All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 11, 2023 - The Ben Shapiro Show
55:03
UPenn’s President Is Gone, Alex Jones Is Back
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Well, folks, the big news over the weekend is that the University of Pennsylvania's president, Elizabeth McGill, stepped down from her position as president of the university.
So too did the chairman of the board of trustees, a person named Scott Bach.
They're both leaving because McGill, along with Claudine Gay over at Harvard, as well as the president of MIT, they all testified in front of Congress where Elise Stefanik, who's the representative from New York, grilled them about anti-Semitic chants on college campuses, genocidal chants on college campuses, and she asked them pretty clearly, and over and over, why exactly doesn't this violate your university's policies against hate?
What exactly would violate your university's policies against hate?
And none of these presidents could answer the question, because of course, certain types of hate on campus is totally allowed, and certain types of hate on campus, totally verboten.
That is the way that it works on college campuses.
In fact, certain rational statements So, the president of Penn has now been ousted from her position.
to the sea, Palestine shall be free, which means the obliteration of the Jewish state.
That is totally fine.
Even when said directly in front of a bunch of Israeli Jews.
So the president of Penn has now been ousted from her position.
She resigned on Saturday, according to the New York Times, four days after she appeared
before Congress and appeared to evade the question of whether students who called for
the genocide of Jews should be punished.
Support for McGill, which had already been shaken in recent months over her approach
to a Palestinian literary conference and the university's initial response to the Hamas
attack on Israel on October 7th unraveled after her testimony.
This is according to the New York Times.
By Saturday evening, one day before Penn's board of trustees was expected to meet and fire her, she said that she would quit.
Scott Bach, the board's chairman, said in an email to the Penn community, That she had voluntarily tendered her resignation and an hour later he tendered his resignation as well.
There are two other presidents who testified in front of Congress and who are also now on the hot seat.
That of course would be Claudine Gay of Harvard and Sally Kornbluth of MIT.
Now it is very unlikely that Claudine Gay goes anywhere.
She has been touched by the hand of the diverse God and that means that she will go nowhere.
However, When it comes to McGill, McGill did not fulfill any of those prerequisites.
She was a white lady, and that means that she could be ousted pretty safely by the DEI contingent, and then she will presumably be replaced by somebody of more diversity.
Apparently, McGill will remain as the university's leader until an interim president is chosen.
She will also stay at Penn as a faculty member in the law school.
Bach's resignation took effect immediately as well.
The vice chair of Penn's board is a person named Julie Platt, and she chairs the Jewish Federation of North America's board.
She's not expected to lead the Penn board permanently.
Now, what's really fascinating about what's going on at these universities is that some of the activities of venture capital are now being used against a lot of these university boards.
So a lot of these university boards are comprised of people who are major donors, and venture capitalists are part of that major donation group.
One of the people who's been leading this charge is Bill Ackman.
Bill Ackman is the CEO of Pearshing Square.
He's a major investor.
And donor as well to Harvard.
He's not on the board, but he's certainly a donor to Harvard in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
He pulled his donation and now he's going after Claudine Gay.
He wrote a letter to the Harvard Governing Board of Directors.
One thing to know about Bill Ackman, this guy is like Liam Neeson of Venture Capital.
When it comes to hostile takeovers of other corporations and restructurings, he has one particular set of skills and he is putting them to heavy use today.
The letter that he wrote To the Harvard Governing Board of Directors says this, Dear Members of the Harvard Governing Boards, In her short tenure as president, Claudine Gay has done more damage to the reputation of Harvard University than any individual in our nearly 500-year history because of her failure to condemn the most violent barbaric terrorism the world has ever seen for supporting, rather than condemning, 34 Harvard-branded student organizations who hold Israel, quote, entirely responsible for Hamas's barbaric acts, for failing to enforce Harvard's own rules on student conduct, and for other failures of leadership,
President Gay catalyzed an explosion of anti-Semitism and hate on campus that is unprecedented in Harvard's history.
In light of Harvard's leadership position, President Gay's mishandling of October 7th and its aftermath on campus have led to the metastasis of anti-Semitism to other universities and institutions around the world.
President Gaise's actions and actions have gravely interfered with the ability of students to continue to learn at Harvard and for its faculty to teach and do research.
Classes are continually disrupted by protesters who use bullhorns and other disruptive methods, and the offending students suffer no disciplinary action.
Literally as I write this post, says Bill Ackman, highly disruptive protests are underway inside Widener Library while students are trying to study for final exams and finish their term papers during the last two weeks of the semester.
Winner Library is, of course, a massive historic library over at Harvard University.
It's an amazing, amazing place.
The fact that it's being disrupted during exams is pretty wild.
Again, I'm an alum of Harvard Law.
As a result of President Gay's failure to enforce Harvard's own rules, says Ackman, Jewish students, faculty, and others are fearful for their own safety as even the physical abuse of students remains unpunished.
President Gay's absurd explanation for the lack of disciplinary action for the October 18th HBS incident was that the university cannot discipline students until the Harvard University PD and FBI investigations are complete.
To date, I am unaware of any disciplinary actions taken for the October 18th incident nearly two months later.
President Gay's principal response to address anti-Semitism on campus was to set up a task force.
Within a few weeks of its formation, Rabbi Wolpe, the only rabbi on the task force, publicly announced his resignation from the committee.
President Gay's failures since October 7th led to a congressional investigation of her conduct.
This outcome on its own is an incredible embarrassment to Harvard.
I've been unable to identify any former Harvard president being the subject of a congressional investigation since the establishment of Congress in 1789.
President Gay's entire testimony was abysmal.
She was disrespectful and condescending to Congress.
She was a hostile witness, unwilling to answer direct questions from members.
In words that will forever live in infamy, President Gay's response to the question, does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard's rules regarding bullying or harassment?
President Gay said, quote, it depends on the context.
And he goes on to talk about the destruction of Harvard University, about the evils of DEI practices.
Those would be diversity, equity, and inclusion practices at the Harvard University Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion and Belonging, which was formed under Gay's oversight.
He points out that there has been tremendous discrimination, and he suggests, of course, that they search for a new president.
He is right about all of that.
Now, will she be outed?
I highly doubt it.
Despite the fact that there is new evidence that has been uncovered by the journalist Chris Rufo, who has been excellent on university campuses, as well as Chris Brunette, about the fact that Claudine Gay, in her PhD thesis, apparently plagiarized multiple sections But that apparently is not going to be enough to discredit her either.
Right now, 300, I guess the number's up to 500 as of this morning, faculty at Harvard are urging against gays removal.
And one of the reasons that they are urging against that removal is because they don't want to hand some sort of victory to Elise Stefanik, who's the Republican congresswoman from New York.
A bunch of the professors are suggesting that it's very important that gay remain Because after all, she is very diverse.
And she does represent something very important for the university system.
We'll get to that in just one second.
First, PeerTalk has you covered for the holidays with a free Moto G 5G phone.
No gimmicks and no trading necessary.
Just sign up for PeerTalk's unlimited talk, unlimited text, and 15 gigs of data.
You can get all of that for just $35.
You'll get the Moto G 5G phone for free.
But here's the deal.
You need to move fast because these phones are almost gone.
So if your current phone is on life support, upgrade for free with PeerTalk.
The new Moto G 5G boasts a two-day battery life, an exceptional quad-pixel camera, and a whole lot more.
Pure Talk gives you America's most dependable 5G network at half the price.
So, make the switch today.
Just head on over to puretalk.com slash Shapiro, get this exclusive offer, and select the plan that's right for your family.
Remember, Pure Talk gives you America's most dependable 5G network at half the price.
So, make that switch today.
That's puretalk.com slash Shapiro.
Claim your free Moto G 5G phone with a qualifying plan.
Again, that is puretalk.com slash Shapiro.
Pure Talk is simply smarter wireless.
I've been using Pure Talk for a couple of years at this point.
Their coverage is excellent.
Same tower network as one of the big guys.
Plus, you can get that free Moto G 5G phone right now with a qualifying plan, puretalk.com slash Shapiro.
Okay, so.
This all raises a question.
Why exactly are these institutions of supposed higher learning sticking with their embattled leaders?
Why couldn't those leaders have simply condemned chance, like from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free?
Or there's only one solution, intifada revolution, both of which are genocidal calls for the destruction of Jewry.
To answer that question, there's another question we have to answer.
What exactly is the purpose of higher education at this point?
Obviously, universities serve a purpose that wouldn't have stuck around this long if they hadn't.
But that purpose has shifted over time.
Originally, if you go back to the Middle Ages, universities were an extension of church education.
Those who completed what was called the trivium, grammar, rhetoric, and dialectics, dialectics is logic, and the quadrivium, math, geometry, music, and astronomy, moved on to universities.
Over time, universities evolved into centers of learning, in which scholars would pass along age-old wisdom and search for new answers.
Citizens who went to university were expected to become leaders in their fields and to be inculcated in the values of their societies at the same time.
Over time, however, the centralization of a separate intellectual class led universities down two paths.
The first path towards specialization in industry, the preparation of a professional class, the reason that you need a degree in order to serve as a scientist or as a lawyer, for example.
The second path was towards social experimentation.
Now, the path toward professional specialization has been quite often very positive.
You get a lot of very brilliant minds in a room talking physics, you're going to get better results than if they were just all over the continent somewhere.
Obviously, the science emanating from our universities has changed the world and it continues to do so.
Which is why, when we were at UCLA, the people who were called South Campus majors, those would be the science majors, were considered the useful people.
But all of this has also meant an increasing credentialization of society in which a university degree is considered an entree to the workforce altogether.
Because again, those degrees were not restricted to being in the sciences, they were then extended out to the liberal arts.
The second path, social experimentation, has been the way of universities since at least the mid-19th century.
As religion started to fade in Western life, and as universities increasingly became battlegrounds for various replacement theories, social experimentation became the key purpose of the university.
New theories, very fancy theories, of living from bureaucratic centralization, German progressivism, to broadening of social rights sprang from universities.
Universities became the seedbeds of social change.
The new purpose of the university and the education system in general was well summed up by the theorist John Dewey, who is considered one of the most important educational philosophers of all time.
He's an early 20th century progressive, very much on the left.
He argued that universities were designed to create a progressive citizen, a citizen ready to take part in the rebuilding of a great state unbound by history and religion.
As Dewey said, quote, education has to undermine and destroy the accumulated
and self-perpetuating prejudices of long ages.
When social life in general has become more reasonable, more imbued with rational conviction,
less moved by stiff authority and blind passion, educational agencies may be more positive
and constructive than a president.
Then they will work in harmony with the educative influence exercised willy-nilly by other social surroundings
upon an individual's habits of thoughts and belief.
Experts, you see, would guide the life of the nation.
This was early 20th century progressivism.
You see it at the top levels of the Democratic Party today.
That philosophy, sort of top-down intelligentsia rule, was not relegated to the United States, far from it.
Dewey's own thought was an outgrowth of German progressivism, where similar ideas were dominant.
It's no wonder that German universities actually represented a center of power for Hitler, as historian Neil Ferguson writes this week, go ahead and quote.
A hundred years ago in the 1920s, by far the best universities in the world were in Germany.
German academics acted as Hitler's think tank, putting policy flesh on the bones of his racist ideology.
The intelligentsia, as Neil points out, also have an ugly habit of creating coalitions of the supposedly dispossessed to act as shock troops for their new ideas.
Certainly that was the case in the 1960s, when universities in the West were reacting not against the supposed handcuffs of God and theology and religion, but now against the supposed evils of nationalism.
Now the universities would be directed toward a new sort of social engineering, toward global citizenship, in which the atomized individual would be the prime mover, so long as that individual declared fealty to the intellectual movement of the time.
Thus, Herbert Marcuse, who was one of the progenitors of the so-called new left in the 60s, posited on university campuses teaching from Berkeley a free sex lifestyle in order to create a non-repressive civilization.
He preached the end of capitalism, which of course had led to Western power and nationalism and what he called fascism.
He argued for the banning of alternative viewpoints, which stood against tolerance for his cause.
He called this repressive tolerance.
Tolerance that represses non-tolerant ideas.
No wonder revolutionary students during the 1968 para-student revolt carried banners reading Marx, Mao, and Marcuse.
The chaos in the streets of the West during the 60s and 70s was born in the universities of the West.
Well, today's universities promote a new sort of social experiment.
This experiment is called Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
Unlike its more brash and open predecessors, DEI makes far more humble claims, at least publicly, to donors.
They don't want free love or revolution or pacifism.
They simply want more diversity, more inclusion.
They want that in the entire body politic.
They want more equity, modeled by the universities, of course.
But here's the thing, the same people who stood behind the old revolution stand behind the new revolution.
DEI is the result of something called critical theory.
A belief that all systems of power are reflections, not of merit, but of exploitation.
That all hierarchies are not a reflection of people being good at things and people being bad at things, but of the people at the top hurting the people at the bottom.
And the only corrective to that exploitation is to completely restructure those systems of power by appeal to group identity and coalitional politics.
Put together a coalition of the dispossessed to overturn the hierarchy.
In this view, anyone successful must be denigrated as evil.
If you're successful, not because you're good at things, it's because you're a bad person.
Anyone unsuccessful must be upheld as good.
Because, of course, they're a victim of the evil system.
This oppressor-oppressed binary is the motivating feature of life on campus today.
It is the new revolutionary ideology.
And it results in oppression and discrimination, just as surely as the German university's revolutionary idea resulted in oppression and discrimination.
In both cases, that resulted in discrimination against the Jews, always.
That is why the presidents of major universities struggled to answer basic questions about anti-Semitism in front of Congress.
This new philosophy is focused entirely on that oppressor-oppressed binary.
That binary cannot be allowed to fall.
For if it falls, then so does the entire revolution, the entire ideological edifice that acts as the basis for the revolution against an American meritocracy.
If a few Jews need to be threatened with swastikas and elimination, To preserve DEI, well, then that's the way it's gonna have to go.
DEI is the purpose of the universities.
Understand, it is not just something universities do.
It is what universities are.
It is the center of why they exist today.
It is not a means toward an end.
It is, in fact, the goal, the restructuring of society.
Because the goal is always perpetual revolution by the intelligentsia.
And DEI is the current revolution.
It is the entire pedagogy, meaning the way of teaching.
In the words of Paolo Freire, who is the chief force behind so-called critical pedagogy, Quote, And that's what you're watching today.
From every arena of the left, the attempt to protect DEI, it has to be done.
We'll get to that in just one second.
And that cannot be allowed.
And so DEI must be protected.
And that's what you're watching today.
From every arena of the left, the attempt to protect DEI, it has to be done.
We'll get to that in just one second.
First, it's the season of giving.
One gift you can rarely go wrong with.
Beautiful, classic jewelry that you didn't actually have to spend a ton of money on.
At the Pearl Source, you get the highest quality pearl jewelry at up to 70% off retail prices.
The Pearl Source cuts out the middleman by eliminating those crazy jewelry store markups and selling directly to you, the consumer.
You can order from the comfort of your own home.
You'll find the largest selection of pearls available anywhere.
Each jewelry piece is custom-made specifically for you.
The Pearl Source let me choose a custom piece of jewelry for my wife.
Beautiful piece of jewelry.
Plus, I know the family that runs the Pearl Source.
amazing family, we're good friends with them, Don't wait until it's too late.
There are only a few days left to shop for the holiday season.
The Pearl Source offers fast and free two-day shipping on every order.
Everything comes beautifully packaged in an elegant jewelry box that's ready to be given as a gift.
And if you get it wrong, Because, gentlemen, we tend to do that sometimes.
Good news!
The Pearl Source comes with a no-hassle 60-day money-back guarantee with free return shipping, so it's risk-free.
Give a gift that can be passed down for generations.
And for a limited time, listeners to my show can take 25% off your entire order.
It's the biggest sale of the year.
It only takes place once.
Don't wait until it's too late to do your holiday shopping.
Go to thepearlsource.com.
Get 25% off your entire order now.
If you want fine pearl jewelry at the best prices online, go straight to the source, the Pearl Source.
That's ThePearlSource.com.
Go check them out right now.
Okay, so speaking of the necessity of protecting DEI, amazing story today.
out of Stanford University.
Jewish Insider reporting on this.
Apparently, there's controversy that's breaking out.
Why?
Because there is a newly formed anti-Semitism committee at Stanford University, right, to fight discrimination against the Jews at the university.
And of course, the reason discrimination is happening against Jews at the university is the same reason that discrimination has been happening against Asian American applicants to universities, which is the Jews are considered disproportionately successful in the hierarchy of oppression.
Therefore, they can't be included in the oppressed coalition.
So, apparently, the faculty co-chair of the committee is a person named Ari Kelman, who's an associate professor in Stanford's Graduate School of Education and Religious Studies.
In 2017, he wrote a paper with other Stanford faculty members, it was called Safe on the Sidelines, and he said anti-Semitism was not a problem on college campuses because, quote, different representation of campus culture come from the difficulties in defining what counts as political speech and what counts as anti-Semitism.
This is the entire thing.
When you're yelling about how Jews should be wiped out, that is just a form of political speech.
This is what Claudine Gay and the rest of these idiots meant.
What they mean, and they're not idiots, they're smart, they're nefarious, what they mean is that it is a form of political speech to call for the wiping out of the so-called oppressor class and the Jews are part of the oppressor class.
That's what Kelman is saying here too.
He's also an agent on the inside.
He served on the academic board of a group called Open Hillel.
So Hillel International is a Jewish support group on campus, basically, where students, when I was at Harvard, it's a place where you go to get a meal, and it's where they have Sabbath services and all the rest.
Well, Hillel International is pro-Israel.
And this person has been working to open up Hillel International to wildly anti-Israel events because, of course, he is anti-Israel.
No shock there.
So that is just one controversy that is breaking out.
And the media, of course, are fully invested in the continuation of DEI.
It is truly amazing.
So the most obvious example of this came courtesy of the least funny show on television, Saturday Night Live.
So Saturday Night Live opened this week with a skit about this congressional hearing.
Now, this is pretty rich territory, right?
This is a rich vein to mine.
You have three university presidents, all of whom are supposedly intellectuals who can't answer a basic question.
So, was SNL's skit about the stupidity of our higher education officials, or was it about how Elise Stefanik, the person asking very simple questions, was the bad person?
Oh, you know the answer to this one.
Because the cast over at SNL, the writers, the higher-ups there, totally agree with the DEI revolution.
So that means the villain in this piece is Stefanik.
Here we go.
Now, I'm gonna start screaming questions at these women like I'm Billy Eichner.
Anti-Semitism, yay or nay?
I'm sorry, what?
Yes or no is calling for the genocide of Jews against the Code of Conduct for Harvard.
Well, it depends on the context.
What?
That can't be your answer, you pen lady.
Same question, yes or no.
Well, we are serious about stopping all forms of hatred, anti-semitism, Islamophobia... The second one!
MIT lady, chance to steal.
And keep in mind, if you don't say yes, you're gonna make me look good, which is really, really hard to do.
Okay, so the entire skit, again, because they're protecting the university presidents, because of that, because of that, they cannot even get a laugh at the expense of university presidents, because to acknowledge that these university presidents are enmeshed in an ideology that is evil would mean to undermine the very basis for so much of the Democratic Party coalition.
Now, it doesn't have to be this way.
The Democratic Party could embrace just a broader agenda, an agenda that used to be what was called like the John Edwards kind of agenda, the two Americas, more kind of Class-based agenda as opposed to the racially-based agenda that is DEI.
But they won't do that because they believe that since 2012, since Barack Obama won in 2012, the Democrats have believed that they have created a coalition of the oppressed that is electorally undefeatable, which is wild since they lost in 2016.
But they're going to keep pushing this.
The Democratic Party is going to keep moving along with this, which is why, of course, the headline from the New York Times is, quote, as fury erupts over campus antisemitism, conservatives seize the moment.
Wow, so much seizing!
My favorite brand of New York Times journalism is the Republican Notice headline.
Republicans Notice.
Democrats Kill Baby.
Republicans Notice.
Democrats Pro-Anti-Semitism.
Republicans Notice.
Yes, the real headline there is Republicans Noticing.
So the question from all of this is what is the likely next outcome going to be?
We'll get to that in just one second.
First, College football playoff teams were announced last week, which means now is the perfect time to join PrizePix.
Even if you don't follow college football, PrizePix offers projections on pretty much every sport there is.
NBA, MLB, NFL, NHL, PGA, college sports, esports, NASCAR, tennis, MMA, disc golf, whatever you are into.
PrizePix is the easiest and fastest way to play daily fantasy sports.
You pick two to six players.
You choose whether they will score more or less than their prize picks projection.
You can win up to 25 times your money on a single entry.
You don't compete against other people.
It's just you versus the projections.
Plus, prize picks has a reboot policy.
It keeps your entries in play, even if one of your players gets injured.
For NFL games and college football top 25 matchups, if you have a player who exits that game in the first half and doesn't return in the second, that player is now magically rebooted.
PrizePix is the only daily fantasy sports platform with injury insurance.
So, producer Jake, big football and basketball fan, and PrizePix allows Jake to enjoy his weekends by making entries on his favorite players.
He says the easy-to-use interface is fantastic.
It is for you, too.
Go check it out.
Go to prizepix.com slash ben.
Use promo code BEN for a first deposit match up to $100.
That's prizepix.com slash ben.
Promo code BEN for a deposit match up to $100.
Okay, so what is the outcome of all this likely to be?
So if you are somebody who doesn't like the DEI agenda, because it is bad, actually it's quite horrible, it's not going to be enough to just fire a few of the presidents.
That's not enough.
If they are then replaced with presidents who attempt to quote-unquote broaden out DEI, this whole system has failed.
So first of all, DEI cannot actually be broadened out to include, say, Asian Americans and Jews.
Because to do so would be to include them in the oppression hierarchy.
And to do that would be to explode the oppression hierarchy because Jews and Asians are too successful.
So you can't do that.
But let's say they try.
Let's say that they try to put a friendly face on this.
The way that's going to work is with more speech restrictions on campus.
There are two ways that this can go.
Way this can go, number one, is that you could just explode the DEI agenda.
Which would mean that people would have to become less sensitive on campus.
It would mean that, yeah, you can chant some really bad stuff about Jews, but it would also mean that you could say some, you know, reasonable things like boys are not girls on campus without being dragged into the dean's office.
That you could be, quote-unquote, fatphobic by mentioning that being overweight is bad for your health without being dragged into the dean's office.
In other words, the answer to this would be to get rid of DEI entirely.
That is the better solution.
Do you think they're going to go for that?
Or are they going to go for more speech codes?
Because more control is always the answer from people who love control.
Oh, you guessed it.
Obviously, the media and members of the intelligentsia are trying to move along with the idea that there need to be more controls over speech.
See, the problem with what the university president said the other day, they were making the argument that free speech means that people have to be able to chant genocidal slogans against Jews.
I'd be open to that argument.
I really would.
If I had not been banned from half the college campuses in America, I'd be open to that argument.
If a bunch of other people had not been banned from college campuses, including students, the same university that said that Kyle Kashuv, a student at Parkland, Who, in a group text, when he was 16 years old, wrote a racial slur, had to be banned from Harvard because he couldn't be admitted because of that.
That same university says that you can chant genocidal slogans on campus.
Okay, you can't have it both ways.
If the idea is that this double standard is what is to prevail, we'll just add Jews to the double standard, that doesn't solve the problem at all.
In fact, in many ways, it makes the problems worse because, again, the hypocrisy is perfectly obvious to everyone.
And yet, that is precisely what is being called for by, wait for it, the intelligentsia.
So a person named Claire O. Finkelstein, an Algernon Biddle Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy at University of Pennsylvania, she has a piece titled, To Fight Anti-Semitism on Campuses, We Must Restrict Speech.
That's at the Washington Post.
She says, The value of free speech has been elevated to near sacred level on university campuses, which is a joke.
That is a lie.
It is not true at all.
But she says, As a result, universities have had to tolerate hate speech, even hate speech calling for violence against ethnic or religious minorities.
University presidents are resisting this conclusion.
Rather than confront the conflict between the commitment to free speech and the commitment to eliminating the hostile environment facing Jewish students on campus, many simply affirm their commitment to both, or by time, by setting up task forces to study the problem.
Countering speech with more speech might just mean adding to the hateful rhetoric on campus and would not solve the problem.
So instead, this person recommends that universities shut down more speech.
Universities have a duty under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act to ensure their campuses do not descend into quote-unquote hostile environments that effectively exclude students of ethnic, religious, or racial minorities from receiving the benefit of educational programs and activities on campus.
In fact, Penn has already been sued by two Jewish students alleging the university has become an incubation lab for virulent anti-Jewish hatred.
Though open expression and academic freedom are critically important values in higher education, says this professor, there are other values that universities must promote as well.
For example, encouraging civil dialogue across differences, et cetera.
Now, does anyone believe the universities have been promoting this stuff?
No.
The universities have been engaging in Marcuse-style repressive tolerance for literally my entire lifetime and longer.
And now, it's only now that they are starting to talk about, oh, by the way, free speech matters when you're yelling at Jews.
It's the double standard that everybody's noticing.
And the amazing solution from people on the left is what if we put more restrictions on speech?
They will not let go of the DEI without a fight.
They will not do it.
This is why you're seeing, over at University of Wisconsin, insane battle right now between the Universities of Wisconsin and the Republican-led state legislature.
So, the Republicans in the Wisconsin legislature, they wanted to curb DEI funding.
The Board of Regents had agreed to vote on a deal between the University of Wisconsin leadership and Assembly Speaker Robin Voss that would freeze and cap DEI hiring in exchange for funding held up by the legislature.
But then, the Board of University of Wisconsin rejected that proposal 9-8.
They left $800 million in taxpayer funding of the University of Wisconsin system on the table and the future of the system's DEI offices in limbo.
The Board also voted not to table the vote for further discussion, effectively killing the deal.
So on Friday, it looked like they had a deal to basically freeze hiring in sort of the DEI centers of University of Wisconsin.
Not even to just dismantle DEI entirely, which is what actually needs to happen in the Wisconsin legislature, but to just freeze hiring.
And the University of Wisconsin Regents said no.
They said no, we will leave $800 million in student funding on the table in order to preserve DEI.
Because again, they have now made it clear that they're not interested in their students.
They're interested in creating this brand new, magical, socially experimenting world in which DEI is the ultimate principle.
According to Voss and his fellow Assembly Republicans, quote, That is how strongly these university leaders will hold on to DEI.
It is the M.O.
that would have been made across the UW system, all so they could continue their ideological campaign
to force students to believe only one viewpoint is acceptable on campus.
That is how strongly these university leaders will hold on to DEI.
It is the MO, it is the raison d'etre for the entire system for them.
The revolution is the system.
Now, what is the solution to all of this?
Well, there are a few solutions to all this, and I've talked about them on the program before.
Solution number one, if you're a donor to one of these universities, pull your money now.
Pull it, and never give it back.
These empty pledges to fix antisemitism on campus?
Maybe that's what got you going?
First of all, I think you should have withdrawn your money years and years and years ago.
I literally wrote in 2004 that people should be withdrawing their money from universities, not based on antisemitism, based on the evil ideology that was being promoted by the DEI crowd.
I wrote that 20 years ago.
So you guys are late on the ball, but glad you're here.
Glad you've joined the party.
Pull your money now and do not put it back.
That is step number one.
Step number two, redirect that money towards something useful.
Why not give it to University of Austin, which is an actual ideologically open non-DEI campus?
That'd be a great start.
Or here's an even better idea.
Instead of doing that, why not instead use the money that you are going to use to give to a bunch of fat cat professors at Harvard University living on their pension and writing garbage about the intersectional identity of black queer women or something.
Instead of that, why not take that money and, I don't know, hire some people out of high school so they can avoid completely the maw of the government educational complex.
How about that?
Because let's be real about this.
There are a bunch of people getting rich off the government educational complex.
First of all, all the professors.
The entire faculty.
The administrative faculty at these universities is not just professors.
It's huge bureaucracies of DEI bureaucrats who sit there all day long and do this crap.
There are only certain wings of these universities that are worth supporting at all.
The scientific wings.
Everything else has become not just useless, worse than useless.
Counterproductive and bad.
How about instead of that, if you've got a student who's about to go to a liberal arts university, the reason you as a parent are sending your student there, I don't blame you.
My parents did it for me.
The reason that you do that is because you are attempting to get your kid a job.
But why don't business people all over the country get together and start hiring kids out of high school?
At Daily Wire, I would much rather hire some kid who got a 1500 on his SATs and had a 4.0 GPA out of high school than after that kid had been through four years of a Barnard college program.
Without a doubt.
That is a solution.
All these solutions need to be on the table and they need to be on the table right now.
University system, the Lenda Est.
Because the same people can't be left in charge.
Getting rid of those presidents is not going to help.
The entire bureaucracy needs to be wiped away.
You talk about the deep state in the federal government?
The deep state in the university system is the entirety of the university system in virtually every state across the country.
In violation of its own taxpayers.
That has to stop immediately.
Okay, speaking of free speech, in just one second, we'll get to Alex Jones, who's just unbanned on X. First, let's talk about the way that light comes into your house.
This is a big thing for me.
So in our house, you know, the thing that I love best about our house, lots of windows, lots of light coming into the house.
But what that means is that when I have the window coverings on, they can't look hideous.
Because, let's be real, if you don't have any window coverings, well then everyone can see in your house whenever, and also all the heat, and it's... Just go to Blinds.com, okay?
That's all I'm saying.
With over 40,000 five-star reviews, Blinds.com is the number one online retailer of custom window coverings.
You can measure and install it yourself, or have Blinds.com send local professionals to take care of the installation for you.
There's no showroom, no retail markets, no matter how many you order, installation is just one low cost.
If you don't have an eye for design, Blinds.com experts are always available to help choose the style and color right for you.
Everything they sell is covered by their perfect fit and 100% satisfaction guarantee.
With hundreds of styles and colors to choose from, Blinds.com is sure to have the perfect treatment for your windows.
Shop Blinds.com's Merry Green Monday sale.
It's happening Right now.
Get up to 45% off select items.
Save up to 45% off right now at blinds.com.
When you check out online, don't forget to tell them you heard about blinds.com from The Ben Shapiro Show.
Rules and restrictions may apply.
Go check them out right now.
Blinds.com.
Also, it was another amazing weekend here at The Daily Wire with Lady Ballers.
Thanks to all of you who have watched exclusively on Daily Wire Plus.
Most triggering comedy of the year?
Well, it's still triggering people.
It's one of the most streamed movies in America.
It's been a huge success.
We couldn't have done it without the support of our members.
Now with well over 5,000 raving reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, it has earned a 91% audience score.
We've also dropped the official Ladyballer soundtrack available now on Spotify, Apple Music, Pandora, and wherever it is you stream music.
If you're not a DailyWirePlus member, plans start at $14.99 a month.
You get access to Ladyballer's plus all of DailyWirePlus' exclusive member content.
Don't wait!
Sign up today at dailywire.com slash subscribe.
Okay, meanwhile, speaking of free speech, so again, what the left wants on campuses is less free speech, because this will somehow make things better.
And that, of course, is not true, because it ends up being free speech for some, but not for others.
Which brings us to Alex Jones.
So, over the weekend, Elon Musk unbanned Alex Jones on X. That was the right move.
It was.
In fact, people forget this, because of the onlines.
But way back when, in 2018, when Alex Jones was banned from social media, I actively stood up for Alex Jones.
I think that Alex Jones should not be banned from Apple and Facebook simply because the standards that are being used by a lot of these social media companies are extraordinarily vague.
The problem is this.
Once you start saying that hate speech is a rationale for banning people from social media, you get into some very, very vague territory.
Because as we know, the left does not have a consistent standard that they uphold when they are looking at hate speech.
So I mean that was back in 2018.
In 2018 when he was banned.
And he was banned apparently over following around a CNN reporter and kind of harassing the reporter or asking questions.
That was a really ridiculous reason to ban him from Twitter.
But Twitter was doing this sort of stuff routinely and it was actually pretty terrible because they unpersoned him all at once.
Now again, it's hard to find less of an Alex Jones fan than I am.
The sort of soft peddling of Alex Jones that Tucker Carlson did on his ex show the other day I thought was absurd.
I mean, Alex Jones did, for years, promote a conspiracy theory that Sandy Hook was a false flag attack in order to do a gun grab and that there were crisis actors who were being involved in that thing.
We want total bans of all semi-autos, just as we knew they would do.
You've heard me say, look for a big mass shooting at schools.
You've heard me.
We've got to find the clips the last two months.
I've probably said it 20 times.
We've got loaded phone lines.
A lot of police officers calling in to get us their take on what's happening.
It's more than these dead poor children's eyes.
You gotta go with your gut, man.
My gut tells me I've never felt this freaked out.
I told my wife that last night and this morning.
And, uh, I really think they're gonna try to come after the guns.
It's gonna start a civil war.
The globals don't care a bunch of police get killed trying to do this, by the way.
But it took me about a year with Sandy Hook to come to grips with the fact that the whole thing was fake.
The whole thing was fake.
I mean, even I couldn't believe it.
I knew they jumped on it, used the crisis, hyped it up, but then I did deep research, and my gosh, it just pretty much didn't happen.
Alex Jones promoted the Pizzagate conspiracy theory, which suggested that there was some sort of pedophile ring being run out of Comet Ping Pong Pizzeria in Washington, D.C., and one of his listeners then went crazy and decided to shoot the place up.
Now, that's not Alex Jones' fault because Alex Jones didn't tell him to shoot the place up, but he was promoting that conspiracy theory and then had to apologize for it.
I will warn you, uh, this story that's been the biggest thing on the internet is a rabbit hole that is horrifying to go down.
Now, this is tied into Podesta with thousands of emails.
WikiLeaks have come out with Podesta going to rituals where they drink blood.
This is the kind of stuff Alex Jones does routinely.
The attempt to turn him into a voice of reason is contra to what Alex Jones himself has said in his Sandy Hook lawsuit.
He literally said, I act a part when I am on my show and I say things I do not think are true on my show in order to act that part.
That was his defense.
OK, so this is not a defense of Alex Jones as a human being, because frankly, I don't think Alex Jones is totally worth defending as a human being.
But.
I also don't think that everybody that I agree with, that's the standard for being on X. I don't think that's the standard for being on social media.
I mean, hell, I've argued that people I think are a lot worse than Alex Jones should be allowed to be on social media.
Because the problem is, once you have a gatekeeper, that gatekeeper is going to be a problem.
The gatekeeper, you better trust that gatekeeper a lot, and I don't.
I don't trust any of these gatekeepers very much.
And so I'd rather have a platform like X with Alex Jones on it, And other ridiculous human beings, like Suleiman Ahmed, who's a liar with regard to, for example, the Israel-Gaza conflict.
I'd rather have those people on X than not have them on X. Because, frankly, I don't think that I'm the sole repository of all truth, nor do I think that even if I'm right all the time, which of course I may, of course I think that, nor do I think that people don't have a right to view other opinions.
So Musk, over the weekend, unbanned Alex Jones.
He admitted that this was bad for business, because it is.
And here was Musk then having a conversation with Alex Jones about all of this.
Now, I will say, do I think this is a smart PR move by Elon Musk to do some sort of conversation with Alex Jones?
I do think that there is a difference in kind between, of course you're allowed to use my platform and I, perhaps the most powerful person and certainly the richest person on earth, I'm going to have a conversation with you sort of allowing you to soft pedal all of your ridiculous and ludicrous nonsense.
I don't think those are the same thing at all.
I think there are plenty of people who ought to be on X that I personally disagree with, but I also don't think are worthy of like a great conversation because I just don't think that they're wonderful people and I really don't think they're within my Overton window.
But my Overton window is not X's Overton window and nor should it be, by the way.
Because if you want a platform to remain a platform, it has to include even people you don't think are inside the Overton window.
In any case, here was Elon having a conversation with Alex Jones over the weekend.
Look, I honestly don't really know you and you don't know me, but one of the questions I really have to just get out of the way, and you've probably talked about this already before, is the whole Sandy Hook thing.
and and you know because I it's not like obviously if you know if somebody's
denying or that murders of children that's not cool at all you know and so
just what exactly did you say and and and what what is going on with that
situation you know I just I would like to actually hear what did you say and yeah.
The internet exploded and it was a top story off and on for years with all these professors and former school safety people and all of them Saying they believed it was a drill.
And I simply covered them covering that.
What was entered in court against me in both cases where I was found guilty by judges, like in New York, there's a judge in Trump's case, not even a jury, his real estate case.
And, and then years later, after Trump got elected and after I was deplatformed, it made me bigger.
And so suddenly I would wake up and there would be sometimes 100 articles or more a day, every major news channel saying that I was currently saying nobody died, currently sending people to their houses, currently peeing on graves.
I don't even know these people's names.
I only said one of their names ever.
Now, now, and I'm, and I believe their children died and I understand all that, but I'm saying, imagine, I was not deplatformed, no mention of the school shooting in Connecticut for like six, seven years.
Then they go back to my timeline and it turns out it was a big New York PR firm, Democratic Party.
They dredged it up.
They run hundreds of articles, sometimes a day, but a week for over a year.
Suddenly it becomes a big story again.
Okay, so, um, that is not a good explanation, because it has literally nothing to do with what he originally said about Sandy Hook, which is what Elon was asking him about.
By the way, the exact quotes from Alex Jones about Sandy Hook are, quote,
My gut is, with the timing and everything that happened, this is stage.
And you know, I've been saying the last few months, get ready for the big mass shootings.
And then magically it happens.
Folks, we've got to get private investigators up to Sandy Hook right now,
because I'm telling you this, this stinks to highest heaven.
It's as phony as a three dollar bill.
You got parents laughing, ha ha ha, and then they walk over to the camera and go boo hoo hoo, and not just one but a bunch of parents doing this, and then photos of kids that are still alive they said died.
I mean, they think we're so dumb.
Why did Hitler blow up the Reichstag?
To get control?
Why do governments stage these things to get our guns?
Why can't people get that through their heads?
Again, like, Alex Jones, conspiracy theorist, says a bunch of crazy crap.
Like, a lot.
The attempt to sort of mainstream, this is one of the problems by the way with having a speech police
when it comes to these platforms, is that if the platforms are fairly open and you have people like
Alex Jones on there, he'll get community noted, people will note when he's saying silly garbage,
and that's a good thing. I think that's a good thing.
Instead, what ends up happening is when you conflate the Overton window of say Jack Dorsey or the
Twitter board with legitimate conversation, when that Overton window is the platform, then the feeling
is as they shrink that Overton window, rational people end up outside their Overton window.
And then they find themselves on the same side of that wall as Alex Jones, for example.
And so there's been this conflation in the American mind between banned by X or discriminated against by Jack Dorsey and rational.
And that's not correct.
I mean, it's so weird.
You don't, you can say two things at once.
One, Alex Jones ought to be on X. He ought to be on Facebook.
He ought to be on Apple.
The removal of him from these supposedly neutral services is ridiculous and not based on any hard and fast policy.
If they wanted to say, The hard and fast policy is if you lose a billion dollar court case on defamation, then you don't get to be on the platforms.
Fine, at least that's a standard, but you don't have any standard.
You're just arbitrarily applying a standard.
And the problem is when you arbitrarily apply that standard, then the reactive right tends to say,
okay, you arbitrarily applied the standard, therefore you're rational and good,
which is what Tucker did with Alex Jones the other night, right, he had him on his show,
and he spent like an hour and a half trying to make Alex Jones not only look good,
but look like a prophet.
It was very weird.
And I don't know why Tucker is doing that.
I think Tucker, again, is much more mainstream, legitimate voice, and much more intelligent than that.
So I'm not sure what game he's playing there.
But again, that game, which is Alex Jones is like a rational, reasonable person.
That is not the same question as does Alex Jones belong on X. So Elon Musk, totally right to put Alex Jones back on X. By the way, I think you should broaden it out to include people I absolutely despise and think are terrible.
And if they are removed, if they are returned to X, I think that that will be, you know, again, a good thing in the sense that X ought to be an open platform.
I'm saying that, even while I say that that will include people who are viciously anti-semitic, racist, horrible people who I really, really don't like.
Because if the argument is that these are platforms, then the platforms have to be platforms.
They cannot, in fact, just be publications by another name.
By the way, when we're talking about Alex Jones, okay, Alex Jones's lawyer said in 2017 during a custody battle that his footage could not be entered into the evidence Because Alex Jones is playing a part.
So he said that all of the crazy, which was being used by his ex-wife as a rationale for custody, they said, actually, he's not crazy.
He's lying, right?
He's an actor.
That's what he does.
So again, one of those two things is true.
In just one second.
We'll get to the latest in the Israel conflict again.
The lack of clarity from the Biden administration is creating significant risks in the Middle East because this is what they do.
First, I've got a holiday gift idea that's sure to make you the hero of the season.
Now, we all know the holidays can be a little bit hectic.
The shopping, the cooking, the never-ending list of things to do.
That's why you need the gift of GenuCell skincare.
From now until Christmas, GenuCell's most popular package has a special discount just for my listeners at GenuCell.com slash Shapiro.
Treat yourself and your loved ones to the absolute best skincare in the world.
Those troubling forehead wrinkles, fine lines, skin redness, yes, even a sagging jawline will disappear right before your eyes with GenuCell's most popular collection.
GenuCell promises immediate effects.
You'll see results in less than 12 hours guaranteed or your money back.
GenuCell sent a ton of product for the entire office.
Our favorite thing about GenuCell?
Clean, natural product.
It's excellent stuff.
My family's been using GenuCell for like a decade.
You should do the same.
Go to GenuCell.com slash Shapiro.
Get this incredible holiday discount.
Every order today is instantly upgraded to free express shipping.
That's GenuCell.com slash Shapiro today.
Again, GenuCell.com slash Shapiro.
Go check them out right now.
G-E-N-U-C-E-L.com slash Shapiro right now.
And you get that free express shipping.
The product is great.
You're going to love it.
And again, instant effect.
Or your money back.
That is one of their guarantees.
Results in less than 12 hours or your money back.
Go check them out right now.
That's genushell.com slash Shapiro today.
Meanwhile, the conflict in the Middle East continues.
Israel versus Hamas.
That continues.
Israel is seeing tremendous military success.
One of the things that's happening is as they go into these areas that were supposed to be clear of civilians, they're arresting everybody who's a military age male in these areas.
And then one of the things that they're doing is the same thing that the United States government does, by the way, when it arrests people very often.
They have them undress and they make sure that they don't have contraband
on them, in this case, weapons on them, suicide vests on them. And of course, the media are latching
onto this. So the same media that have been doubting Israel's word about, you know, like
women being raped and brutally murdered, that same media is like, oh my God, I can't believe that
they're undressing these men before they arrest them. This is literally one of the
things that they are doing, which is totally Hamas is engaging in some of the worst human rights violations ever, and Israel is arresting people and not just shooting them, keeping them alive, will release many of these people, but they undress them temporarily to make sure they don't have bombs on them, and the media are like, oh my God, what a human rights violation.
It's like Abu Ghraib.
Really?
Was that what Abu Ghraib was?
Was it just men undressed?
Or was it like simulated sexual act?
Was it alleged torture?
I mean, what exactly?
It's so insane.
But again, this is what our media do, our vaunted media.
Meanwhile, Hamas literally stealing aid.
There's actual footage that's been released by the IDF of Hamas stealing the supposed humanitarian aid that is going into the Gaza Strip.
They're literally stealing food.
They're literally stealing water.
You can see it from aerial shots.
These are members of Hamas who are going up to a humanitarian aid truck and they're just removing all of the resources and they're reloading it into the Hamas trucks.
They're stealing the aid.
Meanwhile, the White House is still sending some mixed signals.
So the White House, over the course of the last 72 hours, did veto a UN resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire.
And the White House is like, guys, this is the middle of a military operation.
That happens to be correct.
But the White House is still doing this ridiculous routine where they believe that if they send mixed signals, somehow this is going to tick off terrorists less or something.
So, Antony Blinken He has to uphold the lie that so much liberal foreign
policy has been based on for the last, I don't know, since the end of World War II, which is that
there is a community of nations, that everyone really, the default is that everyone gets
along and war is an aberration, as opposed to the world is a really mean and nasty place
and sometimes you have to go and you have to kill the bad guys.
So instead, it's all this sort of weird happy talk combined with the underlying understanding that all of liberal foreign policy is based on a lie, which is that everyone is friendly, the UN is a wonderful place, and all of the rest.
So, Anthony Blinken yesterday, he was asked about Israel's continuing military operations.
Israel, by the way, has killed fewer people with every bombing than any modern military in history in an urban area.
They've dropped, at this point, hundreds of thousands of bombs at this point.
They're killing about 0.8 people per bomb dropped, which is a way lower ratio than, say, Iraq, Afghanistan, or wherever else you're talking about urban combat.
In any case, here was Tony Blinken.
Again, the United States' position so far has been Israel needs to defeat Hamas, and then we want to look to the Arab world as though we are tugging Israel's chain, because if we don't, Israel will just go hog wild, which, of course, is not true.
The reality is that a cold and collective policy by the West of, if you screw with us, you find out, would be better.
Not passionate, not overweening, but F around and find out is an excellent foreign policy.
That is the kind of foreign policy that ends with, wait for it, deterrence.
You know what doesn't?
Oh my gosh, we have to be so careful.
Oh my gosh, I don't know about us.
We might, we might, I don't know, we might, maybe we're the bad, like this kind of stuff has to stop.
Here's Anthony Blinken over the weekend.
Martha, we're focused on two things.
We're focused on what is their intent, and do they have in place, are they taking necessary measures to make sure that they're acting in adherence with international humanitarian law and international law?
But then also, what are the results?
And as I've said before, there's a gap between the intent.
We've seen the results.
There's a gap between the intent and the results, and that's the gap that we're trying to make sure is closed.
This could be over tomorrow.
This could be over tomorrow.
If Hamas got out of the way of civilians instead of hiding behind them, if it put down its weapons, if it surrendered.
Okay, so, um, he's right about that last part, but notice how he responds every time the media goes, but we've seen the results, oh my god, people are- Yes, it's called a war, and Hamas is overtly violating the laws of war, but the minute that Martha Raddatz says the thing, then Blingham, well, you know, we're seeing a gap, we're seeing- Name a war where you don't.
Seriously, where's the magic weapon?
If the Jews had their space laser, maybe they'd be using that.
But they don't.
Contra popular opinion.
My favorite Tony Blinken clip over the weekend actually was he was asked why the U.N.
has been so slow in condemning Hamas rapists.
We all know the answer to this.
The U.N.
is comprised of horrible countries that don't care about mass rape and celebrate the mass rape of Jewish women particularly.
That is the reality.
The U.N.
is garbage.
The U.N.
is a trash heap.
It should be blown up and the earth should be salted beneath it.
It is a horrible place, but Tony Blinken can't just say the obvious because to say the obvious would mean undermining the international order.
That doesn't exist, by the way.
Can we be clear about how foreign policy has historically worked over the course of the last several centuries?
The only thing guaranteeing any level of solidity in foreign policy during the 18th and 19th centuries was British hegemony over the waters.
That's it.
And then, that hegemony waned, and we got World Wars I and II.
Then the only thing that guaranteed any level of world peace was the United States having hegemony, largely over the waters.
And as that begins to wane, we are getting chaos.
This notion that the United Nations has been the thing standing between the world and global war since 1945 is the dumbest load of garbage I've heard in foreign policy talk in a long time.
Anyway, here's Antony Blinken trying to uphold the precious, the UN.
I don't have an answer.
I don't know why countries, leaders, international organizations were so slow to focus on this, to bring it to people's attention.
I'm glad it's finally happened.
The atrocities that we saw on October 7th are almost beyond human description, or beyond our capacity to digest.
And we've talked about them before, but the sexual violence that we saw on October 7th is Beyond anything that I've seen either.
So thank you for doing that.
And look, I don't have a good answer to that question.
I think it's a question that these organizations, these countries need to ask themselves.
Oh, they have to ask themselves.
If we shame them, if we shame them, then we'll do it.
Guess what?
A policy of shaming terrorists does not work.
A policy of shaming terror supporting regimes does not work either.
You know what works?
Unending, cold-calculated determination.
That's what works in foreign policy.
Period.
That's it.
So meanwhile, what is the United States doing?
Well, every time they show this sort of wavering, that means that we're now getting pushed around.
And when I say we, I mean the United States and the West more broadly.
We are getting pushed around in the Red Sea.
We're getting pushed around by a bunch of Houthi pirates who are armed like, you know, 1980s Mujahideen at best.
If the United States wanted to end... Thomas Jefferson ended the Barbary pirates, okay, in like 1802.
And yet here we are, the most powerful military in world history, like, oh, well, those Houthis, man, we can't touch the Houthis.
Gotta be real careful.
Why?
Please explain why.
Why is it that international shipping should be harassed in the Red Sea by a bunch of barbarian morons?
And we're supposed to sit here as the West and be like, well, you know, they are, we have to be careful with the Houthis.
Why?
Here's Anthony Blinken explaining.
There have been missile attacks on commercial ships in the Red Sea, says there are threats to dozens of countries.
Well, might dozens of countries, I don't know, destroy the Houthis then?
There were a series of missile attacks on commercial ships in the Red Sea this week.
The USS Kearney rushed to aid them, ended up shooting down several drones fired by the Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen.
The Yemeni Armed Forces now saying they will prohibit the passage of any ships to Israel and consider them a target.
What do you do about that?
Well, there are a number of things.
First, what we've seen coming from the Houthis directed at ships in that area is a threat not just to Israel, not just to us, but to dozens of countries that are engaged in shipping that depend on this corridor for goods moving about every single day.
And this has actually implicated the interests directly of well over a dozen countries with crews from all sorts of different places.
Okay, so that's true.
And also, what is the West going to do about it would be the question.
The more weakness you show to, you know, a tiny, badly armed little nothing of a terrorist group like the Houthis.
As the United States, the most powerful military in world history.
Of course that leads to signals.
What signals do you think you're giving exactly?
Deterrence is the foreign policy that works.
And deterrence is basically just a mildly more sophisticated version of f*** around and find out.
That's all.
But here's the thing.
If you're gonna do that, you have to make them find out.
That is the only way to make that happen.
Now, the real reason why the Biden administration is so concerned about all of that is because, of course, they're deeply afraid that if they're mean to the Houthis, that somehow they're going to lose Muslim votes in Michigan.
First of all, if you're mean to a terrorist group and you lose Muslim votes, maybe that's just the price of doing business.
Honest to God, if you as a party can't stand up to Muslim terrorists because you're afraid that Muslims in Michigan aren't going to vote for you if you stand up to terrorists, maybe there comes a... That is kind of an amazing condemnation of your party, is it not?
We're told constantly by the media that the right has to dissociate from white supremacists.
Which they should, by the way.
Of course.
Of course.
Because there are certain votes not worth having.
How about people who like Hamas?
It seems to me if you like Hamas, maybe that's a vote that's not worth having.
Maybe that's the price of being, you know, a half-decent party.
Okay, coming up.
We'll be joined by Bishop Robert Barron, the Bishop of the Diocese of Winona, Rochester.
He is here to talk about Christmas and the Christmas season.
If you're not a member, become a member.
Use code SHAPIRO at checkout for two months free on all annual plans.
▲
Export Selection