SECURING AMERICA WITH FRANK GAFFNEY - DECEMBER 13th, 2025

Summary

Securing America with Frank Gaffney - Episode Summary

Podcast: Real America’s Voice (iHeartPodcasts)
Host: Frank Gaffney
Air Date: December 13, 2025
Main Guests: Brian Kennedy, Reggie Littlejohn, Peter McIlvenna

Episode Overview

This episode of "Securing America with Frank Gaffney" delivers deep-dive conversations on U.S.–China financial entanglements, creeping surveillance and social control infrastructures, and the growing influence and threat of Sharia supremacism in Western democracies. Frank Gaffney discusses:

• Wall Street's complicity in enabling Chinese military companies with American investment, in conversation with Brian Kennedy.
• The development of digital IDs, surveillance, and the specter of a "digital gulag," with Reggie Littlejohn.
• The Muslim Brotherhood’s infiltration of Western institutions and the erosion of free speech in the United Kingdom, with Peter McIlvenna.

---

1. U.S. Investments in China’s Military – The Wall Street–China Nexus

With Brian Kennedy, Chairman, Committee on the Present Danger: China
[00:29–19:45]

Key Discussion Points

• Wall Street Supports Chinese Military Expansion

  • The episode opens with Maria Bartiromo confronting JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon about U.S. investments in Chinese military-linked companies ([00:29]).
  • Gaffney emphasizes that despite public assurances, Dimon and big banks continue to provide substantial funding (hundreds of billions) to companies like CATL, recognized by the Pentagon as Chinese military entities ([01:55]).
  • Kennedy notes Wall Street’s primary allegiance is to profit, not U.S. interests:

    “They’re looking out for the interests of themselves… they're looking to make money any way they can… What we lack is a robust system…to monitor these investments.” ([04:07] – Kennedy)

  • Money is Fungible: Even civilian investments in China end up supporting the regime and, by extension, the military ([04:30]).

• Policy vs. Law

  • Gaffney and Kennedy discuss the difference between policies – which allow loopholes – and the need for binding laws to stop capital flows to adversaries ([07:07]).

  • "Policy is policy. It’s not the law. And there's always enough wiggle room… to drive a truck through." ([07:22] – Kennedy)

• Wall Street Lobbyists and Legislative Battles

  • Wall Street’s extensive lobbying efforts block meaningful legal restrictions on investing in China.
  • Gaffney is blunt:

    “They’re paying the Chinese to prepare to kill us. I don’t know how to put a finer point on it but to call it treachery, if not flat out treason.” ([08:37] – Gaffney)

• Civil-Military Fusion in China

  • Any investment in China, even in seemingly benign sectors, aids the PLA due to China’s “civil-military fusion” policy ([05:54], [07:07]).

Notable Quotes

• “So long as money is going to Communist China, it’s going to be used, quite likely, not for good, good, good things.” ([05:03] – Kennedy)
• "We don’t have patriotic businessmen, unfortunately." ([07:48] – Kennedy)

Legislative Recommendations and Recent Memorandum

• Kennedy and Gaffney sent a memo to White House officials urging strict enforcement and legislative measures to halt U.S. investments in Chinese military firms ([09:29]).
• Discussion of the new National Security Strategy and its lack of specificity on capital flows ([11:16]), and the importance of “reciprocal and fair” trade ([13:00]).

---

2. Surveillance and the "Digital Gulag" – Global Social Credit and Digital IDs

With Reggie Littlejohn, Founder of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers & Anti-Globalist International
[20:16–32:15]

Key Discussion Points

• The Chinese Social Credit System as a Global Threat

  • Gaffney introduces Littlejohn’s work fighting Chinese-style surveillance and population control abuses ([20:16]).
  • Littlejohn explains how China’s centralized social credit system tracks every aspect of citizens’ lives—location, behavior, medical records, online activity, etc.—to enforce conformity and punish dissent ([22:42]):

    “They know what you look like, where you are, where you live, where you work… Anything that is in digital form, it’s all put into a centralized database to come up with a number about how compliant a Chinese communist sheep you are.” ([23:12] – Littlejohn)

  • She warns that digital ID systems can be harnessed for similar control in the West.

• Building the Infrastructure for Digital Tyranny

  • The “digital gulag” is not a physical prison but a digital system constraining freedoms via surveillance and denial of access ([25:31]).
  • Massive data centers and artificial intelligence operate the infrastructure ([25:58]).
  • The biometric component is especially concerning because, unlike a credit card, biometric data can’t be changed if compromised ([27:02]).

• International Rollout and Policy Risks

  • The World Economic Forum and WHO are advancing interoperable digital IDs for banking, travel, healthcare, communication, voting, and more ([27:40]).
  • Potential abuse:

    “I'm not saying everyone implementing this is evil… but they are unwittingly setting up the system that could do that in the wrong hands.” ([28:30] – Littlejohn)

  • Larry Ellison’s vision:

    “We should all be wearing body cams so that everything we say, everything we do, everywhere we go, is going to be uploaded into AI…” ([29:21] – Littlejohn)

• Implications for the U.S.: Real ID and Beyond

  • Real IDs can swiftly become biometric-enabled, leapfrogging into the surveillance state if not carefully monitored ([31:00]).

Notable Quotes

• “You can change your credit card. You cannot change your iris. You cannot change your face.” ([27:07] – Littlejohn)
• "This is 1984 on steroids. My God, it is." ([30:36] – Gaffney)

---

3. Sharia Supremacism and the Muslim Brotherhood’s Influence in the West

With Peter McIlvenna, Hearts of Oak (UK), joined by Lord Malcolm Pearson
[33:25–49:23]

Key Discussion Points

• The Muslim Brotherhood’s Influence and Legal Inaction

  • McIlvenna discusses how the Muslim Brotherhood, although recognized as extremist, is only banned in Austria among European nations ([36:08]).
  • Despite years of evidence (in the UK, US, and elsewhere), Western governments have failed to decisively ban the Brotherhood, likely due to geopolitical and funding considerations ([36:54]).
  • Only Austria has taken concrete steps, with the UK merely "discussing concerns" ([36:54]).

• The Holy Land Foundation Trial and its Aftermath

  • Gaffney relates how the landmark U.S. terrorism financing case stagnated after the Obama administration, leaving over 300 unprosecuted co-conspirators, including CAIR ([39:32]).
  • Governor Abbott of Texas has recently designated CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood as terrorist organizations ([40:16]).

• Political Will and Policy Betrayals

  • Trump’s 2016 Youngstown speech promised to “strip out and remove one by one the support networks of radical Islam,” something Gaffney and McIlvenna agree is still unfulfilled ([43:40] – Gaffney).

• Grooming Gangs and Legal Threats to Speech

  • McIlvenna describes the mass rape and abuse perpetrated by “Muslim family mass rape gangs” targeting British girls, facilitated by police and media fear of "Islamophobia" accusations ([44:50]).
  • The UK government is codifying a legal definition of "Islamophobia," potentially making it illegal to criticize or expose abuses by Muslim groups or individuals ([45:24], [46:13]).

    “The UK government are going down the line that any criticism or any offense… means that the police must arrest you… if you're raising an issue… you have broken the law.” ([45:59] – McIlvenna)

  • This legal shift amounts to the state enforcing Sharia blasphemy codes ([47:25]).

    “You’re talking about the absolute adoption and enforcement of Sharia law by His Majesty’s Government if this were to proceed…” ([47:25] – Gaffney)

• Chilling Statistics and Ongoing Cover-Up

  • Up to 1 million young British girls may have been raped or enslaved by these gangs ([48:44]).
  • Legal prohibitions on speech would criminalize those who expose such crimes:

    “You cannot criticize these men for carrying out what they’re carrying out and the law will protect them… the state’s moving.” ([48:44] – McIlvenna)

Notable Quotes

• "Ban the Brotherhood… should be also thought of as saving civilization." ([35:45] – Gaffney)
• “There may be as many as 1 million young British girls that have been raped serially and enslaved in this fashion. Is that right?”
  – “That was a left-wing MP Sarah Champion said up to 1 million girls have been affected.” ([48:44] – Gaffney/McIlvenna)

---

Memorable Moments and Timestamps

• [01:55] — Frank Gaffney deconstructs Jamie Dimon’s Fox News interview and introduces the topic of U.S. investments in Chinese military companies.
• [13:00] — Brian Kennedy details the rare earth minerals/capacity dilemma underpinning U.S.-China trade and national security vulnerabilities.
• [20:35] — Reggie Littlejohn introduced, transitioning the show to digital surveillance and authoritarian social controls.
• [23:11] — Littlejohn’s chilling breakdown of China’s social credit system, delivered in stark language.
• [29:21] — Description of Larry Ellison’s body cam/AI-controlled future, underscoring Western tech’s role in the digital gulag.
• [36:54] — McIlvenna critiques Europe’s and the UK’s refusal to ban the Muslim Brotherhood despite years of evidence.
• [40:16] — Gaffney summarizes Western government failures in prosecuting Islamist networks due to changing political winds.
• [47:25] — The segment linking legal definitions of “Islamophobia” to de facto enforcement of Sharia blasphemy codes in Britain.
• [48:44] — The potential scale of sexual abuse enabled by political and legal trends.

---

Conclusion and Takeaways

This episode of "Securing America" weaves together the dangers of foreign threats enabled by Western policy failures, the looming risk of internal repression through digital technology, and the challenges posed by the spread of Sharia supremacism. The discussions are urgent, direct, and blend policy expertise with alarm over rapid changes in law, technology, and culture. Gaffney and his guests repeatedly call for legal, cultural, and civic awakening, particularly as the U.S. faces what they see as existential risks from both foreign adversaries and domestic complacency.

---

For further detail, listeners are invited to read Gaffney and Kennedy’s memo at presentdangerchina.org and to follow the organizations and guests featured throughout the episode.

Transcript

[A]

This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human.

[B]

Welcome to Securing America with me, Frank Gaffney. The program that's a kind of owner's manual for protecting the country we love against all enemies, foreign and domestic, to the glory of God and his kingdom. One of the glories of God in my estimation is my friend Brian Kennedy. We're going to be talking with him in this first block and I am very excited to get his thoughts on a number of topics, but one in particular, let me give you a little bit of context for our conversation with Brian on Sunday. The Titanium Lady Fox News's Maria Bartiromo lit up one of the worst perpetrators of the sort of treachery her three part Underwriting the Enemy series has relentlessly exposed JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon. While diamond was given a chance to tout his company's commendable commitment to invest $1.5 trillion in enhancing US security and resiliency, he was also pressed about his practice of raising funds for Chinese military companies. He declared that he was not going to violate American national security policy and would absolutely walk away from deals with China assisting with military equipment, unquote. In fact, Dimon and his hilt know that doing otherwise actually violates President Trump's America first investment policy, which thanks to Representative John Moliner, Congress is poised to make the law of the land. American security and resiliency starts with ending our underwriting of the enemy. Those are my thoughts. For more of them, please check out the work we do at X, at Frank Afney and also@the US future.org where you will find the website of the Institute for the American Future. It makes this program possible and I hope that you will consider supporting what we do there. Let's turn to Brian Kennedy. Brian is of course the former president of the Claremont Institute. He is these days the president of the American Strategy Group. He is also an author of numerous books, including one very important one about Communist China's war Inside America. We're anxious to get his thoughts on the nature of that war being waged by the likes of Jamie Dimon, who recently, despite his protestations on Maria's program, helped arrange hundreds of billions of dollars in American and other investors money flowing to a company called catl C A T L is the acronym, which is a Chinese military company, according to the United States Pentagon, as well as a company that is providing absolutely military equipment to the Chinese Navy, for example, by putting in batteries in their conventionally powered submarines, making them longer range, very quiet and very lethal to our carrier battle groups and other assets in the Pacific. Brian Kennedy, I want to talk to you about what it is that is being done by those on Wall street like Jamie Dimon, who may profess that they don't want to violate US Policy and yet are doing so and doing so to the benefit of those who are trying to kill us, the Chinese Communist Party's military. Your thoughts, sir?

[C]

Yeah, thank you, Frank, and great to be with you as always. I think one challenge we have here is somehow expecting Jamie Dimon or any Wall street head of an investment bank to be looking out for the interests of the United States. They're looking out for the interests of themselves, their shareholders and they're looking to make money any way they can, anywhere they can too. What we lack in this country is a robust system within our government, within the Treasury Department especially, that will actually monitor these investments and make sure that the Jamie Dimons of the world are not investing US Investor dollars in companies which are antithetical to the interests of the United States. Let us also say the bleeding obvious, which is money is fungible. So even if you're investing in a company in Communist China that is of a civilian nature, a clothing company or, you know, small electronic manufacturer, et cetera, that's going to find its way, one way or the other into a state owned enterprise that supports the, you know, communist Chinese regime and by extension the communist Chinese military, any penny going to Communist China could easily end up supporting a regime that is antithetical to the United States, our freedom and our liberty and just the financial well being of the American investor. So I think we've learned the lesson here and I think Maria understands this. So long as money is going to Communist China, it's going to be used, quite likely not for good, good, good things.

[B]

I neglected to mention that you are.

[D]

Of course the chairman of the Committee.

[B]

On the Present Danger China and have been a leading voice in warning about precisely this kind of engagement and how it is in fact enabling in some cases actually military companies of the Chinese Communist Party. As I mentioned, the Pentagon is a list called the 1260 H list that specifies what they call Chinese military companies operating in the United States as part of an effort to try to, you know, discourage people from doing business with them. And yet we still see people being able to invest in them, in other words, keeping them in business. But Brian, to your larger point, the Chinese Communists have of course coined a phrase for this so called civil military fusion, which means that basically any company in China that is getting investor dollars from the United States or otherwise Being, you know, supported with maybe purchases of whatever products they sell, is actually also enabling the military of China. Is that right?

[C]

Oh, yes, of course it is. I think our challenge here, Frank, is that they're going to take whatever money they can get out of the United States in whatever form they can get it. And I think we've learned the lesson that you need a government agency here preventing that from happening. You need laws from making that possible. When Jamie Dimon says his ideas and his practices are compatible with U.S. policy. Well, policy is policy. It's not the law. And there's always enough wiggle room in the area of policy to drive a truck through whatever it is that Americans want to restrict reasonably. And you see with Representative Moliner that he takes all this very, quite, very seriously and really does want to restrict this. And until it's restricted and until it's the law of the land, our investment bankers, our elites on Wall street, they're going to behave in whatever way they need to to make as much money as they can, because they're going to U.S. investors, they're getting billions and trillions of dollars over time, and they're making a fee on all that. And they're becoming quite wealthy in the process. And so they look at the U.S. government and U.S. policymakers as more or less fools, and they know they're not going to stop until it's the law of the land. We don't have Patriotic businessman, unfortunately.

[B]

Yeah, but the problem is, Brian, as you know so well of course, that at the same time that a Jamie Dimon is saying that he's not going to violate American policy, you point out, oh, yes, he is violating American policy right now, the America first investment policy. But he's also got his lobbyists, I'm quite sure, if not he, others on Wall street have their lobbyists all over Capitol Hill trying to make sure that it's, it's not the law of the land, that it is illegal to engage in this treachery. Let's call it what it is, folks. They're paying the Chinese to prepare to kill us. I don't know how to put a finer point on it, but to call it treasury, if not flat out treason. So, Brian, we have to take a short break here in just a moment, but I wanted to just tell our audience a little bit about a memorandum.

[D]

That you and I sent to one.

[B]

Of the top policymakers in the Trump.

[D]

Administration this morning as we speak, and.

[B]

The importance of that memo for trying to assure that this treachery, this, this subvention of our mortal enemy stops, at least with respect, for heaven's sakes, to these Chinese military companies. We'll get into all of that and more with the great Brian Kennedy. Stay tuned. Please. Welcome back. And a very special welcome once again to my very great friend and cherished colleague, Brian T. Kennedy. Brian Travis Kennedy at that. Brian is a man of great experience and enormous influence, I think, not least within the Trump administration, but also on Capitol Hill and in the media. Steve Bannon features him prominently, of course, among others, as do we, whenever we can. Brian is these days the chairman of the Committee on the Present Danger China, which I'm proud to be the vice chairman. And he and I wrote a letter that I mentioned just before the break. Give us a little bit of the background on it, Brian, if you would. Both in terms of what we've just been discussing, it sort of gives rise to the memo in the first place, but also the National Security Strategy that was unveiled by the White House last week and how it bears on our recommendation, Sir.

[C]

Yeah. Thank you, Frank. The national security strategy, as far as it goes, is pretty tough and articulates a lot of very sensible, let's call it commonsensical kind of approaches when it comes to our enemies abroad. One of these, of course, is Communist China, and it wants to have relations with Communist China, we the United States, in ways that are mostly reciprocal in nature. Now, I say that knowing that fair and reciprocal. Fair and reciprocal, yes, absolutely. And so I personally don't even think we need a document like the National Security Strategy. The President Trump and American policymakers always have to be looking out for what is in America's national interest, what is fair and reciprocal. Right. Just from a common sense point of view, one of the things with Communist China is their trade policies. And are they behaving Is the money that we are exchanging with Communist China when we engage in trade with them? Are those relationships fair? Are the trade deals fair? Are we being treated the right way? Are we being excluded from Chinese markets when we give them access to US Markets? And so this requires policymakers to examine and see whether or not in fact, these things are fair and reciprocal. One of the things that is lacking in that document, even though I think it's quite good overall, is the kind of specificity when it comes to US Investor dollars going to Communist China. And we have to be very careful, as we've been talking about, in making sure that no money is going there that would be at all harmful to the United States. Now, we suggest all these things at A time when we very much need to engage in trade with Communist China when it comes to these rare earth minerals and rare earth magnets that are essential to our manufacturing here in the United States. So we're in kind of a predicament right now. We would like to, I think, as a nation, have a more robust domestic manufacturing here in this country. We would like to decouple from Communist China, but we can't do so until we have a more robust manufacturing base here with the capacity to produce these rare earth minerals or acquire them from allies or friendly nations abroad. And so we are in this predicament right now where things are not quite perfect. We cannot decouple from Communist China. But the thrust of the memorandum we sent to the White House earlier today was that in that interim period, we want to at least make sure that there is not obvious investments being placed in companies that mean the destruction of the United States. And I would say the transfer of technologies going to Communist China. And one of the things that we didn't talk about when it came to Jamie Dimon was, you know, they want to invest 1.5 trillion in American national security and infrastructure. Well, one of those things is artificial intelligence. And left to its own devices, the kind of companies Jamie Dimon would be investing in would be more than happy to transfer this technology and other technologies to Communist China. The globalist part of American society, even that still exists within the Republican establishment in Washington is still very much of the view that we can play nice with Communist China, that we can be long term partners, that we don't have to worry about their threat to the United States. And one of the jobs that you have been so brilliant at, Frank, is highlighting this for Americans so that they understand there is a threat from Communist China unless we wake up to that threat and are extremely careful about one, making sure we're not making the Chinese wealthy and technologically capable, but also that we need to be wealthy and technologically capable. Until we have that understanding properly in place, we're going to be up against it. And that's one of the things President Trump is trying to correct here. And we've offered to help them wherever we can so that they understand the parameters of that and what they need to be tweaking within the administration to make sure that we're not enabling Communist China any more than we already are.

[D]

Well, thank you for your compliment, Brian, back at you.

[B]

You've been leading this very important effort for five or six years now. Let me just say, Brian, that you rightly say that there's not a lot of detail in the national security strategy about how to handle either inbound or outbound investment with the Chinese. But that is exactly what, of course, the American First Investment Policy was all about. It was promulg back In, I think.

[D]

The 21st of February, if memory serves.

[B]

By the President in a National Security Presidential memorandum. And it would be perfect, I think, if applied forcefully. And this brings us to the present moment because this memo to Stephen Miller, the Deputy Chief of Staff of the White House, was written in connection with a very, very worrying development. We've been told that the trade truce, as it's been called, has arranged for those rare earth minerals and rare earth magnets, as you call them, to be.

[D]

Freely flowing to our companies here.

[B]

And the Chinese on Friday of last week said, no, actually not.

[D]

We're just going to let them go to civilians and only if we think the, you know, are deemed worthy, which.

[B]

Is to say not involved in anything like our military applications or even dual use purposes. And Brian, what this memo addressed to Stephen Miller, who's been appointed the guy in charge, as I understand it, for the President, of making sure that we try to maintain that trade truce as best we can because of the high stakes, our excess to rare earth minerals specifically. And, and we suggested in the memo, and I want you just to lay the groundwork a little bit for this in terms of a memorandum of understanding that was promulgated after Joe Biden as Vice president engineered it back in May of 2013. How does that fit into all of this, Brian, and our specific recommendations in the memo to Steve Miller?

[C]

Well, look, one of the, one of the important pieces of the Trump agenda is making sure that we have these fair trade deals and the relationship between the United States and Communist China is today not at all fair. They're able to come to you, they're able to come to US Capital markets. One, we don't want American investors investing in communist China because those are dollars that are better spent in the United States investing in our future. Number one, they're able to, however, because of Joe Biden and the Obama administration, the Chinese companies are able to come to the United States and without any disclosure of the kind of auditing requirements that American corporations have to have through the pcaob. They don't have to do any of the kind of reporting that an American corporation would so that an American investor in a transparent way knows what's really going on in that Chinese corporation. You want to invest in an American corporation, you can read their financials in A Chinese corporation that's all hidden from you now, that on its face is utterly insane. And we've transferred trillions of dollars of American wealth to Communist China through that process. And one of the things we were highlighting for Stephen Miller was to examine that whole thing and make sure that.

[B]

That makes sense and practice in a.

[D]

Reciprocal way, restrictions on Chinese companies benefiting from their trade arrangements with us, as the Chinese are doing to us just right out of the pages of the National Security Strategy. Brian Kennedy, we have to leave it at that.

[B]

So much more to talk about. Thank you for your leadership on this. The memo will be [e-mail] as is the work of our committee. Check it out.

[D]

Be right back, folks, with more. Stay tuned.

[B]

We're back. And so I'm delighted to say, as a dear friend and great, well, freedom fighter here in our country and truly worldwide. Her name is Reggie Littlejohn, and as you can see from the backdrop behind her, she founded and has been running a marvelous organization, Women's Rights Without Frontiers. It's been focused on combating totalitarianism and the horrors that it inflicts, particularly on women, notably through things like forced abortions for population control purposes, especially in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party. More recently, Xi has founded and is running a new organization, the Anti Globalist International, which is a vehicle for carrying forward work that she and I have been doing on a couple of different coalitions, informal coalitions, the Anti Vax Passports coalition and the Sovereignty Coalition, which she has been a leading light in, particularly in connection with a topic that we wanted to visit with her about today. And that is something that she, I think, coined the term for the Digital Gulag. We're going to explore what it is, where it is, and why we should be particularly concerned that we may all find ourselves residing in it in the not too distant future. Reggie, it's great to have you. Welcome back to Securing America.

[E]

Thank you so much for having me, Frank. It's great to be here.

[B]

Well, it's great to have the chance to talk with somebody who's really been.

[D]

Thinking about this and warning about it.

[B]

Assiduously for years, because it's now not just a distant, fearful prospect. It is upon us. And there was a marvelous piece that.

[D]

Was written by man whose name I'm not recalling at the moment at Gatestone.

[B]

Institute, a wonderful organization about how the Chinese social credit system is coming our way. And maybe we could start, given your long history with monitoring and exposing and otherwise castigating the Chinese Communist Party, we Could start with, what does that mean? What is the Chinese social credit system, Reggie?

[E]

Well, this whole issue of the Chinese social credit system going worldwide is what caused me to co found the Sovereignty coalition with you and also to found Anti Globalist International. Because any mandatory digital ID can be attached to a digital dollar and can result in a Chinese style social credit system anywhere in the world. So what is that Chinese style social credit system in China, they just, they follow everybody digitally. They track everything digitally, same as we do in the United States, same as people do in Europe. Everything is tracked. But the difference is that in China it is centralized. So they have facial recognition, real time geolocations. They know what you look like, where you are, where you live, where you work, every place that you have ever traveled is all recorded. And also your criminal history, your medical history, your Internet search history, your Internet spending history, and basically anything that is in digital form, it's all put centralized into a centralized database to come up with a number about how compliant of a Chinese communist sheep you are. And if you obey all the rules, you never make any waves, they will allow you to live what looks like a normal life. But you know that if you step out of line, then you're going to. Then, then there's going to be the punishments. And the punishments start with you won't be able to borrow money to buy a home, you will lose your job, your kid won't be able to go to good school.

[A]

School.

[E]

If you do something even worse, like criticize the government online or God forbid, refuse to be vaccinated, they can cut you off from your credit card and your bank account. And if you're truly a dissonant, they will just disappear you. Okay, and so my concern is that through the World Health Organization, in Europe and elsewhere and even in the United States, that we are setting up the infrastructure that could operate in a. In the wrong hands. The same as the China social credit system.

[B]

Now what, what, Reggie? When you talk about infrastructure, I think.

[D]

Most people's minds would go to physical, you know, places. Well, prisons for that matter.

[B]

And the term gulag, of course, refers.

[D]

To the Soviet prison system back in the heyday of communism and the Soviet Union.

[B]

When you talk about a digital gulag, is that a physical thing? I mean, a card, I guess, but what else?

[E]

Okay, so the digital, Digital gulag is, is digital. It's not primarily physical, although it does have a physical aspect to it, Frank, which is that in order to run this, this is run on artificial intelligence, is run on AI, massive amounts of AI. And so that in order to be able to support this massive amount of AI, there have to be physical structures that are being built and they are being built.

[B]

Data centers, for example.

[E]

The data centers. Right, right. Massive. So there's a physical aspect to it, but the primary aspect to it is digital. It's a digital gulag, meaning that you are digitally trapped. And so what does that mean for you and me? Well, just think about what, Larry.

[B]

And again, just to be very much laymanist, that means your electronic fingerprints, your electronic retinal scans, your electronic data sets and so on are all being aggregated and assessed by artificial intelligence and manipulated into this so called score that assesses, as you say in China, at least how good a communist sheep you are. So if that were to manifest itself beyond China, what would we be seeing? And are we seeing it now?

[E]

What, what you've done, what you have just identified is the biometric aspect of this, which is very frightening because if it's hacked, okay, if our bio, biometric data is hacked, there's no way for us to change it. You can change your credit card, you cannot change your iris, you cannot change your face. So that's a whole can of worms. The biometric aspect of this is a whole can of worms. But let's look at the World Economic Forum. They have a chart on there about digital IDs and I believe that, that the World Health Organization, the way that they are rolling out these interoperable international digital IDs in connection with the EU, that the ultimate goal is the World Economic Forum, total digital id, which is that you are going to need a digital ID in order to open a bank account, to access health care, to travel, to own a communications device like a laptop or a cell phone, to participate in social media, to access government benefits. So in America, that would be Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, to vote, to pay your taxes. And so what that means.

[B]

Let me just interrupt you, Reggie. You're not just speculating that that's what could happen. You're telling us that that's what's in the works under the World Economic Forum and Bank of International Settlements and the like.

[E]

So what I'm saying is, I don't believe that the rank and file people who are implementing this stuff are necessarily intending to trap us in a digital gulag, but they are unwittingly setting up the system, the infrastructure, the system that could do that in the wrong hands. And it's so easy for things to.

[B]

Fall, including here, including here.

[E]

Okay, so here we have Larry Ellison, an American who's probably, I believe he's the second richest person in the world, who is the founder and president of Oracle, who is working with Trump on some of these things.

[B]

And so what Larry says is artificial intelligence among them.

[D]

Yeah.

[E]

What we need for what this artificial intelligence is going to do is it's going to create individualized cancer vaccines for everybody's individualized tumor. Okay. I think that that's how he sold it to Trump. That's how he's trying to sell it to the American people. But then if you go back to just before Trump was elected, Larry Ellison gave a speech to Oracle where he cast his vision for the future. This is what he said. I believe that we should all be wearing body cams so that everything we say, everything we do, everywhere we go, is going to be uploaded into AI. And, and what that's going to do is that's going to keep the police on their best behavior because they will know that everything they say and everything they do is being monitored. And it's going to keep ordinary citizens like you and me on our best behavior because we know that everything we say, everything we do is being monitored by AI. And so what that's going to do is it's going to help us with mall shootings, because if there's an escalation at the mall, AI will pick it up immediately. And. And then they can just send in drones, because drones can get there so much faster than people.

[C]

Okay.

[E]

This is his. He said this is his vision for the future.

[B]

You know, this is 1984 on steroids. My God, it is.

[E]

Absolutely.

[B]

And so Ellison is not just a guy, he's a guy who has considerable influence, including inside the Trump administration. Is there reason to believe that, for example, real IDs in this country will turn into that kind of infrastructure and be abused for this kind of purpose.

[E]

Real IDs. Yeah. Okay, so real IDs are not yet biometric, but they can become biometric immediately. So, like, for example, if you have a real id, the picture that was taken of you is biometric. Now, that is not. It's not in a chip on the real id. Yeah, okay, that's my understanding. But it's not in a chip, in the real ID itself, but it is biometric ready. So, in other words, they could take the next step very quickly to make them all biometric.

[B]

Indeed. I just have to say this is such a rich topic.

[D]

There's much more to come on this, Reggie.

[B]

I hope that we can do very.

[D]

Soon a sovereignty summit and maybe an X space on this and have your leadership, as always and very much at the center, come back to us with much more in the way of updates, if you would, very soon. We have to leave it at that for the moment, though. God bless you. We'll be right back, folks. Stay tuned.

[A]

Run a business and not thinking about radio. Think again. Because more people are listening to the radio and iHeart today than they were 20 years ago. And only iHeart broadcast radio connects with more Americans than TV, digital, social, any other media, even twice as many teens than TikTok. And that reach means everything. Just think about the universal marketing formula. The number of consumers who hear your message times the response rate equals the results. Now let's get those results growing for your business. Radio's here now more than ever, and iheart's leading the way. Think radio can help your business. Think iheart streaming, podcasting and radio where the reach is real. Let us show [e-mail] that's iheartadvertising. Or call 844-844. Iheart one more time. Just call 844-844, iheart and get radio working for you.

[B]

We're back. And so is Peter McElveen, one of the freedom fighters who has come to the fore in a country that is now, well, under siege. Doesn't quite describe it, because siege suggests they're outside the walls. And unfortunately, the enemy is very much inside the United Kingdom at the moment. And when I speak of the enemy, I'm specifically speaking of what I call Sharia, supremacists. People who embrace are following scrupulously the dictates of the Islamic operating code that.

[D]

Emanates from the divine direction, for want of a better term, that this character called Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam, says he got from angels and the like.

[B]

As well as his own personal practice.

[D]

Which is pretty horrific, especially when you consider that he's described as the perfect man. The man I'm speaking of, pretty darn.

[B]

Near perfection in most respects, is Peter McElveena. He is a dear friend as well.

[D]

As a very valued colleague. And he runs an operation called Hearts of Oak with another man I revere, Lord Malcolm Pearson, for whom he works in the House of Lords some of the time. And the rest of the time, he is helping the rest of us understand.

[B]

What is going on in the United.

[D]

Kingdom and in Europe more generally, and what's headed our way in the form of jihad. Stealthy if not violent, probably both. And I couldn't be more pleased to have him with us. Today to talk about all of that at this juncture. Peter, welcome back, my friend. Good to have you as always.

[F]

Thank you, Frank.

[B]

I want to say first of all.

[D]

Thank you, Peter, for enlisting in a campaign that our Victory Coalition and friends have launched in the past couple of days. We hope to do so in earnest.

[B]

This week called Ban the Brotherhood. And I want to add a Philip to it.

[D]

I think it should be also thought of as saving civilization.

[B]

Ban the Brotherhood. And I want you to talk a little bit about what is really on.

[D]

The line in terms of Western civilization.

[B]

At the moment as you are witnessing it with your front seat perspective given.

[D]

What'S happening at the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood and assorted other jihadists in the United Kingdom.

[F]

Well, there are two. Let me touch on the UK and then let me come back to the US Point of view and understanding. I think part of the issue you have in Europe, the Muslim Brotherhood, it's done fantastically well on influencing and yet not being the target itself. And it's this moving target which I think has utterly confused any European government. Certainly I think Austria is the only country to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization back in 2021. I know France in, in Europe. In Europe, in yes, in Europe I.

[D]

Know that nations have done it, some.

[F]

Of them at least other. So Bayan has done it. I think UAE have done it. So other country, I think Saudi even has done it. And in Europe we've had some kind of conversation. I know that in Germany and France they've discussed concerns. I know in the UK we've also discussed concerns. Different government reports have talked about Muslim Brotherhood being an extremist organization. But it's only Austria, they've gone ahead and actually designated a ban for it. And I don't know why there is such fear, why I don't know what your benefit. Now you have to go deeper into the funding aspect. And of course this is to do with Europe's position in the Middle east with Islamic countries. But Austria has taken the lead maybe because Austria is not necessarily at the heart. You've generally had that France, German, UK axis in Europe and they've all held off. So that is where we are now. Muslim Brotherhood very closely linked to most of the major Islamic organizations in the uk the aid organizations, Muslim counts of Britain, other organizations. So it kind of this shadowy figure behind the scenes. And I've always been intrigued, Frank, maybe when we catch up sometime next year over food or drink, I can find out regarding we're 20 years on from the Holy Land foundation trial. And there are those lists of hundreds of organizations that every the government had huge concerns about. And we are now 18 years later and once again talking about banning the Muslim Brotherhood. The impact it has, and it's intriguing when an organization was so high profile during the Holland foundation, it then dips and now has reappeared 18 years later. And I think that neither does seem to be the the desire. But yeah. And yet there have only been few that have really tried to push us. No. Ted Cruz has tried to introduce legislation numerous times, has never happened. Suddenly there is an interest. And that's why I think the Ban the Brotherhood initiative that you have started, Frank, is perfectly timed for now.

[D]

Peter, thank you. Let me just take a second here or two to amplify what you've just alluded to, and I'm happy to break bread with you at any point. And a stiff drink is probably required for this story.

[B]

But just to cut to the essence.

[D]

Of it, the Holy Land foundation trial.

[B]

Was the largest financing terrorism prosecution in America's history for terrorism, that is and.

[D]

It involved this entity, the Holy Land foundation, based in Texas, that was raising money for a designated terrorist organization known as Hamas.

[B]

In the course of the prosecution, the Justice Department listed something over 300, as I recall, unindicted co conspirators, including, by the way, the Council on American Islamic Relations, which Governor Greg Abbott of Texas.

[D]

As you know, Peter, recently designated as a terrorist organization, along with the Muslim Brotherhood, of which it is, you know, the leading edge.

[B]

The idea, as I understand it, was.

[D]

That the Justice Department was supposed to, having successfully prosecuted the five principles in.

[B]

The Holy Land foundation, to turn its.

[D]

Attention to Prosecuting the other 300. Only something happened almost simultaneously with the convictions of those first five. A guy by the name of Barack Obama was elected president of the United States. We're going to come back and pick up the rest of that tale on the other side of this short break. You're not going to want to miss it. Stay tuned for more with Peter McElveena of Hearts of Oak right after this. Welcome back.

[B]

We're visiting with Peter Michaelvena, a great leader in the fight for Western civilization.

[D]

Based in the United Kingdom. His reach is, however, now very firmly on both sides of the pond, in part thanks to our friend Steve Bannon, amplifying his work and what we try to do in our small way here at Securing America with him most weeks. Peter, I just want to finish this tale because you you picked a scab, I guess is the way I would put it, by asking about The Holy Land Foundation.

[B]

And just to finish the thought, when Barack Obama was elected, one of the first things that his bagman, the Attorney.

[D]

General of the United States, Eric Holder.

[B]

Did was to snuff any thought of a second prosecution that would have in.

[D]

Fact gone after the Muslim Brotherhood's infrastructure in the United States, at least, you know, 300 of its leading front organizations, including the Council on American Islamic Relations. And frankly, ever since what we have.

[B]

Seen successive administrations, and I'm sorry to say I think it's true of the Trump administration as well, doing is employing.

[D]

Muslim Brotherhood affiliated people, or at least sympathizers with the sort of Sharia supremacism of which the Muslim Brotherhood is the leading edge.

[B]

And as a result, we've not seen.

[D]

Anything remotely like the kind of, well.

[B]

To quote Donald J. Trump.

[D]

As you know, on October, excuse me, August 15.

[B]

2016.

[D]

As the nominee for the presidency.

[B]

Of the Republican Party hadn't been elected yet, Donald Trump went to Youngstown, Ohio and made an epic speech about the ideology of radical Islam and how it had to be countered. In strong contrast to what Hillary Clinton, who was all about embracing the Brotherhood.

[D]

In fact had at her right hand.

[B]

Homa Abedin adopt Brotherhood operative.

[C]

I believe.

[B]

Trump said he was going.

[D]

To have a very different policy.

[B]

And one of the things he specifically.

[D]

Said, Peter, which goes to this point about the Holy Land foundation and so much more, and the Brotherhood's vast infrastructure.

[B]

In our country, as he said, in a Trump administration, we will strip out and remove one by one the support.

[D]

Networks of radical Islam. We need that to be done right now. And the place to do that, Mr. President, is, is by designating the Muslim Brotherhood as the terrorist organization. It is. Anyway. Forgive me for taking so much of your time, Peter. I appreciate you listening and nodding, but.

[B]

Talk a little bit about one aspect of what Sharia supremacism is looking like that I want particularly young people in America to be taking aboard. Tommy Robinson has been in the vanguard on that and so has with his inspiration, Elon Musk, and so have you. Tell us about the so called grooming gangs of Britain.

[F]

Well, these are Muslim family mass rape gangs and they have operated for over 50 years. And again, it's this fear of pointing out something that comes from the Islamic community or comes from Islamic teaching because you don't want to be branded Islamophobic. And we've had discussion on this even over the last two days in the UK about this term, this reference that they're pushing through in a working group to bring Islamic blasphemy through the back door.

[D]

And we have, wait a minute, speak to that point. That's a reference that's very important, Islamic blasphemy. What are you referring to there? And what does the backdoor mean here?

[F]

So we have a working group in the UK started by the government to bring together an official legal definition for Islamophobia to codify that in law. And the concern is meaning to prohibit.

[D]

Engaging in so called Islamophobia.

[F]

And again, what is Islamophobia?

[D]

Yes, of course.

[F]

And it seems to be that the UK government are going down the line that any criticism or any offense, which of course is very dangerously, very wide open. So on a, over the weekend Sharia.

[D]

Supremacists are after all easily offended, are they not?

[F]

Very easily, very easily fried. And, and we have there, there are a number of people over the weekends raising concerns of the UK government have sidelined any dissent on this because they want to force this through and present.

[B]

Make the point about how this ties.

[D]

Into the Islamic tenets of blasphemy.

[F]

Well, this is, this is hugely fear because again on the grooming gangs no one talked about it because of fear of being branded because Islamophobic. But if that is a legal definition then it means that the, the police must arrest you for any criticism. So if you're raising an issue of how is, or how Muslims are treating someone else according to Islamic teaching, then you have broken the law and you will be arrested. At the moment it depends on the police forces, it depends on who complains. But they, this would be then across the board, you cannot utter anything.

[D]

Peter, I'm sorry, I just want to press you on this point. What they would be enforcing, whether it's.

[B]

The law of Britain or not, is the law of Islam which says that you may not say anything that gives offense to a Muslim because that blasphemes against Islam. So in effect you're talking about the, the absolute adoption and enforcement of Sharia law by his Majesty's government if this were to proceed. Is that right?

[F]

Oh, exactly. And we have had these 85 Sharia courts operating for about 20 years. Sorry.

[B]

Okay, we're almost out of time.

[D]

Peter.

[B]

Get to the bottom line. You're not going to be able to talk about rape gangs because that would be blaspheming against Islam and impermissible under this new statute. Is that basically where this is headed?

[F]

That's basically where it's been head that where it's headed. And we've already had that suggestion. Now it will be codified in law. So you cannot criticize these men for carrying out what they're carrying out and the law will protect them as they have done and will be continue to arrest the girls, the young children for prostitution. And of course children cannot choose, but that's where the state's moving.

[B]

And Peter, I've heard you say that there may be as many as 1 million young British girls that have been raped serially and enslaved in this fashion. Is that right?

[F]

Very quickly, that was A left wing MP Sarah Champion said up to 1 million girls have been affected. She's a UK newspaper.

[B]

This is, as I say, obscene and outrageous.

[D]

It must not be allowed to happen in Britain and certainly must not. Come here. Peter McElvena, thank you. Come back to us soon. Heartsovoak.org Stay tuned, folks. We'll be right back with more.

[A]

This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human.