the Panama Canal reduces shipping costs massively. For example, when the canal first opened in 1922, it was estimated that a ship’s journey from Oregon to the UK, was shortened by 42 percent, reducing costs by 31 percent. If the Panama Canal was blocked or destroyed, or if American merchant vessels were denied passage, the effects on the U.S. economy would be tremendous.

3. The canal is a key defense point for the U.S. military

Historical / Contributor | Getty Images

Similarly, the canal is key to the U.S. military and national security. The canal shaves off approximately 8,000 miles of the voyage between the Pacific and the Atlantic. If U.S. Navy ships were denied access in a time of crisis, the extra time required to bypass the canal would be disastrous. Conversely, if the U.S. can keep the Panama Canal from being used by foreign aggressors, it would provide a massive advantage in future conflicts.

A foreign enemy could easily exploit the canal's current vulnerability. This was proven in 2021 when a cargo ship accidentally blocked the Suez Canal for a week, paralyzing global trade. Imagine China intentionally sabotaging the Panama Canal, considering it controls ports on both ends, owns a bridge that spans the Canal, provides its telecom services, and has the second-largest fleet of ships using the route.

TOP 5 takeaways from JD Vance's 'Face the Nation' interview

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

After an eventful first week in office, JD Vance wrapped the week up with a bang of an interview on "Face the Nation."

Last weekend, Vice President Vance joined "Face the Nation" host Margaret Brennan, who drilled Vance on everything from the economy to immigration. Vance clapped back with polite yet cutting responses, and he defended Trump against some of her more accusatory queries.

If there was any lingering doubt that JD Vance wasn't vice presidential (or presidential) material, they have just been blown away. Here are the major takeaways from his electricinterview on Sunday:

1. J.D. Vance defends Trump's cabinet picks

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Brennan opened the interview with a barrage of questions that brought up concerns surrounding some of Trump's cabinet picks, specifically Pete Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard.

Brennan began by questioning how effective Pete Hegseth could be as Secretary of Defence, given that he was confirmed with a tie in the Senate that VP Vance broke. Vance responded with a quick breakdown of all of the issues the military is currently facing. Vance argued that Hegseth's unpopularity in the Senate results from his being a disruptor.

Brennan also attacked Tulsi Gabbard, calling her unfit for the title of "Director of National Intelligence." Vance defended Gabbard, citing her formidable resume and strong character. Vance also discussed the corruption of our intelligence services, which out-of-control bureaucrats have weaponized against the interests of the American people. He expressed his belief that Gabbard would be the right person to reign in the corruption and return the National Intelligence Service to its intended purpose.

2. J.D. Vance explains how Trump's economic policies will lower consumer prices

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan pushed Vance on the economy, specifically questioning when prices for consumer goods would begin to fall. Vance explained that within the plethora of executive orders issued by Trump during his first week in office, many were aimed at bringing more jobs back into America, which will raise wages and lower prices. Other orders will boost energy production, which will reduce energy costs and decrease the costs of goods.

3. J.D. Vance sheds light on needed FEMA reforms

ROBYN BECK / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan drilled Vance on President Trump's proposed FEMA reforms, specifically regarding Trump's suggestion to send states a percentage of federal disaster relief funds so that they can quickly distribute aid rather than wait on federal action. While Brennen argued that FEMA has specialists and resources that states would not have access to, leaving people without aid, Vance argued that recent disasters, like Hurricane Helene, have proven that FEMA's current bureaucratic red tape deprived Americans of immediate aid when they needed it most.

4. J.D. Vance defends Trump's mass deportations

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

Vance defended Trump's decision to allow ICE to conduct raids into churches and schools against Brennen's criticisms, arguing that law enforcement should remove a dangerous criminal from a school or church, regardless of their immigration status. He also advocated for Trump's proposed changes to birthright citizenship to prevent illegal immigrants from abusing the constitutional amendment by having "anchor babies" on U.S. soil.

Vance also took a hard stance supporting Trump suspension of admitting Afghan refugees. Brennan argued that Afghan refugees were going through a thorough vetting process and were now being abandoned by the U.S. However, Vance cited the foiled terrorist attack in Oklahoma City during Trump's 2024 campaign that was orchestrated by an Afghan refugee, who was allegedly vetted by federal agents. The vetting process is clearly flawed, and it was a prudent decision to halt the admission of these refugees until further notice.

5. J.D. Vance insists that Trump will still reign in Big Tech

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

To wrap up the interview, Brennan questioned the Trump administration's stance on Big Tech given the attendance of the industry's biggest names at Trump's inauguration, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Apple CEO Tim Cook, and TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew. Vance assured Brennan that Trump is still resolved to curb the power and influence of Big Tech.

Top THREE reasons the U.S. NEEDS Greenland

EMIL STACH / Contributor | Getty Images

Are Trump's repeated promises to claim Greenland for the U.S. just belligerent imperialism or a deft move to secure the future of America?

During his patriotic inaugural address, President Trump reiterated his campaign promise to expand American territories, including securing U.S. control over Greenland. This is not a new idea despite what the mainstream media may claim.

The idea of buying Greenland was originally introduced by progressive hero Woodrow Wilson in 1917 as an attempt to secure the homeland as America was gearing up to enter the First World War. The second attempt came after World War II when President Truman tried to buy the island from Denmark in another attempt to shore up national security, this time against the Soviets. Since then, Trump floated the idea in 2019, which was met with much the same ridicule as now.

The truth is that the acquisition of Greenland represents far more than just an outlet for repressed imperialist desires. It would be one of America's best investments in a long time, which is why we've been eyeballing it for so long. Here are three reasons the U.S. needs Greenland:

Strategic Military Position

THOMAS TRAASDAHL / Contributor | Getty Images

For the majority of the 20th century, Europe was the region from which a foreign attack on American soil could be launched: the Germans for the first half of the century, and the Russians for the second half. On both occasions, Greenland stood between our foreign enemies and the United States.

After the World War II, America was the official military defender of Greenland, per an agreement with Denmark. Under this agreement, the U.S. built Pituffik Air Force Base, a remote base 750 miles north of the Arctic Circle. Due to its location, approximately halfway between D.C. and Moscow, the Pentagon still views Pituffik as a vital component of America's nuclear defense.

The U.S. also built a secret base within the ice cap known as Camp Century. Camp Century was part scientific outpost, part nuclear-tipped ballistic missile silo built in the ice to withstand a direct atomic strike. The nearly two miles of icy tunnels were powered by a nuclear reactor and were designed to survive a nuclear first strike, and return fire. Although abandoned in 1967, Camp Century still symbolizes the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security.

Untapped Resources

OLIVIER MORIN / Contributor | Getty Images

While Greenland's population is a mere 56,000, the island has a total landmass nearly three times the size of Texas. According to a 2009 geological assessment, a whopping 30 percent of the Earth's undiscovered natural gas, and 13 percent of its undiscovered oil is locked away beneath Greenland's icy ground. There are also untapped deposits of valuable rare earth metals including copper, graphite, and lithium.

Neither Greenland nor Denmark have any real plans to tap into this immense wealth trapped beneath the ice, but it could prove crucial for ending the West's dependency on China. China has the global market cornered on rare earth minerals- including America. We acquire 72 percent of our rare earth mineral imports from China, making us entirely dependent on them for the manufacturing of many essential goods. Tapping Greenland's natural resources would help free America, and the West, from China's yolk.

Polar Silk Road

mark peterson / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2018 China launched an ambitious project that aimed to cut the travel time of cargo vessels between its ports and European markets in half. China, in collaboration with Russia, plans on developing new shipping routes through the Arctic Ocean. This bold new strategy, dubbed the "Polar Silk Road," has been made possible thanks to new tech, including a fleet of Russian, nuclear-powered icebreakers, the latest of which is capable of breaking through nearly 10 feet of ice.

With clear waterways from eastern China and Northern Europe, it won't be long before the first cargo ships brave the frigid sea and China looks to the next leg of the journey: the Northwest Passage. The Northwest Passage is the area of sea between Canada and the North Pole that would be an optimal shipping route between America's East Coast and Asia if it wasn't frozen over most of the year. But with new technology, we may be able to overcome the challenges of the ice and open the passage to commercial traffic, and Greenland is positioned directly on the passage's easternmost mouth.

Greenland would quickly become a key location along the Northwestern Passage, acting as a sentinel of the east, with the ability to control traffic through the trade route. If China or Russia were to take control of Greenland, they would dominate the Northwestern Passage, along with the rest of the new northern trade routes.

Is Romania squashing its own 'Trump' candidate?

DANIEL MIHAILESCU / Contributor | Getty Images

This week the streets of Bucharest, the capital of Romania, erupted in protest after the Constitutional Courts annulled the recent first round of the presidential election after the "far-right" candidate won.

The government is lying to you. If you have been listening to Glenn for a long time you already know that, and you also know that if you try to call attention to the lies you get labeled a conspiracy theorist or "far-right." This is not only true in America but across the world. Politicians cheat, steal, and grab power, then lie about all of it. This is the root of countless issues across every government on the planet, and recently Romania has become the latest example of this unfortunate phenomenon.

But what is really happening in Romania? Was this an actual attempt to stamp out someone who would shed light on lies and corruption? Or did the Romanian government put a stop to a genuine bad actor?

The Election

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

On December 6th, 2024, the Romanian Constitutional Court canceled the second round of the presidential election amid claims of Russian interference. The second round of the election would have seen right-wing candidate, Calin Georgescu face off against pro-European centrist Elena Lasconi.

The trouble surrounds Georgescu, who stands accused of using Russian aid to run an unprecedented social media campaign that helped him win an election pollsters claimed he stood no chance of winning. Georgescu's rapid rise in popularity on social media does raise some eyebrows, and to add to the suspicion he declared he had zero campaign spending. On the other hand, Georgescu's supporters claim that his quick rise to stardom and underdog victory is due to the growing resentment for the ever-out-of-touch political elite.

Georgescu's Platform

Andrei Pungovschi / Stringer | Getty Images

Georgescu rose to prominence on a platform many of his detractors have labeled "far-right," "pro-Russian," and "populist" (sound familiar?). His positions include supporting Romanian farmers, increasing Romanian self-reliance, and increasing local energy production. Georgescu has been lauded for his message of hope and vision for the future and his dedication to truth, freedom, and sovereignty.

Georgescu is also a vocal Christian and a supporter of the Romanian Orthodox Church. He has questioned the climate change and COVID-19 narrative as well as NATO and the war in Ukraine, which is how he earned his "Pro-Russian" monicker. Georgescu promised to respect and honor its obligations to the EU and NATO, but only to the extent that they respect Romania and its interests.

What Happens Next?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

After Georgescu's unexpected victory, the Romanian Constitutional Courts annulled the election's first round and scheduled it to restart on May 4th. As of now, it is unclear whether Georgescu will be allowed to participate in the new election. This act by the Constitutional Courts triggered mass protests in the capital, Bucharest, and has caused many Romainians to question the state of democracy within their country.

Many of the protesters are calling what happened a coup and are demanding the election be allowed to continue to the second round. They are also calling for the resignation of current President Klaus Iohannis, who has maintained power thanks to the incomplete elections. Georgescu has officially challenged the court's decision and even made a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, but it is unclear if his appeal will make any difference.