Point of View June 23, 2025 – Hour 1 : Updates from the Weekend

[00:00:04] Across America, Live, this is Point of View, Kirby Anderson.

[00:00:20] Thank you for listening to the Monday edition of Point of View. How was your weekend? I think ours all changed rather dramatically on Saturday night, and as we went off the air on Friday, talking about the fact that there may be an attack by the U.S. in the future, but probably something that would go through Congress, and we were wrong.

[00:00:39] The two weeks that Donald Trump was talking about turned out to be two days, and as you well know, this very significant attack on three different nuclear facilities in Iran took place over the weekend, as evidenced by the fact that right now, if you are looking at the news, we do have evidence that Iran launched an attack on the U.S. Air Force bases in Al-Adid, which is one of the many.

[00:01:05] You've got Al-Adid, and a number of others there in Qatar, or Qatar, depending on how you want to pronounce it. This attack comes after the U.S. Embassy there told Americans to shelter in place until further notice.

[00:01:18] As far as we can determine, the Patriot Missile Defense, those would be the MIM-104s, actually have been able to beat back that attack, but we do know that the Joint Chief, that would be General Dan Cain, Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, as well as the Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, have been in the Situation Room monitoring the possibility of Iranian retaliation.

[00:01:45] And so the concern about there being some response from Iran has now been fulfilled. And as far as we know, even though this was an attack because of the Patriot Missile Defense System and others, that seems to have not done any significant damage. But we'll have more as an update as we go along. Let's, if we can, try to answer a lot of questions I suspect you have. How was this done? Why was it done?

[00:02:13] What are the implications of it and the rest? And so we're going to try to work our way through that in the first hour. Our plan has been, and it still is, for us to spend some time with Hal Donaldson, his book, What Really Matters. He was somebody that was recommended by John Kasich. And when we found out his book was available, we thought we'd chat with him as well. So we are, in a sense, dealing with lots of very significant issues.

[00:02:36] And don't forget that this week we're going to spend a little bit more time talking about the fact that as we come to our fiscal year end, we hope that you will click on that banner which says, anchored to truth. We have a match on the table, dollar for dollar match. I'll talk more about that later. I've got a viewpoints commentary up there. We've got videos. And many of the articles I'm going to be referring to are there. If you find yourself saying, okay, that was a good point. I had not thought about that before. Or I'd like to see the documentation for what you're talking about.

[00:03:06] Let's see if we can provide as much of that as possible on the website pointofview.net. Okay, how was this achieved? A couple of, I should say, B-2 bombers flew 37 hours nonstop in order to hit deep inside Iran on these nuclear sites.

[00:03:28] These American B-2 Spirit stealth bombers flew actually nearly 37 hours from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri. Then were able to strike three of these very fortified nuclear sites. The president on Saturday night, 10 o'clock Eastern Time, 9 o'clock Central, said that this was a very successful attack.

[00:03:51] And at least according to the New York Times, the mission required multiple mid-air refueling operations with the B-2 bombers flying deep into hostile airspace and unleashing. And they talk about six of these GBU-57 bunker busters.

[00:04:10] The total, I've heard 12, I've heard 14, but nevertheless you can see that the six that were unleashed in the Fordow facility was the most significant. Because this is one that was regarded as perhaps the most impenetrable due to its deep underground construction. And yet Trump declared on Truth Social that it is gone and it was amazing success.

[00:04:38] There have been some since then that have said maybe we need to wait for a full accounting of that as well. And all of this was part of what is called Midnight Hammer. This is when the Pentagon said these U.S. strikes happened when you had the 14 bunker buster bombs, as well as then about 30 Tomahawk missiles, which were actually launched from the Navy.

[00:05:02] The operation, because it was called Midnight Hammer, deployed these B-2 stealth bombers from the Air Force base there in Missouri. Dan Cain, who again is the general and chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters at a press conference Sunday morning that there were no reports of U.S. forces even coming under fire. Some of that gets down to the deception that was used. Some planes were flown to the west.

[00:05:29] These came in apparently in a different direction in the east. And so as a result, there was the deception that was involved in that regard. There was also, of course, the deception of Donald Trump saying, well, we're going to give him two weeks and turned out to be two days. And so this set of bombers took off early Saturday U.S. time, later dropped their bunker busters. And as a result, left.

[00:05:55] And some have reported that Iran didn't even know they were hit until after they were gone. Pete Higgs said, this is a plan that took months and weeks of positioning and preparation so that we could be ready when the President of the United States called. It was a great deal of precision. It involved misdirection and the highest of operation security.

[00:06:17] The official said that the 75 precision guide weapons were used and the operation was one that used some about 125 aircraft, including those which were deceptive, those which were using for refuel and the rest. I might just mention that we've on a few occasions talked about the B-12 or B-2, excuse me, Spirit, one of the most secretive and lethal aircraft ever built.

[00:06:44] If you go out on YouTube right now, there's supposedly a video of the cockpit, not of the actual flight, but of a previous one, manufactured by Northrop Grumman. And it is famed for its stealth technology, but also for its ability to deliver just a huge payload. Because as we have pointed out before, these bombs are like 30,000 pounds.

[00:07:07] And so, again, this is what it was actually designed to do, to come in in a very stealth way, not be easily observed, certainly by radar and other things, and then be able to drop these precision-guided bombs, 30,000, again, GBU-57AB massive ordnance penetrator bombs, known as bunker buster bombs. And, of course, then you have about 400 miles away in the Gulf.

[00:07:37] This is where the submarines launched 30 Tomahawk cruise missiles at two of the other nuclear sites as well. So that's how it was accomplished. Again, just think about 37 hours in a plane, whether it is a luxury plane or whether it is a strategic plane or military plane.

[00:07:59] You can imagine what that must have been like, but nevertheless, it is one more illustration as to why you do not want to cross the United States military. We come back, though, lots of response. Should the president have consulted individuals? It turns out, as you'll find out in just a minute, of the so-called Gang of Eight, yes, four of them were consulted, Republicans. Four of them were not. Those would be the Democrats. I think you might know why.

[00:08:28] And then what kind of reaction and response are we getting from other countries. And then I want to take you to some various pieces from New York Times, National Review, and a variety of others addressing this issue from different perspectives. We'll come back with more right after this.

[00:08:58] This is Viewpoints with Kirby Anderson. Freedom in this country depends on three important foundations, morality, limits, and human rights. First, freedom depends on morality. John Adams observed, Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. When the citizens have an internal moral compass, the size and scope of government can be small. There's no need for external laws and regulations from government.

[00:09:25] If people do what is right and demonstrate common sense, the republic will thrive. Second, freedom also depends on limits. Lord Acton famously explained, Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That is why the framers instituted checks and balances in our constitutional system. They also recognize the rights of citizens to hold government officials accountable. A moral people keep the government in check. A limited government keeps political leaders in check.

[00:09:52] A third foundation of freedom depends on respecting human rights as granted by our Creator. That important principle is found in the Declaration of Independence, which explains the why of American government. And it is also implied in the Constitution, which explains the how of American government. And this country has not always lived up to those ideals, but they provided a worthy goal to achieve.

[00:10:14] Although you may know all these foundational principles, I fear that a whole generation of young people do not know them because they were never taught in their civics classes. And I see each of these foundational principles slipping away. If we don't begin to teach these principles to our children and grandchildren, then morality, limited government, and respect for human rights will soon become relics of our past. That is why we need you to teach them to your family today. I'm Kirby Anderson, and that's my Point of View.

[00:10:47] Go deeper on topics like you just heard by visiting pointofview.net. That's pointofview.net. You're listening to Point of View, your listener-supported source for truth. Back once again, if you'd like to join the conversation at 8-800-351-1212. Let's, if we can, first of all, quote from the Wall Street Journal. Editors there actually said Trump meets the moment on Iran.

[00:11:15] The editors say President Trump's decision to strike Iran's three most significant nuclear sites on Saturday helped rid the world of a grave nuclear threat and was a large step towards restoring U.S. deterrence. It also creates an opportunity, they say, for a more peaceful Middle East if nations of the region will seize it. Good if there, but nevertheless, that's the case. A little bit later, they say, Mr. Trump gave Iran every chance to resolve this peacefully.

[00:11:43] The regime flouted its 60-day deadline to make a deal. Then Israel attacked, destroying much of the nuclear program and achieving air superiority and supremacy. And still, the president gave Iran another chance to come to terms. But, again, it is very obvious that Ayatollah al-Khamenei wanted a bomb more than he wanted peace. He goes on to say that the Pentagon on Sunday disclosed more details of the mission,

[00:12:11] which include a deception and B-2 bombers and deep penetrating bombs only the U.S. can deploy. And they point out the fact that military conflict is sometimes unpredictable, and Iran may retaliate no matter how self-destructive that would be. Of course, Iran is running out of missiles, we might point out. And I think there were, nobody gave me a count on how many were actually launched at Qatar or Qatar, but nevertheless, it didn't seem like it was a massive strike there as well.

[00:12:42] They go on, and a little bit later, to say, at the same time, the Israeli campaign yielded an unrivaled strategic opportunity, which we even talked about on Friday. Suddenly, Iran's airspace was uncontested, and that really is the case right now. Its substantial ballistic missile program was degraded. Several of its proxies have been bludgeoned into silence. Think about what has happened to Hamas, Hezbollah, what even might be happening a little bit right now to the Houthis.

[00:13:10] And its nuclear program has been reduced to a few key sites. So then they come to this conclusion. We would say that what has been unfolding left Mr. Trump little choice. But then they add a comma, except U.S. presidents always have a choice, and they've been known to kick the can down the road. I found this on X, and maybe you can find it as well,

[00:13:37] a series of quotes that maybe illustrate how each president's talked about this, but we have been in the same situation since the middle of the 1990s. Here's Bill Clinton, 1995. We are determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Here's George W. Bush in 2006. Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons, period. Here's Barack Obama, 2015.

[00:14:06] I have stated that Iran will never be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. Here's Joe Biden in 2022. We will not allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon. And then Donald Trump in 2025. Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Simple as it can be.

[00:14:32] One of the things that I might point to is a very interesting YouTube video that I watched recently by Douglas Murray. Now, if you're not familiar, Douglas Murray kind of left at center from England, but he has always been very strong about the Muslim threat, and also has been very strong about the danger of Iran.

[00:14:56] Matter of fact, if you go to your local bookstore, I would commend one of his books called Democracies and Death Culls, which really kind of gets us into kind of what has happened since October 7th in Israel with Hamas. But nevertheless, in this particular piece, and it looked like from the format he was in either Oxford or Cambridge, I think it was Oxford Debate Society, in which he was making the case that, and this is interesting,

[00:15:22] this came 12 years ago, saying someone in the future, could be a prime minister, could be a president, will finally destroy Iran's nuclear facilities and nuclear capability. At the time, there will be all sorts of countries that will condemn the action, but privately they will all breathe a sigh of relief.

[00:15:45] One of the things I've posted, by the way, is a very good piece of an interview with the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, in which at one point he was asked about that, and he said, look, many of these individuals in these various governments have to, of course, speak out and condemn the president for what he has done. But privately, they're very relieved because of the potential threat of Iran.

[00:16:11] And I'll get into that a little bit later when I quote from David French in his piece that appeared in the New York Times. But nevertheless, at the very end of this piece by the editors of the Wall Street Journal, they said that credit goes to President Trump for meeting the moment despite the doubts from part of his political base. Because some of the people that have been critical of the president are part of what might be called the MAGA movement. We talked about that on Friday. But it also ended TACO.

[00:16:40] They said the chatter about TACO. TACO stands for Trump always chickens out. We'll probably quiet down now, but the more significant reassessment has to be with U.S. foreign policy. And the bottom line is that there were individuals that say we should just simply not ruffle the feathers of Iran. The best we could hope for would be some kind of, as they say, flimsy deal that bribed Iran with billions of dollars,

[00:17:09] but still left open the path to the bomb. Which, of course, is exactly what you had under the Obama administration, under John Kerry and others. And the editors of the Wall Street Journal simply say they were wrong, and the world is safer for it. Let me also just mention something else, and we'll get into some other aspects of this in just a minute. Because, again, we have to understand that there will not only be some criticism from individuals who have been supporters of Donald Trump,

[00:17:39] but there also are the Democrats who are arguing that this is an impeachable offense, which is a little hard to argue for if for no other reason you think of, let's mention Bill Clinton, launching missiles into, I don't know, Sudan, Afghanistan. You can think of all sorts of actions that were taken by Barack Obama and others. But nevertheless, we'll see where that goes. But the argument right now has been this.

[00:18:08] As a Democratic Party, we agree that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons, but we should not have allowed the president to take this action. And the biggest argument they make is, we were not consulted. Well, again, every time I bring this up, people say, yes, well, then you're going to have leaks. Yes, you are. And one of the things that was really striking the other night is to have people that have actually covered the Pentagon,

[00:18:36] saying we have never, ever seen something held so tight. You know, this argument that the Defense Department and the Pentagon's in disarray under Pete Hegseth. Well, if you're looking for that argument, you're going to have to look somewhere else because nobody saw this coming. And the mission was kept under wraps for a long period of time. But just before we take a break, let me explain something. We have what is known as the Gang of Eight.

[00:19:03] You have four on the Republican side, four on the Democratic side. And these are the leaders. I would be the Speaker of the House, and this would be the Senate Majority Leader. And likewise, you would have the House Minority Leader and then the Senate Minority Leader. And then you would have the other four individuals are the individuals who are the chair of those particular committees, having to do with intelligence and other aspects of that, armed services and intelligence.

[00:19:31] And so we now know that, indeed, President Trump did inform the Republican leadership before the B-2 bombers dropped their payload, but kept the Democrats in the dark. And that comes from Axios. So they were complaining that they weren't briefed in advance. And I think we all pretty much know why. And that is the Republican counterparts were given advance notice.

[00:19:59] Democrats weren't because of the fear that, and I think it's a very legitimate fear, that they would leak it. Well, we're going to come back and get into some other aspects of this before we go on to other topics, because this isn't the only thing in the news. But as we go to a break, if you'd like to find some of these articles, they're available at the website pointtoview.net. And as you go there, let me encourage you to think about clicking on that banner that says Anchored to Truth, Give Now.

[00:20:29] We have a $56,000 match challenge. It's probably going to go up, but the bottom line is we've got money available. It's already put in the bank, ready to go to match your funds dollar for dollar. I do know that there are a few thousand dollars that have been already submitted and matched. But if you want to make sure that your dollars are matched, do it now, because by the end of this week, or certainly by this time next week, which would be the last day of June 30th,

[00:20:59] if it's not available then, well, it won't be matched. So if you've always said, I appreciate the kind of news, information, commentary, and perspective you have on Point of View, I'm going to ask you even during the break to click on that button that says Give Now. And, of course, if you ever want to make a phone call, that's 1-800-347-5151. We'll take a break, come back with more right after this.

[00:21:30] Well, I do need to say that we are running out of time to raise funds by June 30th, the deadline that will determine our budget for the next fiscal year. Your gift will make a difference. And thanks to an ongoing matching challenge, your gift will be doubled through the month of June. Here's why Point of View is the media ministry to support as we forge into the future.

[00:21:56] Point of View is trustworthy, with proven dedication to a biblical worldview for 53 years and counting. Additionally, Point of View is making a multi-generational impact. Your support equips listeners to articulate biblical truth about the issues of our day with their children and even their grandchildren.

[00:22:19] Americans need a proven resource to equip current and future generations to live out God's truth in our time. Give it to them today by giving at pointofview.net or call 1-800-347-5151. That's pointofview.net and 800-347-5151.

[00:22:46] Point of View will continue after this. You are listening to Point of View. The opinions expressed on Point of View do not necessarily reflect the views of the management or staff of this station. And now, here again, is Kirby Anderson.

[00:23:12] Back once again and again, if you'd like to join the conversation, 1-800-351-1212. Let's be very clear, and that is, if you want to follow the Constitution, and that certainly seems to be something that's fallen out of favor, but the Constitution in Article 1, Section 8, says that Congress has the power to declare war, to raise and support armies, and makes rules for the military. But Article 2 also says the President is the Commander-in-Chief,

[00:23:40] and that certainly gives him some authority over the armed forces to direct the operations once he's authorized. Now, since then, of course, we've had a War Powers Act in 1973 and a variety of others, and the bottom line is I would like someday for a president, and it's certainly not this president, but it wasn't the last few either, to actually ask for a declaration of war.

[00:24:06] If you go back to our history, remember Thomas Jefferson wanted to go against the Barbary Pirates. He asked for a declaration of war, did not get it, but he got authority to use military force. Later on, you had the second, well, between that, you had the War of 1812. I think that one was a declaration of war. The one after that, again, when you had James Madison, it was James Madison, architect of the Constitution.

[00:24:32] He now asked for authority and was not given an opportunity to declare war, but was used that against the Barbary Pirates again. What we have working right now is a situation in which, really, since 2001, the authorization for the use of military power, and that was given to George W. Bush, and there have been presidents that have said, well, that gives me enough justification to use military force, but it's nothing close to a declaration of war.

[00:25:02] If you really want to be honest, the last time we had a true declaration of war from Congress was December 8, 1941. So we do need to get back to what the Constitution requires, but let's also be honest enough to mention that the two Bush presidents, George Herbert Walker Bush and George W. Bush, father and son, both sought approval from Congress, in one case even sought approval from the United Nations,

[00:25:29] and yet they're sometimes being tarred for having some of the greatest misadventures in the Middle East. So even getting approval isn't any justification necessarily, but it's just a reminder of the fact that this is a president right now, Donald Trump, who says, look, if you allowed Barack Obama to do it, if you allowed Joe Biden to do it, I'm going to do it as well. And we've seen that in a number of different policy issues.

[00:25:54] But if you did not have a chance to hear Donald Trump's speech, it's relatively short, which is uncharacteristic. But there was a statement that was made at one point, and Dan McLaughlin picked up on it. Donald Trump said this, For 40 years, Iran has been saying, death to America, death to Israel. They have been killing our people, blowing off their arms, blowing off their legs with roadside bombs. This was their specialty.

[00:26:20] We lost over 1,000 people and hundreds of thousands throughout the Middle East, and around the world have died as a direct result of their hate in particular. So many were killed by their general, Qasem Soleimani. I decided a long time ago I would not let this happen. It will not continue. That phrase about roadside bombs, Dan McLaughlin picks up on and said, We have not forgotten. Here's what he said.

[00:26:46] We have, of course, lost many Americans to Iranian war and terrorism over the past 45 years, including hundreds of U.S. Marine peacekeepers killed by truck bombs in Beirut in 1983. We've talked about that before. But by mentioning roadside bombs, Trump is talking specifically about Iraq. So the bombs go off in Iraq, but they were actually from Iran.

[00:27:15] And so he goes on to say, Had the U.S. faced only Iraqi opposition, the war in Iraq would have been very different. And Iran, having the longest border with Iraq and a border with Afghanistan, was the largest third-party foreign participant. For years, critics of the war downplayed the extent to which U.S. military deaths in Iraq were Iran's doing. To his credit, Trump has not forgotten.

[00:27:43] So I posted that because that phrase about roadside bombs was, I think, mentioned once in one of the commentaries. But I think this was very significant. If you know individuals that have served in Desert Storm or a variety of other outreaches or even were there in one way or another helping refugees in Iraq, you recognize that the greatest threat sometimes was not just Iraq but Iran.

[00:28:12] And when we hear people say, well, Iran is not a threat to us, yes, it is. And it isn't just, of course, the truck bombs in Beirut and a variety of other issues that we've mentioned on this program. It was even these roadside bombs as well. So I thought I might mention that that piece by Dan McLaughlin, We Have Not Forgotten, is there.

[00:28:36] I thought I would also mention that there was a very good interview, probably the best I've found so far, with the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, in which he explains some of the background, what was happening behind the scenes. I gave you some in terms of the way in which these B-2 bombers were flying. But also he gives you some of the percentages of uranium enrichment. You're going to see a lot of people making claimants.

[00:29:03] And again, you know, everybody's allowed their own opinion, but they're not allowed their own facts. And again, Marco Rubio takes you through the level of uranium enrichment, which is not necessary if you wanted to have nuclear power. It's necessary for one and only one thing, and that is to create a nuclear bomb. And how close they were in terms of the percentage of uranium enrichment that was taking place.

[00:29:31] Now you might say, well, why should I believe him? You've heard the phrase before, Bush lied and people died. You know, and I always said it should have been Colin Powell lied and people died, because if you remember, he's the one that came before the United Nations and made the case for weapons of mass destruction. Did we find any? Not a whole lot. If you want to even consider some of the most bizarre things, weapons of mass destruction.

[00:29:57] And so in some respects, you might say, well, then why should I believe Marco Rubio? Well, maybe because Marco Rubio looking at Colin Powell says, I don't want to repeat that error, number one. And number two, I was able to get the right facts, which were easily developed because of some of the various investigations that were taking place. And so I think it is probably very helpful to see that particular interview as well,

[00:30:25] so that you can understand a little bit more on some of the background on these issues. Finally, let me go to the New York Times. David French was out on X talking about this. David French has been with us on a number of occasions talking about these topics. And as a result, he says, you know, if you want to understand why a nuclear Iran is dangerous, all you need to do is look at the Ukraine war.

[00:30:51] Because he said two things have happened since President Trump's first term that alter the strategic calculus about Iran. Russia invaded Ukraine and Hamas massacred Israeli civilians. He says the first event taught the world a lesson it shouldn't forget. When a nuclear armed nation engaged in armed aggression, the rest of the world really doesn't have too many options. He says those options narrow considerably.

[00:31:17] But by every step, Western powers have worried when they've actually done anything to help Ukraine, what would be the response from a nuclear armed Russia? He goes on to say, if you want to get another look at that, just think of a nuclear armed North Korea. And that means that Western powers, as he says, need to contemplate the kind of military actions that they could take.

[00:31:43] Very different than the actions they took against Saddam Hussein in Iraq or Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. And he says, now imagine Iran with even a modest nuclear arsenal. And you can see the potential danger there as well. And so because Iran's military capabilities have been sharply degraded,

[00:32:07] and because the proxies in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria have suffered very significant catastrophic military defeats, Iran is weaker than it's been in years. And the other part of that, of course, is the second part he makes, and that is October 7, 2023, Iran was living with the reality that Hamas is dangerous. And so by, first of all, defeating lots of Hamas, removing a lot of the leadership in Hezbollah,

[00:32:37] those pagers and cell phones, and now removing a lot of the military armament of Iran, this, I think, has had a very significant blow against the largest current country of Middle East terrorism and Middle East sponsor of terrorism. And if nothing else, it brings us back to the July issue of Outlook,

[00:33:03] in which we have a whole section there on the very significant axis of evil. Didn't you notice that Russia wanted to come and help Iran, and China has actually flown people into the country, so we recognize this axis of evil, North Korea, Russia, China, and Iran. But now one of those is actually very significantly degraded because of the actions over the weekend.

[00:33:33] Let's take a break. We have some other things to cover besides just what has happened in Iran, and we'll do that. Right after these important messages. You're listening to Point of View, your listener-supported source for truth.

[00:34:00] Back for a few more minutes, let me just mention that one of the many benefits that comes from supporting Point of View is you receive our Outlook magazine, and I mentioned just a minute ago the July issue, which, if it hasn't arrived in your mailbox, will be there very shortly. For those of you watching online, let me hold up one of the articles, and the article there says Foreign Policy and the New Axis of Evil. If you look at that, you see I have a picture of, of course, Vladimir Putin,

[00:34:28] Xi Jinping, and, of course, Ayatollah Khamenei. And it just illustrates again that we are dealing with dangerous people. We are dealing with a very significant existential threat to America, to the Western world, to democracy, and so that's one of the reasons why these kinds of actions are necessary. And as the editors of the Wall Street Journal said, the president really had no choice,

[00:34:57] but then added, but, of course, every other president has decided there was a choice, and that is to kick the can down the road. Well, that did not take place. And as you are finding yourself maybe interacting with individuals sometimes, you will get facts and figures that we want to try to respond to, one of which I could mention real quickly, and that is the other day, Whoopi Goldberg, hardly ever mentioned her on the air here, but she was on The View,

[00:35:25] and when at one point they were talking about what it's like to live in Iran, she made the case that African Americans face the same hardships that women and gay people face in Iran. Well, first of all, that is patently false, but you might say, okay, do I have some facts that I could counter that with, because I know people that will watch that and believe that, you know, and how do I respond?

[00:35:54] And again, you can find this piece, Kayleigh McEnany, you might remember her, she's press secretary for the first Trump administration, they said, well, let's just take one example. Masa Amini, and she even held up the picture there, who was 22 years of age at the time, did not wear her shijab, was arrested in Iran, she died in a re-education class in prison, where she was physically abused by Iranian authorities.

[00:36:23] So there's one very good illustrative example. But not to be finished with that as well, Kayleigh McEnany then cited a UN report in which, again, the UN may have even downplayed some of this, nevertheless acknowledged that the Iranian government killed about 500 people, detained 200,000 others, including children. The regime has used shotguns, rifles,

[00:36:51] deliberately shot people in the eyes, they face sexual violence, all sorts of things of that nature. And again, then there was one of the other hosts there at the time was saying, yes, she wouldn't even be allowed to make these comments without wearing a hijab, and then even then would not be allowed to make the comments without facing some kind of retribution. Harris Faulkner, who is also with Fox News, I did not know this, was actually on Star Trek The Next Generation with Whoopi Goldberg. I did not know that.

[00:37:21] So Harris Faulkner and Whoopi Goldberg were on the same program. But she went on to say, I don't know, she knows the facts here, that's not to say bad things did not happen previously in this country here, as Faulkner says, but on Juneteenth, where we recognize the emancipation from slavery, and she does this the day before, and she's just ignorant of the facts. So the bottom line is,

[00:37:47] sometimes you might run into somebody who is giving you something that might seem like a very unreasonable statement, and you might say, where do I go to find the answer? And I'm hoping that if you subscribe to our Outlook magazine, if you give monthly, you'll receive this, certainly for sure. And then of course, if you give at the dollar a day, $30 a month or more, which is our Truth Team level, you'll receive also the booklets,

[00:38:14] and our most recent one was on Sharia law. Some others have been on everything from Buddhism and Hinduism, and a variety of other topics, and that's just one of the many benefits of supporting Point of View. And again, you can go to the website and find out more. But let me, if I can, at least cite one other thing that I thought was significant, and that is, we had the testimony from the Secretary of Education, Linda McMunn,

[00:38:41] and she was actually in the House Education and Workforce Committee, and she was there for hours. I mean, these testimonies go on and on and on, partially because what you're going to get is partisan digs, you're going to be people making speeches, hopefully they can use them in their re-election campaign, and all the rest. But she stood her ground, and I know there are a lot of people that think we shouldn't have a Department of Education, but I don't think it's going to be disbanded anytime soon.

[00:39:10] So if we're going to have a Secretary of Education, let's at least have a person with common sense. And so the last article I've posted for you to read goes into some of her comments. She talks about, for example, the need on campus to have free speech, and the need for us to rethink student loans and repayment plans. She talked about the issue of the foreign influence in these various schools,

[00:39:37] and if you've received our Outlook magazine on that, we've talked about that in some detail. Matter of fact, on the dangers of foreign money and foreign students on campus, she even cited a recent FBI arrest of Chinese nationals that were bringing in a pathological fungi into the University of Michigan, which would be a risk to our safety and security, even our food supply. And so as a result, she was very clear.

[00:40:06] On a couple occasions where she didn't have an answer, she was quite honest to say, I'll try to get back to the members with a reasonable response. But then she also went on to talk about the shameless capture of colleges and universities by the hard political left, which she said were actually lacking viewpoint diversity, which is a nice way to say virtually almost every professor on campus is a registered Democrat.

[00:40:35] And even though they supposedly promote diversity, they actually don't have anything of the sort in terms of their hiring decisions. And this article that I've posted for you, written by Teresa Manning, who has written about this issue before, points out that you have certain states, I'll just use Iowa as an example, in the state of Iowa, the state legal code requires that no more than five of the nine members of the Board of Regents

[00:41:05] belong to a single party. Can't have all Republicans, can't have all Democrats. And so there is within some of the requirements for the state board regents, a requirement for, if you will, some kind of political and ideological diversity. And of course, nothing of the sort exists on campus. And I thought that was a really powerful argument as well. And so if nothing else, she went on to talk about some of these other issues,

[00:41:35] which the higher education system maybe even is need for some reform and some shock. And I thought of nothing else, since you probably would not have heard this anywhere else, except on point of view, if you are concerned about the state of education, especially the state of higher education in America, I think this article by Teresa Manning would be one that you might want to find. And it's on our website at pointofview.net. We come back. I'm going to be talking for a while with Hal Donaldson.

[00:42:04] He is the president of Convoy of Hope. John Kasich, when he was on the program recently, identified some people that he had such respect for. And Hal Donaldson was one of those. So we thought we'd get him on briefly to talk about that. And then we'll get back to some of the issues in the news. But as we take a longer break, what a great opportunity for you, first of all, to find these articles. They're very important articles. I've tried to find the ones that I thought were most helpful to you.

[00:42:31] They're available either in printed form or ones of video that you can pass on to others. We also, of course, have our banner, where, as we have said, as we come to the end of this fiscal year, we certainly need your financial support. And if you appreciate what we're doing, I would certainly appreciate your gift. It could be a one-time gift, but I hope some of you might even consider a monthly gift. Because, after all, our bills come in monthly, our support comes in monthly, matches up pretty well. It's all available at the website, pointofview.net.

[00:42:59] Click on the button that says Give Now, and we'll be back right after this. Well, I do need to say that we are running out of time to raise funds by June 30th, the deadline that will determine our budget for the next fiscal year. Your gift will make a difference. And thanks to an ongoing matching challenge,

[00:43:26] your gift will be doubled through the month of June. Here's why Point of View is the media ministry to support as we forge into the future. Point of View is trustworthy. With proven dedication to a biblical worldview for 53 years and counting. Additionally, Point of View is making a multi-generational impact. Your support equips listeners to articulate biblical truth about the issues of our day

[00:43:55] with their children and even their grandchildren. Americans need a proven resource to equip current and future generations to live out God's truth in our time. Give it to them today by giving at pointofview.net or call 1-800-347-5151. That's pointofview.net and 800-347-5151.

[00:44:26] Point of View will continue after this. and by giving at the lowest and the lowest and the lowest and the lowest and the lowest