November 29, 2025 • 48 mins
SEGMENT 1: Frank Gaffney is by Grant Newsham Pt. 1
SEGMENT 2: Frank Gaffney is by Grant Newsham Pt. 2
SEGMENT 3: Frank Gaffney is by Bill Walton
SEGMENT 4: Frank Gaffney is by Gordon Chang Pt. 1
SEGMENT 5: Frank Gaffney is by Gordon Chang Pt. 2
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
We're back, and so praise the Lord is Gordon g
Chang follow him with that handle at X if you would.
It is an incredibly important feed and resource for our country,
as are all of his appearances on this program. Yes,
but many many others as well, including I want to
say a special word of appreciation to you and to
(00:32):
your host frequently, Maria Bartiromo at Fox Business and Fox News. Gordon,
the two of you are rendering week upon week, I
think incalculably important service to our country doing well pretty
much what you just talked about. It's not the same
(00:53):
thing as having our government, specifically President Trump laying out
what we're up against, but do and a frequent topic
for your conversations with Maria and her efforts including two well,
I think it's now the three if I'm not mistaken,
maybe four specials that she has done on various aspects
(01:14):
of China's unrestricted warfare, and in particular the financial warfare
elements of it is to discuss how it is that
our mavens of Wall Street persist in taking money from
American investors, much of it without their knowledge, and putting
(01:38):
it into Chinese companies, including Chinese companies working directly for
the military of Communist China building up the threat that
it poses to us. And I would just ask you.
We did a webinar on this subject last week. I
commend it to all of our listeners. Committee on the
Present Danger China as the sponsor Present Danger China is
(02:00):
where you can find it, and I entreat you to
take stock of this horror and help us correct it
and gordon your thoughts on that subject and the need
for such a course correction. Sir.
Speaker 2 (02:17):
We don't understand the Chinese political system and because of that,
we are pouring money into the Chinese military, which is
configuring itself to kill Americans. Just to give you an example,
the Financial Times recently reported that there is a White
House memo that talks about Ali Baba the Internet. Chinese
(02:39):
Internet giant retailer has been helping the Chinese military and
Ali Baba and the Chinese embassy in the US deny it.
But we got to remember one thing, and that is
China runs a unitary state. No entity in China may
disobey an order of the Communist Party. So whether we're
(02:59):
talking about a state owned enterprise or a privately owned
enterprise or a publicly listed enterprise. They all are required
to help the Chinese military. And when you talk about
Ali Baba, there's also the issue of military civil fusion,
which is the doctrine that every entity and every person
(03:19):
in China who has anything the military wants has to
give it to the military. So really what we're talking
about is a single state, and we don't view China
that way. We think China is organized like we are.
That you have a government and we've got private companies,
and those private companies can defy the US government. They
(03:40):
don't have to follow what the US government says. So
for instance, Apple did that a few years ago in
refusing to unlock its phones for was either the Defense
Department or one of the other national security agencies. That's
perfectly permissible in our country. So we sort of assume
that China's organized the same way. No, it's not. And
(04:01):
because you have these big Chinese companies on our markets,
they are taking cash from Americans, they're using it to
develop their own businesses, and those businesses transfer important technology
to the Chinese military. So you know, we have this distinction.
We sometimes sanction Chinese military link companies. Well, every company
(04:23):
in China, regardless of its business is military linked and
so therefore none of them should be on our exchanges.
And also Frank Americans should not be permitted to invest
in Chinese companies in China. And right now there is
a torrent of foreign cash going into China's equity markets. Now, yeah,
the Chinese economy is stumbling, but the markets there are hot,
(04:45):
and we are helping to fuel this. These Chinese military companies,
which means all Chinese companies.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
And thereby prop up the Chinese Communist Party as well,
which as well, as you said at the outset, is
in tent on destroying. This is the height of insanity. So,
as you may know, Gordon, in the webinar, we were
able to present some of the highlights of an interview
(05:13):
that I had with Congressman John Molinar, the Chairman of
the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party and
absolutely extraordinary legislator man who I think is doing probably
as important a job as any in our government at
the moment in trying to expose what we're up against
and encourage on the one hand, the government to take
(05:37):
the necessary steps to address it, and the private sector,
especially these Wall Street companies. He has particularly gone after
Jamie Diamond at JP Morgan and Brian moynihan at Bank
America and the CEO of Morgan Stanley and others about
(05:58):
the help that they're giving to the Chinese military, among others.
And I wish him well in doing that, but I
also am extraordinarily happy that he is saying he intends
to legislate to put into statute the kinds of changes
(06:18):
that President Trump at the outset of his second term
announced in his as he calls it, America First Investment policy,
and I just pray he'll be able to get that done.
But I wanted to ask you about a specific initiative
that could be done basically right away without having to
go through the sausage making of legislation and getting the
(06:40):
President's signature and so on, and that is ending a
memorandum of understanding negotiated, as you know, with the help
of then Vice President Joe Biden, who subsequently went on
to become I think a Chinese asset controlled asset, as
Sam Fatus calls him, by allowing the Chinese communist parties companies,
(07:06):
including ones that are tied to the PLA, as you say,
preferential access to our capital markets Gordon. They don't have
to abide by our securities laws or regulations uniquely not
American companies can't do that, not European companies, nobody else,
just those of our mortal enemy. What is wrong with
that picture? And would you agree that Paul Atkins, the
(07:30):
Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, ought to rip
this thing up right away and within thirty days that
underpinning for this whole enterprise on Wall Street with China
would come undone.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
I think whatever one thinks about Chinese companies on American exchanges,
and there's all sorts of opinions about it, there is
no justification, no justification for giving Chinese companies a free
pass on US securities law. This is just I don't
understand the motivation for it. I don't understand why we've
(08:07):
permitted this. And yes, the sec should rip up this
memorandum immediately, and the President the Trump administration can do
it without going through, as you say, the sausage making
of American legislation. Because the American markets are deep and
they are the world's most attractive. Because the rules favor everybody,
(08:28):
they just they make sure that the company's disclose well
We've given essentially the right to the Chinese not to
disclose relevant information for investors that corrodes the reputation of
our markets. Why are we doing this? There is, as
I said, no reason why, and I think the Trump
administration needs absolutely to revoke that memorandum, especially in light
(08:52):
of that February Investment America Investment First memorandum that the
White House issued.
Speaker 1 (08:58):
Amen. I'm so pleased that you feel this way too, Gordon,
because I think that you have become renowned not just
for your warnings of what's afoot here, but also highly
respected for your recommendations as to what we must do
about it. And this is one of those practical, near term,
(09:22):
very effective steps that we can take, and if you
will speak about it on your other platforms, it will
go a long way, I think, to helping make this happen.
God bless you, my friend. Thank you for joining us regularly,
and we look forward to our next visit. In the meantime,
I have a very happy Thanksgiving. Bless you and your
family and the work you do. We'll talk with you soon.
(09:46):
The rest of you, I hope will stick to We'll
be right back with more. Right for this welcome to
(10:26):
Securing America with me, Frank Affney, the program that's a
kind of owner's manual for protecting the country we love
against all enemies foreign and domestic, to the glory of
God at his Kingdom. We're going to talk about all
of the challenges that we're facing from what I considered
to be the single most serious threat facing our nation,
(10:50):
and that would be the Chinese Communist Party, the determination
it has to destroy this country, and the relentless way
it has been pursuing that ambition for decades, mostly without
any effective response or even any particular clarity that it's
(11:12):
happening on the part of the United States government and therefore,
of course the American people. Few have understood better the
peril of that situation than our first guest. He is
the Great Gordon Chang. You can follow him as I
do at Gordon GI Chang at Twitter. He is also
(11:33):
a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute, a columnist
for Newsweek, the author, most recently of Plan Read Communist
China's Project Destroy America. We are privileged to have him
as a regular contributor to this program, as he does
on so many other platforms. His clarity on all these
(11:55):
issues is of surpassing importance, and we're deeply grateful to
him for visiting with us at a time such as this. Gordon,
welcome back to my friend.
Speaker 2 (12:03):
Well, I'm deeply grateful to be able to talk to you, Frank,
so thank you.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
Thank you, my friend. Let me start, Gordon by asking
you about the topic of a webinar of our committee
on the Present Danger China that will be held at
one pm Wednesday, Eastern time. I'd like to have your
comments for a contribution to that program as well as
(12:30):
this one, Gordon. So I'm going to set it up
by asking the following. We have, as I've vindicated, an
ongoing problem of abiding and indeed intensifying Chinese aggression. Mostly
it has taken place in the non kinetic space, that
(12:54):
is to say, in various ways that are harmful, but
on occasion it gets pretty darn kinetic, if not explosive,
at least murderous, for example, with fentanyl and with the
COVID nineteen biological warfare attack. The question is at what
(13:17):
point does this become a war? And if we've already
crossed that line, what must we do in response?
Speaker 2 (13:29):
We Americans think of war as kinetic war, World War two,
Korean War, etc. China has a project to destroy America,
and we have to view it in terms of a struggle.
And as you point out, Frank, sometimes the war goes kinetic,
but sometimes it isn't. But all the time, China is
intending to take down our society. Now, to start with
(13:52):
the basics. In May twenty nineteen, People's Daily, which is
the most authoritative publication in China, carried a landmark editorial
that declared a quote unquote people's war on us. That's
a term which resonates in Communist Party thinking. It goes
all the way back to the Maoist era. And if
(14:13):
we needed a definition, Ela Daily, which is the main
propaganda organ of the Chinese military, in March to twenty
twenty three, defined People's war as total war. Now China,
although it denies it, has a doctrine of unrestricted warfare.
That's the title of that nineteen ninety nine book from
two Chinese Air Force Kernels, which essentially argues that the
(14:36):
China can use any tactics, including terrorism, to take down
the US. And to show you the nature of this struggle.
In that book, they talk about bin Laden, who China
at the time was actually supporting. They talk about Bin
Laden hitting the US. So that's two years before nine
to eleven. So it gives you a dimension of all
(14:57):
of this. Now, China knows that the the United States
is a far stronger society, and so what they've been
trying to do is to weaken US, and they do
it in a number of different ways. So you mentioned
COVID nineteen. We know COVID nineteen came from the Wuhan
Institute of Virology. We don't know whether it was a
(15:18):
manufactured biological weapon or whether it was just escape pathogens.
I think it was a biological weapon, but that's something
question for virologists. And we know that it escaped into
the Chinese population and there are questions about that. But
what's really important is not anything up to that point.
(15:39):
It's what Sijnping did after that disease got into the
Chinese population, because he then took two decisions. One of
them is that he told the world it was not
transmissible human to human when he knew it was highly contagious.
He had to know it was highly contagious no later
than the second week of December. But China did not
admit human transmissibility until January twenty of twenty twenty, and
(16:04):
then he said it was only limited transmissibility. And then
all the while they were telling health officials around the world,
including the United States on January three, I think it
was that this was don't worry about it. The other
thing they did was while they were locking down their
own society, they were telling others to take rivals from
(16:26):
China without travel restrictions or quarantines. Lockdowns are controversial, but
by locking down their own society, they were telling the
world they thought this was an effective way to stop disease.
You take these two things together, lying about contagiousness and
the lockdowns, and it shows that the spread of this
disease outside China's borders was deliberate. That means seven million
(16:48):
people outside of the China who died from COVID. Those
were murders. That includes one point two million Americans. We
know about fentanyl. Last year, forty eight thousand Americans from
a disease which we know the Communist Party sorry, a
drug which the Communist Party has been behind. They are
fully behind the fentanyl scourge. We know that because fentanyl producers,
(17:15):
some of them are state owned. But even if they're not,
China runs a total surveillance state, and they know what
these fentanyl producers are doing. Chinese diplomats give covered to
the gangs. Chinese central government provides subsidies for the production
of fentanyl. Every container that leaves China is inspected by
Chinese officials. China's TikTok promotes illicited drug use. The fentanyl
(17:36):
gangs they laundered their proceeds through the Chinese state banking system.
I could go on and on, but you can see
that the fentanyl deaths are not overdoses. They're murders. We
can go on a number of different things China's doing,
but we can see that this is a long term
project to take down our country, and whether we think
about war in kinetic terms or not, this is a
(17:57):
struggle which is existential.
Speaker 1 (18:02):
Gordon. That's so helpful in terms of setting the stage
for an appreciation of what they have been doing to
us until now. And you can obviously flesh it out
with other things that are not murderous literally though they
are deadly for sure, like destroying our industrial base and
(18:26):
like creating dependencies on Chinese sources of supply. That are
unreliable at best and at worst going to be.
Speaker 2 (18:34):
Cut off, attacking our food supply.
Speaker 1 (18:36):
Attacking our food supply. Indeed, and I guess I would
ask you this question very pointedly, at what point must
we consider the state we're in with respect to China
as a state of war.
Speaker 2 (18:52):
The President of the United States has an obligation to
talk to the American people about what siegumping is doing,
which is preparing all of Chinese society, not just the military,
for war. We think we're a society in peace. We're not.
And I think that this was a failure of our
presidents going back to almost the turn of the century,
(19:13):
not to talk to the American people about what China
is doing. So, although we're a far stronger society, as
I mentioned, we could lose our country because we're not
defending ourselves with the vigor and with the determination that
is necessary. So there's a failure of the American society
to understand the situation we are in, and that failure
stops at the top, starts at the top.
Speaker 1 (19:38):
I couldn't agree more. It's time that we rectify that,
and I believe that Donald Trump is the man to
do it. We'll talk about another way in which he
can make a course correction on the other side of
this very short break. It's an incredibly important topic. Please
stay t in for more.
Speaker 3 (19:55):
Right after this, we're back, and so is Bill Walton.
Speaker 1 (20:18):
We've missed him, but we have him now, and we
have him on a topic that is of very important
well moment, shall we say, because the latest conference of parties,
the thirtieth of these things, where the world gathers to
fulminate about the terrible damage that is being done to
(20:44):
the world's climate and the temperature of that climate, specifically
by human produced CO two carbon dioxide. The last time
I checked, every time we excit, we are generating it
and limiting. That seems to me to be a formula
(21:05):
for some pretty nasty things for humans, to say nothing
of cows and a lot of other creatures. But we
are joined by Bill for the purposes of explaining what
on earth this is all about, and he brings to it,
of course, the expertise of a man who has spent
much of his life in the financial sector. A maven
(21:28):
of Wall Street at Allied Capital, he has most recently
been the host of a terrific television program, The Bill
Walton Show. He has until recently been the vice chairman
of the Conservative Political Action Coalition as well Men of
many Parts, and we're interested in his views on COP thirty.
(21:48):
Welcome back, Bill. It's good to have you, my friend.
Speaker 4 (21:50):
Great, great talking with you, Frank.
Speaker 1 (21:52):
So what I have to ask just for level setting purpose, Bill,
is your informed assessment of whether, in fact, man impacted
carbon dioxide production is causing the world to end at
(22:13):
some point in the foreseeable future or similar dire outcomes.
Speaker 4 (22:18):
Well, we're talking about that that villain. CO two, which
is you mentioned, is sort of essential to life and
something we breathe out all the time, and most importantly
it's essential to plant growth. And if you look at
you know, they've done some experiments and if you have
a plant sitting in a room with a certain level
(22:38):
of CO two and then there's one just above that,
and then another above that, and you come back in
six months, the plant that was exposed to the most
CO two grows significantly larger than the other two. And
the CO two was demonized it they called it a
I remember what what was a phrase epad EPA used
to demonize it. Anyway, they did, and about fifteen years
(23:03):
ago and the.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
Well, I think they had something on their mind, like
banning it. I think at one point it was just.
Speaker 4 (23:10):
They have a term. They have a term. It's say,
oh gosh, I'm supposed to be expert in this, and
it slipped my mind. Well anyway, see, I'm I'm I'm
a member of a coalition called the CO two Coalition,
which is a group of scientists PhDs spent their lifetime
in this in this field, but you know, in physics
(23:31):
and in other related areas of science, not exactly climate,
because and the interesting thing about this group is they're
all retired. They're all sixty five, seventy seventy five years old.
Because you can't get a job in the climate field
unless you go along with the quote consensus. And so
since these guys are retired, they don't need grants, they
(23:54):
don't need their professorships. They can say they truly think,
and what they truly think is that CO two is
not only not harmful, but it's benign. And they will
admit that there has been some men made increase in
CO two and some man made increase in temperature, but
not anything that is dramatic, nor anything that caused us
(24:18):
to reorganize society, drop fossil fuels and run to windmills
and solar and windmills. Chinese built windmills, Chinese built solar panels,
and of course China two coal plants a week. They're
the largest carbon bitter in the world. And interestingly, at
(24:40):
this conference, they had the biggest pavilion and they had
the largest delegation except for the delegation from Brazil, which,
of course, since it was hosted in Brazil, you would expect. Uh.
So China has become, in our absence, the leading advocate
for the readjusting the world economy, but not that Chinese economy, uh,
(25:01):
to address climate change.
Speaker 5 (25:03):
Uh, it's it's almost the Chinese economy if you wanted
to if you wanted to wreck if you wanted to
wreck western sieve, uh, civil you would.
Speaker 4 (25:13):
You would start by reducing their ability to produce reliable, cheap,
consistent energy. And that's exactly what wind and solar are about. Germany,
we can see, used to be the manufacturing capital of
the world and now it's been, you know, eclipsed by
China and the China. The German economy is growing, so
(25:34):
the Chinese is succeeding in their plan by demonizing carbon
to to in effect destroy the German economy, the.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
And not just the German economy. This is true in
the not Well, you've.
Speaker 4 (25:47):
Got France, you've got Brussels, you've got all the all
the both most of the eager adopters, and Britain, Great Britain.
You know, cost of electricity is going up five times.
It's it's uh, it's it's it's.
Speaker 1 (26:00):
Well, so it's turned to what this so called COP
thirty was about. What was the upshot of all of
this thrashing around about climate change and man induced stuff.
I think endangerment finding was the thing you were looking
for in terms of what EPA was saying about this.
Speaker 2 (26:18):
I think that COP types are all about.
Speaker 4 (26:21):
Right, I should have had my groc open before me. Well,
you know, as you pointed out, Conference of the Parties,
you know, is what COP stands for. COP thirty thirty
is thirty years. And this guy kicked off by something
called the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and
(26:43):
they had their first meeting Earth Summit and Rio de
Janeiro in nineteen ninety two. They had another COP in
Berlin in nineteen ninety five. Now this gave us this conference.
It's not just a gathering. They come up with statements
and statements that they would hope that governments around the
world would follow to the letter. And they came up
(27:04):
the Kyoto Protocol and also the famous Paris Agreement, which
thankfully Donald Trump got us out of, which would have
had a catastrophic effect in our economy. And so they've
been coming together every year. This year was different because
it was in Brazil beside the rainforest. In fact, they
(27:24):
had to carve out big chunks of the rainforest in
order to accommodate a highway.
Speaker 1 (27:29):
To make this stuff up.
Speaker 4 (27:31):
Now you can't. Then the cruise ships offshore to accommodate
the fact there weren't enough hotel rooms, and so you've
got the cruise ships. You know, they're diesel engines running
away twenty four to seven. So the comedy is there,
But the serious thing is they want and a sense
(27:53):
if we've talked about this, Frank, this is all sort
of a one world governance agenda and similar climate what
World Health Organization is doing with their desire to take
control of governments when there's a crisis, when there's a pandemic,
and so this is more of one size fits all,
(28:14):
one world. You will be happy living with nothing, you
will be happy owning nothing. And it's interestingly you go
on the websites of all these different organizations and the
prescriptions are almost identical. This year, though the attendance was
roughly half what it was at the last one. They're
expecting one hundred thousand, they got fifty. And part of
(28:37):
that is because what Donald Trump has been doing in
the United States by really calling out what the climate
agenda as I think he flat out calls it a con,
a hoax, a con. And he has Chris Wright in
the Energy Department, who knows as much about this as
anyone that's articulating what her energy needs should be. And
(29:00):
he's been very, very strong and advogating nuclear and also
pointing out that that the hydrocarbons are not the devil
that they've been portrayed as being, and so we need
to keep those in our energy mix. You know, it's interesting,
for thirty years they've been talking about switching over to
renewables wind and solar, and the mix of energy has
(29:24):
been about eighty percent fossil fuels for that entire period.
So for all this storm and drung. They haven't affected,
you know, the source of our energies.
Speaker 1 (29:34):
And among other reasons, Bill for the very practical one
that almost everything we do that's important, whether it's you know, manufacturing,
whether it's artificial intelligence, if you think that's a thing
that will need to be pursuing, they all require reliable
(29:54):
base load power and simply don't produce.
Speaker 4 (29:58):
Yeah. Yeah, so that's so right. A couple of things here.
There have been some big brain economists that have done
studies on this, and they will say there's like almost
a one to one correlation between energy production and lower
cost energy and economic growth. And so it's it's intrinsic
in the in economies that energy is the key driver. Also,
(30:20):
if you look at a chart, our energy level has
been flatlined for gosh, I don't know, twenty twenty five years, well.
Speaker 1 (30:27):
China veluption, I mean, or what's consumption or production production.
Speaker 4 (30:33):
Production, and you know, we've done a lot of energy
saving things with appliances and different sort of regulations, and
we haven't had that big of increase in demand and
electricity China. I think though, in anticipation of AI and
other needs, you know, the these technology, new technologies just
use energy. They just it's incredible how much appetite they
(30:55):
have for electrical power. Well, their chart for electrical reduction,
in part because of these two new coal plants every
week is going up like this. So they're much more
prepared to meet, for example, the needs of artificial intelligence.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
Than we are, and increasingly from indigenous sources, notably cold.
Speaker 4 (31:22):
As you would say, I got to make this point.
I know we're about done indigenous people. At this conference.
They were trotting out indigenous people. These are Indians that
live in the rainforest to say they really rather live
in the rainforest as is and not have modern life
than to have this terrible thing carbon.
Speaker 1 (31:40):
I'm sure they were not pulled on the subject.
Speaker 4 (31:42):
I'm sure they weren't paid either.
Speaker 1 (31:45):
Just another fraud, just another hoax. Thanks Bill for this report.
We look forward to talking with you in the near future.
Thank you. I have a great Thanksgiving my friend, God
bless you and yours. We'll talk with you soon. We'll
be right back. Books, please to.
Speaker 3 (32:18):
Welcome back.
Speaker 1 (32:19):
We are talking now with a man to whom we
turn frequently on matters involving the challenges we face from
what I call Shariah supremacism. He is a practicing Muslim
by background. He is also a former Attendant commander in
(32:40):
the United States Navy. He served in its medical Corps,
among other things, serving on Capitol Hill tending to the
members of Congress there and the Supreme Court. He has been,
among other things, an internist excuse me, a nuclear medicine
(33:02):
specialist his medical practice, and is also a man who
has taken a leading role in trying to reform Islam.
He is doctor Zudi Jasser, the author of an important
book on this subject entitled The Struggle for the Soul
(33:23):
of Islam. Is I recall patriots fight to save his faith.
He has been, among other things, the founder and leader
of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy and the Muslim
Reform Movement, and we're always delighted to catch up with
him whenever we can. Doctor Jasser, we're speaking to you
before Thanksgiving. I hope you have a very happy one,
(33:46):
and I give thanks for your appearances on this program,
among other things. Welcome back, well, thank you.
Speaker 6 (33:52):
Likewise, Frank, it's always great to be with you.
Speaker 2 (33:53):
Appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (33:54):
Thank you, so Zudi. In the past few days, the President,
as shared with John Solomon and his audience that he
intends to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as an international terrorist organization.
And you have been contending with the Brothers probably as
(34:18):
long in as hard as anybody I know, both within
the struggle for the soul of Islam, as you put it,
but also in terms of their efforts to sort of
marginalize you or worse, talk to us about this group,
the role that it is playing, not just you know,
(34:38):
elsewhere around the world, but here in the United States
as well, and the implications for our country if we
fail to treat them as they should be as a
terrorist organization.
Speaker 6 (34:51):
Well, this designation has been a long time coming, and
as I talk about in my book, a Battle for
the Soul of Islam, from when I was in college
at the Inn, Wisconsin. My foray and understanding the ravages
of political Islam was working against the Muslim Student Association
and quickly getting an education on what they're all about,
(35:13):
the fact that they use Islam as a cloaking in
order to control communities, to control minorities, vulnerable groups like
women and others in their own cliques if you are
in the West, but then globally it's a movement that
whose mothership Islamism if the ideology, but the mothership of
the of the movement is the Muslim Brotherhood on the
(35:34):
Sunday side, based out of Egypt, and that movement has
had thousands upon thousands of splinter groups that have emanated
from it. And the designation of that group as a
terror group, you know, is I think one of the milestones,
if you will, and I use that term intentionally, has
been to the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood talks about
in a book milestones on how he is going to
(35:55):
defeat the West. Seydo Kotov did the same thing, and
they use these miles stones as a way to defeat secular,
non Islamic countries. And we should have milestones for America
first for defeating our greatest threats, whether it be Soviet
communism in the twentieth century or now political Islam in
the twenty first century, and all of its permutations from
(36:16):
the OIC and I think ultimately the Muslim Brotherhood by
designating it, and we can go into some of the
other points in history from the Holy Land Foundation, trial
and on victories, but this designation will certainly give us
freedom thinking Muslims a lot more oxygen.
Speaker 1 (36:35):
Well, I pray so Zudi and again, depriving you of
that oxygen is a central purpose of the Brothers, is
it not, And really trying to assure that they and
only they speak for the Muslim community in the United States,
and at the same time they're all about radicalizing it,
(36:58):
including people I believe, like you know, your own family
who came here to get away from Sharia and all
that it compels mum pithful Muslims to do, including jihad.
Speaker 6 (37:11):
Right one hundred percent, And all you need to do
is you know. I testified to Congress about this a
few times, the last time was twenty eighteen to Congressman
DeSantis on the Oversight Committee about why the Muslim Brotherhood
should be declared a terrorist organization. And at the end
of the day, a lot of these groups, if you
look at the Holyland Foundation trial, Care was a unindicted
(37:33):
co conspirator because it was part of the funnel. It's
an adjacent group that provided a lot of the contacts
and networking for funding that ultimately led to money going
to Hamas, which is why the board of the Holyland
Foundation is in prison for twenty five years. So a
lot of these adjacent groups are feeding from that same ideology.
What is that, the sense that Islam is a supremacist idea.
(37:55):
Islamic law should control the communities and it takes precedence
over any other law, be it American constitution, Western secular law,
Christian law, whatever it might be. They find those to
be inferior to their Islamic supremacism, and their emams teach
that from the pulpit within our country, which I called
out from ninety five when I was in my uniform
(38:16):
at the Islamic Society of North America, I called out
Sadaj Wahaj as being a seditious trader because he held
up the Koran and said, we are here to replace
this from the Constitution to the Qoran. And I said
that sedition. And now that Imam, thirty years later is
taking pictures with Mamdani a few weeks before he won
(38:37):
the New York mayorship, So this designation could not come
too soon and finally begin to expose the reality of
people like Mamdani and ilhan Omar that really have oaths
to systems outside of America, outside of our constitution, that
make them truly a threat to our freedom and democracy
and s.
Speaker 1 (38:57):
Just a quick point, you mentioned the Muslims Students Association,
which was the wellspring of the Muslim Brotherhood of course
in the sixties. You also mentioned the Council in American
Islamic Relations, a group that is not, I don't think
just adjacent to Hamas. It was established by Hamas. And
(39:17):
we know that because the FBI back in the day
when it did this sort of thing, was wiretapping the
organizational meeting in Philadelphia, and it was very clear that
Hamas or SAMA as they called it in code, was
you know, to be the beneficiary of this sort of
political warfare instrument called the Council on American Islamic Relations
(39:38):
or CARE. So again, you have been confronting these guys.
You have seen firsthand the kind of control they try
to exercise and the kind of submission they seek to
impose on everybody, not just Muslims like yourself, but the
rest of us as well. We have to take a
short break. When we come back, I want to talk
about another of these characters on mom Dannie met the
(40:01):
President of the White House last week. Stay tuned. We're back,
(40:25):
and so is doctor Zudi jasser Man, who served in
the uniform of the United States Navy, and these days
is seeking to run for Congress from his state of Arizona.
He did once before, he seems to be making headway
this time around, and we're very pleased to have him
here with us to talk about some of the topics
(40:47):
that that should be I hope front and center in
your race, Zudi. And another of them is the fact
that you have been fairly forthright, shall we say, in
your credit of another of these Sharia supremacists, a man
who is a convert to Islam, a convict in fact,
(41:08):
to the Shia strain of Islam that has a sort
of death cult quality to it, Twelverrism, as it's called,
despite the fact that he's not only all of that,
but a communist to boot, and the President of the
United States had properly castigated him in the race to
(41:34):
become the next mayor of New York City. Having won
that race, the President actually met with him at the
White House last week, and you'd hardly know that not
only had the President called him out for what he is,
but Zorammdani had described the President as, oh, I don't know,
a fascist and a dictator, and the like something he's
(41:56):
actually said again subsequent to the meeting, and yet he
got a very hearty welcome and a promise from the
President to try to help him succeed. What do you
make of all this, sir, and what should the rest
of us make of it?
Speaker 6 (42:10):
Yeah, you know, the President I think is likely well
intended trying to, you know, in many ways help New
Yorkers withstand the Socialist onslaught, the Islamist onslaught that's going
to happen with the mayor, and try to buffet some
of that. But at the end of the day, the
(42:30):
Islamists are simply dissimulators. They will lie in every meeting
in order to appease whoever's in front of them, and
then go on to do what they do with their
closest constituents, which are the Islamists and the Red Green Axis.
So I wouldn't trust anything Mamdanie would say at the
press conference or at the meeting that he had with
the President. And actually I was a bit saddened to
(42:53):
see him platform this way because there's no really contrary
narrative right now for Muslims. One of the reasons I'm
running is I believe we need to flip the script
the DEI years. If you look recently just this weekend,
h Rap Brown, who then Trent, who then converted to Islam,
was part of the Red Green Axis back in the
(43:15):
sixties and seventies when he was killing cops and radicalizing
Muslims along with Malcolm X and you know Fara Khan
and Muhammad Ali and other icons. And now we've come
thirty forty years later with BLM, etc. That Red Green
axis is more potent than ever. And Mamdani as part
of the immigrant part of that access of the Islamists
(43:37):
that have come to destroy America from abroad, be it
from Congo, Iran, India, wherever it might be. They despise,
they despise the West, and they're trying to use Katari money,
Turkish money, and others to destroy us in a common
enemy process that with the Chinese and others. And we
have to expose that. And we want to flip the
(43:59):
script so that we can say, you know what, this
is a very American battle. Our founding fathers fought against
theocracy and created the greatest democracy in the world. Muslims
are having this same battle. And President Trump said it
as you mentioned to me back in twenty sixteen that
this is a core battle against radical Islam, theocratic Islam,
that we have Muslims that are on our side in
(44:19):
our reform movement, and the Mamdanis of the world are
the enemy, if you will, of that from that ideology
that we need to defeat. And I hope he has
for every one press conference he does with Mamdani, he
has ten with our Clarity Coalition and Muslim reformers to
begin to flip that narrative, if you will, and make
it about diversity of ideas, not diversity of skin color
(44:42):
and other apologetics.
Speaker 1 (44:44):
Well, I do too, Zudi, and I want to thank
you for bringing back up this idea of a very
important speech that the president made when he was actually
the Republican nominee for presidents in his first campaign sixteen.
In August fifteenth of that year's to be precise, he
(45:05):
went to Youngstown, Ohio to deliver a profound denunciation of
what Hillary Clinton was doing with the Muslim brothers and
others in the you know what, he called the radical
Islamic you know, sort of ideological camp. And in addition
(45:26):
to condemning the ideology of radical Islam, he said two
things that I think weren't repeating in this moment, specifically
about Mumdani. He pledged to quote screen out any immigrants
who have hostile attitudes towards our country or its principles,
(45:48):
or who believe that Sharia law should supplant American law.
He also said that he would take it to the
quote support networks for radical Islam in this country, which
will be stripped out and removed one by one. So
(46:14):
I guess I ask you, Zudi Jasser in New York City,
for example, is that likely that we'll see people who
espouse Sharia being discouraged from coming to the city taking up,
you know, rolls in networks there of the Muslim brotherhood,
(46:34):
or is it likely that we'll see more of that,
In fact, they'll be kind of given a sanctuary in
which to operate. And one other thing, you said that
you wouldn't trust anything he says, How about the loyalty
oath that he's supposed to take upon taking office. You've
sworn that oath many times I know in the course
of your career. If he does take it, whether it's
(46:57):
on a Quran or something else, is it likely that
he will adhere to that oath in your estimations.
Speaker 6 (47:03):
Well well, as we learned in the Cold War, we
can vet immigrants for whether they're part of the Communist
Party or part of ideologies that threaten us. And it's
you know, we've put them on record. They could lie,
but we put them on record. And then ultimately, as
I've tried so many times in the House and the
Senate to tell them, listen, we need to vet folks
that get clearances and so many whether it's police, Pentagon officials,
(47:26):
service members, all of them should be vetted for these ideologies.
And that vetting is not only their loyalty oaths, which
they absolutely have to take as citizens, but it's also
what have they said to be on our side in
this war for liberty, for separation of Moskin State, for
our constitution? Have they countered Shariah? And mcdonnie hasn't done
(47:47):
any of that. He stood next to its misogynists, he
stood next to anti American theocrats and has apologized. These
are organizations that he works with, our part and parcel
of cut, our Turkey, et cetera. And they hate America
and the hate.
Speaker 1 (48:01):
Israel, and they're seeking to destroy us from within. Zudi Jesser,
thank you for standing against all of that. Come back
to us with updates on it, if you would. God
bless you, my friend. Thanks to all of you for
joining us this time. I hope you'll do so next time.
Until then, go forth and multiply
We're back, and so praise the Lord is Gordon g
Chang follow him with that handle at X if you would.
It is an incredibly important feed and resource for our country,
as are all of his appearances on this program. Yes,
but many many others as well, including I want to
say a special word of appreciation to you and to
(00:32):
your host frequently, Maria Bartiromo at Fox Business and Fox News. Gordon,
the two of you are rendering week upon week, I
think incalculably important service to our country doing well pretty
much what you just talked about. It's not the same
(00:53):
thing as having our government, specifically President Trump laying out
what we're up against, but do and a frequent topic
for your conversations with Maria and her efforts including two well,
I think it's now the three if I'm not mistaken,
maybe four specials that she has done on various aspects
(01:14):
of China's unrestricted warfare, and in particular the financial warfare
elements of it is to discuss how it is that
our mavens of Wall Street persist in taking money from
American investors, much of it without their knowledge, and putting
(01:38):
it into Chinese companies, including Chinese companies working directly for
the military of Communist China building up the threat that
it poses to us. And I would just ask you.
We did a webinar on this subject last week. I
commend it to all of our listeners. Committee on the
Present Danger China as the sponsor Present Danger China is
(02:00):
where you can find it, and I entreat you to
take stock of this horror and help us correct it
and gordon your thoughts on that subject and the need
for such a course correction. Sir.
Speaker 2 (02:17):
We don't understand the Chinese political system and because of that,
we are pouring money into the Chinese military, which is
configuring itself to kill Americans. Just to give you an example,
the Financial Times recently reported that there is a White
House memo that talks about Ali Baba the Internet. Chinese
(02:39):
Internet giant retailer has been helping the Chinese military and
Ali Baba and the Chinese embassy in the US deny it.
But we got to remember one thing, and that is
China runs a unitary state. No entity in China may
disobey an order of the Communist Party. So whether we're
(02:59):
talking about a state owned enterprise or a privately owned
enterprise or a publicly listed enterprise. They all are required
to help the Chinese military. And when you talk about
Ali Baba, there's also the issue of military civil fusion,
which is the doctrine that every entity and every person
(03:19):
in China who has anything the military wants has to
give it to the military. So really what we're talking
about is a single state, and we don't view China
that way. We think China is organized like we are.
That you have a government and we've got private companies,
and those private companies can defy the US government. They
(03:40):
don't have to follow what the US government says. So
for instance, Apple did that a few years ago in
refusing to unlock its phones for was either the Defense
Department or one of the other national security agencies. That's
perfectly permissible in our country. So we sort of assume
that China's organized the same way. No, it's not. And
(04:01):
because you have these big Chinese companies on our markets,
they are taking cash from Americans, they're using it to
develop their own businesses, and those businesses transfer important technology
to the Chinese military. So you know, we have this distinction.
We sometimes sanction Chinese military link companies. Well, every company
(04:23):
in China, regardless of its business is military linked and
so therefore none of them should be on our exchanges.
And also Frank Americans should not be permitted to invest
in Chinese companies in China. And right now there is
a torrent of foreign cash going into China's equity markets. Now, yeah,
the Chinese economy is stumbling, but the markets there are hot,
(04:45):
and we are helping to fuel this. These Chinese military companies,
which means all Chinese companies.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
And thereby prop up the Chinese Communist Party as well,
which as well, as you said at the outset, is
in tent on destroying. This is the height of insanity. So,
as you may know, Gordon, in the webinar, we were
able to present some of the highlights of an interview
(05:13):
that I had with Congressman John Molinar, the Chairman of
the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party and
absolutely extraordinary legislator man who I think is doing probably
as important a job as any in our government at
the moment in trying to expose what we're up against
and encourage on the one hand, the government to take
(05:37):
the necessary steps to address it, and the private sector,
especially these Wall Street companies. He has particularly gone after
Jamie Diamond at JP Morgan and Brian moynihan at Bank
America and the CEO of Morgan Stanley and others about
(05:58):
the help that they're giving to the Chinese military, among others.
And I wish him well in doing that, but I
also am extraordinarily happy that he is saying he intends
to legislate to put into statute the kinds of changes
(06:18):
that President Trump at the outset of his second term
announced in his as he calls it, America First Investment policy,
and I just pray he'll be able to get that done.
But I wanted to ask you about a specific initiative
that could be done basically right away without having to
go through the sausage making of legislation and getting the
(06:40):
President's signature and so on, and that is ending a
memorandum of understanding negotiated, as you know, with the help
of then Vice President Joe Biden, who subsequently went on
to become I think a Chinese asset controlled asset, as
Sam Fatus calls him, by allowing the Chinese communist parties companies,
(07:06):
including ones that are tied to the PLA, as you say,
preferential access to our capital markets Gordon. They don't have
to abide by our securities laws or regulations uniquely not
American companies can't do that, not European companies, nobody else,
just those of our mortal enemy. What is wrong with
that picture? And would you agree that Paul Atkins, the
(07:30):
Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, ought to rip
this thing up right away and within thirty days that
underpinning for this whole enterprise on Wall Street with China
would come undone.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
I think whatever one thinks about Chinese companies on American exchanges,
and there's all sorts of opinions about it, there is
no justification, no justification for giving Chinese companies a free
pass on US securities law. This is just I don't
understand the motivation for it. I don't understand why we've
(08:07):
permitted this. And yes, the sec should rip up this
memorandum immediately, and the President the Trump administration can do
it without going through, as you say, the sausage making
of American legislation. Because the American markets are deep and
they are the world's most attractive. Because the rules favor everybody,
(08:28):
they just they make sure that the company's disclose well
We've given essentially the right to the Chinese not to
disclose relevant information for investors that corrodes the reputation of
our markets. Why are we doing this? There is, as
I said, no reason why, and I think the Trump
administration needs absolutely to revoke that memorandum, especially in light
(08:52):
of that February Investment America Investment First memorandum that the
White House issued.
Speaker 1 (08:58):
Amen. I'm so pleased that you feel this way too, Gordon,
because I think that you have become renowned not just
for your warnings of what's afoot here, but also highly
respected for your recommendations as to what we must do
about it. And this is one of those practical, near term,
(09:22):
very effective steps that we can take, and if you
will speak about it on your other platforms, it will
go a long way, I think, to helping make this happen.
God bless you, my friend. Thank you for joining us regularly,
and we look forward to our next visit. In the meantime,
I have a very happy Thanksgiving. Bless you and your
family and the work you do. We'll talk with you soon.
(09:46):
The rest of you, I hope will stick to We'll
be right back with more. Right for this welcome to
(10:26):
Securing America with me, Frank Affney, the program that's a
kind of owner's manual for protecting the country we love
against all enemies foreign and domestic, to the glory of
God at his Kingdom. We're going to talk about all
of the challenges that we're facing from what I considered
to be the single most serious threat facing our nation,
(10:50):
and that would be the Chinese Communist Party, the determination
it has to destroy this country, and the relentless way
it has been pursuing that ambition for decades, mostly without
any effective response or even any particular clarity that it's
(11:12):
happening on the part of the United States government and therefore,
of course the American people. Few have understood better the
peril of that situation than our first guest. He is
the Great Gordon Chang. You can follow him as I
do at Gordon GI Chang at Twitter. He is also
(11:33):
a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute, a columnist
for Newsweek, the author, most recently of Plan Read Communist
China's Project Destroy America. We are privileged to have him
as a regular contributor to this program, as he does
on so many other platforms. His clarity on all these
(11:55):
issues is of surpassing importance, and we're deeply grateful to
him for visiting with us at a time such as this. Gordon,
welcome back to my friend.
Speaker 2 (12:03):
Well, I'm deeply grateful to be able to talk to you, Frank,
so thank you.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
Thank you, my friend. Let me start, Gordon by asking
you about the topic of a webinar of our committee
on the Present Danger China that will be held at
one pm Wednesday, Eastern time. I'd like to have your
comments for a contribution to that program as well as
(12:30):
this one, Gordon. So I'm going to set it up
by asking the following. We have, as I've vindicated, an
ongoing problem of abiding and indeed intensifying Chinese aggression. Mostly
it has taken place in the non kinetic space, that
(12:54):
is to say, in various ways that are harmful, but
on occasion it gets pretty darn kinetic, if not explosive,
at least murderous, for example, with fentanyl and with the
COVID nineteen biological warfare attack. The question is at what
(13:17):
point does this become a war? And if we've already
crossed that line, what must we do in response?
Speaker 2 (13:29):
We Americans think of war as kinetic war, World War two,
Korean War, etc. China has a project to destroy America,
and we have to view it in terms of a struggle.
And as you point out, Frank, sometimes the war goes kinetic,
but sometimes it isn't. But all the time, China is
intending to take down our society. Now, to start with
(13:52):
the basics. In May twenty nineteen, People's Daily, which is
the most authoritative publication in China, carried a landmark editorial
that declared a quote unquote people's war on us. That's
a term which resonates in Communist Party thinking. It goes
all the way back to the Maoist era. And if
(14:13):
we needed a definition, Ela Daily, which is the main
propaganda organ of the Chinese military, in March to twenty
twenty three, defined People's war as total war. Now China,
although it denies it, has a doctrine of unrestricted warfare.
That's the title of that nineteen ninety nine book from
two Chinese Air Force Kernels, which essentially argues that the
(14:36):
China can use any tactics, including terrorism, to take down
the US. And to show you the nature of this struggle.
In that book, they talk about bin Laden, who China
at the time was actually supporting. They talk about Bin
Laden hitting the US. So that's two years before nine
to eleven. So it gives you a dimension of all
(14:57):
of this. Now, China knows that the the United States
is a far stronger society, and so what they've been
trying to do is to weaken US, and they do
it in a number of different ways. So you mentioned
COVID nineteen. We know COVID nineteen came from the Wuhan
Institute of Virology. We don't know whether it was a
(15:18):
manufactured biological weapon or whether it was just escape pathogens.
I think it was a biological weapon, but that's something
question for virologists. And we know that it escaped into
the Chinese population and there are questions about that. But
what's really important is not anything up to that point.
(15:39):
It's what Sijnping did after that disease got into the
Chinese population, because he then took two decisions. One of
them is that he told the world it was not
transmissible human to human when he knew it was highly contagious.
He had to know it was highly contagious no later
than the second week of December. But China did not
admit human transmissibility until January twenty of twenty twenty, and
(16:04):
then he said it was only limited transmissibility. And then
all the while they were telling health officials around the world,
including the United States on January three, I think it
was that this was don't worry about it. The other
thing they did was while they were locking down their
own society, they were telling others to take rivals from
(16:26):
China without travel restrictions or quarantines. Lockdowns are controversial, but
by locking down their own society, they were telling the
world they thought this was an effective way to stop disease.
You take these two things together, lying about contagiousness and
the lockdowns, and it shows that the spread of this
disease outside China's borders was deliberate. That means seven million
(16:48):
people outside of the China who died from COVID. Those
were murders. That includes one point two million Americans. We
know about fentanyl. Last year, forty eight thousand Americans from
a disease which we know the Communist Party sorry, a
drug which the Communist Party has been behind. They are
fully behind the fentanyl scourge. We know that because fentanyl producers,
(17:15):
some of them are state owned. But even if they're not,
China runs a total surveillance state, and they know what
these fentanyl producers are doing. Chinese diplomats give covered to
the gangs. Chinese central government provides subsidies for the production
of fentanyl. Every container that leaves China is inspected by
Chinese officials. China's TikTok promotes illicited drug use. The fentanyl
(17:36):
gangs they laundered their proceeds through the Chinese state banking system.
I could go on and on, but you can see
that the fentanyl deaths are not overdoses. They're murders. We
can go on a number of different things China's doing,
but we can see that this is a long term
project to take down our country, and whether we think
about war in kinetic terms or not, this is a
(17:57):
struggle which is existential.
Speaker 1 (18:02):
Gordon. That's so helpful in terms of setting the stage
for an appreciation of what they have been doing to
us until now. And you can obviously flesh it out
with other things that are not murderous literally though they
are deadly for sure, like destroying our industrial base and
(18:26):
like creating dependencies on Chinese sources of supply. That are
unreliable at best and at worst going to be.
Speaker 2 (18:34):
Cut off, attacking our food supply.
Speaker 1 (18:36):
Attacking our food supply. Indeed, and I guess I would
ask you this question very pointedly, at what point must
we consider the state we're in with respect to China
as a state of war.
Speaker 2 (18:52):
The President of the United States has an obligation to
talk to the American people about what siegumping is doing,
which is preparing all of Chinese society, not just the military,
for war. We think we're a society in peace. We're not.
And I think that this was a failure of our
presidents going back to almost the turn of the century,
(19:13):
not to talk to the American people about what China
is doing. So, although we're a far stronger society, as
I mentioned, we could lose our country because we're not
defending ourselves with the vigor and with the determination that
is necessary. So there's a failure of the American society
to understand the situation we are in, and that failure
stops at the top, starts at the top.
Speaker 1 (19:38):
I couldn't agree more. It's time that we rectify that,
and I believe that Donald Trump is the man to
do it. We'll talk about another way in which he
can make a course correction on the other side of
this very short break. It's an incredibly important topic. Please
stay t in for more.
Speaker 3 (19:55):
Right after this, we're back, and so is Bill Walton.
Speaker 1 (20:18):
We've missed him, but we have him now, and we
have him on a topic that is of very important
well moment, shall we say, because the latest conference of parties,
the thirtieth of these things, where the world gathers to
fulminate about the terrible damage that is being done to
(20:44):
the world's climate and the temperature of that climate, specifically
by human produced CO two carbon dioxide. The last time
I checked, every time we excit, we are generating it
and limiting. That seems to me to be a formula
(21:05):
for some pretty nasty things for humans, to say nothing
of cows and a lot of other creatures. But we
are joined by Bill for the purposes of explaining what
on earth this is all about, and he brings to it,
of course, the expertise of a man who has spent
much of his life in the financial sector. A maven
(21:28):
of Wall Street at Allied Capital, he has most recently
been the host of a terrific television program, The Bill
Walton Show. He has until recently been the vice chairman
of the Conservative Political Action Coalition as well Men of
many Parts, and we're interested in his views on COP thirty.
(21:48):
Welcome back, Bill. It's good to have you, my friend.
Speaker 4 (21:50):
Great, great talking with you, Frank.
Speaker 1 (21:52):
So what I have to ask just for level setting purpose, Bill,
is your informed assessment of whether, in fact, man impacted
carbon dioxide production is causing the world to end at
(22:13):
some point in the foreseeable future or similar dire outcomes.
Speaker 4 (22:18):
Well, we're talking about that that villain. CO two, which
is you mentioned, is sort of essential to life and
something we breathe out all the time, and most importantly
it's essential to plant growth. And if you look at
you know, they've done some experiments and if you have
a plant sitting in a room with a certain level
(22:38):
of CO two and then there's one just above that,
and then another above that, and you come back in
six months, the plant that was exposed to the most
CO two grows significantly larger than the other two. And
the CO two was demonized it they called it a
I remember what what was a phrase epad EPA used
to demonize it. Anyway, they did, and about fifteen years
(23:03):
ago and the.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
Well, I think they had something on their mind, like
banning it. I think at one point it was just.
Speaker 4 (23:10):
They have a term. They have a term. It's say,
oh gosh, I'm supposed to be expert in this, and
it slipped my mind. Well anyway, see, I'm I'm I'm
a member of a coalition called the CO two Coalition,
which is a group of scientists PhDs spent their lifetime
in this in this field, but you know, in physics
(23:31):
and in other related areas of science, not exactly climate,
because and the interesting thing about this group is they're
all retired. They're all sixty five, seventy seventy five years old.
Because you can't get a job in the climate field
unless you go along with the quote consensus. And so
since these guys are retired, they don't need grants, they
(23:54):
don't need their professorships. They can say they truly think,
and what they truly think is that CO two is
not only not harmful, but it's benign. And they will
admit that there has been some men made increase in
CO two and some man made increase in temperature, but
not anything that is dramatic, nor anything that caused us
(24:18):
to reorganize society, drop fossil fuels and run to windmills
and solar and windmills. Chinese built windmills, Chinese built solar panels,
and of course China two coal plants a week. They're
the largest carbon bitter in the world. And interestingly, at
(24:40):
this conference, they had the biggest pavilion and they had
the largest delegation except for the delegation from Brazil, which,
of course, since it was hosted in Brazil, you would expect. Uh.
So China has become, in our absence, the leading advocate
for the readjusting the world economy, but not that Chinese economy, uh,
(25:01):
to address climate change.
Speaker 5 (25:03):
Uh, it's it's almost the Chinese economy if you wanted
to if you wanted to wreck if you wanted to
wreck western sieve, uh, civil you would.
Speaker 4 (25:13):
You would start by reducing their ability to produce reliable, cheap,
consistent energy. And that's exactly what wind and solar are about. Germany,
we can see, used to be the manufacturing capital of
the world and now it's been, you know, eclipsed by
China and the China. The German economy is growing, so
(25:34):
the Chinese is succeeding in their plan by demonizing carbon
to to in effect destroy the German economy, the.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
And not just the German economy. This is true in
the not Well, you've.
Speaker 4 (25:47):
Got France, you've got Brussels, you've got all the all
the both most of the eager adopters, and Britain, Great Britain.
You know, cost of electricity is going up five times.
It's it's uh, it's it's it's.
Speaker 1 (26:00):
Well, so it's turned to what this so called COP
thirty was about. What was the upshot of all of
this thrashing around about climate change and man induced stuff.
I think endangerment finding was the thing you were looking
for in terms of what EPA was saying about this.
Speaker 2 (26:18):
I think that COP types are all about.
Speaker 4 (26:21):
Right, I should have had my groc open before me. Well,
you know, as you pointed out, Conference of the Parties,
you know, is what COP stands for. COP thirty thirty
is thirty years. And this guy kicked off by something
called the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and
(26:43):
they had their first meeting Earth Summit and Rio de
Janeiro in nineteen ninety two. They had another COP in
Berlin in nineteen ninety five. Now this gave us this conference.
It's not just a gathering. They come up with statements
and statements that they would hope that governments around the
world would follow to the letter. And they came up
(27:04):
the Kyoto Protocol and also the famous Paris Agreement, which
thankfully Donald Trump got us out of, which would have
had a catastrophic effect in our economy. And so they've
been coming together every year. This year was different because
it was in Brazil beside the rainforest. In fact, they
(27:24):
had to carve out big chunks of the rainforest in
order to accommodate a highway.
Speaker 1 (27:29):
To make this stuff up.
Speaker 4 (27:31):
Now you can't. Then the cruise ships offshore to accommodate
the fact there weren't enough hotel rooms, and so you've
got the cruise ships. You know, they're diesel engines running
away twenty four to seven. So the comedy is there,
But the serious thing is they want and a sense
(27:53):
if we've talked about this, Frank, this is all sort
of a one world governance agenda and similar climate what
World Health Organization is doing with their desire to take
control of governments when there's a crisis, when there's a pandemic,
and so this is more of one size fits all,
(28:14):
one world. You will be happy living with nothing, you
will be happy owning nothing. And it's interestingly you go
on the websites of all these different organizations and the
prescriptions are almost identical. This year, though the attendance was
roughly half what it was at the last one. They're
expecting one hundred thousand, they got fifty. And part of
(28:37):
that is because what Donald Trump has been doing in
the United States by really calling out what the climate
agenda as I think he flat out calls it a con,
a hoax, a con. And he has Chris Wright in
the Energy Department, who knows as much about this as
anyone that's articulating what her energy needs should be. And
(29:00):
he's been very, very strong and advogating nuclear and also
pointing out that that the hydrocarbons are not the devil
that they've been portrayed as being, and so we need
to keep those in our energy mix. You know, it's interesting,
for thirty years they've been talking about switching over to
renewables wind and solar, and the mix of energy has
(29:24):
been about eighty percent fossil fuels for that entire period.
So for all this storm and drung. They haven't affected,
you know, the source of our energies.
Speaker 1 (29:34):
And among other reasons, Bill for the very practical one
that almost everything we do that's important, whether it's you know, manufacturing,
whether it's artificial intelligence, if you think that's a thing
that will need to be pursuing, they all require reliable
(29:54):
base load power and simply don't produce.
Speaker 4 (29:58):
Yeah. Yeah, so that's so right. A couple of things here.
There have been some big brain economists that have done
studies on this, and they will say there's like almost
a one to one correlation between energy production and lower
cost energy and economic growth. And so it's it's intrinsic
in the in economies that energy is the key driver. Also,
(30:20):
if you look at a chart, our energy level has
been flatlined for gosh, I don't know, twenty twenty five years, well.
Speaker 1 (30:27):
China veluption, I mean, or what's consumption or production production.
Speaker 4 (30:33):
Production, and you know, we've done a lot of energy
saving things with appliances and different sort of regulations, and
we haven't had that big of increase in demand and
electricity China. I think though, in anticipation of AI and
other needs, you know, the these technology, new technologies just
use energy. They just it's incredible how much appetite they
(30:55):
have for electrical power. Well, their chart for electrical reduction,
in part because of these two new coal plants every
week is going up like this. So they're much more
prepared to meet, for example, the needs of artificial intelligence.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
Than we are, and increasingly from indigenous sources, notably cold.
Speaker 4 (31:22):
As you would say, I got to make this point.
I know we're about done indigenous people. At this conference.
They were trotting out indigenous people. These are Indians that
live in the rainforest to say they really rather live
in the rainforest as is and not have modern life
than to have this terrible thing carbon.
Speaker 1 (31:40):
I'm sure they were not pulled on the subject.
Speaker 4 (31:42):
I'm sure they weren't paid either.
Speaker 1 (31:45):
Just another fraud, just another hoax. Thanks Bill for this report.
We look forward to talking with you in the near future.
Thank you. I have a great Thanksgiving my friend, God
bless you and yours. We'll talk with you soon. We'll
be right back. Books, please to.
Speaker 3 (32:18):
Welcome back.
Speaker 1 (32:19):
We are talking now with a man to whom we
turn frequently on matters involving the challenges we face from
what I call Shariah supremacism. He is a practicing Muslim
by background. He is also a former Attendant commander in
(32:40):
the United States Navy. He served in its medical Corps,
among other things, serving on Capitol Hill tending to the
members of Congress there and the Supreme Court. He has been,
among other things, an internist excuse me, a nuclear medicine
(33:02):
specialist his medical practice, and is also a man who
has taken a leading role in trying to reform Islam.
He is doctor Zudi Jasser, the author of an important
book on this subject entitled The Struggle for the Soul
(33:23):
of Islam. Is I recall patriots fight to save his faith.
He has been, among other things, the founder and leader
of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy and the Muslim
Reform Movement, and we're always delighted to catch up with
him whenever we can. Doctor Jasser, we're speaking to you
before Thanksgiving. I hope you have a very happy one,
(33:46):
and I give thanks for your appearances on this program,
among other things. Welcome back, well, thank you.
Speaker 6 (33:52):
Likewise, Frank, it's always great to be with you.
Speaker 2 (33:53):
Appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (33:54):
Thank you, so Zudi. In the past few days, the President,
as shared with John Solomon and his audience that he
intends to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as an international terrorist organization.
And you have been contending with the Brothers probably as
(34:18):
long in as hard as anybody I know, both within
the struggle for the soul of Islam, as you put it,
but also in terms of their efforts to sort of
marginalize you or worse, talk to us about this group,
the role that it is playing, not just you know,
(34:38):
elsewhere around the world, but here in the United States
as well, and the implications for our country if we
fail to treat them as they should be as a
terrorist organization.
Speaker 6 (34:51):
Well, this designation has been a long time coming, and
as I talk about in my book, a Battle for
the Soul of Islam, from when I was in college
at the Inn, Wisconsin. My foray and understanding the ravages
of political Islam was working against the Muslim Student Association
and quickly getting an education on what they're all about,
(35:13):
the fact that they use Islam as a cloaking in
order to control communities, to control minorities, vulnerable groups like
women and others in their own cliques if you are
in the West, but then globally it's a movement that
whose mothership Islamism if the ideology, but the mothership of
the of the movement is the Muslim Brotherhood on the
(35:34):
Sunday side, based out of Egypt, and that movement has
had thousands upon thousands of splinter groups that have emanated
from it. And the designation of that group as a
terror group, you know, is I think one of the milestones,
if you will, and I use that term intentionally, has
been to the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood talks about
in a book milestones on how he is going to
(35:55):
defeat the West. Seydo Kotov did the same thing, and
they use these miles stones as a way to defeat secular,
non Islamic countries. And we should have milestones for America
first for defeating our greatest threats, whether it be Soviet
communism in the twentieth century or now political Islam in
the twenty first century, and all of its permutations from
(36:16):
the OIC and I think ultimately the Muslim Brotherhood by
designating it, and we can go into some of the
other points in history from the Holy Land Foundation, trial
and on victories, but this designation will certainly give us
freedom thinking Muslims a lot more oxygen.
Speaker 1 (36:35):
Well, I pray so Zudi and again, depriving you of
that oxygen is a central purpose of the Brothers, is
it not, And really trying to assure that they and
only they speak for the Muslim community in the United States,
and at the same time they're all about radicalizing it,
(36:58):
including people I believe, like you know, your own family
who came here to get away from Sharia and all
that it compels mum pithful Muslims to do, including jihad.
Speaker 6 (37:11):
Right one hundred percent, And all you need to do
is you know. I testified to Congress about this a
few times, the last time was twenty eighteen to Congressman
DeSantis on the Oversight Committee about why the Muslim Brotherhood
should be declared a terrorist organization. And at the end
of the day, a lot of these groups, if you
look at the Holyland Foundation trial, Care was a unindicted
(37:33):
co conspirator because it was part of the funnel. It's
an adjacent group that provided a lot of the contacts
and networking for funding that ultimately led to money going
to Hamas, which is why the board of the Holyland
Foundation is in prison for twenty five years. So a
lot of these adjacent groups are feeding from that same ideology.
What is that, the sense that Islam is a supremacist idea.
(37:55):
Islamic law should control the communities and it takes precedence
over any other law, be it American constitution, Western secular law,
Christian law, whatever it might be. They find those to
be inferior to their Islamic supremacism, and their emams teach
that from the pulpit within our country, which I called
out from ninety five when I was in my uniform
(38:16):
at the Islamic Society of North America, I called out
Sadaj Wahaj as being a seditious trader because he held
up the Koran and said, we are here to replace
this from the Constitution to the Qoran. And I said
that sedition. And now that Imam, thirty years later is
taking pictures with Mamdani a few weeks before he won
(38:37):
the New York mayorship, So this designation could not come
too soon and finally begin to expose the reality of
people like Mamdani and ilhan Omar that really have oaths
to systems outside of America, outside of our constitution, that
make them truly a threat to our freedom and democracy
and s.
Speaker 1 (38:57):
Just a quick point, you mentioned the Muslims Students Association,
which was the wellspring of the Muslim Brotherhood of course
in the sixties. You also mentioned the Council in American
Islamic Relations, a group that is not, I don't think
just adjacent to Hamas. It was established by Hamas. And
(39:17):
we know that because the FBI back in the day
when it did this sort of thing, was wiretapping the
organizational meeting in Philadelphia, and it was very clear that
Hamas or SAMA as they called it in code, was
you know, to be the beneficiary of this sort of
political warfare instrument called the Council on American Islamic Relations
(39:38):
or CARE. So again, you have been confronting these guys.
You have seen firsthand the kind of control they try
to exercise and the kind of submission they seek to
impose on everybody, not just Muslims like yourself, but the
rest of us as well. We have to take a
short break. When we come back, I want to talk
about another of these characters on mom Dannie met the
(40:01):
President of the White House last week. Stay tuned. We're back,
(40:25):
and so is doctor Zudi jasser Man, who served in
the uniform of the United States Navy, and these days
is seeking to run for Congress from his state of Arizona.
He did once before, he seems to be making headway
this time around, and we're very pleased to have him
here with us to talk about some of the topics
(40:47):
that that should be I hope front and center in
your race, Zudi. And another of them is the fact
that you have been fairly forthright, shall we say, in
your credit of another of these Sharia supremacists, a man
who is a convert to Islam, a convict in fact,
(41:08):
to the Shia strain of Islam that has a sort
of death cult quality to it, Twelverrism, as it's called,
despite the fact that he's not only all of that,
but a communist to boot, and the President of the
United States had properly castigated him in the race to
(41:34):
become the next mayor of New York City. Having won
that race, the President actually met with him at the
White House last week, and you'd hardly know that not
only had the President called him out for what he is,
but Zorammdani had described the President as, oh, I don't know,
a fascist and a dictator, and the like something he's
(41:56):
actually said again subsequent to the meeting, and yet he
got a very hearty welcome and a promise from the
President to try to help him succeed. What do you
make of all this, sir, and what should the rest
of us make of it?
Speaker 6 (42:10):
Yeah, you know, the President I think is likely well
intended trying to, you know, in many ways help New
Yorkers withstand the Socialist onslaught, the Islamist onslaught that's going
to happen with the mayor, and try to buffet some
of that. But at the end of the day, the
(42:30):
Islamists are simply dissimulators. They will lie in every meeting
in order to appease whoever's in front of them, and
then go on to do what they do with their
closest constituents, which are the Islamists and the Red Green Axis.
So I wouldn't trust anything Mamdanie would say at the
press conference or at the meeting that he had with
the President. And actually I was a bit saddened to
(42:53):
see him platform this way because there's no really contrary
narrative right now for Muslims. One of the reasons I'm
running is I believe we need to flip the script
the DEI years. If you look recently just this weekend,
h Rap Brown, who then Trent, who then converted to Islam,
was part of the Red Green Axis back in the
(43:15):
sixties and seventies when he was killing cops and radicalizing
Muslims along with Malcolm X and you know Fara Khan
and Muhammad Ali and other icons. And now we've come
thirty forty years later with BLM, etc. That Red Green
axis is more potent than ever. And Mamdani as part
of the immigrant part of that access of the Islamists
(43:37):
that have come to destroy America from abroad, be it
from Congo, Iran, India, wherever it might be. They despise,
they despise the West, and they're trying to use Katari money,
Turkish money, and others to destroy us in a common
enemy process that with the Chinese and others. And we
have to expose that. And we want to flip the
(43:59):
script so that we can say, you know what, this
is a very American battle. Our founding fathers fought against
theocracy and created the greatest democracy in the world. Muslims
are having this same battle. And President Trump said it
as you mentioned to me back in twenty sixteen that
this is a core battle against radical Islam, theocratic Islam,
that we have Muslims that are on our side in
(44:19):
our reform movement, and the Mamdanis of the world are
the enemy, if you will, of that from that ideology
that we need to defeat. And I hope he has
for every one press conference he does with Mamdani, he
has ten with our Clarity Coalition and Muslim reformers to
begin to flip that narrative, if you will, and make
it about diversity of ideas, not diversity of skin color
(44:42):
and other apologetics.
Speaker 1 (44:44):
Well, I do too, Zudi, and I want to thank
you for bringing back up this idea of a very
important speech that the president made when he was actually
the Republican nominee for presidents in his first campaign sixteen.
In August fifteenth of that year's to be precise, he
(45:05):
went to Youngstown, Ohio to deliver a profound denunciation of
what Hillary Clinton was doing with the Muslim brothers and
others in the you know what, he called the radical
Islamic you know, sort of ideological camp. And in addition
(45:26):
to condemning the ideology of radical Islam, he said two
things that I think weren't repeating in this moment, specifically
about Mumdani. He pledged to quote screen out any immigrants
who have hostile attitudes towards our country or its principles,
(45:48):
or who believe that Sharia law should supplant American law.
He also said that he would take it to the
quote support networks for radical Islam in this country, which
will be stripped out and removed one by one. So
(46:14):
I guess I ask you, Zudi Jasser in New York City,
for example, is that likely that we'll see people who
espouse Sharia being discouraged from coming to the city taking up,
you know, rolls in networks there of the Muslim brotherhood,
(46:34):
or is it likely that we'll see more of that,
In fact, they'll be kind of given a sanctuary in
which to operate. And one other thing, you said that
you wouldn't trust anything he says, How about the loyalty
oath that he's supposed to take upon taking office. You've
sworn that oath many times I know in the course
of your career. If he does take it, whether it's
(46:57):
on a Quran or something else, is it likely that
he will adhere to that oath in your estimations.
Speaker 6 (47:03):
Well well, as we learned in the Cold War, we
can vet immigrants for whether they're part of the Communist
Party or part of ideologies that threaten us. And it's
you know, we've put them on record. They could lie,
but we put them on record. And then ultimately, as
I've tried so many times in the House and the
Senate to tell them, listen, we need to vet folks
that get clearances and so many whether it's police, Pentagon officials,
(47:26):
service members, all of them should be vetted for these ideologies.
And that vetting is not only their loyalty oaths, which
they absolutely have to take as citizens, but it's also
what have they said to be on our side in
this war for liberty, for separation of Moskin State, for
our constitution? Have they countered Shariah? And mcdonnie hasn't done
(47:47):
any of that. He stood next to its misogynists, he
stood next to anti American theocrats and has apologized. These
are organizations that he works with, our part and parcel
of cut, our Turkey, et cetera. And they hate America
and the hate.
Speaker 1 (48:01):
Israel, and they're seeking to destroy us from within. Zudi Jesser,
thank you for standing against all of that. Come back
to us with updates on it, if you would. God
bless you, my friend. Thanks to all of you for
joining us this time. I hope you'll do so next time.
Until then, go forth and multiply
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.