All Episodes
Previous Next
April 24, 2018 - The Ben Shapiro Show
47:27
When Tyranny Leads To Death | Ep. 524
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
So, here we are, and the Alfie Evans case continues to take priority in Great Britain.
Parkland survivor Kyle Kashub is interviewed by the police for going to a gun range, and a feminist wants your second grader to learn about transgenderism.
No, I'm not joking.
This is the Ben Shapiro Show.
So we have a lot to get to today.
The Salphy Evans case in Britain truly is astonishing, and it is accompanied by British law enforcement focusing in areas where, let's just say, they probably should not be putting their law enforcement focus.
We'll get to all of that in just a second.
First, I want to say thanks to our sponsors over at Wing.
You know, you've taken a little bit of time to wring yourself out over the New Year's and now you're in the middle of the year and you're thinking to yourself, boy, I could really use something to relax.
Well, that's what Wink is for.
Also, it is great for when you have to go over to a family member's house and you don't know what bottle of wine to bring.
You don't know anything about wine.
All you know is that you need something better than Manischewitz grapes, grape juice with Some sort of coughing syrup inside.
And so you need a good wine.
Well, that's what Wink is for.
Wink makes it easy to discover great wine.
Wink's wine experts select wines matched to your taste, personalized for you, shipped right to your door, starting at just $13 a bottle.
There's nothing like coming home to a box of delicious Wink wine selected just for you.
It is the best day of your month.
So here's how it works.
You go over to Wink, and then you try their palette profile quiz.
You answer simple questions that your average store clerk wouldn't ask or translate into a recommendation, like how do you take your coffee, and how do you feel about blueberries.
And then they send you wines curated to your taste.
The more wines you rate, the more personalized your monthly selections.
Each month, there are new delicious wines.
Right now, their popular wine is the Summer Water Rosé.
So go over and check it out right now at trywink.com slash ben and you get 20 bucks off your first shipment.
That's trywink.com, slash Ben, W-I-N-C, T-R-Y-W-I-N-C, dot com, slash Ben, for $20 off.
Again, trywink.com, slash Ben, so they know that we sent you.
All right, so, I have to say, the British law enforcement system, I think they have their priorities all screwed up.
So I'm gonna show you something that the British law enforcement system is cracking down on, and then I'm gonna show you something that the British law enforcement system is, something else they are doing, And you'll see the difference right away.
So, they're obviously spending heavy amounts of time right now cracking down on people who violate traffic ordinances.
So, this has become a very popular clip online.
The local police in Britain tweeted out that this one guy who was speeding and violating the law and had a laser jammer, I guess, that was aimed at a traffic camera.
He was flipping off the traffic camera all the way.
This is North Yorkshire Police.
They tweeted out, top tip, if you want to stay out of trouble, don't do what this driver did and swear at our mobile safety cameras while driving past in a car fitted with a laser jammer.
Today, this guy is beginning eight months in jail for perverting the course of justice.
And then they released a video of this fellow who's driving with his finger up in the air, flipping off the camera.
So it's, so, you know, This is where they're putting their focus.
Now what's amazing about this is that obviously they're not just mad that the guy had a laser jammer, which apparently is illegal.
It perverts the court of justice.
They're really upset that he was flipping off the traffic camera.
So this is where they're putting heavy focus.
Other places where the Brits are putting heavy focus right now.
So they just gave an 800 pound fine to a guy who had his girlfriend's pug make a Nazi salute on YouTube.
Yeah, so here's the story.
There's this guy in Britain who is a YouTube kind of lols guy.
All he does is make funny YouTube videos.
And he doesn't like his girlfriend's pug dog.
And so his girlfriend is constantly going on and on about how cute this pug dog is.
So while she was out of town, he trained the pug dog to give a Nazi salute every time he said, gas the Jews.
Okay, so it's ridiculous.
It's comedy.
Maybe it's funny to some, not funny to others.
The Brits fined this guy 800 pounds.
He barely escaped a jail sentence for training a pug dog to do a joke Nazi salute.
So that's what the British authorities are focused on.
Here's what they are not focused on.
They're not focused on rape gangs in Britain.
According to the UK Independent, grooming gangs abused more than 700 women and girls around Newcastle with arrogant persistence.
After police appeared to punish victims while letting the perpetrators walk free, a case review is found.
The report into the response by authorities to child sexual exploitation found that before a large-scale police operation was launched in 2014, officers' actions were sending an unhelpful message to perpetrators.
Investigators said the abuse could not be stopped without work to understand the profiles, motivations, and cultural influences of perpetrators after finding similarities with grooming in Rotherham, Rockdale, and Oxford.
In Oxford.
Here is the reason why they've been so soft on these grooming gangs.
It's because these grooming gangs are largely Muslim men.
And so every time they're in the press, they're referred to as South Asian men.
The religion is never mentioned.
We're supposed to pretend that unassimilated radical Muslim immigration into various European societies has no impact.
But the Brits are not focused on that.
No.
Instead, they're ensuring that a child must die.
So, the big story out of the UK today is actually the story of Alfie Evans.
And this is very similar to the case you'll remember of Charlie Gard.
Charlie Gard was an 11-month-old baby who had a degenerative brain condition.
And the British courts ruled that the hospital could trump his parents' wishes.
His parents wanted to bring him to the United States for experimental treatment, and the British court system ruled that the hospital, which had testified that it would be against the child's interests for him to be moved to the United States for the possibility of further treatment, they ruled instead that the kid had to be removed from life support and the parents had to watch him die.
Well, now they're doing the same thing to Alfie Evans, who's two years old, suffers from an undiagnosed brain condition that has left him in a semi-vegetative state, and he's been ordered removed from life support by the British government over the wishes of his parents.
His parents want to ship him to Italy and put him under the care of the Vatican Hospital.
His parents wanted to move him there to pursue palliative measures, but the British court ruled that that would not be in Alfie's best interest.
Instead, it would be in Alfie's best interest to die.
Which is an amazing ruling, right?
The ruling that it would be better for you to die does not seem like a medical ruling.
It seems like a values ruling.
It seems like a ruling in favor of euthanasia as opposed to a ruling in favor of the possibility of a medical miracle or in favor of the possibility that maybe some doctor knows something that you don't.
So they removed him from life support, pursuant to the order of a British court.
And then Alfie continued to breathe on his own for 15 hours after being disconnected from life support.
They didn't think that was going to happen.
They thought he'd die as soon as he was removed from life support.
The hospital still has not reconnected him to oxygen machines, even though he's lived for 15 hours without the oxygen machines.
There's supposed to be another court hearing today.
And Alfie Evans' dad has talked to the media about all of this.
As you all know, I'm still here now, and Alfie's still here.
Why?
Because I'm still fighting.
I'm still fighting, and so is Alfie.
I've been in touch with the ambassador of Italy.
If these doctors dare to remove my son's life, they're going to be done for murder by the Italians.
I've got a private prosecution case right now in front of the chief judge.
The chief judge will now decide if these are murder of my son, and I'm confident he will decide that.
I've been Alfie's side every minute of every day.
I've been with them all day today and all they've done is try to do what they've been given the mission to do and that's murder my son in a straight up execution.
Straight up execution.
What I wanted to speak down on camera and say now that my son's life lies in Jeremy Hunt's hands and he's a member of Italy.
My son belongs to Italy and I'm not stopping this fight until Alfie tells me to.
Alfie ain't telling me to fight.
I love this army.
I love Alfie and I love Kate.
Okay, so the Italian government gave Alfie Italian citizenship so that they could issue an effort to save his life in the European High Court.
You know, the United States government tried to do that, I believe, with Charlie Gard.
Something I was encouraging Congress people to do is give him honorary citizenship so they could make a case that he ought to be removed from Britain and headed over to the United States.
Pope Francis has tweeted, I renew my appeal that the suffering of his parents may be heard and that their desire to seek new forms of treatment may be granted.
Again, all this comes down to is in Britain, they believe that in a conflict between the parents and the hospital, in a case of controversy, not in a case where clearly, you know, the parents are refusing a life-saving treatment for example, but in a case where the parents want to save the life, And the hospitals want the kid to die.
They're saying the hospitals still have full range over what exactly should happen to the kid.
Which is just an amazing, amazing argument.
An amazing anti-life, bureaucratic argument.
You know, evil comes in a lot of forms in terms of government.
Evil comes in the form of tyranny.
Evil comes in the form of communism.
Evil comes in the form of governments that take a hands-off position with regard to murder.
Evil also comes in the form of bureaucratic niceties.
Bureaucrats who sit atop the world in their little offices in Britain and decide whether a child should live or die because they know more than the parents do or because hospital administrators say they know more than the parents do.
The British government actually had to place 30 officers around the hospital to prevent protesters from attempting to move the baby.
Those protesters were attempting to storm the hospital and remove the baby.
And by the way, this father, I believe, under natural right, has every right to grab that baby and make a break for it and push everyone out of his way.
It's his baby.
It's his kid.
And he's not attempting to kill the kid.
He's attempting to save the kid.
The hospital is attempting to kill the kid.
It's just an amazing thing.
Now, here's my question.
Where is the American left in all of this?
So the American right is saying, you've got to save this kid's life.
You've got to do everything possible to save this kid's life.
Where is the American left in all this?
And the American left that suggests that abortion is fine because it's just a cluster of cells.
But once the baby is born, it's no longer just a cluster of cells.
Where are they for all of this?
The American left that cheered.
I remember there's a movie called John Q. It came out in 2002.
It was a movie with Denzel Washington.
And the movie was about a black kid who had an enlarged heart and they didn't have the money to pay for his heart surgery.
And so John Q took over the hospital with a gun and tried to hold the doctors hostage to perform the surgery on his son.
And this movie was praised to the skies by liberals because liberals said, this is what the American health system is like.
Well, in this particular case, this is not about who's paying for what.
The parents aren't asking the British government to pay for anything.
In this particular case, you've got a father who is trying to remove his son from a hospital to save the son's life.
And the American left is utterly silent.
So when it comes to free market economics in the health care system in the United States, then they're very upset.
But when it comes to actual bureaucratic murder, happening in the UK, then the American left just goes completely silent.
Which says to me that this has a lot less to do with how they think the healthcare system should be run and a lot more to do with how they value human life.
That if the baby has some sort of degenerative brain condition, that this is a baby that is not deserving of life.
You can see the short leap from here to the eugenics of the left in the early 20th century.
It is not a long leap by any means whatsoever.
It really is horrifying.
And to show how horrifying it is, just remember, this week, the British royal family, Princess Kate and her husband, Prince Harry, they had a baby this week, and the entire nation of Britain celebrated.
And this is a beautiful thing, of course.
Imagine if, God forbid, God forbid, one of the members of the royal family had a child like Alfie Evans.
Do you really think, do you really think the royal family would allow the hospital to kill the child in violation of the will of the parents?
Do you really think that would happen?
Or is there a class differentiation, even in a system where we pretend there is no class differentiation?
Is there a difference between royal and rich in Britain, and being poor and in the clutches of the National Health Service?
The answer is, of course there is.
Once the government gets to say what sort of care you deserve and what sort of care you must be provided, they also get to say what sort of care you don't deserve and what is best for the child.
So there are folks who say this has nothing to do with nationalized healthcare because it isn't a question of rationing.
But inherently, it is a question of how a rationed system considers the value of human life.
Because they do have to make calls as to what is best for particular human lives.
And they also have to decide whether they think a human life is worth living at a particular point.
And they've decided this kid is suffering and that his suffering is not worth trying to preserve his life, which isn't their decision in the first place.
It really is horrifying.
It really is disgusting.
And it's demonstrative of the difference in value held between the right and the left when it comes to saving human lives, even kids like Alfie Evans.
It's just, it's devastating.
It's devastating.
This kid is the same age as my own kid.
And the thought of a hospital trying to do this to me with regard to my own kid is so horrifying.
I can't imagine a situation in which I would not bring a gun and try to break my kid out just because... I mean, I don't know what the hell right the hospital has to tell a parent what is best interest for their child when it comes to trying to kill the child.
Again, it's one thing to say that the kid...
should be, that the kid should be allowed to get a treatment when the parents don't want the kid to get a treatment.
It is another thing to say, the kid should be deprived of life-saving support because the hospital thinks differently than the parents.
Just unbelievable.
Well, I have more on this, but for that, before we get to that, first I wanna say thanks to our sponsors over at Upside.
So, the fact is that if you were an astronaut right now, you'd wanna be talking to Mission Control on a regular basis.
Well, when you are traveling, you also want to be talking to Mission Control on a regular basis, or at least you want to have access to Mission Control if something should go wrong.
Well, that's what Upside.com is for.
Upside.com, the folks at Upside are your Mission Control.
They're looking out for you every step of the way, handling any problems that might pop up.
They've got a team of specialists working 24-7 to make sure your flight, hotel, and car rental all go off without a hitch.
They monitor your trip around the clock.
They proactively keep you posted on everything from if it's going to rain to alternative return flights home in case you want to squeeze in one more meeting.
You don't get that level of service from any of these other travel sites.
I know.
I've used them.
Upside has the best service.
I promise.
We use it here at the office.
For easy booking, competitive prices, and a team that always has your back, book your next business trip at Upside.com.
And for a limited time, when you book that first business trip with Upside, you'll get a minimum $100 Amazon.com gift card.
Just go to Upside.com slash Ben to book your first business trip.
That's Upside.com slash Ben.
And you get at least a $100 Amazon.com gift card when you book that first trip.
Again, $600 minimum purchase required.
$600 minimum purchase required while supplies last.
See the site for complete details.
Go to Upside.com slash Ben.
It lets them know we sent you.
And you get a $100 Amazon.com gift card when you book your first trip.
So go check it out.
There's no reason not to and every reason to do so.
Upside.com slash Ben.
All right.
Speaking of authorities that have overreached in incredibly dramatic fashion.
So, Kyle Kashuv, who I've become friendly with, the Parkland student who is pro-gun, right?
Pro-Second Amendment.
Yesterday, he called me up, and he told me that he had been called by school administrators to sit before school security and be grilled.
What exactly did Kyle do that required school security, the armed resource officers, the armed school resource officers, to actually sit across from him and grill him?
Well, he went to the gun range with his dad.
Which, last I checked, in America is not only perfectly legal, but highly recommended.
People should learn to shoot with their parents.
They should learn to shoot.
They should learn how to use a gun.
They should know what gun safety looks like.
And Kyle is a kid who has met with a multiplicity of senators on both sides of the aisle.
He's gone to the White House in an attempt to push solutions to gun violence.
He was called by administrators down to the office, and then he was grilled for 10 to 15 minutes over pictures of him at a gun range.
And so he had tweeted out, "It was great learning about our inalienable right "of Second Amendment and how to properly use a gun.
"This is my first time ever touching a gun "and it made me appreciate the Constitution even more.
"My instructor was very informative.
"I learned a lot.
"Second Amendment is important "and we need to preserve the Second Amendment." And obviously these sounds like the words of a deeply violent human being, right?
Obviously, Kyle is a threat to public safety.
It wasn't a threat to public safety when 30 times, 30 times, the police were informed about the shooter in Parkland and weren't able to remove his guns from him.
It wasn't a threat to public safety when the FBI ignored two separate red flag warnings about the shooter in Parkland.
But Kyle, he's a real threat because he went to a gun range with an instructor and his father and then tweeted about the value of the Second Amendment under the Constitution.
It really is an unbelievable thing.
The fact is, here's what Kyle told me yesterday.
What he said, and what he said was this, quote, near the end of third period, my teacher got a call from the office saying, I need to go down and see a Mr. Greenleaf.
I didn't know Mr. Greenleaf, but it turned out he was an armed school resource officer.
I went down and found him and he escorted me to his office.
Then a second security officer Here's what he says.
Okay, so in a second, I want to continue with this account from Kyle Kashev because it really is just amazing.
Here's what he says.
He says, They're incredibly condescending and rude, these officers.
Then a third officer from the Broward County Sheriff's Office walked in.
Remember, this is the same Broward County Sheriff's Office that had armed resource officers on the grounds when the shooting was happening, and they didn't charge in because supposedly that would have been too dangerous.
So they let the kids get shot inside while they did nothing outside.
A third officer from the Broward County Sheriff's Office walked in and began asking me the same questions again, says Kyle.
At that point, I asked whether I could record the interview.
Right?
Which is perfectly within his rights to ask whether he could record the interview.
And they said no.
Which is always weird to me.
It's always weird to me when police officers say that you can't record a particular interaction.
Because this is somehow going to be a serious problem.
If you're doing your job, you shouldn't be worried about recording interactions in the middle of doing a job that is paid for with public dollars.
He said, I asked if I had done anything wrong.
Again, they answered no.
I asked why I was there.
One said, don't get snappy with me.
Do you not remember what happened here a few months ago?
I mean, obviously, not only does Kyle remember what happened there a few months ago, he's been stumping for legislation by working with Bill Nelson, a Democrat, and Marco Rubio, a Republican, in the state of Florida.
Not only does Kyle know what happened at Parkland, the reason that he went to the range to learn how to use a gun is because he believes that guns can be used in self-defense and defense of others.
But the idea, of course, here, is that now that he's touched a gun, the gun has infected him with the sickness that caused what happened at Parkland, which is just an insane idea.
And all these folks on the left who act like touching a gun is the same as getting bubonic plague is ridiculous.
Anyway, Kyle continues, they continued to question me aggressively, though they could say nothing I had done wrong.
They kept calling me the pro-Second Amendment kid.
I was shocked and honestly scared.
It definitely felt like they were attempting to intimidate me.
I was treated like a criminal for no other reason than having gone to the gun range and posted on social media about it.
So I've talked to Kyle again today.
He says that the situation at the school is not particularly great for him, not only because the administrators are relatively unfriendly, but there are a lot of other students who are pro-gun control who are very upset with him for speaking out on these issues.
Demonstrating once again the leftist tolerance only extends to people who agree with you, but the fact that government bureaucracy in the United States, government bureaucracy in Britain, government bureaucracy in Canada, the government bureaucracy has gone so far that basic freedoms are now being ruled out of bounds by bureaucrats, and we're all supposed to sit here and take it for the sake of our safety.
So in Britain, obviously these two cases are not similar except for the bureaucratic incompetence at issue, or the bureaucratic malice at issue.
Now obviously in Britain you have this case with a kid who's now being left to die by the bureaucrats, and in the United States you have bureaucrats from the county sheriff's office who are now grilling a kid for having exercised his Second Amendment rights.
Up in Canada, of course, they have bureaucrats who will prosecute you for speech violations if you say things that they don't like.
We are living in an era when freedom is going by the wayside in favor of particularly approved politically correct views.
Those views range from guns are bad to a kid doesn't deserve to live if the kid is suffering or if the kid has a degenerative brain condition to if I don't like what you say I simply get to shut it down.
This sort of bureaucratic overreach is demonstrative of a worldview that says that expertise resides in a select few who sit at the top of government.
That is a lie.
It is untrue.
Unfortunately, it is also the outgrowth of a 250-year project in the West to remove decision-making possibilities from the common man and take it up to the top level again.
And one of the amazing things about the Enlightenment is what the Enlightenment said is basically everybody should have a say in how the government is run.
Everybody should have a say in how society functions.
And then, there was a counter-enlightenment that happened, or part of the enlightenment itself.
I don't want to call it the counter-enlightenment.
It was part of the enlightenment itself, the Comtean idea, the Auguste Comtean idea, that there was a select group of people at the top of a society who knew better than you how society ought to run, and those people were more enlightened, they were more logical, they were more reasonable, they knew the social science better, and therefore they should get to make the rules.
That mentality, whether it is applied to economics, or whether it is applied to social life, or whether it is applied to speech, is a dangerous mentality.
It is a mentality that threatens your freedom in an extraordinarily serious way.
And it threatens your freedom also because those authorities, again, are willing to make political compromises that damage your rights in every conceivable way.
They're willing to make compromises for their own political betterment.
They're willing to say and do things in order to gain votes and gain public credit that they wouldn't do if it affected their own family.
It's truly an amazing and sort of horrifying thing, honestly, that they're constantly willing to make these sorts of decisions at the bureaucratic level that affect your life.
And I'm going to tell you about some of those bureaucratic decisions in just a second.
We're not allowed to talk about the bureaucratic decisions I'm about to tell you about, but they are pretty astonishing.
First, I want to say thanks to our sponsors over at Tommy John's.
So Tom Patterson was just a normal dude who became so frustrated with the fit and feel of his undergarments, he decided to do something about it.
He went home, and he sketched up some smarter designs, had a tailor sew some prototypes, and voila, the revolutionary Tommy John underwear was born.
That was 10 years ago, and since then, Tommy John has sold over 5 million pairs of underwear, and more than half a million dudes have made the switch to Tommy John.
So let me tell you, I have Tommy John underwear.
They are spectacular.
They are on my butt right now, and they are phenomenal.
I have several pairs of them.
Not only are they great, they also go through the wash and they come out just the same as they were when they first came out of the packet.
They're worth every penny.
Tommy John uses proprietary fabrics and innovative designs to make sure the legs never ride up, the waistband never rolls down.
It's impossible to get a wedgie with Tommy John's.
Tommy John's horizontal quickdraw fly can change your life as well.
Look, even if you don't believe anything that I've said, it doesn't matter because bottom line is if you buy it and you don't like it, Then they have a best pair you'll ever wear or it's free guarantee.
So, you can try them for yourself and you have nothing to lose.
Join the revolution against uncomfortable undergarments.
Make the switch to Tommy John.
No adjustment needed.
Hurry to tommyjohn.com now and use promo code SHAPIRO for 20% off your first order.
That's tommyjohn.com.
Use promo code SHAPIRO for 20% off your first order.
Again, promo code SHAPIRO, 20% off.
And again, today only, all customers actually get an extra 10% off all Tommy John limited edition anniversary prints.
So check that out.
Tommyjohn.com.
Pretty spectacular deals they're handing out to our customers.
Tommyjohn.com.
Use promo code Shapiro for that special deal and to let them know that we sent you as well.
Okay, so speaking of bureaucratic incompetence and the effect thereof, I have to talk about this story from Germany.
So, In Germany, Europe is really on the brink here.
And you can see that the United States is going to follow if we are not careful.
So on Tuesday, a guy named Joseph Schuster, he's the head of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, told German Jews they should avoid wearing kippahs on the street.
Kippah is a yarmulke thing I wear on the top of my head right here.
After an Arab-Israeli was assaulted for wearing a yarmulke just days ago in a social experiment.
So the Arab-Israeli walked around town in Germany, in Berlin, and he was wearing a yarmulke because he didn't believe all of the talk about anti-Semitism spreading in Europe.
Again, an Arab guy, not Jewish.
He was walking around, wearing the amikah, and he got beat up.
He was hit with a belt buckle.
The suspect who beat him up was shouting Yahudi, which means Jew in Arabic.
The suspect in the assault is a 19-year-old Syrian refugee of Palestinian origin.
So Joseph Schuster explained that people should stop, quote, showing themselves openly with a kippah in a big city setting in Germany and wear a baseball cap or something else to cover their head instead.
So listen, as an Orthodox Jew, there are certain times when I'm traveling where I will wear a baseball cap specifically because I know that I'm going into a more anti-Semitic area.
When I was in France with my wife a few years ago, I would not wear my kippah openly in France because of all the anti-Semitism in France.
There have been cases of people wearing yarmulkes who were beaten in the streets in Paris.
That was particularly true.
I remember there was one subway ride that my wife and I had to take to the, I think it was the 19th arrondissement, the 19th district.
And my wife was wearing a necklace that had a Star of David on it.
And as we went into the 19th district, you could see that the population was changing.
It became a very heavily young Muslim male population.
And for safety reasons, for risk assessment reasons, my wife took her necklace and stuffed it inside her shirt.
Did that mean that she was being racist?
No, because the crime rate against Jews in particular areas of France is much higher than in other areas.
You have to make a basic risk assessment, and that is not discrimination.
That is using the data that is available to you to make a risk assessment.
In any case, Schuster explained that people should stop showing themselves with a kippah.
They should wear a baseball cap.
According to the Associated Press, Schuster suggested three years ago Jews should not wear skull caps in areas with large Muslim populations.
OK, so here's the thing.
This is one of the things you're not allowed to talk about.
So if you're a member of the bureaucracy in Europe, you're supposed to pretend that the large increase in Muslim immigration into Europe has had no cultural impact.
This is obviously untrue.
Jamie Kerchick has written about it in his book, The End of Europe.
Douglas Murray has written about this in his book, I believe it's called The Death of Europe.
The change in the culture in Europe, thanks to Muslim immigration, is obvious.
It is obvious.
And this is not suggesting that all Muslim immigrants into Europe are bad people or anti-Semites.
It is suggesting that the percentage of people who are immigrating to Europe from Muslim lands who are anti-Semites is higher than in the natural born population.
And I am not saying this on the basis of no evidence.
Johannes Duenstad of the University of Oslo writes, quote, in a June 2017 study, quote, Available data on perpetrators suggests that individuals of Muslim backgrounds stand out among perpetrators of anti-Semitic violence in Western Europe.
Attitude surveys corroborate this picture insofar as anti-Semitic attitudes are far more widespread among Muslims than among the general population in Western Europe.
Paulina Newding wrote in the New York Times last year, quote, "Today, entering a synagogue anywhere in Sweden usually requires going through security checks, including airport-like questioning.
At times of high alert, police officers with machine guns guard Jewish schools.
Children at the Jewish kindergarten in Malmo play behind bulletproof glass.
Not even funerals are safe from harassment.
A spokesman for Malmo's Jewish community put the situation starkly.
You, quote, "Don't want to display the Star of David around your neck," he said, just like my wife, or as spokesman for the Godeberg synagogue put it, it's a constant battle to live a normal life and not to give in to the threats, but still be able to feel safe.
According to this writer in the New York Times, fully 51% of all anti-Semitic attacks in Sweden were perpetrated by Muslims, as opposed to 5% perpetrated by right-wing extremists and 25% perpetrated by left-wing extremists.
And let's be real about this.
The threat to Jews in Europe right now is highest from Muslim immigrants to Europe.
End of story.
It is not coming from these homegrown right-wing groups.
There are problems there.
I'm not a fan of a lot of these far-right nationalist groups.
But let's not pretend that those far-right nationalist groups are presenting the same level of risk and threat to Jewish citizens of Europe as new Muslim immigrants are if you're talking about just the group data.
Again, this does not mean every individual Muslim immigrating to Europe is an anti-Semite who is a danger.
It does mean that the increased Muslim immigration unvetted from areas like Syria is going to have a marked impact on how Jews are treated, on how gay people are treated, on how non-Muslim citizens are treated in Europe, which is why you're seeing such a blowback in terms of Europeans reacting to Angela Merkel importing so many folks from these areas into Europe.
These are serious cultural questions that have to be tackled.
And when you have an entire society that has decided that assimilation is a mistake, this is what you get.
All these folks who keep claiming diversity and tolerance.
Diversity and tolerance are fine so far as they go, but it can't be tolerance for bad behavior.
It can't be tolerance for violent behavior or for anti-Semitism, for example.
It's amazing.
But the bureaucrats in Europe have made hay over this multicultural issue for years.
Now, it's hilarious that every so often, even the same officials who push the multicultural ethos are forced to admit that it's not working.
Angela Merkel a few years back said multiculturalism was not working, and that was about the time she decided to import hundreds of thousands of more people from an area of the world that had a very poor history of assimilation.
This is David Cameron, the former Prime Minister of Great Britain.
He did a whole speech a few years back about how multiculturalism had failed in Britain.
But all these authorities, all these bureaucrats believe they know better than you, they believe they know better than their own citizenry, and they believe that they can change society simply by wishing that it would be so.
And this is a serious problem.
And ignoring this problem is not going to make it go away.
Well, one of the kickbacks from the multicultural left on this is that if you talk about the problem, that you are somehow exacerbating violence.
So, I hesitate even to mention it because it's so stupid, but there's a shooter named Alexander Bissonnette, who is up in Canada, he's in Toronto, and this was in 2017.
And I announced that his name was Alexander Bissonnette, who had shot up a mosque.
I did that.
The reason I mention his name is because he's been convicted and because it's relevant to the particular story.
I generally don't mention the names of mass shooters on the program, regardless of who they are.
In this particular case, it matters a little bit because the left is trying to claim that I am responsible for the shooting.
So the left is claiming I'm responsible for the shooting, particularly one reporter for a far-left publication in Toronto, because this human piece of garbage who shot up a mosque had viewed some of my videos apparently.
He watched my Twitter.
Now what's funny about this is that he watched a lot of people's Twitter accounts.
He apparently had retweeted or liked 93 of the posts on my Twitter account.
I don't know what those posts were.
I don't know if they had to do with feminism.
I don't know if they had to do with economics.
I'm not aware that they had to do with Muslims in particular.
But in any case, the idea here is that because I say That a higher percentage of the Muslim population is radicalized than, for example, a percentage of the Christian population, or the European percentage at large, that this is somehow promoting violence against Muslims.
This is insane.
Okay?
This is insane.
You have to recognize the fact on the ground in order to talk about the best way that we can all live together in a society.
But those facts have to be fact.
Okay?
And just citing facts does not mean that you are promoting violence.
If you go out and you shoot a Muslim because you're worried about the impact of radical Islam on the world, you are a piece of crap.
You're a bad human being.
I've said this 1,000 times.
I've said in this particular rant about the impact of Muslim immigration into Europe that I'm not talking about individual Muslims and whether they're anti-Semitic or not.
I'm talking about the data that is being demonstrated in Europe and what that means for government policy.
But what the left has decided to do is if you mention these facts because they don't like these facts being mentioned because it cuts against their worldview, which is that there are no such thing as Western values and that everyone from anywhere should be imported into any country with no impact on how the prevailing culture operates.
They believe that if you mention these facts, you should be cast out of polite society, or you should be blamed for violence.
Now, I have been incredibly consistent on this particular point.
If you say something, if you make a political argument, and you are not calling for violence, if somebody does violence in your name, you are not responsible for that violence.
I said this about Bernie Sanders and the congressional baseball shooting.
Go and look it up.
I talked about this with regard to President Obama's rhetoric with regard to cops before the Dallas police shooting.
I said this with regard to Black Lives Matter.
I said their arguments are bad.
Their arguments are creating more conflict with police officers.
But at no point did I suggest that the President of the United States, Obama, was responsible for the shooting of Dallas cops.
Because he had not called for the shooting of cops.
And the same thing is true here.
But the left fails to make that connect deliberately.
Because what the left wants to do is shut down speech.
Their whole goal here is to shut down speech, is to prevent rights, because they believe that the citizens' exercise of the citizens' rights is more of a danger than the bureaucrats' shutdown of the citizens' rights.
It's an amazing thing.
It's an amazing thing.
So they'd prefer to shut down free speech and blame free speech for the sins of evil human beings, rather than make arguments against the arguments that I'm making.
Or make arguments against the arguments that Kyle Kashuv is making with regard to guns.
Or make arguments with regard to the arguments that are being made about the value of life in Britain.
Better to shut all that down.
Better not to have the conversation at all.
Better to ignore it.
Better to pretend none of this is happening.
Okay, so I want to talk about the expansion of the bureaucracy in the United States with regards to economics in just a second.
First, you're going to have to go over to dailywire.com and subscribe.
So for $9.99 a month, you can get a subscription to Daily Wire.
When you do, you get the rest of our show, you get the rest of Andrew Klavan's show live, you get the rest of Michael Knoll's show live, and if you get the annual subscription, you get this, the very greatest in all beverage vessels, the Leftist Tears hot or cold tumbler.
I think time may be running out to get one of these, so you should probably do it right now.
So go and check it out right now at the annual subscription.
$99 a year, cheaper than our monthly subscription.
If you just want to listen later for free, go over to YouTube, go over to SoundCloud, go over to iTunes, subscribe and leave us a review.
We always appreciate it.
We are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast in the nation.
So speaking of the growing bureaucracy in the United States, this is an amazing story.
Bernard Sanders, Bernie Sanders, the socialist Vermont loon bag, he has now announced his new plan.
His new plan is to give every American a job.
Apparently after reading some Marx, smoking some dope, eating a pudding cup while watching the movie Dave, he decided that we would now give every American a job.
So what is his plan?
I love this.
The Washington Post reports, quote, Senator Bernie Sanders will announce a plan for the federal government to guarantee a job paying $15 an hour in health care benefits to every American worker who wants or needs one, embracing the kind of large-scale government works project that Democrats have shied away from in recent decades.
So it's easy, right?
We just give everybody a job.
You know, this isn't going to change anything.
Adding a massive layer of government bureaucracy to just hand people jobs to make work projects, you know, dig a hole, fill the hole back in, like FDR, it won't do any damage.
Sure, exactly that kind of policy led to a lengthening of the Great Depression by seven years, according to economists from UCLA.
But if we do it now, it won't make any difference.
I mean, come on.
We'll just tell people, we'll go out on the street, and if you want a job, come in here, we'll pay you 15 bucks an hour for doing something completely useless, and it'll just be awesome.
It'll just be terrific.
On the best part of the Washington Post report, I do love this line, quote, Of course.
Of course they hadn't done a cost estimate for the plan.
Because if you are hiring tens of millions of American workers, it's going to cost a fortune, and you don't have the money for that.
Yeah, I love that they haven't decided how it'd be funded.
They know how it's gonna be funded.
It's gonna be funded by taxing the crap out of people who actually earn in the private sector, so we can pay for an ever-growing, ever-present public sector.
If full employment were this easy, the Soviet Union would have been a paradise.
The Washington Post, I love this.
They show for the plan, even though Bernie Sanders says he has no way to pay for it and he has no idea how much money it's gonna cost, but it's a great plan.
Let me tell you, the best plans, all of the best plans are for fairness.
Fairness guaranteed by an amount of money I will not tell you about, paid for by people who might be you, but I will pretend not for purposes of this conversation so we can pretend that I am full of charity and largesse.
So here's how the Washington Post pushes this stupid plan.
"Job guarantee advocates say their plan would drive up wages by significantly increasing competition for workers, ensuring that corporations have to offer more generous salaries and benefits if they want to keep their employees from working for the government." So the logic here, apparently, is that the government will offer you a job that you get paid more than you would in the private sector, so the private sector has to pay you more to compete.
That will drive up wages, It will also create massive unemployment.
Because what happens when the businesses can't afford to compete?
Either they go out of business, or they have to fire their workers.
You stupid idiots.
That's exactly what happened during the Great Depression.
It's from that UCLA study.
In the three years following the implementation of FDR's policies, wages in 11 key industries averaged 25% higher than they otherwise would have done, the economists calculate.
Wouldn't that be great, according to Bernie Sanders?
But unemployment was also 25% higher than it should have been, given gains in productivity.
Meanwhile, prices across 19 industries averaged 23% above what they should have been, given the state of the economy.
Because when you drive up the cost of labor, you also drive up the cost of the product.
With goods and services that much harder for consumers to afford, So, apparently Bernie Sanders' idea is, let's copy that.
national product floundered at 27% below where it otherwise might have been.
So apparently Bernie Sanders' idea is let's copy that.
That was awesome.
Also, the Washington Post says that Bernie Sanders' plan will reduce racial inequality because black workers face unemployment at about twice the rates of white workers, as well as gender inequality because many iterations of the plan call for the expansion of federal childcare work.
So again, this is the soft bigotry of low expectations.
If you think that black workers can't compete with white workers because of their color, or women can't compete with men because of their femalehood, this is stupid.
It's stupid, it's the soft bigotry of low expectations, and it's a welfare program for particular segments of the population that are politically powerful.
But again, this is all about growing the government at the expense of the private citizen, because remember, the private citizen is going to have to pay for all of this.
Bernie Sanders doesn't want to mention that part, because it's awkward.
If they actually mention that you have to pay for all of this, then people might push back on the idea that everything in the world is free.
Now, Cory Booker and Kirsten Gillibrand have both embraced Bernie Sanders' plan, because Bernie Sanders now runs the Democratic Party.
Whatever you think of the chaos inside the Republican Party at any given point, at least they're not proposing full employment plans from the movie Dave.
At least they're not thinking of Bernie Sanders as a thought leader.
My God, that dude... I wonder if he has two brain cells to rub together.
And now meanwhile...
The French are visiting the United States and things are weird.
So apparently President Trump and the Prime Minister of France, the President of France rather, Emmanuel Macron, they planted a tree together.
A really kind of pathetic tree that they planted together over at the White House.
And it made for some weird pictures.
So here's what that sounded like.
They're actually going out to plant a tree.
It's a tree that the French president brought over to the White House, a European sisal oak, a tree from France.
The tree comes from the Belleau Wood in France, the site of a World War I battle.
So that's weird.
The French have really scaled back their gifts.
They used to give us the Statue of Liberty.
Now they give us a branch.
So thanks for that, guys.
So that's pretty amazing.
And the pictures are pretty hilarious.
But one of the reasons the French are over here is because they want to make the case that Donald Trump should maintain the Horrible, awful, no good, very bad Iran deal.
So the Iran deal, of course, was signed by President Obama and the Europeans, and it essentially gave a crapload of money to the Iranians in exchange for a promise that they would not go nuclear for 10 years.
They presumably have been using all of that money for terrorism throughout the Middle East, in Syria, in Lebanon.
They've been handing some of that money to Hamas.
And they have been expanding their reach all across the Middle East with the money handed to them by the Europeans and by President Obama.
Meanwhile, they've been developing all of the predicates for nuclear technology.
And after 10 years, they can go nuclear anytime they want.
John Oliver, for some reason, was making the case on HBO that the Iran deal should remain in place.
I'm not sure why John Oliver is seen as some sort of political know-it-all, considering the amount he knows about politics could fit inside a shoebox.
But here he is trying to explain why the Iran deal should stay.
He makes as good a case as anyone in the Democratic Party.
Unless Congress or our European allies figure out something they can sell to Trump as a fix, it seems that Trump is going to reimpose sanctions on May 12th.
And if he does that, this deal could collapse.
And the damage of that would be long-term and potentially irreversible.
Just set aside the fact...
You would alienate a whole generation of younger Iranians who support this deal.
Just think about what this would do to America's credibility.
Why would North Korea consider signing a nuclear agreement with us if we just broke the agreement we signed only three years ago with Iran?
And if this deal dies and Iran resumes its nuclear weapons program, it could then start a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.
And the problem here is, I can't offer you much hope.
There is not really a write-your-congressman solution to this.
We could be in serious trouble.
Okay, this is so stupid.
First of all, the younger generation of Iranians are not in favor of the Iran deal because they don't like the mullahs.
They want anything that gets rid of the mullahs.
They may be in favor of a little bit more economic growth in Iran, but they're certainly not in thrall to the mullahs the same way that the American left seem to be, or the British left seem to be, or the European left seem to be.
It's a pretty incredible argument.
Also the argument that it shreds our credibility when we sign a nuclear deal with Iran if we get rid of the nuclear deal.
No, it actually reimposes our credibility given the fact that we know that they're going to develop nuclear weapons and we're putting the threat of sanctions and military force back on the table.
That would be us saying to the North Koreans, listen guys, we're not going to sign a fake deal with you.
We're not going to do with you what we did with Iran.
We're not going to pay you off so you can go and cheat again.
But again, the left is so in favor of anything that President Obama did, and so against anything Trump does, that they're willing to ignore the fact that this Iran deal was garbage at the start.
The same left that's complaining about human rights atrocities in Syria, funded with Iranian dollars, is now complaining that we shouldn't pull out of a deal that's giving those dollars to Iran to go to Assad to be used for genocide against people in Syria.
It's an amazing, amazing thing.
So the French are over here making that case.
I don't think that that case is going to go particularly well.
Thank goodness President Trump has around him a very good national security team at this point.
John Bolton is his national security advisor, obviously.
He's got his new Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, or soon-to-be Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo.
So all of that is really good.
The left's hysteria with regard to everything Trump's done is so overwhelming that it's leading them into this box canyon of politics where they're suddenly on the same side as the mullahs, which is just an amazing thing.
But it just goes to show you that there are too many folks on the left who are more willing to make common cause with some of the worst people on earth rather than acknowledging that fighting the worst people on earth might force them to make common cause with people like President Trump from time to time.
Okay, time for some things I like and then some things that I hate.
The things that I like.
So over the weekend, I watched the movie Hostiles.
This is one of those films where it looked good in the theaters, but I knew I wasn't gonna be able to go see it in the theaters because my wife would never see this movie with me.
It's a bloody Western with Christian Bale and Rosamund Pike, who is really a fantastic actress.
You know, she may be the best actress out there right now.
And the movie, I think, is probably the best Western since "Unforgiven," I think that's fair to say.
It's really dark.
It is also kind of hopeful about the nature of the human condition.
It's very honest about what happened between Native Americans and white Americans in the West.
It's honest about the treatment of Native Americans, and it's also I don't know how you've done it all these years.
Seeing all the things you've seen, doing all the things you've done.
movie opens with Rosamund Pike's entire family being slaughtered by Native Americans who raid her house and then kill her husband, two of her daughters, and her baby.
I mean, it's pretty brutal stuff.
But again, it doesn't go easy on the cowboys either.
So here is a little bit of the preview.
I don't know how you've done all these years.
Seeing all the things you've seen, doing all the things you've done, makes you feel inhuman after a while.
Captain, you do know Chief Yellow Hawk.
The Army wants to be certain that the Chief gets home to Montana safely, without incident.
You have any idea what he's done?
He's a butcher.
Then the two of you ought to get along just fine.
I've killed savages because that's my job.
You have no idea what war does to a man.
I hate them.
I got a war bag of reasons to hate them.
This will be done.
And it will be done by you.
Parade's over.
Put him in chains.
So the movie's really effective, and I think that it does, again, a really good job of trying to draw out all sides of the conflict here.
And it does generate a fair bit of sympathy for everyone involved.
And it does demonstrate that there is bad blood on every side and bad people on every side in this particular conflict, which is really good.
Well worth remembering, and that people do bad things, but sometimes strive to overcome the bad things that they've done.
So, again, I really like the movie.
I thought the movie was really, really good.
I'm surprised that it didn't get more play in the press, but I guess that anytime you make a movie that isn't Dances with Wolves about Native Americans, where it turns out that the white guys are universally bad and the Native Americans are universally good, then I guess that you get a lot of flack for that.
So, check out the movie.
It's really an interesting watch, I think.
Okay, time for a couple of things that I hate.
So the radicalism of the Democrats is on full display.
Kamala Harris, my senator from California, she is now making statements like assault weapons need to be banned across the country, but she says this in probably the least articulate way that I've heard in quite a while.
To address the fact, again, another false choice.
I'm in favor of the Second Amendment.
Me too.
And I also want, I want smart gun safety laws.
Absolutely.
Assault weapons shouldn't be walking the streets of a civilized country.
I agree.
Okay, number one, assault weapons aren't walking the streets because people have to be carrying them.
Second of all, you generally can't carry a rifle around in public.
And third, when she says that she's in favor of the Second Amendment, but quote unquote assault weapons should be banned, everybody acknowledges that when people talk about banning assault weapons, they really mean removing virtually all operative rifles in the United States.
It's really amazing that the left keeps... They're just being dishonest.
They're just being dishonest at this point.
What the left really wants is a full gun ban.
They should just argue for a full gun ban because that's actually what they want.
That's what they think would be effective.
And so if that's what they think would be effective, let's have that conversation.
But they're not willing to have that conversation.
Instead, they want to have these little ancillary conversations around the edges that will have no impact on gun violence and will simply be the predicate for a further encroachment on American liberties.
That's really what's going on here.
Folks on the left, listen to this show.
You want to know why people on the right think that you're going for a gun grab?
Because the conversation always starts off like this.
Folks on the left say, we don't want your guns.
And you say, well, you kind of do.
They say, well, we just don't like assault weapons.
You say, well, assault weapons are ill-defined.
What do you mean by that?
They say, well, semi-automatic weapons.
You say, well, that's virtually every weapon in circulation in the United States.
And they say, well, You know, that's OK.
You know, we can take the ones that will make it harder for people to get them.
You say, well, what about the ones already in circulation?
And they say, well, we'll have to probably take some of the ones away from you people in the end anyway, because we have to get them out of circulation.
Then you say, well, what about revolvers?
Because those basically operate the same way.
They just don't automatically load the next round in the chamber.
They say, well, yeah, revolvers probably have to go, too.
And by the end of the conversation, you've come around to the idea that there should be a full gun ban.
Because they believe, in the end, they believe that guns are responsible for the violence.
They don't believe that some types of guns are more responsible than other types of guns.
Because there's no data to support that, anyway.
So, just pointing out the stupidity here.
But, you know, the radicalism of the Democrats is of course a feature, not a bug, for so many on the left.
Al Sharpton.
Says that he wants to endorse Kamala Harris.
Shock of shocks.
The demonstrative intersectionality of the left continues every single day.
Al Sharpton, a legitimate piece of debris.
I mean, Al Sharpton is a bad, bad guy.
I mean, this is a guy who has participated in racial hoaxes.
This is a person who has helped legitimately incite violence.
I mean, when we talk about speech inciting violence, this is a guy who went in front of a crowd and accused people of murder who had not committed murder.
And people in the crowd were calling for violence.
I mean, it was...
Al Sharpton is a bad, bad human.
And here he is endorsing Kamala Harris.
Just crazy.
I felt a real passion from Kamala Harris about really fighting for issues like criminal justice, as well as the economy and other things.
And we made it clear, she was a prosecutor, we may not agree on everything.
Right.
But I think she really wanted that audience who's from around the country, civil rights activists.
Okay, so great.
Al Sharpton and Kamala Harris on one wing of the party, and the radicalism of the party is only being united by their hatred for President Trump.
It's one of the reasons why the Democrats lost election after election, all the way up to the point where Trump won the presidency.
We'll find out whether uniting around hatred for Trump is strong enough to actually create solidarity within the party.
Okay.
We'll be back here tomorrow.
Tomorrow I will be speaking in Lynchburg, Virginia at Liberty University at Convocation.
Really looking forward to that.
Looking forward to seeing all the students there.
Should be a blast.
But we'll see you here again tomorrow.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Mathis Glover.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
Our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
Edited by Alex Zingaro.
Audio is mixed by Mike Coromina.
Hair and makeup is by Jesua Alvera.
The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire Forward Publishing production.
▲
Export Selection