SECURING AMERICA WITH FRANK GAFFNEY - SEPTEMBER 6TH, 2025

Summary

Podcast Summary: "Securing America with Frank Gaffney"

Date: September 6, 2025
Episode Theme:
This episode of "Securing America with Frank Gaffney" on Real America’s Voice dives deep into two major topics central to current geopolitical and social debates: first, the realities of humanitarian aid inside Gaza following the Israel-Hamas conflict (with guest Brooke Goldstein), and second, the accelerating threat of global governance and erosion of national sovereignty (with analyst Alex Newman). The discussions aim to debunk prevalent narratives, expose the actors behind global developments, and rally listeners to active defense of American freedom and values.

---

1. Humanitarian Aid in Gaza: Myths vs. Realities

Guest: Brooke Goldstein (Founder and Executive Director, The Lawfare Project)

[00:25 – 10:26]; Resumes [11:31 – 21:44]

Main Points and Insights:

• Brooke Goldstein’s Mission to Gaza

  • Goldstein recounts being among the first civilians, granted permission by U.S. and Israeli authorities, to enter Gaza for humanitarian fact-finding ([03:43]).
  • Hosted by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), she stresses it is the only NGO directly feeding Gazans without Hamas interference.

• No Food Shortage; Food Distribution Problem

  • Goldstein reports:
    • “There is no food shortage in Gaza. There are hundreds of thousands of tons of food going into Gaza all the time. What there is is a food distribution problem...” ([03:56])
  • Hamas allegedly uses food as both a weapon and a revenue source, intercepting shipments and reselling at exorbitant prices.

• On the Ground: Direct Witness Accounts

  • Goldstein describes witnessing over 12,000 men and 3,500 women/children being fed daily at GHF sites, which are protected from Hamas but not targeted by Israel or the IDF ([04:40]).
  • “Not one person, not one civilian has been killed at the GHF feeding sites.” ([06:51])

• Violence and Misinformation

  • Claims of Israeli aggression at food distribution sites are debunked; incidents of violence are attributed solely to Hamas efforts to discourage aid, including attacks on volunteers ([06:51]).
  • Goldstein highlights: “The IDF is not shooting at civilians getting food... All violence has occurred entirely by Hamas design...” ([07:50])

Memorable Quotes:

• Brooke Goldstein:

  “Hamas goal is to use food as a weapon. It is their number one source of income, to steal food and resell it at higher prices...” ([04:27]) “What is so baffling to me is those parties who claim to care about food shortages are the very people protesting the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.” ([08:50])

Key Timestamps:

• [03:43] Goldstein details her fact-finding mission
• [06:51] Dispelling rumors of Israeli aggression at food distribution sites
• [13:00] Criticism of international NGOs and calls to question their motives

---

2. Role of International NGOs and Propaganda

[11:31 – 16:59]

Main Points and Insights:

• NGOs and Humanitarian Aid: Complicity or Advocacy?

  • Goldstein accuses many NGOs—specifically under UN auspices—of facilitating Hamas, smuggling weapons/drugs, and opposing direct food delivery to civilians ([13:00]).
  • Over 93% of UN aid, by her account, is seized by Hamas, with NGOs failing to challenge this and, in some cases, enabling it.

• Propaganda and Public Perception

  • Humanitarian organizations and media are portrayed as unwitting (or complicit) partners in Hamas’s propaganda, maximizing civilian casualties for global outcry against Israel.

• Demand for Relocation and Safety of Civilians

  • Goldstein claims that those refusing Gazans' legal right to refugee status, insisting they remain as “human shields,” are complicit in perpetuating the conflict ([15:40]).
  • She calls this complicity a “sick” advocacy for genocide by trapping civilians in harm’s way.

Quote:

• “Those parties...demanding that Gazans remain...and be used as civilian human shields are...advocating for genocide against the Gazan Arab people.” ([15:55])

---

3. Fighting Antisemitism: End Jew Hatred Movement

[16:09 – 20:24]

Main Points and Insights:

• About the Movement

  • Goldstein explains the grassroots rise of the End Jew Hatred Movement, with tens of thousands of activists seeking to counter antisemitism in North America and Europe ([16:59]).
  • Frames ending Jew hatred as “the civil rights issue of our lifetime,” urging parity with other hate-based movements' recognition.

• Political Weaponization of Antisemitism

  • She warns that “anti-Jewish discrimination is legitimized under political advocacy,” reflected in college campus activism and global protests.
  • Pro-Palestinian movements are characterized as “pro-terror,” not democracy movements, often unsafe for flag-waving American patriots.

• Countering Radicalization in Schools

  • Highlights new campaign: End Hatred in Education (K-12), targeting foreign-funded radicalization and indoctrination, allegedly by countries like Qatar ([19:29]).

Quote:

• “Jew hatred is a sickness, a virus that makes people act irrationally and against their own self-interest.” ([16:59])
• “If we don’t get a hold of this...the future of America looks very bleak. That’s why we are at a crossroads right now.” ([19:50])

---

4. The Threat of Global Governance and Erosion of American Sovereignty

Guest: Alex Newman (Liberty Sentinel Media)

[24:58 – 53:09]

Main Points and Insights:

• Why Global Governance Is Dangerous

  • Newman outlines the inherent dangers in consolidating world power: ”When you have a global government, it will be a magnet for the very worst kind of people.” ([25:44])
  • Sovereign nations, he says, limit the excesses and ambitions of dictators (“If one leader went too crazy...there were other nations to put a stop to those ambitions.” [26:02])

• CCP Influence and UN Manipulation

  • Both Gaffney and Newman explore the increasing infiltration of international agencies (e.g., UN, WHO) by Chinese Communist Party officials and allies ([31:13]–[33:41]).
  • Guterres, UN Secretary-General, and other international heads are portrayed as “puppets” or ideological allies of the CCP.

• Funding and Global Taxation

  • The coming “International Maritime Organization” shipping emissions tax is cited as the first true global tax, aiming for $100 billion per year from 2027, paving the way for future international taxation ([37:07]).
  • Once the UN is financially independent, it is feared there will be no remaining checks on its ambitions.

Quotes:

• Alex Newman:

  “They are laying the groundwork here for global taxes, global prosecutions...Right now, the only thing standing between that and where we’re at is Donald Trump.” ([39:03])

---

5. Can U.S. Withdrawal Curb Globalist Overreach?

[39:27 – 43:53]

Main Points and Insights:

• U.S. Withdrawing from International Bodies

  • Withdrawal from institutions like WHO or entire UN agencies is called a necessary defensive measure, despite fears that China’s influence would increase in the U.S.’s absence ([41:00]).
  • Newman emphasizes that as long as the U.S. government pays attention to these international mandates, they remain dangerous.

• Global “Health Emergencies” as Pretext for Control

  • Panelists warn that in a future international “emergency,” unaccountable bureaucrats (e.g., WHO head Tedros) will dictate policy even to the U.S., highlighting the urgency for withdrawal or legislative defenses ([42:55]).

---

6. The UN’s “Pact for the Future” and Unchecked Emergency Powers

[44:58 – 49:43]

Main Points and Insights:

• UN 2.0: International Emergency Authority

  • Newman describes witnessing the passage of the UN “Pact for the Future,” which gives the UN Secretary-General essentially unchecked power to declare and manage international emergencies across all sectors—education, economy, climate, free speech, etc. ([46:30])
  • “The UN and its agencies would become the primary decision making authority and all stakeholders would have to defer to their decisions.” ([47:00])

• Global Governance Acceleration: WEF and Larry Fink

  • Gaffney and Newman discuss the elevation of Larry Fink (BlackRock CEO) to co-chair of the World Economic Forum, solidifying the “three-legged stool” of globalist governance: government (UN), business community (WEF), and religion ([49:43]).

Quotes:

• “This is quite literally the announcement of a global government style machine...with no checks and balances.” (Newman, [48:00])
• “We're not dealing with people who just have bad policy ideas. We're dealing with people who want power over our lives and they need to be opposed.” (Newman, [50:25])

---

7. Call to Action: Defending Sovereignty and Freedom

[49:43 – 53:09]

Key Recommendations:

• Grassroots Mobilization
  • Protect children from indoctrination at the local level; parents urged to seek alternatives to public schools infiltrated by globalist curricula ([50:45]).
• Political Engagement
  • Demand that Congress codifies executive actions preserving sovereignty so future administrations cannot reverse them as easily ([51:38]).

Host’s Final Thoughts:

• Gaffney closes with a warning that America risks losing its freedom if citizens don’t act decisively, echoing Ronald Reagan:

  “If we don’t, ladies and gentlemen, we will...tell our children and our children’s children what it was like to live in America when it was free.” ([52:34])

---

Memorable Moments and Notable Quotes (with Timestamps)

• “There is no food shortage in Gaza...What there is is a food distribution problem...”
  — Brooke Goldstein ([03:56])

• “Not one person, not one civilian has been killed at the GHF feeding sites.”
  — Brooke Goldstein ([06:51])

• “Those parties...advocating that these civilians do not get fed...must die in Islamic jihadic war against Israel.”
  — Brooke Goldstein ([15:55])

• “Ending Jew hatred is the civil rights issue of our lifetime.”
  — Brooke Goldstein ([17:19])

• “When you have a global government, it will be a magnet for the very worst kind of people.”
  — Alex Newman ([25:44])

• “They're laying the groundwork here for global taxes, global prosecutions of those who refuse to comply. Right now, the only thing Standing between that and where we're at right now is Donald Trump.”
  — Alex Newman ([39:03])

• “The UN and its agencies would become the primary decision making authority and all stakeholders would have to defer to their decisions.”
  — Alex Newman ([47:00])

• “We’re not dealing with people who just have bad policy ideas. We're dealing with people who want power over our lives and they need to be opposed.”
  — Alex Newman ([50:25])

---

Conclusion: Why This Episode Matters

This episode is a rallying cry for vigilance and activism—whether resisting antisemitism and propaganda on the ground or confronting global governance schemes from the halls of the UN to American schools. Both guests, Goldstein and Newman, stress the urgent need for Americans to be informed, engaged, and proactive in defending sovereignty, civil rights, and truth against both misinformation and the expanding reach of unaccountable international bodies. Listeners are left with clear, actionable insights and a compelling call to “go forth and multiply” in defense of their country’s founding ideals.

---

For more, visit The Lawfare Project (lawfareproject.org) and Liberty Sentinel Media (libertysentinel.org).

Transcript

[Brooke Goldstein]

This is an I Heart podcast.

[Frank Gaffney]

Foreign 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. We are thrilled to be able to introduce to you, I believe, for the first time since we've been doing this program, a friend of many years. We don't call them old friends, but a friend of many years and a very, very valued colleague. Her name is Brooke Goldstein. She is a, well, a force of nature in terms of the various causes and organizations that she has helped advance, notably her present role as the film founder and executive director of the Lawfare Project. And you can find out much more about [e-mail] she is a filmmaker, having made a marvelous film entitled the Making of a Martyr. She is also spearheading a movement about which we will talk in the course of this interview. It's called the End Jew Hatred Movement. She is, in other words, an extraordinary and vitally needed champion for freedom in our time. And we couldn't be more proud to have her with us. Welcome, Brooke. It's so good to have you here.

[Brooke Goldstein]

Thank you, Frank, for reaching out. I'm very grateful to be here, and I would say more than just a friend. You have always been a mentor to me. You were there from the beginning. I've learned so much from you. Everything that you have said over the years has come true. True. All of your warnings of radicalization, of Islamism gaining power. In fact, you are also the publisher of my first book. And so I'm very grateful to you for helping to mentor me and helping along my career and really being a thought leader and one who has always stood up with moral courage. So thank you for having me.

[Frank Gaffney]

Well, I can't ask for a better obit, so I'm going to charge you with writing it up, if you wouldn't mind. Thank you, Brooke. That's wonderful and very, very much appreciated. Let me turn to what you've been doing lately. You have recently returned from the Gaza Strip and a fact finding effort you've made there to see what's going on with Israel's efforts to relieve, well, the suffering, specifically the nutritional needs of the people who are caught up in this war that Hamas, which has misruled them and brutalized them for decades, precipitated with its attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. Tell us about this mission. Tell us what you did while you were in Gaza and the Takeaways.

[Brooke Goldstein]

Thank you. So about two and a half weeks ago, I was actually privileged to be one of the first civilians to have been given permission by the Americans and the Israeli government to enter into Gaza so that I could see for myself and document firsthand what is really going on. I was hosted by the Gaza Humanitarian foundation, which is an independent organization, a non profit organization that is feeding the people of Gaza. It is the only organization, the only entity that has been able to get food directly into the hands of Gazans. Because that is the issue, Frank. There is no food shortage in Gaza. There are hundreds of thousands of tons of food going into Gaza all the time. What there is is a food distribution problem because in the north, especially, a terrorist group that is hell bent on starving its own civilians, using its civilians as human shields, using its own civilians as hostages, frankly, in this war and increasing civilian casualties, uses food as a weapon. It is Hamas's number one source of income, is its ability to. To steal food and to resell it at higher prices in the markets in the north of Gaza. That is how it funds its terrorism. In the south, on the other hand, we have organizations like the Gaza Humanitarian foundation that have been set up to disrupt this economic warfare, so to speak. And it has proven to deliver. And I have the numbers here. Over a hundred, wait, let me hold over 125 million meals directly into the hands of Gazans. And we've heard so much misinformation about what's going on. We've heard that these facilities are unsafe, which is not true. I went there myself. I witnessed over 12,000 men and over 3,500 women and children being fed directly. These sites are open twice a day and the people are protected, actually from Hamas. Hamas goal is to spread misinformation and to prevent and otherwise discourage the Gazans from retrieving food because it disrupts its ability to use food as a weapon.

[Frank Gaffney]

Let me ask you a question, Brooke, because what we're hearing, as you know here in the west, has been, yes, the Israelis are working with this group, best known as, I guess, ghf, to feed the Palestinians. But they're also shooting the Palestinians when they go to those outlets and try to get food. What did you establish is the truth of that matter?

[Brooke Goldstein]

Well, I didn't witness any of that. In fact, not one person, not one civilian has been killed at the GHF feeding sites. What you have is the Israelis secured the perimeter. They are behind the Green Line. So it's not Hamas controlled territory. But Hamas does come in and Hamas has come in. At one time, Hamas threw a grenade at the civilians. It injured a couple. Nobody died. Another time, Hamas actually attacked the Gazan civilian volunteers who are working at the site. On their way into the site, they attacked a bus. They murdered over 10 people. Those people were then delivered to the Nasser Hospital where allegedly Doctors Without Borders was working and they were refused treatment. And those people perished in the courtyard of the Nasser Hospital because the Hamas run hospital refused treatment to the Gazans who were helping to feed other Gazans. We also had a stampede that was orchestrated where Hamas terrorists came into the site and started pushing the women and one woman got caught in the barbed wire. Idf. The IDF is not shooting at civilians getting food. There's been not one injury or death. That GHF is responsible for any and all violence. The limited three instances of violence that have occurred within the last three months have occurred entirely by Hamas design in order to discourage people from getting food. And what is so baffling to me is that those parties who claim to care about food shortages or claim to care about Palestinians having access to aid are the very people who are protesting the existence of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. Well, you, you know, you can't talk out of both sides of your mouth. And so that's why it was so important that I went and saw for myself what was going on.

[Frank Gaffney]

Well, this is very heartening on the one hand that the number of incidents have been very few and not precipitated by the idf, the Israel Defense Forces or the, the, the folks responsible for this aid distribution. It's, it's very troubling though, as you say, that there is this relentless campaign on the part of these so called humanitarian non governmental organizations against this effort and in support of Hamas. And we get back from a short break. Brooke Goldstein, I want to ask you about what's up with that? Who are these so called humanitarian organizations and what role are they actually playing in this struggle to care for the people of Gaza? Brooke Goldstein's in the house. Stay tuned. We'll be right back with more.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

Hey there. I'm Mary Kathryn Hamm.

[Carol Markowitz]

And I'm Carol Markowitz. We've been in political media for a long time, long enough to know that.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

It'S gotten, well, a little insane.

[Carol Markowitz]

That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.

[Carol Markowitz]

We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth Seriously.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people. Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday.

[Carol Markowitz]

And Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you list.

[Frank Gaffney]

Welcome back. My dear friend Brooke Goldstein is with us, fresh from her fact finding mission to Gaza, where she actually visited with the Gaza Humanitarian foundation to examine for herself what is happening on the part of Israel and the United States working with this group known as GHF to try to provide needed food distribution to people who are the more or less, I suppose it's fair to say, innocent victims of the war that Hamas precipitated, though there are some who are obviously involved in that war or supportive of it. They're in need of food now, that's for sure. And Israel has been doing, it seems, enormous effort to try to address that need without subsidizing or otherwise propping up its enemy and ours, by the way, Hamas. So, Brooke, you were talking about the criticism that Israel has come in for and this operation, which is an American Israeli joint venture. Who are these so called humanitarian groups and organizations, the UN and otherwise, and what role are they actually playing in all of this?

[Brooke Goldstein]

Okay, so I just want to preface that with just a couple facts. Israel has done more to provide aid and medicine and food and otherwise opportunity to the Gazans than every Arab state combined. Israel is unprecedentedly feeding the civilians of an enemy population in the middle of active combat. That is historically unprecedented. The fact is that 93.5% of all of the aid that's been delivered by the United nations has been diverted by Hamas. We just saw a week and a half ago a horrific video of Hamas terrorists attacking an aid truck. I met those truck drivers personally. I spoke with them at length, and they set the truck driver on fire while he was alive so that they could steal the aid. That is the fact of what is going on right now. And the aid groups, the NGOs, who are attempting to deliver aid, but actually have been caught smuggling weapons, they're caught smuggling drugs, there's a huge drug problem right now being smuggled in. Those are the same same groups that are protesting against the direct delivery of food and medicine by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. So you really have to call into question what their motives are, because this is not just, you know, a physical battlefield. It's not just an economic war with the food against Hamas. This is a propaganda war. And you see very clearly when Hamas officials have journalists, they strap on a press vest thinking that they're going to be immune to international law, to the laws of armed conflict. And they are operating and embedded within the terrorist group to document their atrocities for their propaganda campaign. Now, Hamas goal is to maximize civilian casualties. And these same NGOs that are against the Gaza Humanitarian foundation, against the feeding of the Gazan people, are the same groups who are refusing to allow the Gazan civilians their legal right to refugee status to be temporarily relocated to safety so they cannot be used as human shields by Hamas. In fact, those parties who are demanding and insisting that the Gazans remain, they remain to be held hostages, and they remain to be used as civilian human shields by Hamas, those are the parties advocating for genocide against the Gazan Arab people because they are insisting that they remain there, that they have civilian casualties solely for the purpose of using them as a propaganda war against Israel. How sick is that? How sick is it that there are people advocating that these civilians do not get fed and they are not entitled to their refugee status, that they must die, they must die in Islamic jihadic war against Israel?

[Frank Gaffney]

You, you've, I know, been identifying and documenting how sick this is as part of a larger endeavor you've mounted. You call it the End Jew hatred movement. And it sounds a lot as though those NGOs, whether they're associated with, I don't know, the UN or the Red Cross or Red Crescent or whatever it might be, are exhibiting symptoms of Jew hatred to the extent that they're playing the role that you've just described. Tell us a little bit about this movement, Brooke Goldstein, if you would, and what you're trying to do to actually end this horror of Jew hatred.

[Brooke Goldstein]

Sure. Well, I'll preface that also by saying that Jew hatred is the type of sickness, it's a virus that makes people act completely irrationally and against their own self interest. You know, every society that has allowed Jew hatred to flourish has itself then crumbled and disintegrated. And the End Jew hatred movement, which of which I am the proud founder, and we have, I think, over 65,000 thousand activists across the United States, as well as activists in Canada and Europe, is a true grassroots movement that really says enough is enough, right? Everyone is against, you know, ending hatred against gays or ending hatred against women or ending hatred against blacks, you name it. The time is now for a movement that advocates that we must end Jew hatred. Ending Jew hatred is the civil rights issue of our lifetime. We are in the age of minority rights movements, and yet the issue of anti Jewish discrimination has become so politicized that Jew hatred And anti Jewish discrimination is legitimized under political advocacy. So we have so many instances and we see it, you know, every day on college campuses. We see it on streets across the world where Jews are being targeted for being Jews. And a Hamas propaganda campaign or a so called Israeli Palestinian conflict is just the latest excuse to target Jews for being Jews. And I would conclude with this. Now you see all around us in Europe, on the streets of New York, on the streets of Paris, in la, in London, these so called protests, these so called pro Palestinian protests. These are not democracy movements. These, they are not waving European flags, they're not waving American flags. In fact, if you went into one of these protests and started waving an American flag, you would be beaten up, you would be at risk. These are pro terror movements. And you have been warning about this for over 20 years, Frank, and I've been warning about it and we wrote about it in the book the War Against Free Speech. And what I say is the most important thing to do is do what we're doing now, talk about these issues openly, not to be intimidated by it. Because the great threat, not just to Jews, is radicalization, and in particular theologically motivated radicalization. And we're seeing it in our schools across the country, which is why the Endure Hatred movement is so proud to now have launched the End Hatred in education K through 12 campaign, which is a true grassroots movement together with our allies, American allies, to stop the indoctrination and radicalization happening in our schools, and much of it foreign, funded by terrorist states like Qatar. Because if we don't get a hold of this, and if we don't reverse the hateful indoctrination happening in our schools, kindergarten, even in kindergarten, the future of America looks very bleak. That's why we are at a crossroads right now. We must do everything we can to work with all of our allies not just to combat and defeat anti Semitism, but to end hateful Islamist radicalization, Marxist radicalization that's happening in our schools.

[Frank Gaffney]

Brooke, I said at the outset how much I admire your leadership in this freedom fighting that you've done valiantly for decades. As you say, I can't think of a more important focus of effort than the one you've just described. It is truly the case that of all of the minorities you can think about the one that is not allowed to stand up for itself, the one that is being silenced, the one that is being pilloried at every turn, including by mainstream press and even governments, the Jewish people. And it is untolerable and it must stop. And we salute you for your efforts to do that. And I hope you'll come back for a longer conversation about all of this in the very near future. God bless you. Keep up the Great [e-mail] We'll be right back, folks. Stay tuned.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

Hey there, I'm Mary Kathryn Ham.

[Carol Markowitz]

And I'm Carol Markowitz. We've been in political media for a long time.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.

[Carol Markowitz]

That's why we started Normalely a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.

[Carol Markowitz]

We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people. Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday.

[Carol Markowitz]

And Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.

[Frank Gaffney]

We're back. And what a delight to be able to say we're back with Alex Newman, a tremendous contributor to the fight for freedom in this country, one of the most, I think, thoughtful analysts of the various threats to it, as well as an incredibly creative, well, free range mind when it comes to figuring out what we need to do to preserve our freedom. He is the proprietor of a wonderful media organization, Liberty Sentinel Media. He has his own podcast program. He appears relentlessly, thanks be to God, on various programs, including this one. He is also the author of countless essays and articles and a couple of important books very much relevant to our topics today, including Indoctrinating Our Children to Death, About Our Government, Schools, War on Faith, Family and Freedom, and the Deep State, the Invisible Enemy behind the Scenes. It's always illuminating and frankly exhilarating to have a chance to visit with him. And I'm so pleased to be able to do it with him now. Welcome back, Alex. Great to have you.

[Alex Newman]

It's an honor and a pleasure. Thank you very much, Frank.

[Frank Gaffney]

Where to begin? Alex? It's a target rich environment, but I think I'd like to start with what I know is a special passion we share, which is the alarming efforts being made now by, well, yes, the UN and assorted institutions that nestle underneath it, like the World Health Organization, to achieve what has been described as world government by sort of evolving inexorably more and more power in the hands of their various international bureaucrats. But also, we've just been treated to a very urgent, insistent statement by no less than the Communist Chinese dictator Xi Jinping, that what the world needs now is global governance, and he's got a multifaceted initiative to make that happen. Talk to us. First of all, Alex, based upon your long study of this topic, what's wrong with global government? And then let's talk about what these various initiatives portend.

[Alex Newman]

Well, thank you again, Frank. And I think there's a lot of ways to analyze this problem of global government, But I would start just with the pragmatic approach. When you have a global government, it will be a magnet for the very worst kind of people. And historically, we've seen that government power tends to attract people who want to wield it for improper purposes. Thankfully, the fact that we have sovereign nation states has kept those ambitions in check. When one leader went too crazy, Adolf Hitler, pick your crazy dictator. There were other nations to put a stop to those ambitions before they could get too far out of control. What happens when you have a global government and there is no longer any force that can properly withstand that power? Well, you have a recipe for disaster. It would attract every Hitler, every Castro, every Pol Pot, every savage Stalin. They'd all be stabbing each other in the back and murdering each other's moms to try to rise to the top of that hierarchy. Incredibly dangerous situation. Secondly, we see the very people who are building these institutions, and we know quite a bit about them because they speak publicly, they write essays, they give speeches, and we can see from their actions the kind of things that they believe. And the Chinese Communist Party is a very good example of this. I mean, these are ruthless individuals. They've slaughtered at least 100 million of their own people, if you don't count the babies that they've butchered in forced abortions. What do you think they will do to you if they end up in charge of a global system with the ability to impose their will on you? So I think for a whole number of reasons, and we could go into the biblical reason, you know, it was God's idea to divide people up into nations. He says it repeatedly in the scriptures. And there's just something really important about the limiting power that nations have. So I think there's a lot of reasons. Right, but those are some of the key ones.

[Frank Gaffney]

Let me drill down on a couple of them, because I think you've really captured the essence of this to the extent you can either have sovereign nations, including the one we care most about, of course, which is ours, a constitutional republic, which is rooted in. In the conviction that God has given US unalienable rights, and we have a state to guarantee them and protect them on the one hand. Or you can have some kind of entity, presumably made up of multiple sub entities, that will take care of governing you instead, and you're entrusting to them protecting your powers or your freedoms. I should say, if one could possibly do that. This seems like an open and shut case, and I think that's been true. You've participated in a lot of the work that we've done as a sovereignty coalition. When you talk to the American people about this, this isn't even a close call. People are horrified to even hear that this is afoot, let alone that it's in prospect. So why is it, if it's that obvious that this is a bad idea, that it remains a persistent problem and in fact, if anything seems to be gaining ascendancy?

[Alex Newman]

Well, I think the reason this continues is because there's a lot of powerful people who want it to continue. Frank and I mentioned the Chinese Communist Party. While they're taking over the architecture of global governance, at the same time, they are also progressively strengthening it. But at the same time, we have very powerful forces in the United States, some of the most powerful men on Wall Street. Larry Fink is a good example. He just became the co chair of the World Economic Forum. This guy's on record publicly to the media saying that markets prefer totalitarian government. I mean, this is crazy stuff. This is absolutely crazy stuff. Totalitarian societies don't innovate. They imitate, they rip off people's technology. But we have very, very powerful people in the United States, in China, in Europe, in London, a lot of the capitals of the world, and also a lot of the powerful financial people who believe that they will benefit by creating this. And I think their most powerful tool. Frank, you alluded to it briefly in the introduction. They're manipulating the minds and the beliefs of the next generation. And they're doing it very strategically, very deliberately. The UN even has an agency, it's called UNESCO, that since the 1940s has been very openly working to groom children to believe that global government is the answer to all of our problems. If we have a global government, we won't have war. If we have a global government, we can stop climate change. If we have a global government, we won't have international tax avoidance and evasion. So they are being conditioned to see global government as the solution to everything. And they're also being conditioned to believe that the system we are leaving behind, at least here in America, the system as you mentioned of God given rights, of a government that exists to protect these rights, that that is somehow malevolent, that it was created by bad guys because they are dead and they are white and they were, you know, 250 years ago. And so therefore we shouldn't care anymore or we should reject what they had to say. Say, even though that represented, I think, one of the highest achievements that mankind ever reached. So we have all these forces coalescing around this idea and people are going to see in the next few years, it's going to become increasingly obvious they're going to be coming out of the closet more and more.

[Frank Gaffney]

Yeah, coming out of the closet is an interesting turn of phrase. In this case, you've mentioned something that again, has not gotten nearly the attention that it deserves, I think despite your best efforts and ours. And that is the Chinese Communist role in these institutions. And it's a stunning statistic how many of them are actually run by Chinese nationals. Talk a little bit about how that's come to pass and the implications of it. If you think you're getting something benign under a Secretary General like Guterres at the United nations, are you in fact basically just getting a puppet for the Chinese Communist Party?

[Alex Newman]

There's no question about it. And Guterres is a really good example. I mean, this is a guy who openly allied himself with socialists. His entire political career. He was a member of the Portuguese Socialist Party. After that, he actually became the head of the Social Party.

[Frank Gaffney]

Socialists aren't communists.

[Alex Newman]

Yeah, they're communists with a slightly different outer wrapper. But if you look at his track record as head of the Socialist International, that's the biggest organization of socialist political parties in the world. There's a lot of former Communist parties in there. There's a lot of current Communists and Marxists in there, some of whom have the blood of millions of innocent people on their hand. So you listen to Guterres. He's got much more in common with Xi Jinping and the CCP than he does, say, with the ideas that made America great, with the ideas of the American Founding Fathers.

[Frank Gaffney]

He's not even a Chinese national. He just, you know, aligns with them very closely.

[Alex Newman]

That's right.

[Frank Gaffney]

But how about those actual, you know, Chinese Communist Party members and the like who are in charge of these organizations?

[Alex Newman]

Yeah, the UN is absolutely filled with leaders from the ccp and they're not even shy about admitting it anymore. They have a school of global governance in Beijing at the Foreign Service University, and they are openly taking over the architecture of The UN I started digging into this over a decade ago. I've written many articles about it in the New American in the Epic Times and Diplomat magazine. The last time I looked and it's been maybe a couple years since I've looked, but five of the 15 UN specialized agencies were being run by members of the CCP, at least another three or four by well known puppets of the CCP. And for perspective, there was one American, one running one of the least important of these agencies, the World Food Program. So that gives you a sense of how deeply infiltrated the union, McCain's widow.

[Frank Gaffney]

The last time I checked. So I'm not even sure she's on our team beyond being an American. So Alex, we have to take a short break, but when we come back, I want to get into some of the things that you alluded to here that are imputed to be under better care. If a global enterprise is running things. Taxes, for example, is one of the things you mentioned and what that actually might mean if this kind of organization gets access to its own funding streams, is that likely to produce more abuse or less? We'll find the answer out from Alex Newman on the other side of this short break. Please stay tuned.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

Hey there, I'm Mary Kathryn Ham.

[Carol Markowitz]

And I'm Carol Markowitz. We've been in political media for a long time, long enough to know that.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

It'S gotten, well, a little insane.

[Carol Markowitz]

That's why we started Normalely a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.

[Carol Markowitz]

We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

So if you're into common sense, sanity and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people. Catch new episodes of normally every Tuesday.

[Carol Markowitz]

And Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple.

[Brooke Goldstein]

Podcasts or wherever you listen.

[Frank Gaffney]

We're back and so is Alex Newman. Praise the Lord. Liberty Sentinel is his battle station and you can find out all about it. You can find out all about it@liberty sentinel.org Alex, I I was putting the question to you that if you are concerned that global governance might run amok if it represents a concentration of power unchecked by sovereign nation states opting out or refusing perhaps to finance its operations, you're going to love the idea that the United nations will begin being able to levy taxes as I understand it, starting with something called the International Maritime Organization, one of these subsidiaries of the UN that I think probably most of us have never heard of talk about how this is likely to work in practice. Alex.

[Alex Newman]

Well, thanks, Frank. And this has already been approved by multiple levels of UN governance, including the International Maritime Committee. So this is coming out as like a freight train right now. The UN hopes it's going to start collecting the first taxes in the beginning of 2027. And I've seen their estimates. They hope $100 billion a year will be coming in from this tax on emissions of international shipping as a starting point. Now, before we even get to the specifics of this tax, I want to just echo what you said, Frank. One of the last restraints on the power of the United nations is the fact that they need to ask their member states for money when they want to do things. If they want to start a peacekeeping operation is what they call their wars. If they want to hire more UN police, if they want to drag somebody before the International Criminal Court, like they're trying to do to Netanyahu or eventually probably Donald Trump, they need money for those things. And right now, governments can say no, there's not much that the UN can do to extract that money. Once they get their own source of independent revenue, which is what this tax on international emissions from shipping will do, that last constraint will be severed, and they will essentially be able to do what is they want. They'll be able to hire more troops, hire more police, wage more propaganda campaigns, hire more bureaucrats, strengthen progressively these international kangaroo courts that they're establishing. So this, it's hard to overstate the danger of this. And I want to point out too, about this shipping tax. This is just the camel's nose under the tent. The UN itself says the emissions from international shipping. And I should point out, too, the idea that there's Something wrong with CO2 emissions is preposterous. We exhale CO2, it's not hurting the climate. But if international emissions is only 3% from shipping, what then would that mean for agriculture, which they say is 30% of emissions? What would it mean for transportation, for cars, for energy production? If they can tax shipping to save the climate, they can certainly tax any of those other things to deal with this international emergency. In fact, the International Court of Justice just ruled less than two months ago that governments have an obligation under international law to fight CO2 and to fight climate change. And that failure to do so constitutes what they call an internationally wrongful act. So they're laying the groundwork here for global taxes, global prosecutions of those who refuse to comply. And right now, the only thing Standing between that and where we're at right now is Donald Trump.

[Frank Gaffney]

Right. And Donald Trump has, to his great credit, responded to what the Chinese Communist asset WHO runs the World Health Organization has done in the past, initially during his first term, by saying, we're withdrawing from the who, reiterating that on the campaign trail. And then when he first came back to office, that will take another couple of months to, you know, become realized. What we're hearing, though, Alex, and I'd like you to respond to this charge is that, well, to the extent the United States is withdrawing or is cutting the funding for the WHO or the UN or other of its operations, the Chinese are the beneficiaries. Their influence is growing. They're going to, you know, pick up authority and control on the cheap, no less. They're not going to have to pony up the kind of money that we did to exercise dominion. Now, you made the point that they're serious about staffing these things. That's bad enough. But do you, you know, agree that to the extent Donald Trump is trying to hold the line here, it's probably net, net actually strengthening China's position in these international organizations to our detriment?

[Alex Newman]

Well, I think the CCP would have even more influence over these institutions, but we need to be realistic. They already dominate these institutions. And the only reason these institutions are a threat to us is because our governments have historically paid attention to what they have to say with the withdrawal. And I've seen some really good arguments from the folks at Heritage and from other places that withdrawal means we're out. You can't just have another president at some future point jump back in without congressional approval. So as long as the US Government is not involved in these things, whether they're controlled by China or not, really shouldn't make any big difference to us. And I would hope that most of our allies would want to leave these things, too. Why should we willingly put ourselves under the thumb of a mass murdering terrorist organization masquerading as a legitimate political party? So we have, I think, a great advantage by removing ourselves from these things. And whether China gets stronger within them when they're irrelevant doesn't really make any difference.

[Frank Gaffney]

I must say I'm of mixed minds about this. I think the damage that can be done by the one entity that actually has some authority to impose itself on us, and that would be the UN Security Council, would be worse if we did not have a veto that we hopefully have the president willing to exercise there. But the larger point is that what we've certainly seen whether it's in the taxing arena or whether it's in the public health arena. And you've been doing a masterful job, I must say, monitoring and raising awareness about all of these things. Alex, is this notion that in case of an international health emergency, say, a pandemic, we will be told by the UN Agency head, the in this case again, a Chinese Communist asset named.

[Alex Newman]

Tedros.

[Frank Gaffney]

Cabresis, named Tedros Cabresis, what to do about that pandemic, not only that it exists, but that it is now going to be our job to implement his direction. This is all very alarming stuff, and I'm a little bit apprehensive that just getting ourselves out from under it is not going to make it go away as a threat. We'll talk a little bit more about that on the other side of a short break with Alex Newman. Stay tuned, please.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

Hey there, I'm Mary Kathryn Ham.

[Carol Markowitz]

And I'm Carol Markowitz. We've been in political media for a long time, long enough to know that.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

It'S gotten, well, a little insane.

[Carol Markowitz]

That's why we started Normalely a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling and with a healthy dose of humor.

[Carol Markowitz]

We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.

[Mary Kathryn Hamm]

So if you're into common sense, sanity and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people. Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday.

[Carol Markowitz]

And Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple.

[Brooke Goldstein]

Podcasts, or wherever you listen.

[Frank Gaffney]

Welcome back. And a special welcome once again to one of our favorite contributors, Alex Newman, host of his own program, Liberty Sentinel. Check all of his wonderful work out@liberty sentinel.org Alex, we've been talking about the rising power that has been accumulating under the auspices of these various global governance advocates in the United nations, in the World Health Organization, National Maritime Organization, on and on, and not least in the World Economic Forum. And I want to come back to the Larry Fink and his new gig in a moment. But before we do, just on this question of imputing to these wholly unaccountable bureaucrats, whether it's Guterres at the UN or it's people like Gabras at the World Health Organization, it seems to be something that is becoming much more invasive, if I can use that expression. You were present, notably, when the Pact for the Future was approved at the United Nations. Tell us about what it gives Guterres the authority to do and how he is responding to that new authorization.

[Alex Newman]

Thank you, Frank. Yeah, I was there covering this for the new American magazine. It was unbelievable to see this because I've never seen such a openness about the direction that the UN was going. And they actually framed it as the UN was becoming UN 2.0. And whereas UN 1.0 was supposed to deal with international peace and security, UN 2.0 was going to handle education, the environment, the economy, climate change, the Internet, free speech, artificial intelligence, every area of life. And in this agreement that they adopted by so called consensus, in other words, every government in the world agreed to at least let it pass and become part of the body of what they kind of pretend like is international law. They specifically say in there. And I warned that this was coming in 2023 in a big article for the Epoch Times, because I had the reports from Guterres. They say that the UN needs to be strengthened to deal with international emergencies. And in the original policy brief that Guterres put out in 2023, I believe it was policy brief number two, he lists all kinds of different international emergencies that might require UN leadership. Climate change, environmental problems, wars, economic problems, public health concerns, Black swan events that we couldn't predict, something in and out of space, it could be even a regional issue. And they say then, right in the text of this document that the UN and its agencies would become the primary decision making authority and that all stakeholders would have to defer to their decisions. And so what you have here is quite literally the announcement of a global government style machine that would take the reins over everything in the event of an emergency declared, by the way, by Guterres or a future Secretary General with no checks and balances on that declaration.

[Frank Gaffney]

And to the extent that this is becoming again more enshrined in so called international law, more enabled by acquiescence at best, at worst, you know, actual connivance, as we saw under the Biden administration and the ascendancy in a position that is not necessarily, in an official sense, powerful, but by virtue of the economic resources at the disposal of a guy like Larry Fink, now running the World Economic Forum. It to say nothing of, you know, Xi Jinping's new global governance initiative becoming the top priority of his statecraft, it would seem as though those of us who are worried about our sovereignty and the implications of it being crushed in the interest of world government are going to have a full employment program at best. Alex, what do we do about what is now emerging as you've described it so well in this two segments preceding in this one.

[Alex Newman]

Yeah. I'll start by saying it's very hard to overstate the influence of Larry Fink in this whole process. A lot of these globalists have talked about the three legged stool approach to making these transformational global changes. The first leg of the stool is of course, governments, and that's where the UN comes in with 193 member states. The second leg of the stool is the business community, and that's where the World Economic Forum came in. They actually signed a strategic partnership with the UN about seven years ago.

[Frank Gaffney]

Where.

[Alex Newman]

Where they specifically said they were going to bring the international business community to the table on implementing the UN's 2030 Agenda, which they called the master plan for humanity, which the CCP boasted they played a crucial role in developing. And then of course, the third leg of the stool is religion, which right now they're also working at the same time to bring all the major religions of the world on board with this agenda. And so to your question about what do we do about this, I think we need a multifaceted approach. The first step is to understand what we're dealing with here. We're not dealing with people who just have bad policy ideas. We're dealing with people who want power over our lives and they need to be opposed. And I think step one, it begins in our individual lives. We need to protect our children from this kind of indoctrination that the UN is offering. Trump has done a great thing by getting us out of UNESCO, but UNESCO actually bragged in their response to Trump that they're going to keep working with all their American partners anyway. And so they basically said, we don't care if you leave. We're going to keep burning, brainwashing American children. So I'd urge American parents really take this seriously. My wife and I, we homeschool our six children. We use classical conversations. I wouldn't trade it for the world, but I encourage everybody find a suitable alternative, whether it's a good Christian school, Catholic school, home school, lots of good options out there. That's step one, protect your children from being indoctrinated. Step two, we need to be involved in the public arena. We need our members of Congress to listen to what we're saying. We need the president to keep fighting this, and we need Congress to enshrine into law a lot of what Donald Trump has done through executive order and executive policy. So critical that we get this done, Frank.

[Frank Gaffney]

Because if you don't do that, of course you get, God forbid, another leftist president like Biden and the first thing they do is reverse all of the good executive orders and put in terrible ones. Alex, I think these admonitions and recommendations are of the absolute extreme importance and I appreciate the clarity that you bring to these topics every single day. I relish our interactions sometimes on your program, sometimes on this one because I've always learned from them and feel invigorated, if somewhat, you know, alarmed to be sure, but nonetheless invigorated by what you are calling for and calling on us to rise to. If we don't, ladies and gentlemen, we will, as Ronald Reagan used to say, tell our children and our children's children what it was like to live in America when it was free. That mustn't happen. We'll fight it. Thank you. Come back to us soon, Alex. I hope the rest of you do the same next time. Until then, go forth and multiply.

[Brooke Goldstein]

This is an I Heart podcast.