BLOG

Serena Williams Pretty Much Agreed With John McEnroe In 2013

Tennis legend John McEnroe is no stranger to controversy. He was renowned for controversies during his heyday on the courts. Fast forward to 2017, and he's found himself in the middle of the silliest non-controversial controversy.

McEnroe made headlines answering a reporter's question as to why he qualified Williams as best "women's" tennis player --- not the best of ever, saying she would rank around 700th on the men's circuit. His comments ruffled the feathers of liberals and even Miss Williams herself.

As luck would have it, Williams confirmed McEnroe's assertion in 2013 on The Late Show with David Letterman:

"Well, actually it's funny because Andy Murray, he has been joking about myself and him playing a match. And I'm like, "Andy, seriously, like, are you kidding me?" Because for me, tennis -- men's tennis and women's tennis are completely almost two separate sports. So I'm like, if I were to play Andy Murray, I would lose 6-0, 6-0, in five to six minutes, maybe 10 minutes."

Co-host Jeffy Fisher made a prescient observation.

"So all the people that are wanting to abolish sex-segregated sports entirely so women can compete against elite male athletes and get the recognition they deserve, I say yes," Jeffy said.

Glenn agree whole-heartedly.

"I want to see them on the football field. I want to see them on the baseball field. I want to see them absolutely everywhere. Let's just end this nonsense: There is no separation between men and women because we're all exactly the same. Go for it," Glenn said replied.

Enjoy the complimentary clip or read the transcript for details.

GLENN: Let's start with John McEnroe. John McEnroe caused a huge controversy. This is this guy's whole life. He said that Serena Williams, the best women's player in the world, would rank about 700 on the men's tour.

Now, the problem with this is, didn't we have this same debate with Billie Jean King? And who was the guy who --

PAT: Bobby Riggs.

GLENN: Yeah, Bobby Riggs.

PAT: Yeah, he was 55 years old at the time.

GLENN: Yeah. And so this was the same thing about women are just as good as men. Blah, blah, blah.

Well, I'm sorry. But the muscle mass alone is completely different with men. They just have more power than women. It's why there are no women boxers that are going against men. You know, you're not -- you're not going to put Mike Tyson in the ring with the strongest woman in the world because Mike will knock her out. And John McEnroe, he doesn't need anybody to run to his defense, other than the woman who is now playing the victim, Serena Williams. Listen to what she said on Letterman about herself and Andy Murray.

SERENA: Well, actually it's funny because Andy Murray, he has been joking about myself and him playing a match. And I'm like, "Andy, seriously, like, are you kidding me?" Because for me, tennis -- men's tennis and women's tennis are completely almost two separate sports. So I'm like, if I were to play Andy Murray, I would lose 6-0, 6-0, in five to six minutes, maybe 10 minutes.

No, it's true. It's true. It's a completely -- it's a completely different sport. The men are a lot faster than me. They get -- they serve harder. They hit harder. It's just a different game. And I love to play women's tennis. And I -- and I only want to play girls because I don't want to be embarrassed. I would not do the tour. I wouldn't do Billie Jean any justice. So, Andy, stop it.

PAT: Oh, my goodness. How could she say that?

STU: And how can you act like the victim when you said this on national television already?

PAT: Yeah, it is weird that she's acting like the victim.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: When she -- first of all, just to add another little element to this, Glenn, that you may not know, Serena Williams and her sister Venus, back in 1998 claimed they could beat any man who wasn't in the top 200 in the world.

So the man who was ranked 203rd in the world challenged them, and they played. And he -- he played golf that morning. And then while drinking a beer between games and smoking cigarettes on the court, he beat Serena 6-1, and he beat Venus 6-2. So I mean, it was settled with them almost 20 years ago. And then in 2013, she said that to David Letterman. I love the --

GLENN: That's not 700, Pat.

PAT: No, that's true. That's 203.

GLENN: So let me ask you this, why would McEnroe -- McEnroe loves controversy. Why is McEnroe even bringing this up?

STU: You know why he's bringing it up? And this is the part that everyone's missing in the story. He's bringing it up because he was being a wuss and bailing out of the actual point. He was trying so hard to compliment Serena. And John MacEnroe, knowing enough -- a lot obviously about tennis, being a commentator and a long-time player knows that her being seven hundredth in the world is ridiculous. He's actually going and saying --

PAT: He's giving her the benefit of the doubt.

STU: The benefit of the doubt. He said, she's the best female player of all time. He said she might be the best athlete comparatively of all time, because she has dominated her sport so incredibly. But in reality, the people who are 1,000th in the world would also beat Serena Williams easily. And it's not even a knock on Serena Williams. It would be an incredible accomplishment that she would be able to hang with these guys.

We're talking about players that have dominated, you know, entire countries that are ranked 700 and 1,000th in the world. She is a great tennis player and probably the best female player of all time. Though, you could argue that. But when it comes to playing against men, it's just -- there's not a competition there.

PAT: And we're supposed to pretend though now that they're exactly the same, even physically. That they have the same abilities. And the same structure. And the same makeup. And they can compete on an equal basis on every -- on every single playing field. And it's just not true. And we all know it's about it's not true. So why do we try to play this game?

STU: Yeah. And I think the most important thing as far as our audience and conversation is to watch the commentators -- it's the same thing we see in the media. Like, you know, I was watching a show on ESPN, where we were talking about this. And the only person I saw on ESPN all day who had the guts to even talk about this honestly was Will Cane. Who, you know, used to work here.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: But all these commentators are going into these points that they know aren't true. And they're trying so hard not getting fired by ESPN, who fires anyone who says anything mildly controversial. And they were saying things like this.

And Serena Williams kind of made this point here jokingly. But they all said, oh, come on. You can't compare these two.

Men's -- women's tennis is a completely different sport.

No, it's not. It is not. It is tennis. They play it differently because men are capable of more things. They hit the ball harder. They are faster, as Serena pointed out, herself.

It is the same sport. The only reason that women's tennis exists is because women can't play as well as men. Period.

PAT: That's why all women's sports exists. That's why there's a women's basketball league.

STU: Exactly. It's the same sport. If you wanted them all to compete against each other because they were capable of doing the same things, you would just have tennis. Because it's the same thing. They're hitting it the same way.

And it goes back to what you were talking about yesterday, Glenn. How many genders are there? All these basic questions that we all know the answers to and we all used to admit to ourselves. Now we have to deny.

GLENN: Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow.

(laughter)

GLENN: Listen to the oppression. Seriously. No, I'm dead serious. Listen to the oppression that's spewing out of Stu's mouth.

STU: I was quoting you. And, by the way, how many genders are there? I don't know. Ask tennis that has men's tennis and women's tennis. They seem to understand there are two. Why don't they have 27 or 96 different divisions?

PAT: They're working on Xi tennis right now.

STU: Xi tennis is coming?

PAT: Yes, yes. Xi tennis is -- X-I is coming.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Is that only being played by the president of China?

PAT: No, it's a different kind of Xi.

GLENN: Oh, the gender Xi.

PAT: The gender Xi.

STU: Pat, you brought this up. Because there's a movie coming out with Steve Carell in it as Bobby Riggs, which looks amazing.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: Partially because they admit what actually happened, which was Riggs took it as a giant joke. He was trolling people like Andy Kaufman did. He wanted to be the villain. He liked it. He thought it was funny as a 55-year-old to come in and play.

PAT: Plus, it brought everybody a lot of money. It created an aura around tennis. People got interested in tennis. It was a really good thing in the '70s.

GLENN: Wasn't Philadelphia Freedom written about that?

PAT: Yeah, it was written about Billie Jean King. Not necessarily the match about Bobby Riggs. But Elton John was a big Billie Jean King fan. But people forget that a few months before he lost to Billie Jean King, he had beaten the number one women's tennis player in the world, and he beat her severely. I mean, he crushed her. And she is the person who has the most grand slam wins of all time, Margaret Court. And he beat her, I think 6-2, 6-1. It wasn't even a match.

STU: And we all just remembered the second time, where he lost -- didn't train.

PAT: Yeah, right.

STU: Was completely out of shape.

PAT: Took it -- and not seriously.

STU: Fifty-five years old. And he wasn't even the best men's player when he was playing. I mean, it's so ridiculous.

PAT: Right.

JEFFY: And so all the people that are wanting to abolish sex-segregated sports entirely so women can compete against elite male athletes and get the recognition they deserve, I say yes.

GLENN: I say yes.

STU: Fully support it.

GLENN: I say absolutely yes.

PAT: Let's do it.

GLENN: I want to see them on the football field. I want to see them on the baseball field. I want to see them absolutely everywhere. Let's just end this nonsense. There is no separation between men and women, because we're all exactly the same. Go for it.

STU: And if you can't be honest about like a conversation like this about Serena Williams and admit that she, while a great player and incredibly skilled, would not be able to compete in the men's division -- if you can't admit that, why aren't you supporting these divisions being combined?

What the heck is wrong with you? If you think she could beat all these men, why is she only playing women? It's ridiculous. They should all be together. There should be no WNBA. There should be no women's tennis. No women's gymnastic. You could make a serious argument that women are more flexible and do things that men can't do in gymnastic. I don't know. Maybe they would dominate. There's a lot of things that they're -- that might happen.

But then let it happen. If you believe it, let it happen.

GLENN: What -- I mean -- apologize to this audience for the oppression that is happening right here, Stu.

STU: Yesterday, you were so soft-spoken and understanding. We're here for 18 minutes, and look at what's happening.

GLENN: I'm very understanding. What a sexist oppressor. What a white male oppressor?

PAT: Thank you. Don't forget privilege.

GLENN: Here's the thing I've really come to understand, Stu, you can't even discuss things, I mean, as a white male. You don't have any experience except the experience of an oppressor.

PAT: Right. That's right.

STU: I don't think that's right actually.

GLENN: Of course, that's what oppressors say.

PAT: Always.

RADIO

Magna Carta under threat: UK's dangerous shift AWAY from freedom

The United Kingdom is now arresting over 12,000 people a year for "speech crimes" and is debating doing away with trial by jury for many crimes. Glenn Beck warns that if this can be done in the birthplace of these principles (under the Magna Carta), it can happen to the entire West if we don't END this insanity now!

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So let me just start here. Because there is -- there is another story that is out in our newsletter today, that talks about how people of college age are freaking out, after Charlie Kirk's death. They don't want anything controversial on campus.

I mean, that's the reason why colleges and universities had protection of free speech, in the first place.

Was to be controversial. To be able to say the things that nobody wants you to say.

And it's really important.

But let me -- let me first remind people of what the Magna Carta is.

It's 1215? The Magna Carta is Latin for the great chart.

Had it not some magnanimous gift from the king.

The king. King John from England. He was -- he was losing a battle. France was just cleaning England's clock.

The baryons and all the lords and the ladies. Said, you know, this king sucks a lot. This king sucks a lot.

And we've got to stop him. Because he's destroying everything.

And he -- he had lost most of the land, to France. And then he started just imposing huge taxes on everybody. And -- and because nobody in the lower class had any -- this all happened with the lords and the ladies. And they were like, enough. Enough. Enough.

You're abusing your royal power.

Well, nobody had ever said that before. That just didn't happen. He had a divine right. He's the king. But in England, they said, no.

You still have to be moral. You have certain laws, and you can't just do these things.

And so what they did, is they got him to agree to the great charter, the Magna Carta. And it placed the king under the law. Before that, the king was the law. So now the king is under the law: It created the principle of due process. Never before did we have that.

You can't be imprisoned, punishment or stripped of property, except by the lawful judgment of your peers or the law of the land. So this creates jury trials. It creates habeas corpus. Protection from arbitrary arrests. All of these things. The government now has to justify itself in a court of law.

That's revolutionary, okay? It also limited taxation without consent. Which we interpreted later as no taxation without representation. Rule of law. Jury trials. Rights of the accused.

Limits on government. Protection of property. Accountability of leaders. All of that comes from the Magna Carta. Okay?

That gave birth, 500 years later, to us and our ideas. Okay?

Now, England, the birthplace of the Magna Carta is now thinking about getting rid of jury trials and arresting more than 12,000 people every year for what they call speech crimes. 12,000!
Now, I want you to think about that.

In Russia, in the same year this stat came out. The latest year that we have, 2023. In 2023, Russia arrested 4,000 people for speech crimes against the Russian military for Ukraine.

4,000 in Russia, 12,000 in England.

The number I saw. We don't have all the numbers. But the number I saw that were arrested for speech crimes in China was 120.

Okay?

Not for violence. Not for theft.

Not for treason.

12,000 in England for words.

Okay. Now, well, that's going on, now the Prime Minister is floating the idea of eliminating, if not most, many jury trials.

It will only be for murder, manslaughter, oh, and something else like that.

Okay?

So, in other words, if you're like, I believe you should be able to read the Bible in your own language, in your own home, Tisdale.

You don't get any hope. You don't get a jury trial. You get the court. You get the king trying you, not a jury of your peers.

This goes against the Magna Carta, the lawful judgment of your peers. Okay?

That's the safeguard that stands between you and an out-of-control state. This is the first and ancient firewall against tyranny. It is what makes England, England.

And if England of all places, tosses that aside, what does the word "free" mean anymore?

Okay? What does it mean? You can't speak, and then you have no jury -- trial of your peers. Wait. What? First of all, understand this: A nation that polices speech is not free!

A nation that dissolves juries is not just unfree, it's prepping for something worse!

Because the entire architecture of the western world, the liberty that we have, rests on a single radical belief.

The truth does not need a king. The truth shall set you free. Who? Is it not what. Who is the truth? Okay.

No king, but Christ. Because Christ is the truth. That's the Western world!

A person's conscience does not need a permit. Speech does not need a bureaucrat's approval before it leaves your lips! That's the West.

That's what built the world. What took it from darkness, to today.

Freedom is not granted we the state. Freedom preexists government.

Government's only legitimate job is to protect it!

Now, here's the dark little secret, that every single tyrant, and every politician knows today. If you control speech, you control thought. If you control thought, you control people.

If you control people, you don't ever have to worry about controlling the government because no one will ever challenge you again!

This is why it is so essential for any side to go, you can't talk to them.

Don't talk to them. Don't listen. Don't question.

You can't hear that. No. They can say whatever they want. But I have a right to refute it. That's why free speech has to be absolute. Not mostly free.

Not free unless it makes Billy over there cry and uncomfortable.

No. I'm sorry, Billy. You don't like it. Refute it.

Freedom that depends on somebody else's freedoms is not freedom!

Freedom that requires government approval is not freedom! Freedom that can be revoked because a bureaucrat doesn't like your tone is not freedom. Once speech becomes conditional, everything become conditional. Your rights, your property, your conscience, your place in society. Because you only live by permission! Never by principle!

We live by principles. Not people!

Who is actually free?

Who is actually free?

The England that once declared the king himself to be subject of law, or the England that now arrests a man because he's posted the wrong meme?

12,000 people!

Can't find one in 2023 that was arrested for that in America. Not one. The England that gave us John Locke, the philosopher of natural rights. Is that person free?

Or the England that now warns citizens that context doesn't matter, if their words cause someone, anyone, emotional harm.

Britain is about loss. But this is not just a British problem. This is the canary in the coal mine for the entire west.

Because these are the people that came up with it. When the mother country forgets its own legacy, jury trials and freedom of speech. When the random that once stared down monarchs now cowers before hashtags and activists and speech tribunals, than somewhere deep inside the Western soul, a light is flickering.

We must remember here, before that same darkness reaches our shores. Because it's already coming on to our beaches. It's already there. There is no such thing as partial liberty. Freedom of speech is the First Amendment for a reason!

It is the guardrail for every other right!

If you lose the First Amendment, you've lost freedom. And if you lose the Second Amendment, you've lost the ability to defend that first freedom.
It's number one for a reason!

You must be allowed to speak, to gather.

To have a free press!

To question your government. You must have those abilities. You must be able to say, especially about government, the worst things about your government! And question them.

And demand answers. To petition them.

That's all in the First Amendment.

It is the pressure valve that prevents so it's from blowing itself up.

The more we contain speech. The more we say, don't talk about. Don't talk about. Can't say that. Can't say that.

The more the pressure builds up. The more likely we blow ourselves up.

It's the mechanism where the powerless can speak to the powerful.

It's the shield that protects dissenters. Unpopular thinkers, prophets, reformers. And, yes, even the offensive.

Look, there are, quote, unquote, historians now who are getting all kinds of bullcrap about Hitler and everything else.

None of that is true. I don't want to silence them. They have a right to say it.

I have a right to say you're wrong! And show you the evidence of what makes them wrong.

That's the way it works. England is about to forget all of this!

They are truly the birthplace of these kinds of ideas, and those ideas led to our idea of real freedom!

No king!

If they forget this, we cannot -- we believe so -- because there won't be anywhere else in the world to go.

The lesson of history, the lesson that history whispers quietly at first. Then louder. And then finally. And we're about at this point, with a scream!

Is that when a state describes which words are allowed, it will eventually decide which thoughts are allowed. Which beliefs are allowed.

Which citizens are allowed.

In the end, in the end, the prisons don't need bars.

The cell will be in your own mind!

Do you understand that, America?
Do your kids understand that?

We don't even know what it means to be free. I thought this weekend, a lot about as opposed to truth shall set you free.

Thought about a lot. In fact, maybe I'll talk to you about it in a minute or so.

Because I don't think people understand what it means to be free.

We think everybody in the world is free. They're not!

And you're about to really find that out!

You want to be tree, or do you want to be safe? Because you cannot have both.

When safety is defined by those who fear your liberty. It's over!

We used to be people who would explore. We were people that crossed the oceans when everyone said we couldn't. We -- we went to space when everyone said, it's impossible. We crossed mountains that no one had ever crossed. We forged -- we forged a nation of really different people. And lived side by side for so long, yes. With bloodshed from time to time. But generally, in ways that nobody had ever done before. Freedom. Freedom is grand. But it's really dangerous. It's messy. Freedom offends you, a lot. Get over it.

Real freedom, real freedom is the only thing that has ever allowed the human spirit to rise above a king. Above a tyrant. Above the mob. Above the bureaucrats. Real freedom that belongs to you. Given to you by God. And that's what they're about to lose in England. The Magna Carta. The simple idea. No man. Not even a king. No man is above the law. Do we have that here?

Do you think no man is above the law? Or do you think there is a class up in the political range, somewhere, that if you're on the right side, don't worry about jail. That's what the Magna Carta tried to stop. That's what we have forgotten even, and they're about to get rid of it entirely.

The modern west is drifting into far more -- far more sinister creed. No man is above offense.

And that is how civilizations fall.

BLOG

Puttin' the Christ Back in Christmas (Lyric Video)

This song was produced by Glenn Beck using his AI tools.

Lyrics:

Verse 1:

Well, the season's here, and the lights are bright, but they tell me, I can't say Merry Christmas tonight.

They want RamaHanuKwanzMas all in one breath.

Buddy, that phrase is gonna bore me to death.

So, grab some Coco. Let's reclaim this place.

It's the birthday of the baby.

Yeah, remember who that is.

Chorus:

So, I'm putting the Christ back in Christmas.

No microaggression here.

My friend, if words can break you, I'll bless your heart, because that's a battle we can't defend.

Yeah, I'm putting the Christ back in Christmas.

Let common sense unfold. Out with the new, in with the old.

Merry Christmas. Let the truth be told.

Verse 2:

And hey baby, it's cold outside, relax.

It's flirting, not a federal crime.

We used to laugh and dance in snow.

Now they fact-check mistletoe.

They say intent don't matter.

Well, sure it does, ask Santa.

He's judging hearts, not Twitter buzz.

Chorus:

So I'm putting the Christ back in Christmas.

You can keep your outrage warm.

If every jingle is problematic, buddy, that's the real snowstorm.

Yeah, I'm putting the Christ back in Christmas.

Not buying what they sold.

Out with the new, in with the old.

Merry Christmas. Let the truth be told.

Bridge:

They say that greeting is oppressive.

Well, bless my soul.

Who knew if Merry Christmas makes you tremble, the problem ain't the phrase, it's you.

I'll question with boldness. I'll reason with grace, but don't rewrite my holiday to make it a safe space.

So, here's to the manger.

The star in the sky.

The angels who sang up that holy night.

Here's to the story that still brings hope

Even when cultures lost the remote.

Raise your voice, let the bells all ring.

This season was always about one king.

Chorus:

Yeah, I'm putting the Christ back in Christmas.

Let the real good news unfold.

The world may chase the wrapping paper, but the manger holds the gold.

So, I put the Christ back in Christmas from the young to the gray and old.

Out with the new, in with the old.

Merry Christmas. Let the truth be told.

RADIO

The math behind Europe's cultural shift

Europe’s future isn’t being shaped by politics or ideology... it’s being shaped by math. Glenn Beck and UK insider Peter McIlvenna break down the explosive demographic shift transforming Britain and Europe, where Muslim population growth has surged 111% in 15 years while native birthrates continue to collapse. The result is a predictable, unstoppable replacement of cultural and political power, created not by conquest but by birthrates and the West’s loss of confidence in its own heritage. And the same demographic pattern is now emerging in the United States.

RADIO

Sharia Courts & Demographic Takeover - America's Growing Problem with Political Islam

Political Islam is expanding into the West through demographic pressure, parallel legal systems, exclusive community structures, and a belief that Western nations are too naïve to stop it — and Glenn Beck breaks down the evidence. From Marco Rubio’s warning that Islamic political movements openly seek dominance over the United States, to a Texas developer boasting about “manipulating kafirs,” to archived footage of imams defending Sharia punishments on American soil, the signs are no longer subtle. Many Muslims reject political Islam and flee from these systems — but by ignoring what is happening in our own backyard, America risks repeating Europe’s collapse. The question isn’t whether Political Islam exists; it’s whether we’re willing to confront what it demands.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Let me start first. Interview yesterday with Sean Hannity. Here's Rubio, talking about the dangers of radicalized Islam.

VOICE: Ultimately, armed radical Islamic movements in the world, identify the West at large, but the United States in particular, as the greatest evil on earth. And every chance they have -- the notion that somehow radical Islam would be comfortable with simple controls and progress in Iraq and Syria is not born out by history.

Radical Islam has shown that their desire is not simply to occupy one part of the world and be happy with their own little caliphate. They want to expand. It's revolutionary in its nature. It seeks to expand and control more territories and more people. And radical Islam has designs openly on the West, on the United States, on Europe. We've seen that for the rest there as well, and they are prepared to conduct acts of terrorism. In the case of Iran, nation state actions, assassinations, murders, you name it.

Whatever it takes for them to gain their influence, and ultimately, their domination in different cultures and societies.

That's a clear and eminent threat to the world and to the broader west, especially to the United States who they identify as the chief source of evil on the planet. Okay?

The reason why they hate the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the leadership of the UAE and Bahrain, is because they've allowed the United States to partner with them. That's why they hate them. They consider them infidels for it. They hate Israel.

But they also hate America. And they hate anyone in the world, that we have influence, they seek to attack, including here in the homeland.

If you look at the domestic terrorists, the attacks that have happened here domestically, the overwhelming majority of them have been inspired by radical Islamic viewpoints. That includes the shooting in the Pulse Night Club in Orlando, Florida. That includes the Saudi pilot in Pensacola, my home state. Two attacks.

GLENN: Okay.

So I -- I would like to propose we stop calling it radical Islam. Because it's not radical Islam. It's political Islam. There is religious Islam, and I know a lot of religious Muslims that are good people. Okay? I don't put them in the same category because I don't want Sharia law.

That's political Islam. It's not radical. It's what happens all over the world.

It's not radical, it's political.

You remember, if you're my age. When the wall came down. And we finally got to converse with Russians.

And we always thought -- me growing up. I always thought the Russians.

It's Vladimir. Vladimir. Look, he's spying.

Natasha. He's spying.

Okay. That's what we thought when we were kids.

That's not who the Russians were. The Russians were good people. They were decent people.

They wanted the same kind of things we wanted. We don't agree on everything.

They want to be left alone. Raise their kids. Have a chance at some success and retirement.

Just leave me alone.

Most of us are like that. What happens is, our politicians get in the way. The politicians. The political systems are the ones that are the problem. We don't call it radicalized communism.
It's communism. Okay? It's a political philosophy.
This is a political philosophy.

Political Islam -- it's not radical.

It's just a political philosophy, and that political philosophy, just like communism, wants to dominate the world. Unlike communism, political Islam is so incredibly arrogant. It's inevitable to them. Why? Birthrates.

That's why! Birthrates. And they think we're stupid. And, you know what, so do I! I think we're stupid too. Come on, man. Right? Are we not stupid? We look over at Europe. Are the grand Europeans, that colonized the whole world and are abusing everyone, because they're so sophisticated and so powerful, and everything else. Really are they?

Because look at how dumb they are being right now with their own countries in Europe. They're committing suicide. And so are we.

Now, there's this development that is happening in Texas. Let me -- let me give you an interview, a piece of an interview done by a Muslim developer, of Muslim communities, and -- and how -- and how it actually works.

Listen to these 35 seconds of this interview.

VOICE: The way -- like, you can't make it exclusive, like non-Muslims are not allowed. What we're doing, there's something called a secession fee. I don't know what it's called in Dubai. Like your maintenance fee -- the service fee, to cut the grass, to remove the snow, and whatnot. So that service fee will put that 75 percent of the service fee you're paying, close to (another language).

VOICE: Automatically, if you are a practicing Christian, I would advise you, why help the Muslims? You know. They do their own thing.

Right? So this is the way we're going to put the costs, and our attorney already put it in there.

GLENN: This is the way they manipulate the kafirs. The kafirs are you. The non-Muslim people. The infidels.

And they -- they are manipulating. Because, ha, ha, ha. And why would you do that? That's how they make it an exclusive Muslim community. Okay. And what do you get in those Muslim communities? I want to take you back to 2015.
I had been in Irving, Texas. My studios are in Irving, Texas. And I had been there for maybe three years. And it is the most diverse ZIP code in all of America. Which is a great thing. Except, it's also becoming very, very Islamic.

And that is totally fine, as long as we're not talking political Islam.

Unfortunately, we are. And the religion teaches that you can lie, to an infidel. You can lie if it helps Islam.

Okay.

So I had a couple of imams from the Dallas area, come in, from -- from, you know, where all of this is happening. And I just -- I sat them down. And we just had a great conversation.

I want you to listen to this, what finally came out of the mouth of one of the imams. Listen to this.

VOICE: I'm here. I'm sorry to say, back to the first point. I'm here to discuss an issue with the Islamic Tribunal.

So please, don't -- allow us to have a situation. Maybe, we are ready for any discussion.

VOICE: No. I know that.

VOICE: We are ready for any point to lead the discussion. But the main point here, we are -- the reason we are here to discuss this issue. What kind of cases, Islam tribunal have.

And we start with the Sharia.

And why the people are afraid from Sharia.

I'm sorry to say, at one point related to this.

It's not just in Sharia law. Not just in Islamic law. It's everywhere.

Who said that just in Islamic law?

That's even Sharia, in Jewish Sharia, in Christian Sharia. In America here, we cut -- we -- we -- we cut it for some reason. So I'm asking you an easy question.

If anyone kill another, he should have got killed by a law, by Islamic law, by -- by -- by governor. By -- he should have got killed.

What is wrong with that?

If a thief, jump to go back house. Scare your wife. Scare your children. Scare your neighbor.

And they did that with our stores, this is the law. The law to cut his head.

Because if he feels my hands were cut because of that. He will think about this 100 times. He will never do it.

And if you do that one time, they will never do it again.

Look at how many millions of dollars Americans here or other states or other -- outside has been for the -- to keep, the criminal in -- in jail. A lot of millions of -- we can see that just -- that's it. Because he did something good in the whole community. And they scare the whole community.

Why not. Back please to the point. Islamic tribunal.

Yes. We never deal with anything of that. We don't have authority for that. We don't have power for that.


GLENN: But you're okay. You seem to be okay with that. If you had the power for that happen.

No. You don't --

JASON: Absolutely not. Absolutely not. We -- as imam said, we have system. We are very organized people.

GLENN: Right.

VOICE: Sorry, for this example. Somebody can -- might add. I should have killed him.

GLENN: Right.

VOICE: I had to take this case to the judge, and the judge have to -- to the governor. There's a system, a procedure, that I have to follow.

So it's not like this -- this guy gets killed. No, no. We have -- I -- I give you just an easy example for leader. This is after prophet Mohammed, peace be upon him. He sent one to Yemen. And he told him, before he leaves, he ask him, almost as a habit. What did you do if the people bring a thief for you?

He said, I will cut his hand. Okay. He said, you do that. Okay. He said, after -- after -- he said, okay. If one person came with me, without work, and I blew it. And I blew it. I will cut your head. Because he has no job. So he -- if you run from the sword or grab something from here, to eat. Nothing happened to you. So but if you have your job and enough income, and you took -- a bunch of children and you have house and you have car. And you -- or a thief from here or there. So this is the law. Not to please, the point with Sharia. I ask people. We are not here to do that at all.

It is not our authority. It's not our power. It's not our job. We have --

GLENN: You've got to stop. You've got to stop. Okay. This is amazing to me. Because you hear how passionate he is, about how logical that is. Okay? I mean, you just have to do it, it just makes sense to everybody, we just cut your hands off.

And the Prophet Muhammad, peace upon him, and he he's preached this forever. I mean, it just works. It just works.

Of course, we wouldn't want to do that. But it just works. I mean, let me tell you about it again. Really?

Really? You don't want that to happen. Because you're in the United States, but you're cool with it everywhere else. Everywhere else.

But here it's different!

But my religion, which requires me to say, peace upon him, after I mention the prophet Muhammad, my religion, which is extraordinarily well-defined.

It has these raise. In political Islam.

That must be done. Because the Koran requires it, in political Islam.

But we're not going -- yeah. We've got our own little laws going on now.

We have our courts.

Who we're never going to go that far. Wait. Wait. You believe in political Islam? Of course I do. But you're not going to do it?

Of course not. But the Koran commands you to do it?

Of course it does.

You follow every dictate in the Koran? Of course I do.

But not that one? Come on. Come on. Does anybody really believe that?

Now, that does not mean Muslims believe that. Many do. Many do not. The ones who do not are the ones who have lived under it, and have escaped here. And want a different kind of Islam.

And by just turning a blind eye to this, because they know how it happens. They saw it in their company. They don't want it happening here.

You know, we just take care of things like marriages. Oh, so when a guy says, I divorce you. I divorce you. I divorce you. You're divorced, and she loses everything. Oh, you mean the kind, if she wants to testify against her husband on adultery, she has to have two witnesses, plus her, because her voice and one other person as a witness does not equal him, because she's not equal to a man. Oh. Okay. All right.

But you have that one. And that's okay. No. It's not okay. It's not okay.

It shouldn't be okay in any western country, period. Should not be okay.

Unfortunately, we're all turning a blind eye to it.