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

Another Sign of the Times? 'Planned Companionhood' Advocates for Pet Abortions

June 02, 2017
Staff

WRITER

No matter what bombshell report or undercover video surfaces, Planned Parenthood never takes the hit and they just keep trucking along. Try this mental exercise out for a second --- would the left be just as praiseworthy of a group that facilitated pet abortions?

Doc Thompson filled in for Glenn on radio Friday and had an interesting interview with a caller named Rich Pronsky who is starting a business called Planned Companionhood.

"You know, you're still going to have cats and dogs who get pregnant," Rich said. "You know, they have one too many at the kitty bar or whatever, and they wind up with this litter of babies that they might not want. And I believe --- I assume everybody does, the pets have the right to choose. It's their furry bodies, it's their choice."

Just who is this monster you might ask? Rich happens to be none other than former Blaze personality and comedian, Brian Sack. Don't worry animal lovers, Planned Companionhood is not coming to a dog park near you --- you can bark easy.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

DOC: Hi, there it's Doc Thompson in for Glenn today. Thank you so much for joining me. Joined also by my fellow morning Blaze Brad Staggs and Kris Cruz along with Kal. We're regularly heard on the Blaze radio network. Weekday morning 6:00 to 9:00 a.m. Eastern time just go TheBlaze.com/Doc to find out more about us. We talk a lot about businesses and entrepreneurship, I think that's really the backbone of America. Capitalism and free market. And the more we can teach people that and support businesses, it's going to be better for all of us. So we often give people free airtime. We just say come and promote your business. The listeners get to hear about great stories of entrepreneurial and great products. So if you have a business that you want to discuss, just tweet ought at any time with the #BuildingAmerica. #BuildingAmerica, and we go through from time to time and we'll reach out to you saying, hey, we have an opening. We're usually backlogged a few weeks or so. Obviously a lot of people are interested.

BRAD: Free advertising? Backlog?

DOC: Yeah, imagine that. If you're interested, you can go back and search.

KRIS: And it's interesting you say we will go through me. That we is one person.

DOC: Yeah, by "we" I mean Kris. So we spotlight those. Sometimes their businesses have been around for a while, sometimes startup businesses. We have one of those startup business that is trying to get crowd sourcing trying to get started. It's an interesting startup. Rich is joining us from Planned Companionhood. Rich, How are you doing, buddy?

CALLER: Hi, how are you, Doc?

DOC: Doing well, sir. Give me the basic concept of what your business is.

CALLER: Sure. First, thank you for having me on. This is a great platform for me. I'm very excited. I had this idea that came to me the other night, and I did what pretty much all of my friends on Facebook have done. I started a GoFundMe to kind of raise money for this concept. It's Planned Companionhood and what I want to establish is a series of clinics across the United States that provide health services for pets.

DOC: Okay. That's --

KRIS: That's pretty smart.

DOC: How does that differ from any of the veterinarian services or health services out there?

CALLER: You're right. I don't have a degree in veterinarianism. I'm trying to get one from a prest I cannot online university. It's taking some time. I will have it. But in the meantime, we offer services very similar. We spay and neuter cats and dogs, mostly. And something I thought of I thought was very clever. We're going to offer mammal grams. So they're like a pet mammogram. And, again, I don't have the degree in veterinarianism, so you take the cat booby or whatever the medical term is. And you have the glass plates and see if there are any troubles. Also, we're going to offer pet pregnancy counseling to cats and dogs just to kind of guide -- what to expect when you're expecting kind of thing.

BRAD: To the owners of the pets; right? I mean, you're offering counseling to the owners of the pets.

CALLER: Oh, that's interesting. That's interesting. You know, that's not a bad idea. We include the owners. Bring the owners in.

DOC: Yeah, they could be a part of that. I can see that. So you're doing a lot of reproductive health as part of this clinic; is that right.

CALLER: Absolutely. We're going to offer contraceptives. We have kitty condoms, doggy diaphragms, and the IUD, which I understand is for intrauterine because that's -- I tried it out on him, and he seemed to, you know, not take to it. But we'll see. Maybe it works on other dogs. I don't know.

DOC: Interesting. Interesting. Yeah.

CALLER: And we're going to offer of course pregnancy termination.

DOC: So you can spade and neuter before, but you're also going to terminate pregnancies as well for pets?

CALLER: Well, you know, you kind of have to because even though you make these efforts and try to control pet overpopulation or whatever and get the message out there. But, you know, you're still going to have cats and dogs who get pregnant. You know, they have one too many at the kitty bar or whatever, and they wind up with this litter of babies that they might not want. And I believe -- I assume everybody does, the pets have the right to choose. It's their furry bodies, it's their choice.

DOC: So kitty and doggy abortions is what you're saying.

CALLER: Well, I don't like to use that word so I call it termination.

DOC: Okay. Uh-huh. So if they -- this is -- wow that's kind of new. I hadn't heard that. We always hear spade and neuter your pets. Control pet overpopulation. Spade and neuter.

CALLER: That's where I think Planned Companionhood is different.

DOC: Okay. Is pet overpopulation still that big of an issue where we would have to get to the point where you're aborting -- I'm sorry terminating the kitties and puppies? Is it that big of a --

CALLER: You have orphan pets all over the place and the adoption process for pets can take sometimes minutes to hours to get, you know? These pets and that might be a handful.

KRIS: Kris Cruz here. I just have a question for you. You say you posted this on Facebook. Have you gotten any backlash from, you know, the people who are against puppies abortion or any kind of abortion?

CALLER: Well, honestly, what is the red face mean?

DOC: Oh, the emoji? I don't think that's a good one for you.

CALLER: I haven't looked into it. We have a lot of those, but I can feel the energy shortly after we posted it. But I've really been devoting my morning especially to just kind of coming up with my ideas.

DOC: Kind of formulating them.

BRAD: What about counseling? With this counseling, is there going to be alternatives discussed? I mean --

CALLER: You know, we've -- it's more, you know, more like counseling like scheduling the pregnancy termination. Like, what day works better for you? Would a Friday be better? Do you want to come in on a weekend? Monday after work. Like, what -- we're going to work about -- it's about accommodating the people. The kitties or the doggies.

BRAD: I would think somebody would be willing to take the puppies the kids were born and somebody would be able to take them and adopt them.

CALLER: Yeah, I don't know. It just seems to me, you know, you want to give the pet the right to just say, you know, I want this or I don't want this. Get it out of here, you know? Because honestly, and, again, I don't have a degree in veterinarianism, and I will soon from a prest I cannot and accredited online university. But from what I know, it's just a clump of cells in there until they're born. And --

DOC: So you're saying because of these animals are pregnant, we've got to control overpopulation that it's better to go ahead and just abort them, the doggies and kitties, rather than just have people come by and adopt them?

CALLER: Yeah, because, you know, when a kitty cat or doggy gets knocked up for whatever reason, and they forgot to practice whatever and things happen, and then they get pregnant, you don't want to burden that kitty cat or doggy with puppies and kitties meowing and things.

DOC: Okay. I imagine there's going to be some people -- we're talking with Rich Pronsky from Planned Companionhood or what he hopes will become a series of clinics.

CALLER: Right now, we have raised $34.17.

KRIS: What's your goal?

CALLER: We need at least 250 million.

KRIS: Okay. And that covers.

CALLER: That covers the whole country plus give myself a decent salary.

KRIS: So that covers all the clinics or just one clinic with multiple doctors? I mean not doctors, veterinarians with veterinarianism certification, or is it just you performing all of these procedures?

CALLER: No. No. There will be all scattered all over the country and, you know, people are going to come in, they're going to come in on a leisure, they're going to come in however they want to come in, and we're going to help them.

DOC: So I have to think there's going to be some people who don't like the idea of dog abortions or cat abortions.

CALLER: I did run into a few of those on the sidewalk. Yeah.

DOC: What is your response to them where they're saying, hey, that's a life, and you're killing the little doggies and puppies? What do you say to those people?

CALLER: They made an argument, yes, this is an adorable puppy. How could you do that to an adorable puppy. Like, look at this little puppy right here how cute is she? And I was rubbing her. And I understand what they're saying. But then again, you know, if you have a cat or a dog that has a bunch of puppies or kitties inside, you know? Why not encourage them to kill them?

BRAD: Cost. Let's talk about cost. Is this going to -- you're going to obviously charge people -- the owners, I'm assuming are going to end up paying for these terminations.

CALLER: Preferably the taxpayer would. I'm going to see what I can do about that. But we have gotten some grants from the USDA, which I assume is the United States dog association. I don't really know.

KRIS: We know that Bob Hope; right? He was --

DOC: No, Bob Barker.

KRIS: Bob Barker.

BRAD: Bob Hope's dead.

KRIS: Have you tried to reach out to any celebrities? Because this is something they might want to get involved with.

DOC: Yeah, Drew Carey took over for barker.

CALLER: I haven't thought about that. But if you could recommend that, that would be great. You need that celebrity to help kind of sell your -- you know like when Sean Penn helps sell Venezuela and Hugo Ch·vez, you want someone like that and deliver that message who says take this. It's great.

DOC: So animals come in, and they're already pregnant, and you're saying we're going to go ahead and abort the kitties and puppies.

CALLER: If you don't, they're going to run out and have a back alley pet abortion.

KRIS: Or they're going to go to Mexico and have a abortion, which is dangerous.

BRAD: And then they have the slut term.

DOC: I didn't realize back alley pet abortions were a thing. But what would be the problem with that -- why is that a concern of yours --

CALLER: Because I haven't been in a back alley in a long time. Long story, and it ended poorly. But, you know, I assume that these things are going on in back alleys all the time if we don't establish these clinics.

DOC: So you establish a fee. But is that per kitty or doggy aborted? Or is that per service.

KRIS: Terminated.

DOC: Because, you know, sometimes it could be three or five, and you don't know. So the dog comes in, and you go it's going to be certain fee. But then it ends up being six puppies.

CALLER: Right. We call that jackpot.

DOC: Oh, for you?

CALLER: That's when you go, like, yes. And you do that gesture with your hand, and you go "yes" because that means you're going to make extra money. If you're expecting three, and you got six, that's bonus time.

BRAD: So there is some profit to be had on that backside? That makes sense from a profit standpoint.

DOC: We've heard this forever. Control pet population. How come you still have so many pets getting pregnant like this is for years -- have them spade and neutered, and we still have a pet overpopulation problem. How come we still have it then?

CALLER: A very, very good question. Basically pets in the U.S. are not getting quality sex education. And if you think about it, you know, most cats are locked up in a house like a Saudi wife. And dogs, they're literally kept on a very short leash and, you know, when you see people walking their dogs, you don't see them giving them education in sex, talking about the birds and bees. You just see them letting them pee all over the place.

DOC: And that would be a good opportunity right there, I would think --

CALLER: You get to -- yes, instead of getting down and picking up the pooh-pooh, you get down there, and you say, you know, if the dog's name is Rover, you go Rover, let's get a little awkward now and talk about things.

DOC: I mean, I'm not a fan of abortion. We're talking with rich from Planned Companionhood. I don't like abortion, but I can imagine you getting backlash online from this.

CALLER: Yeah, it does seem to be growing.

BRAD: You can take that awkward moment when your dog is humping your leg to --

DOC: This is a teachable moment.

KRIS: Are you going to lead with pet puppy termination? Or are you just going to be, like, hey, we provide all of this other stuff? Or are you just going to lead with the pet terminations?

CALLER: Well, I think like any business, you're going to go where the profit center is; right? Now, once again, I don't have a degree in business, but I am working on one from a prestigious online university, but I know when I run my business, and I'll just tell you right now we're up to $34.82. When I do run my business, I'm going to go where the profit is.

DOC: Rich, interesting concept. We wish you the best in your business.

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

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

What Lee actually proposed

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

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

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

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

The Biden land-grab

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

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

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

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

  Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

American families pay the price

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

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

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

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

Divide and conquer

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

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


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

  

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

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

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

Establish basic liability laws

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

Pass increased whistleblower protections

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

Prevent AI from having legal rights

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

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

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

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

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Operation Midnight Hammer

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

   USAF / Handout | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

What comes next

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

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

That would be catastrophic.

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

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

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

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

Now we pray

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

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

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


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rising Islamism

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

   Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

 

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

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

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

Blending the worst ideologies

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

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

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

Call out radicalism

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.