Is There a Moral Way to Kill a Zombie?

November 14, 2016

Writer

The latest season of The Walking Dead has dominated watercooler talk for weeks. People just can't seem to make peace with the new level of violence in the show. The early seasons, it seems, got rid of those pesky zombies in just the right way.

"It wasn't inhumane. They were just killing them quickly. They weren't torturing or playing games with them or anything like that. They were just killing them," he said.

So if Glenn can't stomach The Walking Dead any longer, just what is he watching?

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

• Is hacksawing a zombie a responsible way to kill?

• What does Stu think about the new movie Arrival?

• What does Glenn call the greatest war movie he's ever seen?

• How many times has Glenn seen Schindler's List?

• Are there spoilers below?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN: Andrew Hertzog says that The Walking Dead has officially jumped the shark.

PAT: Well, is he talking about the first episode? Because he's right about that. That was out of control. That was out of control.

JEFFY: No.

PAT: That was ugly. And -- but now Jeffy's told me last night's was out of control as well.

JEFFY: Well, I mean, it was. Last night was way out of control.

PAT: As much or more than the first one?

STU: Wait. So the apocalyptic zombie series was a little too violent for your tastes?

PAT: Well, seriously --

GLENN: Oh, no, Stu. It got to the point I stopped watching it.

PAT: It's gotten ridiculous.

GLENN: Yeah, it's like crazy. It's man's inhumanity to man now.

JEFFY: We're definitely at that now.

PAT: So is this worse than the opening episode?

JEFFY: Well, violence-wise, no.

PAT: Okay.

GLENN: Inhumanity?

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: This Negan thing is ugly.

GLENN: Ugly.

JEFFY: And our love of Rick --

PAT: Yeah.

JEFFY: I mean, I haven't -- I haven't recorded my talking Walking Dead podcast yet. You'll be able to hear that later this afternoon on TheBlaze Radio.

PAT: Don't ruin it for people.

JEFFY: But this whole -- the Rick that we love --

PAT: Uh-huh.

JEFFY: -- needs to come back. Because the -- the Rick that Negan has developed --

PAT: Uh-huh. Not good.

JEFFY: Is bad. Is bad. Bad.

STU: There's not much you can give away obviously. I'm just surprised --

JEFFY: You don't want to. You don't want to on this show.

STU: I can understand not liking a certain amount of violence in your show. I get that. But I'm surprised that that's some line for you guys. This is a series.

GLENN: Because it was different. It was different because there are zombies. So it wasn't -- it was almost like it wasn't real.

PAT: It wasn't real.

GLENN: Yeah. But it wasn't -- you know -- and it wasn't inhumane. They were just killing them quickly. They weren't torturing or playing games with them or anything like that. They were just killing them. Not all of them.

PAT: This has definitely changed.

GLENN: Yeah. And now it's man's inhumanity to man. So it's different. And I don't like that. I don't like watching, you know, men do things to other people for sport, for entertainment. I just don't like it. It bothers me.

Did you see -- did anybody see The Arrival this weekend?

STU: I did. I did.

PAT: No.

GLENN: And what did you think?

STU: I thought it was good. You know, I thought it was good. I did not see it -- it's in the mid-90s in Rotten Tomatoes, which I did not see it as that.

GLENN: I think it's the best alien movie -- the best -- the most tense alien movie I've seen in a long time without it being, you know, something is falling from the ceiling. You know, without it being alien.

STU: You said it the most tense movie that really did not --

GLENN: I thought it was a great sci-fi movie, one I haven't seen like it ever before. And I really loved it.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: The ending -- it's just very cerebral. It's one that you'll walk out of going, "Okay. I think I get it. I'm not sure if I get it."

STU: That's kind of how -- they're supposedly -- they keep promoting it as having a big twist ending.

GLENN: Oh, stop it.

STU: I didn't think it did really.

GLENN: Because you were walking in, thinking it's going to have a twist.

STU: Yeah, that always ruins it.

Again, why I always talk about spoiler alerts and why I will be very careful here as I speak about this. Because it does ruin your experience. If you go in there expecting something, then it comes and it's not a big deal. And that might have been what happened to me. I didn't think it was that great, to be perfectly honest. I thought it was well done. It was interesting. It was one of those movies, I was like, wow, I'm going to figure out something big coming up soon. Where is it? Where is it? And then, oh, okay. See you later. Like, it was just like kind of a letdown, I felt like. But it was well done. It was well done.

GLENN: Yeah, it was really well done.

STU: Yeah. She's great.

GLENN: Mini spoiler here. Turn down the radio, just a mini spoiler --

STU: Oh, gee, come on, why can't you --

GLENN: No, no. It's not going to --

PAT: Don't. Don't.

STU: Why?

GLENN: Turn the radio down. Turn your headphone --

PAT: We can't turn the radio down.

STU: We work with you.

GLENN: Jeez, for the love of Pete.

PAT: Don't do it. Don't.

JEFFY: Go ahead. Stop it. It's not going to ruin anything.

GLENN: You guys are weak and pathetic. Pathetic.

JEFFY: It's not going to ruin anything.

STU: I mean, I wouldn't -- knowing -- you know, this is in retrospect, but knowing what I know about the movie, I don't know that I would go to it.

GLENN: Oh, I would.

STU: It's certainly not worth a second viewing for me.

GLENN: Oh, I would like to see it again.

JEFFY: Oh, so, Glenn, give us the spoiler. Oh, my gosh.

GLENN: No, I'm not going to -- it's not a spoiler. It's not a spoiler. It's really not a spoiler. You wouldn't understand it until after it happened anyway. But I'm not going to give it. I'm not going to give it.

STU: Good.

GLENN: All right. So anybody see -- anybody see the Mel Gibson movie? Rex Reed just said it's the best war movie since Saving Private Ryan.

STU: Spoiler alert it's a war movie. Oh, come on.

GLENN: I 100 percent agree.

JEFFY: What did People magazine give it?

GLENN: I think that is just an outrageously great show -- or, movie.

JEFFY: Movie.

GLENN: Best war movie I've seen.

STU: Wow.

GLENN: Really, really --

STU: There's been some good ones.

PAT: Is it better than like 13 Hours and American Sniper?

GLENN: Yes. Yes. It's really good. Really good.

PAT: Really? Because I thought American Sniper was tremendous. And 13 Hours. Both of those --

GLENN: It is. They both are very, very good.

PAT: And you like this better?

GLENN: This one -- yeah, I do. I like this better because I've -- I've just never seen a war movie like this. I've never seen one like this. Never seen the heroism. I mean, American Sniper, you know, you're looking at a hero. And, you know -- you know, the lone survivor. You're looking at a hero, not like this. Nothing like this. I've never seen a hero movie like this before. And this is true.

JEFFY: And they replicate the horrors of war really well.

GLENN: Like you won't believe.

JEFFY: And it's really, really good. But you don't want to watch The Walking Dead because it's too violent?

GLENN: It's like -- for instance, I have no problem watching Schindler's List once. I don't need to see that for entertainment. I wanted to see that for history's sake. But I don't need to see that for entertainment. So I don't want to watch a movie about Mengele. Hey, let's watch a show about Mengele and how creepy and icky he was. No. No, thank you. No, uh-uh. Not for entertainment purposes, no.

Nobody else has that line? Just me?

STU: Well, I think the line is sensible, that you don't watch hard-core violence so television. I mean, if that's your thing, that's your thing.

GLENN: No. It's not even hard-core violence. It's really not hard-core violence. Like, for instance, I took Raphe to Hacksaw Ridge. I saw it in advance. There's no swear words in it. It's a great message. The only thing -- there's no sex. There's no swear words. There's nothing.

The only thing in this movie is violence. But it is real violence. It's not gratuitous. It's a real depiction of war. And my son sat in the seat next to me. And, you know, he'll watch anything. And he's like Jeffy. He's just dead inside when it comes to playing video games and zombie stuff. The Walking Dead, not the man's inhumanity to man, but some of The Walking Dead wouldn't faze him. This fazed him. And I was glad to see it.

And he was like -- he reeled back a couple of times, like, "Whoa. Whoa. Whoa, Dad." I'm like, yeah, intense.

And he said, "This is what it's like?" And I'm like, "Yep, that's what war is like." It takes all the fun and games out of war.

STU: Which is positive.

GLENN: Very positive. Very positive.

STU: You do realize that.

So you're just saying you like -- you like when it's real and not when it's fake.

GLENN: Not that I want to watch snuff films, no.

STU: For example -- well, I mean, I -- to me, I would have almost, I think, the opposite line. Like, if it's just a -- you know, it's -- it's -- like I'll watch horror movies. I'll watch, you know --

GLENN: Well, that's what I looked at for like, for instance, The Walking Dead. But it wasn't hacksawing people, just regular people. It was hacksawing the zombies. And so I didn't have so much of a problem because it's really inhumane.

JEFFY: And they're telling us how to survive.

GLENN: I don't know. It's a weird line. I can watch an alien movie. And you can blow all the aliens up, and that's fine. Once you cross over into people and they're just regular people, no, I don't want to see that. I don't want to see that.

STU: Unless it really happened.

JEFFY: Right.

STU: Unless those people actually went through those real things, then you want to see it.

GLENN: Or unless it's like West World, which I'm thoroughly enjoying.

STU: Oh, I gave up on it. It's boring.

JEFFY: I watched the first two, and I'm almost with you.

GLENN: Oh, I don't think so.

JEFFY: After the second episode, I'm almost with you.

GLENN: Maybe that's why I like it, because there's so much going on. And you want -- at least for me, I want to know what the heck is happening with the park. This is -- it's like Jurassic Park on steroids, except the people are the fakes. And you can go there and you can vacation and you can be whatever you want.

JEFFY: I love the idea of it.

GLENN: Oh, it's fantastic. And you can be a good guy, you can be a bad guy. You can be whatever you want. And you can do whatever you want because the people can't kill you, but you can kill them.

And so some people go with their families, and they have a nice little outing in the old wild west. Blah, blah. But the farther you get away from the town, the more violent and risky it becomes.

And they can't kill you, but you can kill them. And it's pretty amazing. Because there's -- because Anthony Hopkins plays this role that is just really good.

JEFFY: Yeah.

STU: The concept is really interesting. The execution to me has been --

GLENN: I like it.

STU: -- dull. I mean, that's my own personal opinion. But there's a lot -- I mean, there's a lot of good stuff out there to watch. You can lose yourself in the world of entertainment, which I've had to do many times over the past year and half or so.

GLENN: Me too. I've watched more television -- I didn't watch television up until last year. I had no connection to television at all until last year. Now, I'm like, I can't turn it off.

Featured Image: Image from season 7 of The Walking Dead.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Antifa isn’t “leaderless” — It’s an organized machine of violence

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Parts of America, like Portland and Chicago, now resemble occupied territory. Progressive city governments have surrendered control to street militias, leaving citizens, journalists, and even federal officers to face violent anarchists without protection.

Take Portland, where Antifa has terrorized the city for more than 100 consecutive nights. Federal officers trying to keep order face nightly assaults while local officials do nothing. Independent journalists, such as Nick Sortor, have even been arrested for documenting the chaos. Sortor and Blaze News reporter Julio Rosas later testified at the White House about Antifa’s violence — testimony that corporate media outlets buried.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

Chicago offers the same grim picture. Federal agents have been stalked, ambushed, and denied backup from local police while under siege from mobs. Calls for help went unanswered, putting lives in danger. This is more than disorder; it is open defiance of federal authority and a violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

A history of violence

For years, the legacy media and left-wing think tanks have portrayed Antifa as “decentralized” and “leaderless.” The opposite is true. Antifa is organized, disciplined, and well-funded. Groups like Rose City Antifa in Oregon, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club in Texas, and Jane’s Revenge operate as coordinated street militias. Legal fronts such as the National Lawyers Guild provide protection, while crowdfunding networks and international supporters funnel money directly to the movement.

The claim that Antifa lacks structure is a convenient myth — one that’s cost Americans dearly.

History reminds us what happens when mobs go unchecked. The French Revolution, Weimar Germany, Mao’s Red Guards — every one began with chaos on the streets. But it wasn’t random. Today’s radicals follow the same playbook: Exploit disorder, intimidate opponents, and seize moral power while the state looks away.

Dismember the dragon

The Trump administration’s decision to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization was long overdue. The label finally acknowledged what citizens already knew: Antifa functions as a militant enterprise, recruiting and radicalizing youth for coordinated violence nationwide.

But naming the threat isn’t enough. The movement’s financiers, organizers, and enablers must also face justice. Every dollar that funds Antifa’s destruction should be traced, seized, and exposed.

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

This fight transcends party lines. It’s not about left versus right; it’s about civilization versus anarchy. When politicians and judges excuse or ignore mob violence, they imperil the republic itself. Americans must reject silence and cowardice while street militias operate with impunity.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened. The violence in Portland and Chicago is deliberate, not spontaneous. If America fails to confront it decisively, the price won’t just be broken cities — it will be the erosion of the republic itself.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn's Show Prep

Is There a Moral Way to Kill a Zombie?

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

The new currency of power

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

The forgotten way

The only way

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

A restoration, not a renovation

The selective guardians of history

The real desecration

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Antifa isn’t “leaderless” — It’s an organized machine of violence

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

A history of violence

Dismember the dragon