📺🔥 GREG GUTFELD’S SHOCKING ON-AIR RANT: “Better to Kill Them in the Ocean and Make Them Shark Feed” — Fox News Host Sparks Christmas-Season Firestorm With Explosive Comments on “Boat Strike” Controversy

Fox News host Greg Gutfeld has ignited a political and media inferno after unleashing one of his most provocative monologues to date—this time over the U.S. military’s controversial double-tap strike on a suspected terrorist vessel, a story that has already been fraught with confusion, speculation, and fierce partisan blame.

But the chaos reached new heights when Gutfeld, co-host of the Fox News panel show The Five, appeared to argue that killing suspected terrorists at sea—mistaken identity or not—was not only understandable but preferable.

And he didn’t stop there.

Calling the individuals on the boat “terrorists” before any official confirmation, Gutfeld insisted he had no sympathy to spare and went on to say that the U.S. should simply “kill them in the ocean, make them shark feed, be done with it.”

The comments, dropped in the middle of a holiday-season broadcast, have triggered instant backlash across social media, political circles, and even among some Fox viewers—many of whom are stunned by the bluntness, the blood-cold tone, and the timing.

💣 “I Refuse to Invest Any Caring” — Gutfeld Dismisses Concerns About Civilian Casualties

The segment began with Gutfeld criticizing what he called Americans’ “hoax instinct”—his term for people who, in his view, still believe initial reports of tragedies despite “10 years of being lied to” by institutions.

He made it crystal clear:

“I refuse to invest any amount of caring on those people on the boat because they are terrorists.”

No qualifiers. No hesitation. No “alleged.”

His declaration came even as other commentators and officials have urged caution, citing uncertainty about the identities of those on board.

But Gutfeld was unmoved—and unapologetic.

🎳 “It Might Take Two Strikes — In Bowling, They Call That a Spare”

In one of the most controversial passages, the Fox host compared airstrikes on moving targets to a bowling game:

“It’d be great to kill a terrorist while he’s terrorizing… you’re going to have to—maybe it’s going to take two strikes. In bowling, they call it a spare.”

The bowling analogy—used to rationalize precision-demanding military action—immediately went viral.

Critics have called it “callous,” “disconnected from reality,” and “chillingly flippant” for something involving life-or-death military force.

Yet to Gutfeld, the logic is simple: if the target is believed to be a terrorist, then the mission should proceed with lethal certainty.

💀 “Worth of Death” — Gutfeld Links Terrorism to Drug Trafficking

Gutfeld then pivoted into an unexpected argument, claiming that the production and distribution of drugs amounts to “weapons of mass destruction”—and those involved become terrorists by default.

“The process of enacting terror still makes you a terrorist… still makes you worthy of death.”

The framing stunned some viewers, given the ongoing public debate in the U.S. about distinguishing between organized crime, cartel activity, and terrorism.

But to Gutfeld, distinctions appeared unnecessary.

🎣 “What If They Were Fishermen?” — Gutfeld Shrugs Off the Risk of Mistaken Identity

At one point, Gutfeld addressed the most widely voiced concern: the possibility that the people on the vessel were innocent fishermen.

His answer?

A rhetorical shrug.

“Maybe we made a mistake, but they’re pretty confident that they aren’t.”

He then flipped the hypothetical:

“What if those terrorists were fishermen?”

The circular logic quickly drew outrage online, with commentators accusing Gutfeld of advocating a “shoot first, identify later” doctrine that mirrors some of the most controversial wartime policies of the past two decades.

🚨 “We Can’t Trust You With Terrorists” — Gutfeld Slams Blue States, Criminal Justice, and… Margaritas?

In a sudden pivot that has since become one of the most replayed clips from the segment, Gutfeld launched into a broadside against Democratic-led states’ criminal justice policies.

He referenced New York’s much-criticized bail reforms and claimed:

“Our New York government released 7,000 criminals into the city. 7,000.”

Then, in a bizarre detour, he compared handling terrorists to handling a Maryland dad “importing margarita mix,” an analogy that left many viewers baffled.

His conclusion, however, was crystal clear:

“We can’t trust you with terrorists.”

And therefore—

“It’s just better for us to kill them in the ocean, make them shark feed, be done with it.”

He punctuated the monologue with a sarcastic:

“Merry Christmas.”

The line has already become a meme—and a lightning rod.

🌊 The Political Aftershock: Outrage, Applause, and Deep Division

Gutfeld’s comments landed in a political landscape already tense with debates over border security, terrorism threats, and military decision-making.

Reaction came fast:

🔻 Critics blasted the remarks

Human rights organizations labeled the comments “reckless and dehumanizing.”

Some foreign policy experts warned that casual attitudes toward lethal force risk undermining international law.

Progressive lawmakers accused Gutfeld of “advocating war crimes.”

🔺 Supporters applauded the bluntness

Many conservatives praised his directness, saying he voiced “hard truths others are afraid to say.”

Some viewers claimed the “fishermen argument” is naive given global terror networks’ use of civilian disguises.

📣 Social Media Meltdown: “Shark Feed” Trends Worldwide

On X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, and Instagram, the phrase “shark feed” dominated trending lists for hours.

Memes exploded instantly:

Gutfeld riding a shark like a cowboy

A Christmas card reading “Merry Crisis, Merry Sharkmas”

Clips of Jaws edited with Gutfeld’s voiceover

Even comedians jumped in, with one posting a video captioned:
“Gutfeld’s version of Silent Night is wild.”

🎄 A Christmas Controversy That Won’t Cool Down Soon

With the holiday season approaching, Gutfeld’s off-the-rails ending—“Merry Christmas”—has struck many as a sardonic punctuation to one of the year’s most polarizing broadcasts.

Whether interpreted as dark comedy, political theatre, or something far more serious, the segment has cemented itself as a moment that will be replayed, dissected, memed, and argued over for weeks.

One thing is clear:
Greg Gutfeld did not miss the mark on creating chaos—he delivered a direct hit.