Speaker 1: All right.
Speaker 2: Joining us now is New York Times best selling author
Speaker 2: Charles Goyett. His book is Empire of Lies Fragments from
Speaker 2: the Memory Hole, and he's had a lot of experience
Speaker 2: with the military with weapons systems. We're talking to him
Speaker 2: a little bit about his experience with the strategic defense
Speaker 2: initiative that Reagan had and kind of get his take
Speaker 2: on what's happening with this anti ballistic missile thing, as
Speaker 2: well as where are we going now? Where are we
Speaker 2: right now in this war? Thank you so much for
Speaker 2: joining us, Charles. So it's a great pleasure to be
Speaker 2: with you, David. Thank you very much for having me. Well,
Speaker 2: thank you. You know, we don't really know. We're getting
Speaker 2: all these contradictory statements every day talking about an Empire
Speaker 2: of lies? Is it nearly over? Are we just beginning?
Speaker 2: We get different stories, even from the same people in
Speaker 2: the Trump regime. So exactly where are we? We always
Speaker 2: got the fog of war, don't we, And I guess
Speaker 2: it's mainly because we're getting a lot of smoke blown
Speaker 2: at us by the government on both sides of the war.
Speaker 2: Tell us what what you say in terms of what
Speaker 2: you're watching.
Speaker 1: First of all, we're not at war. Yeah, then don't
Speaker 1: forget that we've been at war for forty seven years.
Speaker 1: So it's a total confusion. The fog of war, I
Speaker 1: guess that's not good enough. It's this political fog, you know. There.
Speaker 1: Just to get off track for one second, there's a
Speaker 1: great deal to be said for the virtues of the
Speaker 1: founding fathers, who knew the historical precedents for these kinds
Speaker 1: of events, and they decided that on good precedent, they
Speaker 1: decided that the American people should have the power to
Speaker 1: declare war through their elected representatives. And it was because,
Speaker 1: first of all, I mean two primary reasons. First of all,
Speaker 1: of course, they knew the precedents did suggest that executives,
Speaker 1: kings and so on, popes even had a propensity to
Speaker 1: engage in needless wars, and that if you lodge the
Speaker 1: power with the people who had to pay for them
Speaker 1: and die in them, then there was a certain amount
Speaker 1: of reluctance that didn't appear in the executive branch. So
Speaker 1: they moved the war making authority without ambiguity, over to
Speaker 1: the people. But it had the second advantage of having
Speaker 1: the debate about the objectives of the war clarified in
Speaker 1: a declaration of war. So you know that in signing
Speaker 1: the Declaration of Independence, the founders pledge their lives, their fortunes,
Speaker 1: and their sacred honor. In a declaration of war, generally,
Speaker 1: the authorities, the relevant authorities declare, They declare what the
Speaker 1: objective is, who the enemy is, how much resources they're
Speaker 1: dependent on devoting to it, and then you know how
Speaker 1: the end game plays out. We don't ever have any
Speaker 1: of that, And it has the additional virtue of making
Speaker 1: clear to potential opponents that we're at war with these people,
Speaker 1: and if you do anything the contrary or that befriends
Speaker 1: them during this period, and especially to our own people,
Speaker 1: that would be an act of treason. But I hear
Speaker 1: people banding about the word treason all the time in
Speaker 1: the United States today, and yet there is no declaration
Speaker 1: of war. And I mean, the president can't wake up
Speaker 1: in the morning and say, you know, I'm really really
Speaker 1: angry at the people in Bolivia, and so they become
Speaker 1: the objects of a war, and you could commit treason
Speaker 1: by doing business with the people in Bolivia. It's insane.
Speaker 1: That's one of the reasons why we need a declaration
Speaker 1: of war. And of course we haven't had one since
Speaker 1: World War Two. But I'm sorry, but absolutely right. But
Speaker 1: of course that's what this president does. I mean, we
Speaker 1: could wake up tomorrow morning and be at war with
Speaker 1: Canada or Greenland. They're looking at for the last year.
Speaker 1: When you put this in, people talk about Taco Trump
Speaker 1: always chickens out. I said, this is that Trump always
Speaker 1: is capricious as well as odious and what he does,
Speaker 1: and so we never know from moment to moment, because
Speaker 1: neither does he. He doesn't know from moment to moment what
Speaker 1: he's going to do, hasn't made up his mind. And
Speaker 1: I guess when we look at this war, that's one
Speaker 1: of the key things. He's back and forth. He doesn't
Speaker 1: even know where he's going because he hasn't even defined
Speaker 1: the objectives and what winning looks like in his own mind,
Speaker 1: let alone for everybody else. And if you had a
Speaker 1: debate with this, you would expect at least one person
Speaker 1: out of the five hundred and so in Congress would
Speaker 1: ask the uncomfortable question, Uh, why are we doing this?
Speaker 1: And what does winning look like? What is the objective
Speaker 1: in this? And we don't know any of that right now,
Speaker 1: and so everybody's just wondering how long is he going
Speaker 1: to go on this escapade that he's on. Well, you know,
Speaker 1: he's going to go one. He's going to go one
Speaker 1: to unconditional surrender, and to two. He's he's going to
Speaker 1: go to the point where oil prices get too high
Speaker 1: and he becomes desperate to get out. You know, one
Speaker 1: of the news sites, i think it was political, reported
Speaker 1: the other day that Susie Wilds, the chief of staff,
Speaker 1: her hair was virtually on fire trying to figure out.
Speaker 1: You know, we call in all the secretaries, what can
Speaker 1: we do to suppress gasoline prices because we're in big
Speaker 1: trouble in November. Well, that's funny. Here's what you could
Speaker 1: do to suppress gasoline prices. Don't go to war, that's right.
Speaker 1: So you know, it's a there's there. There's so much
Speaker 1: guidance in in the backstory and the history and the
Speaker 1: accumulated wisdom of mankind to prevent these kinds of things.
Speaker 1: It's not just declaration of war. You know the story
Speaker 1: of what is her name? Who let the let all
Speaker 1: the sorrows of the world out of Oh, Pandora Pandora's box. Well,
Speaker 1: Prometheus is the one who stole the fire from the gods,
Speaker 1: the fire of light. You know, that we would be
Speaker 1: able to use our ration, our reason, and so on
Speaker 1: and so forth, and was tormented for having done so.
Speaker 1: But Prometheus means forethought, and then his brother was afterthought.
Speaker 1: His name was Epimetheus, so of course his bride was Pandora.
Speaker 1: You think about things later when it's too late. Gee,
Speaker 1: I wish I hadn't opened that box. So we have
Speaker 1: this not a Promethean society, but an Epimethean society. Yeah,
Speaker 1: thinks about everything later, that's right.
Speaker 2: Yeah. You know, when we look at this again, we
Speaker 2: go to war and we've got our guess thanks half old.
Speaker 2: We don't even have. The Europeans are debating as to
Speaker 2: whether or not they're going to release their strategic petroleum reserves.
Speaker 2: We go to war with ours half empty. Yeah, of course.
Speaker 2: So it was emptied by Biden because he put sanctions
Speaker 2: on and then Trump didn't fill it up, even though
Speaker 2: he's bragging about low oil prices last year. He didn't
Speaker 2: fill up his.
Speaker 1: Tank when you said, and didn't dump. Didn't Biden dump
Speaker 1: the strategic petroleum reserves to make things look better just
Speaker 1: in time for the November election.
Speaker 2: That's right, that's right.
Speaker 1: You know, this is how they work. I mean, we're all,
Speaker 1: we're all, we're all at play, and our affairs and
Speaker 1: our prosperity and our liberties are all at the hands
Speaker 1: of these guys that don't know what the heck they're
Speaker 1: doing and will do anything to further their own fortunes.
Speaker 1: I saw, I saw the story, I believe yesterday that
Speaker 1: the Trump family, I guess, the sons, you know, I mean,
Speaker 1: we're already up to our eyeballs and profiteering and crony capitalism.
Speaker 1: This thing, you know, I saw riskwatch TV for Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: I'm your favorite president. Here's my riskwatch. You know that
Speaker 1: one of these days somebody's gonna really look into the
Speaker 1: cryptocurrency stuff. But the boys came up yesterday investing in Wardronesaw,
Speaker 1: they have some sort of a deal to take a
Speaker 1: substantial steak in the production of war Wardrones. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, would Jefferson or Washington have behaved like this
Speaker 1: or there, would they have let their family behave like this?
Speaker 1: Not a chance. I guess.
Speaker 2: The most disgusting thing I've seen is everybody is talking
Speaker 2: about who's responsible for bombing this girls? School and killing
Speaker 2: like one hundred and sixty something children. And Trump doesn't
Speaker 2: even have the respect for the American people who try
Speaker 2: to come up with a plausible excuse or deniability, right,
Speaker 2: He just makes stuff up like, yeah, we sell the
Speaker 2: tomahawk to everybody, and Iran's got him, and Iron probably
Speaker 2: did it and all the rest of the stuff. It's
Speaker 2: just childish what he's doing and a total disregard for
Speaker 2: human life. He doesn't We've had the senator from Louisiana, Kennedy,
Speaker 2: apologize publicly for that, but neither Trump nor Hegseth apologized.
Speaker 2: They just said, well, I don't know, maybe you know
Speaker 2: somebody else. We'll look into it and see what happened.
Speaker 2: They don't want to accept responsibility for it. They don't
Speaker 2: want to apologize, They don't offer any plausible deniability to
Speaker 2: the American people. They figure we're just going to go
Speaker 2: along with whatever they do, and evidently they're right. That's
Speaker 2: the amazing thing. So, yeah, you're talking about speaking the peering.
Speaker 2: You know, look at Lindsey Graham gloating about how we're
Speaker 2: all going to get rich the WII.
Speaker 1: I guess who is who is we? David? Who exactly
Speaker 1: is we You know, I posted on my x account
Speaker 1: today I think, or yesterday, yesterday or today a stock
Speaker 1: chart of raythee On stock makers of the Tomahawk. Oh
Speaker 1: they're doing great. You may be paying five bucks in
Speaker 1: California or more for gasoline, but uh, you know, raythee
Speaker 1: On shareholders, they're just they're doing great. So we are
Speaker 1: going to get rich. It's a big club, but you.
Speaker 2: And I aren't in it, that's right, which which brings
Speaker 2: us to replenishing all these arms that they're rapidly running
Speaker 2: out of. I mean, that's the kind of the subtext
Speaker 2: of a lot of this is.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: You had Cain, who's the share the Joint chiefs of Staff,
Speaker 2: was saying as they were getting ready to going out,
Speaker 2: you know, we may not have sufficient ammunition really for
Speaker 2: this right as well as allies. So they were low
Speaker 2: on allies and ammunition. They're also low on strategic petroleum reserve.
Speaker 2: But hey, let's go to war anyway. We'll let Israel
Speaker 2: set the timetable and tell us who we have to
Speaker 2: go to war with. But when you look at this,
Speaker 2: and you look at your experience with the Strategic Defense
Speaker 2: Initiative that Reagan began, the Indian missile thing. What is
Speaker 2: your take. Have you've been following what's happening, I've seen
Speaker 2: a lot of different stories about how this is shaking
Speaker 2: out on both sides. Which side is running out of missiles? First,
Speaker 2: whether we have radar sites that have been taken down?
Speaker 2: What is your take on that? Well, my take is
Speaker 2: I simply I simply don't know. And secondarily, I don't
Speaker 2: believe anything in State says yeah. You know, the mutual.
Speaker 1: Assured destruction defense policy of the United States that prevailed
Speaker 1: during the sixties and into the seventies was a disaster.
Speaker 1: You know, it didn't provide any defense. Look at the
Speaker 1: defense budget that we had at the time. That provided
Speaker 1: no defense for the American people whatsoever. With one small
Speaker 1: carve out, and that is that the governing classes in
Speaker 1: Washington were able to provide a small missile defense system
Speaker 1: for themselves, but not for the rest of the country.
Speaker 1: I mean, it was an absolute disaster. And you know,
Speaker 1: by the game theory, by the game logic of mutual
Speaker 1: assured destruction, people that were opponents of it said, well,
Speaker 1: if we have a defense capability, which is what Reagan
Speaker 1: was trying to institute, if we have a defense capability,
Speaker 1: then the Soviets, the Soviets will be at a disadvantage
Speaker 1: because we can strike them and destroy them and they
Speaker 1: can't retaliate. And that was the whole standoff logic of
Speaker 1: that mad period. And so Reagan said, to everybody's shock,
Speaker 1: Reagan said, well, we'll just give them the technology too.
Speaker 1: So that now the reason. Whatever you think of that,
Speaker 1: and I was a being stunned by it, but there's
Speaker 1: an internal life to that. But whatever you think of
Speaker 1: him wanting to do that, Reagan genuinely believed that the
Speaker 1: United States of America is not a country that preemptively
Speaker 1: attacks other countries. I literally believe that there may have
Speaker 1: been substantial evidence on the other side. I'm not prepared
Speaker 1: to say, but it's just been gangbusters since then. I've
Speaker 1: attacks on other countries, and you know, we're not very
Speaker 1: good at it. We make a mess of things. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, you could look at Iraq, Libya, Syria, the
Speaker 1: mess in Ukraine, and now the mess in Iran. And
Speaker 1: there's no reason to think that the current mess in
Speaker 1: Iran is going to turn out any better than the
Speaker 1: prior ones.
Speaker 2: No, no, yeah, it has been a pragmatic disaster when
Speaker 2: you're looking at it from that standpoint, no question about it.
Speaker 2: But it is also a moral disaster if we can
Speaker 2: attack people that have not attacked us throughout history. That
Speaker 2: has always been the litmus test for who has justified
Speaker 2: in their war. Is it a war in defense or
Speaker 2: is it a war of a And we've taken the
Speaker 2: aggressor point over and over again, and that's I think
Speaker 2: where we are right now. So as people are talking
Speaker 2: about nukes, and we've got reports about some Trump cabinet
Speaker 2: members who are building nuclear bunkers. They've got the guy
Speaker 2: who makes a lot of money doing that. He's not
Speaker 2: it for Zuckerberg or whatever. He says. Yeah, I got
Speaker 2: a couple of Trump Cabinet members that are asking me
Speaker 2: when's it going to be ready? And a lot of
Speaker 2: people are concerned about that. What's your take on that
Speaker 2: reading the tea leaves that you see in public, Well.
Speaker 1: I've told friends since before the last election last fall,
Speaker 1: that I didn't think that Trump would last two years
Speaker 1: of this term. And you know, that's a safe bet
Speaker 1: for somebody like me to make because you win so
Speaker 1: many ways. You know, there's the ugly way of you know,
Speaker 1: we know he's been attacked or been assassination attacks. But
Speaker 1: there's also the matter of his health, which can't be
Speaker 1: swept under the carpet forever. That's a challenge. There is
Speaker 1: the prospect that this will go very badly and the
Speaker 1: people will recognize it pretty quickly and decide to do
Speaker 1: something about it. There's the chance that his mental deterioration
Speaker 1: will catch up with him like it didn't with Biden,
Speaker 1: and there's a provision to remove him. There is also
Speaker 1: the chance I think that Americans. I don't go down
Speaker 1: this because I'm not a master of this topic. I
Speaker 1: look at it and it grows by the day, and
Speaker 1: I guess I alluded to it a few minutes ago.
Speaker 1: But the somebody's going to have to do something serious
Speaker 1: about looking at the extent of cronyism in this administration. Oh,
Speaker 1: it is off the charts. I have never seen anything
Speaker 1: like this, and this is just it's run rampant. Everything
Speaker 1: that's not nailed down, and that's nailed down too, that's right,
Speaker 1: And they don't even try to hide it.
Speaker 2: That's what I said. They have so little respect for
Speaker 2: the intelligence of the American people. Because he is surrounded
Speaker 2: by yes men and loyalists. So he figures everybody is
Speaker 2: that way, that that supports him. So they don't bother
Speaker 2: to come up with a plausible why they don't try
Speaker 2: to cover up the the corruption and the cronyism. As
Speaker 2: you point out, it's all in everybody's face. It's truly amazing.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And the Congress, you know, they all they care
Speaker 1: about is their next re election, and so they they're
Speaker 1: afraid that Trump will endorse their opponent and steer money
Speaker 1: to their opponent and so on, so they dare not
Speaker 1: say anything. But at one point along the way here,
Speaker 1: it's going to have to reach a critical mass. The
Speaker 1: American people have are losing faith in him. The Maga
Speaker 1: Coalition is toast, it's history, it's dust, it's finished. He
Speaker 1: has split it so bad, and I don't know what
Speaker 1: gets reformed out of it. But you know, now the
Speaker 1: Republican establishment is cheering for that that neokon deep state
Speaker 1: figure Marco Rubio to be the next presidential nominee. And
Speaker 1: so I mean, we're just we're just in a mess.
Speaker 1: But the whole thing is going to fracture in my view,
Speaker 1: before the end of this year, and some unforeseen way.
Speaker 2: Well I think this war is a good start to
Speaker 2: the big ultimate fracture. When when you look at that
Speaker 2: and you look at, of course, the Epstein files, that
Speaker 2: is something that's become a big problem with his base.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry that the what files, I'm sorry, I don't
Speaker 1: recognize the term anymore was something they used to talk
Speaker 1: about last year. They've they've driven that off the front
Speaker 1: pages for sure.
Speaker 2: Yeah, haven't driven it out of this show. I mean,
Speaker 2: we cover the developments that are there, but they've done
Speaker 2: the best they can to make that go away. But
Speaker 2: that really has broken faith with his base that is there,
Speaker 2: and I think that's part of the issue. I'm not
Speaker 2: sad to see the Maga coalition go away because it
Speaker 2: is a coalition that has coalesced around an individual, not
Speaker 2: around principles, not around the Constitution, isn't it.
Speaker 1: Yeahga, Maga is what I say it is. Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: what he told I think it was Tucker Carlson, or
Speaker 1: in the response to his break with Tucker Carlson, he said, well,
Speaker 1: he's not Mega. Maga is what I say it is. Well,
Speaker 1: that's funny. I remember the expression make America great again
Speaker 1: long before Trump was out of high school. Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: I mean, there have been make America Great movements for
Speaker 1: a very long time. And the idea, you know, this
Speaker 1: is supposed to be a government of laws and not
Speaker 1: a people, so and that should have been drummed into
Speaker 1: the American people from the earliest age. But it's not
Speaker 1: by whim or caprice whatever the deer leader says. We
Speaker 1: don't have deer leaders in this country, or we're not
Speaker 1: supposed to. So when somebody, when somebody runs on a
Speaker 1: platform of ending these these these awful, counter productive elective
Speaker 1: regime change wars on a program, he should be shamed
Speaker 1: by the people to the ends of the earth if
Speaker 1: he breaks that val and.
Speaker 2: He did, and not only had it, but everybody that
Speaker 2: was running with him. He had Tulsi Gabbard, you had JD. Vans,
Speaker 2: all of them were adamant that we're going to not
Speaker 2: do this regime change war. Now what are we doing?
Speaker 2: We're doing the regime change war.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I wonder, and I like Tulsi Gabbard very much,
Speaker 1: and I debate with myself and maybe you have a
Speaker 1: thought about this, but I think, well, she's got to
Speaker 1: make a statement, and she's got to resign. And you know,
Speaker 1: they're marginalizing her at every extent, if not insulting her
Speaker 1: as well. She's got to make a statement and resign.
Speaker 1: We know on the record what she stood for, and
Speaker 1: we know what she said, and then I think, you know,
Speaker 1: maybe she feels obligated to stay in there and do
Speaker 1: what she can to minimize the damage. I don't know
Speaker 1: what the I don't know what the answer is in
Speaker 1: jd Vance by the same token, I'm not you know.
Speaker 1: Jd Vance has always been a question mark for me. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, I've trusted Tulsi, but jd Vance I'm not sure.
Speaker 1: You know, he says a lot of good things, but
Speaker 1: I've never been exactly comfortable or sure. And now we're
Speaker 1: watching this and I think, you know, the only thing
Speaker 1: he can honorable thing he can do at this point
Speaker 1: to me, if it were me, I would resign. I'm
Speaker 1: not trying to say that that's what he must do.
Speaker 1: Maybe he you know, maybe he knows that Trump will
Speaker 1: be gone before the end of this year, is I surmise,
Speaker 1: and he wants to be there to pick up the threads.
Speaker 1: I guess that could be part of his reckoning. But
Speaker 1: maybe that's wise, and maybe I'm foolish. By saying, you know,
Speaker 1: somebody's got to resign, because that has a tremendous clarifying
Speaker 1: effect on the people. It'll be the topic of discussion
Speaker 1: for months if he were to do that, and maybe
Speaker 1: it would have a salutary effect.
Speaker 2: I agree. And of course, when you talk about Telsea Gabbard,
Speaker 2: I think resigning would be the best thing that she
Speaker 2: could do. If she wanted to try to minimize what
Speaker 2: Trump is doing. What better way to do it than
Speaker 2: to lead people away from this and to cement a
Speaker 2: rebellion against this illegal war. But for her own personal benefit,
Speaker 2: I don't see how it benefits her to stay there
Speaker 2: and deny all of her principles and become a bootlicking
Speaker 2: lankey like the rest of them. It's just it's amazing.
Speaker 2: But speaking of Congress, we talked about Congress being essential
Speaker 2: to declare war. Uh, look at what our Congress has done.
Speaker 2: You had they basically said I don't want this hot potato,
Speaker 2: and they kicked it away. They don't want to have
Speaker 2: a They shut down a resolution to hold a vote
Speaker 2: on this, and and and then you've got Mike Johnson saying, well,
Speaker 2: they attacked us. They hit three of our embassies after
Speaker 2: the unleashed them. That's the most twisted thing I've seen
Speaker 2: out of all this stuff coming from Mike Johnson.
Speaker 1: It's so twisted. He's he's twisted right along the way.
Speaker 1: You know, he's a he actually is one of the
Speaker 1: ones among many who said, well this is not a war.
Speaker 1: So but he's he's been twisted, you know. And it's
Speaker 1: not just that. I mean, he is the one that
Speaker 1: For example, there was a movement I guess Nancy Mace
Speaker 1: led it. There was a movement to open up the
Speaker 1: slush fund. There is a congressional slush fund to pay
Speaker 1: off uh, people who charge congress people elected officials, was
Speaker 1: sexual harassment. They don't pay it themselves, their insurance company
Speaker 1: doesn't pay it. We pay it, we pay it, and
Speaker 1: so uh, there was a movement to open the books,
Speaker 1: take a look at it. See what John Cornyan has
Speaker 1: done if he's one of the perpetrators, and you know,
Speaker 1: see what kind of a rats nest this place in
Speaker 1: Washington is. And of course they couldn't have that. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's so flagrant, that's so it's embarrassing to this country's character.
Speaker 2: You look at Dennis Hastert longest serving Republicans figure the House,
Speaker 2: and you know he was a pedophile. They picked him
Speaker 2: he as a wrestling coach, they picked him run for
Speaker 2: Congress and put him a speaker, and uh, you know,
Speaker 2: we've seen this happen over and over again. He was
Speaker 2: on with Rush Limbaugh defending, Uh, was it Tom Delay?
Speaker 2: I think uh in terms of yeah, and he was saying, Oh,
Speaker 2: it's just politics some of Democrats. There's nothing the same
Speaker 2: stuff that Trump is doing now with the Epstein files.
Speaker 2: And Uh, it truly is amazing that that has become
Speaker 2: so endemic, the sexual mis conduct in Congress and their
Speaker 2: slush fund that they want to keep all that they
Speaker 2: got their own fund to pay for it. I guess
Speaker 2: it's one of the perks of Congress, right, it's they
Speaker 2: operate with impunity. Well, you know, and I mean harken
Speaker 2: back to where we started about a declaration of war.
Speaker 2: One of the other virtues of that is that you
Speaker 2: could hold people responsible for their bad judgment when they
Speaker 2: declared a needless war and it cost the American people
Speaker 2: and it cost lives the people who you exercised bad
Speaker 2: judgment or or were were pressured into supporting the war
Speaker 2: by their contributors, which certainly happens a lot. Well, then
Speaker 2: at the end of the day, when the dust settles,
Speaker 2: we can run them out of office and they could
Speaker 2: be shamed for their lives too. But they operate entirely
Speaker 2: with impunity, and they only get in trouble when they
Speaker 2: when they cross the deep state, and then oh boy,
Speaker 2: they unleash the big batteries of guns. Oh yeah. What
Speaker 2: do you think about boots on the ground. We talked
Speaker 2: about likely head of escalation in many different ways, and
Speaker 2: we don't know where this is going, and the guy
Speaker 2: who's running it doesn't know where it's going. But there's
Speaker 2: a lot of uncomfortable movement about boots on the ground.
Speaker 2: What's your take.
Speaker 1: Yeah, this is the camel's nose in the tent business.
Speaker 1: As far as I'm concerned. They they would have what
Speaker 1: have I seen? Recently? They were talking about, well, we're
Speaker 1: just we'll put some troops in, some special forces on
Speaker 1: carg Island, you know, for special operations to protect shipment,
Speaker 1: protect oil. We'll do that, and then oh, by the way,
Speaker 1: we'll arm will arm the Kurds for an operation in
Speaker 1: northern Western I I'm thinking you morons, you know, Aerdowan
Speaker 1: is not going to like that. Turkey is not going
Speaker 1: to like that. You're going to use the curds again
Speaker 1: for American CANi fodder as we've done in the past,
Speaker 1: you know, and that will that will be the end
Speaker 1: in my view. I mean, Turkey is a NATO ally.
Speaker 1: That will be the end of NATO if they do that,
Speaker 1: because Turkey, I can't imagine they would put up with
Speaker 1: that for a minute. So maybe that's good. I mean,
Speaker 1: NATO alliance has been nothing but trouble anyway for several decades.
Speaker 2: Well, of course, Charles, that begs the question, you know,
Speaker 2: when we saw everything that was happening with the Straight
Speaker 2: of Horror moves and being choked off, and the people
Speaker 2: realizing what the consequences are going to be. Finally and
Speaker 2: then Trump throws a life preserver to the market and says,
Speaker 2: don't worry, we'll protect the Straight of Horror moves. You know,
Speaker 2: first he said we'll do it with the Navy, and
Speaker 2: then the Navy shot that down and said we can't
Speaker 2: operate there, you can't put it would be too vulnerable.
Speaker 2: Then he's talking about putting special forces on the island.
Speaker 2: The reality, though, is it just just emphasizes I think
Speaker 2: the fact that there was no thinking, no planning, no
Speaker 2: strategy to any of this stuff. If you want to
Speaker 2: do regime change and use the kurage, wouldn't you have
Speaker 2: started that right away? Had them ready. Now they're reacting
Speaker 2: to what Iran is doing, and I think reading between
Speaker 2: the team lines tea leaves that kind of tells us
Speaker 2: that maybe things aren't going the way they thought they
Speaker 2: were going to go. And why if you understand the
Speaker 2: importance of the Strait of Hormos, why wouldn't you try
Speaker 2: to secure that area as one of your primary strategies.
Speaker 2: I don't understand any of that, but it looks to
Speaker 2: me like they haven't thought through any of this stuff.
Speaker 1: Well answer me this. I mean, if shipping in the
Speaker 1: Strait of Horror Moves is dangerous enough to your ten
Speaker 1: million barrels of oil that you're shipping through there, that
Speaker 1: Lloyd's of London doesn't want to ensure it at any cost,
Speaker 1: why should the American taxpayers pay to secure it and
Speaker 1: to ensure it for oil that we're told we're energy sufficient,
Speaker 1: we produce our own petroleum, why should we pay to
Speaker 1: secure that petroleum that's going to places like China and
Speaker 1: other nations. You know, we're just it's sort of a
Speaker 1: global socialism. You know that everybody, everybody benefits, and we
Speaker 1: the costerers are the benefits are socialized to the whole world,
Speaker 1: to the global American military empire. But the costs land
Speaker 1: in the lap of the American people. Yeah. Yeah, And
Speaker 1: you know it's not that that would be right under
Speaker 1: any circumstances. But these are very PERILEUS circumstances you've got.
Speaker 1: You know, now we're virtually thirty nine trillion dollars in debt.
Speaker 1: That's the visible portion of the debt. You know, most
Speaker 1: of the debt is under the water line and unfunded liabilities.
Speaker 1: But it is debt that cannot be paid. It simply
Speaker 1: cannot be paid by any of the normal mechanisms, you know,
Speaker 1: as creditors start to back away. I was looking at
Speaker 1: these numbers yesterday. China, not too many years ago, was
Speaker 1: a creditor of the United States. When for your listeners
Speaker 1: that don't listen to these things or pay attention to
Speaker 1: these things. You know, when they buy US treasury bonds
Speaker 1: their lonliness money, and the US Treasury says, yeah, give
Speaker 1: us ten million dollars we'll give you this bond and
Speaker 1: we'll redeem it. We'll give you all your money back
Speaker 1: plus four percent or five percent interest, whatever it is.
Speaker 1: So China lends us a lot of money. So not so,
Speaker 1: and like as do a lot of other In fact,
Speaker 1: we are dependent on the kindness of foreign nations. But
Speaker 1: as as so many others do, China loaned us. They
Speaker 1: were one of our top creditors. So few years ago
Speaker 1: they were up to almost well over one point three
Speaker 1: trillion dollars in US treasuries that they had owned, in
Speaker 1: other words, that they had loaned to the United States
Speaker 1: to keep the US government, to keep Washington spending going.
Speaker 1: They loaned that money in the United States, and now
Speaker 1: they're backing away. They know perfectly well the only expedient
Speaker 1: available to the United States to pay off that debt
Speaker 1: is to print more money and devalue the dollar. So
Speaker 1: they're down fifty percent in the US treasuries that they owned,
Speaker 1: and the rest of the world clearly is backing away
Speaker 1: from the dollar. Look these foreign central bankers, you know,
Speaker 1: they know the money printing game, They know the Fiat
Speaker 1: money game perfectly well, and they don't mind fleecing their
Speaker 1: own people with it. But they just don't want to
Speaker 1: be fleeced by by our money printing any longer. And
Speaker 1: so that's why you know, reserves or flowid to gold
Speaker 1: and alternative global monetary systems are being erected and stuff.
Speaker 1: And you know, we're our own worst enemies were as
Speaker 1: they're moving away from the dollar anyway because it's not
Speaker 1: a trustworthy vehicle anymore. We're driving them by our weaponization
Speaker 1: of the dollar, by freezing assets all over the world
Speaker 1: and claiming that people aren't entitled to their own money.
Speaker 1: And then when we release their own money to them,
Speaker 1: Sean Hannity and the other nitwits on Fox starts screaming,
Speaker 1: we gave them, we gave them all this money. Well,
Speaker 1: we didn't give them any money. We released the money
Speaker 1: that they owned that we had stolen from them to
Speaker 1: begin with.
Speaker 2: I agree, Yeah, you said it's like a global socialism,
Speaker 2: and of course I think that's part of the goal
Speaker 2: of government and socialism is to create dependency, right, And
Speaker 2: so if he can use us and the debt, you know,
Speaker 2: the massive credit card that just keeps building and building,
Speaker 2: if he can use that to get people in debt
Speaker 2: to us. But of course another thing is kind of
Speaker 2: surfaced in Lindsay's gloating, and that is the idea that
Speaker 2: the empire, now, as you point out, you know, it's
Speaker 2: an empire of lies, but it's also an empire that
Speaker 2: is trying to set up a global hegemony on oil.
Speaker 2: That's exactly what Lindsay Graham was saying. He said, we're
Speaker 2: looking at the combined control of Venezuela and Iran's oil,
Speaker 2: two of the biggest ones that are there.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I wonder how the American people can countenance. We're
Speaker 1: self sufficient in oil, We've been told repeatedly, and yet
Speaker 1: somehow we can go around the world and steal the
Speaker 1: production the oil of other countries. You know, there will
Speaker 1: come a time when we're not the big gun in
Speaker 1: the world anymore. You know, nothing lasts forever. These empires
Speaker 1: don't last forever. They collapse. There is a syndrome that
Speaker 1: I write about in Empire of Lies Fragments from the
Speaker 1: Memory Hole. There is a syndrome called imperial overstretch. Didn't
Speaker 1: start from me. It's well known. It's well recognized that
Speaker 1: these empires in extremists as they see their global hegemony
Speaker 1: or their control of places far and beyond their own borders.
Speaker 1: As they see their hold beginning to slip, they react
Speaker 1: to it, and they react to it, typically violently. But
Speaker 1: you know, their hegemony such that they had, their dominance
Speaker 1: and stuff, was the result of their economic mind, was
Speaker 1: a result of their productive capacity, was re tholse of
Speaker 1: the work of the people and the wealth and the
Speaker 1: riches that they had produced. That's what enabled the creation
Speaker 1: of the empire of the first place. But when it
Speaker 1: starts to crack, as we're seeing now of the United States,
Speaker 1: the geniuses in Washington, the status, the deep state, the establishment,
Speaker 1: they react to it as though it is a threat
Speaker 1: to their military dominance, and so they divert even more
Speaker 1: funds from the productive economy to beef up the military.
Speaker 1: This is exactly what we're doing now in Iran. I mean,
Speaker 1: we're spending trillion dollars a day in new money there.
Speaker 1: I think the president just asked for another fifty billion
Speaker 1: dollars supplemental. We spend more than the next I don't
Speaker 1: even know the number anymore, was it the next seven, eight,
Speaker 1: nine countries of the world combined. We spend more on war.
Speaker 1: We call it defense, but it's spending on war. We
Speaker 1: spend a trillion dollars a year, and three or four
Speaker 1: weeks ago the President said, no, we need to bump
Speaker 1: that up to one point five trillion. We need a
Speaker 1: fifty percent bump in our military spending. Yes, yeah, so
Speaker 1: that's what we're doing.
Speaker 2: And when we look at this, you know, especially if
Speaker 2: they want to get into a long war with a ron,
Speaker 2: the asymmetric warfare is one of the things that has
Speaker 2: consistently been our downfall. The boots on the ground and
Speaker 2: trying to do regime change in nation building. I don't
Speaker 2: know how he thinks people don't see this as they said, well,
Speaker 2: we're not going to do nation building. Well, they want
Speaker 2: to take the oil, they want to change regime. I mean,
Speaker 2: aren't you talking about putting boots on the ground and
Speaker 2: trying to control the people that are there after you
Speaker 2: have rained death and destruction from the sky. As Warpete
Speaker 2: says and boast about it, it's amazing to see him
Speaker 2: revel in the carnage like this.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it's not just it's not just that we
Speaker 1: want to replace the leadership. We want to make sure
Speaker 1: we name our own guy. Yeah, that's sure that'll go
Speaker 1: over well, you know, years ago. This is kind of
Speaker 1: vague memory, but anybody interested in these kinds of issues
Speaker 1: that we've gotten on now should look up a story
Speaker 1: by Malcolm Gladwell in one of his books, I think
Speaker 1: it was in Blink, and he wrote an account of
Speaker 1: his Millennium Challenge was I think two thousand and two
Speaker 1: military exercise, and there was the Red Team and the
Speaker 1: Blue Team, and it was a Pentagon run military exercise.
Speaker 1: They had to do with the golf, had to do
Speaker 1: with the Persian golf, the straight of horror moves in
Speaker 1: a war with Iran in two thousand and two. And
Speaker 1: the A Team was what we are today. Well, we're
Speaker 1: more advanced, but it was the same thing, you know.
Speaker 1: It was high tech electronic warfare, remote missile launching and whatever.
Speaker 1: They had the equivalent of what we have today that
Speaker 1: is remote and high tech. And the B Team were
Speaker 1: the stragglers, the asymmetric warfare guys that didn't have anything.
Speaker 1: And the guy that led the B Team was a
Speaker 1: general by the name of Paul Van Ripper, and instead
Speaker 1: of using like interceptible messaging and cell phones and things,
Speaker 1: he used couriers on bicycles and instead of a big
Speaker 1: navy craft you know, used little speedboats that zipped in
Speaker 1: and zipped out. And I mean it was all this
Speaker 1: downscale primitive warfare against the goliath, the behemoth of modern
Speaker 1: technology in America's superior military budget and high tech equipment.
Speaker 1: And guess what the B team won. And it was
Speaker 1: so embarrassing. Before they could declare victory, the Pentagon called
Speaker 1: off the exercise because you know, they were being obligated
Speaker 1: by some inventive stragglers using primitive means of communications smoke signals,
Speaker 1: light signals and so on. So there's somebody out of
Speaker 1: look that up.
Speaker 2: Ye you actually the Machia velly In industrial complex that's
Speaker 2: out there. They're making a lot of money off these
Speaker 2: very complicated, expensive weapons systems. And yet we've already seen
Speaker 2: at the beginning of the Iran War how Iran did
Speaker 2: not the decapitation strike didn't affect them the way obviously
Speaker 2: the Pentagon thought it would, because they have decentralized leadership,
Speaker 2: decentralized command and control. And then they attacked our highly
Speaker 2: centralized radar systems. Based on what I've heard several analysts say,
Speaker 2: and that appears to be the case. And so we
Speaker 2: have these very very complex systems that are incredibly expensive,
Speaker 2: and of course that's to the benefit of the people
Speaker 2: like Raytheon who are making these things and the people
Speaker 2: that they keep in Congress, like Lindsey Graham. That benefits them.
Speaker 2: They are the we who are making a lot of
Speaker 2: money off of this stuff. But it doesn't really help
Speaker 2: the United States, and certainly this adventurism, this empire abroad,
Speaker 2: does nothing for the safety of Americans, which has nothing
Speaker 2: to do with national security. National security is like continuity
Speaker 2: of governance and continuity of the empire. It doesn't have
Speaker 2: anything to do with the safety of the American people
Speaker 2: because they were putting us at risk by creating enemies everywhere, yeah, everywhere.
Speaker 1: It is said that Osama bin Laden's fondest hope was
Speaker 1: to lure the United States into a war in Iraq.
Speaker 1: That he hoped to do that, to break, to break
Speaker 1: the global powerhouse, to drain it, to bleed it dry,
Speaker 1: not thinking that he and a bunch of other guys
Speaker 1: in fatigues off in the mountains of Kandahar someplace could
Speaker 1: prevail militarily. But they thought that they could take America
Speaker 1: down financially if they could drain them long enough. Much
Speaker 1: like we thought, much like Brazinski thought that we could
Speaker 1: do to the Soviet Union with his Afghanistan initiative, and.
Speaker 2: What they're trying to do the Soviet Union with Ukraine
Speaker 2: as well. Right, we're using the Ukrainians as our cat
Speaker 2: spaw and figure that we're bleeding the Russians, right, And
Speaker 2: I've heard people like Lindsay Graham boasting about that. Look
Speaker 2: at how many you know, soldiers and tanks and all
Speaker 2: this kind of stuff Russians lost in this war. That's
Speaker 2: what we want, you know this, it's a war of attrition.
Speaker 2: And yet we get suckered in by that same strategy
Speaker 2: on the other side.
Speaker 1: And it's a it's so short sighted. It's it's not
Speaker 1: even short sighted, it's blindness. They have no vision at
Speaker 1: all to wonder. I mean, what happened to the economically
Speaker 1: drained and crippled nation of Germany after World War One
Speaker 1: and with the perpetual payments from the Versailles Treaty of reparations?
Speaker 1: I mean, what to a broken are broken down people
Speaker 1: with no hope and no direction, susceptible to us, you know,
Speaker 1: to the fringe elements like Hitler, Well, of course they are,
Speaker 1: so what do you think is going to happen if
Speaker 1: you if you topple the Russian government, you topple Putin
Speaker 1: and everybody else in the Kremlin, and you break the
Speaker 1: bank of the Soviet the Russian economy, which is what
Speaker 1: they openly talk about hoping to do, is collapse the
Speaker 1: Russian economy. What do they think will take it's place?
Speaker 1: It was only a generation or two ago that they
Speaker 1: had the lubianc prison, they had you know, walls of
Speaker 1: barbed wire, they had the Gulag Archipelago. I mean, what
Speaker 1: do they think is going to arise in the place
Speaker 1: of these guys? Have they given that any thought? Well
Speaker 1: again on precedent, no, because they never give anything any thought.
Speaker 1: It's just destroyed, destroy, destroy.
Speaker 2: That's right. Yeah. What is the regime change going to
Speaker 2: look like? In Iran? For example? And the bottom line
Speaker 2: is our history with Iran began with regime change, begin
Speaker 2: with a coup back in nineteen fifty three, and that
Speaker 2: has blown this whole thing up. They always start the
Speaker 2: clock forty seven years ago with the Iranian Revolution against
Speaker 2: the Shaw, the guy that we put in and equipped
Speaker 2: his secret police.
Speaker 1: It's just a very bad story. Yeah, I blanch when
Speaker 1: I hear them say we've been at war with them
Speaker 1: for forty seven years? Where do they get that number?
Speaker 1: Do they think, you know, it's the Iranian Revolution? Do
Speaker 1: they think those those millions of people that turned out
Speaker 1: in the street to cheer on the abdication or the
Speaker 1: fall of the Shah, they think that they poured out
Speaker 1: in the street because they lived under such a benign
Speaker 1: and lovely government. Of course not, they lived under a
Speaker 1: cruel despotism. You know, the historian laureate of the Reagan
Speaker 1: people was a great It was a great scholar by
Speaker 1: the name of Paul Johnson, and all the Reaganites read
Speaker 1: his history books and they all thought they were great.
Speaker 1: I guess they've been slipped down the memory hole too.
Speaker 1: But Paul Johnson wrote a short account of exactly what
Speaker 1: the reign of Pallavi the Shaw was like. We were told,
Speaker 1: the American people were told, because you know, we don't
Speaker 1: want communism and we don't want to visit communism on
Speaker 1: these people. Well, the elected government Mesada government was no
Speaker 1: more communist than the prevailing beliefs in the Republican and
Speaker 1: democratic platforms these days. He just didn't want to steal
Speaker 1: in his oil and not getting paid for it. But
Speaker 1: in any event, the Shaw that we institute I wrote
Speaker 1: a piece for This was published by The Blaze a
Speaker 1: couple of weeks ago. It was published by the Libertarian
Speaker 1: Institute and Anti war dot Com. I wrote a piece
Speaker 1: called the Deep State wants to restore the reign of
Speaker 1: the Persian Stalin. Yeah, and it's hard to swallow when
Speaker 1: we've been told that the Shaw was so great, But
Speaker 1: you know when we installed him, when Alan Dulles the
Speaker 1: head of the CIA. Ain't it peculiar how CIA heads
Speaker 1: always seemed to show up in these deals, just like
Speaker 1: Brennan showed up in toppling the Ukraine regime. He checked
Speaker 1: in under a false name. But Dulles was out in
Speaker 1: the open, and he escorted Polavi to the Peacock throne
Speaker 1: when the Masada rain. You know, we hired thugs, we
Speaker 1: hired revolutionaries, we hired the worst elements impossible in the
Speaker 1: streets to foment a revolution there like we do. And
Speaker 1: then they escorted Polavi to the to the Peacock throne
Speaker 1: and he proceeded to Oh. One of the things he
Speaker 1: did was he put the massade, and he put General Schwarzkough.
Speaker 1: This is a good one. People will remember. People of
Speaker 1: our age will all remember Storm and Norman General Schwarzkough
Speaker 1: from the First Gulf War. But his father was one
Speaker 1: of the guys that was sent in to help the Shaw,
Speaker 1: along with the Masad, learn how to torture his opponents,
Speaker 1: and that's where the cruel and notorious Savak were born
Speaker 1: out of that. But of course the expatriots, the people
Speaker 1: that fled that were you know, on friendly terms with
Speaker 1: the Shaw and living in Los Angeles now and are
Speaker 1: urging the United States to go to war and put
Speaker 1: in the Shaw's son, you know. They of course they
Speaker 1: want us to do their fighting for them. But the
Speaker 1: people that turned out in the street in nineteen seventy
Speaker 1: nine weren't all there because the rule of the Shaw
Speaker 1: had been in so it lightened and liberated and prosperous
Speaker 1: who was a very ugly time.
Speaker 2: And I remember all the mainstream media news events where
Speaker 2: they would show the Shaw and his family and show Iran.
Speaker 2: It's like, look, he's modernizing Iran. He's making it like
Speaker 2: like America, you know, that type of thing. And yet
Speaker 2: when I was in college, that was my frame of reference.
Speaker 2: For Ran. I was surprised to see all these Iranian
Speaker 2: students that were at the engineering college where I was,
Speaker 2: and they could get over here if they were an
Speaker 2: engineering student. But they were out there protesting Iran. What
Speaker 2: are they doing that for? I mean, it's like he's
Speaker 2: creating the kind of environment that they want to live in.
Speaker 2: And they were wearing these balaklava masks, and so I
Speaker 2: asked some of them, because I had a lot of
Speaker 2: them in my classes, I said, so, what's going on?
Speaker 2: What's all the masks and everything? That was the first
Speaker 2: time I seen any of my protesting were in a mask.
Speaker 2: And they said, well, because the Savaka. I said, what
Speaker 2: is that? And they filled me in on what was
Speaker 2: going on there. It's horrific what was done. The CIA
Speaker 2: massigned at your point, I didn't know that Schwartzkoff was
Speaker 2: his dad was a part of that as well. But
Speaker 2: that has been the history of the empire. The CIA
Speaker 2: sets up and that is murder, coups, assassination, torture, secret police,
Speaker 2: all the rest of this stuff. And we have to ask,
Speaker 2: why do we think that we're immune to that here?
Speaker 2: And of course we're not. And if you're paying attention.
Speaker 2: You've already seen a lot of these aspects already in operation.
Speaker 2: They just haven't become so pervasive and in your face yet.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, jogged my memory by you jogged your my
Speaker 1: memory by talking about your student days, because I remember
Speaker 1: it was after my student days. But being just a
Speaker 1: little bit horrified about these mobs out in the street
Speaker 1: burning American flags in Iran and chanting and chanting death
Speaker 1: to the Aria, to America and the Great Satan. I
Speaker 1: didn't really understand, and most Americans didn't, And that is
Speaker 1: the fault of our education, I guess. But it's the
Speaker 1: fault of the you know, the media, it's the fault
Speaker 1: of it's the fault of the state that whitewashes and
Speaker 1: sanitizes all of its deeds and it doesn't want anybody
Speaker 1: to know anything else. But I remember being shocked what
Speaker 1: is wrong with these people? And it took a few
Speaker 1: years for me to really understand. You know, I have
Speaker 1: been on a book tour talking about my book Empire
Speaker 1: of Lies Fragments from the Memory Hole, and one of
Speaker 1: the surprising things that I hear, I mean, you would
Speaker 1: think you would think, out of all the all the sloganisms,
Speaker 1: and the reasons to actually go to war, it'd be
Speaker 1: something more substantial than this. But I hear, I have
Speaker 1: heard many times from different people. Well you know, they
Speaker 1: call us the Great Satan, and these are the people
Speaker 1: that have been chanting death to America for forty seven years.
Speaker 1: And I go, so, what is is that a thin
Speaker 1: pretext for a war or what? Do you remember Ronald
Speaker 1: Reagan getting ready to do his do his radio address
Speaker 1: and he said, Okay, we're bombing the Soviet Union and
Speaker 1: the bomb start falling in five minutes from leadership was horrified.
Speaker 1: But this goes on all the time. John McCain ran
Speaker 1: around the country going singing like he was, you know,
Speaker 1: some crazed beach boy. Bomb bomb, bomb, bomb bomb. He
Speaker 1: was a presidential candidate. Yeah, so they hear what we do,
Speaker 1: but we don't hear what we do. We only hear
Speaker 1: what they say, and the things don't translate very well anyway.
Speaker 2: Well, you know, Charles, I've heard some people. I listened
Speaker 2: to an Iranian official who is being interviewed and he
Speaker 2: said he's actually a teacher in the university, said, we
Speaker 2: tried to tell the students what it was like inn
Speaker 2: the Shah. They just didn't believe us. They didn't believe
Speaker 2: what we were saying about the Americans. Now they see it,
Speaker 2: and that's the issue. When we do these types of
Speaker 2: things that we're doing, that shows people the character of
Speaker 2: our government. And now he said, now they understand. If
Speaker 2: they wanted regime change, the thing to do would have
Speaker 2: been to just set back and let it happen. It
Speaker 2: was already in a process. But instead they snatched defeat
Speaker 2: out of the jaws of victory. Because then what they
Speaker 2: did was they made themselves the greater enemy that's there.
Speaker 2: And of course part of what was happening was also
Speaker 2: a pushback against westernized abortion and other things like that.
Speaker 2: In Iran coming in, they didn't like that. That was
Speaker 2: part of what they were saying was satanic. And we
Speaker 2: just saw the burning and effigy of ball or Bail,
Speaker 2: the pagan god with symbols of the US and of Israel.
Speaker 2: That's the way they see us, and so they burned
Speaker 2: that in effigy. They did that at the beginning of
Speaker 2: the revolution, and you know, when they took over the embassy,
Speaker 2: that is the starting point of Americans understanding anything about Iran.
Speaker 2: To them. Basically, Iran didn't exist. We don't know anything
Speaker 2: about these other countries until that happened. And then you
Speaker 2: had this long thing every day, day number one, day
Speaker 2: number ten, day number eleven, on and on. It went
Speaker 2: through the nightline doing that, and America held hostage by Iran.
Speaker 2: That was ingrained in the memory of people, and it
Speaker 2: was done without any context at all as to why
Speaker 2: they would take over the embassy. And of course you
Speaker 2: know they held him hostage, but that was extended because
Speaker 2: of the Iran contra affair.
Speaker 1: We don't we certainly don't remember the Iraq Iran war
Speaker 1: in which we provided you know, when when the weapons
Speaker 1: inspectors went into Iraq looking for the missing weapons of
Speaker 1: mass destruction, what they did find was leftovers from the
Speaker 1: Iraq Iran war. They were inert by that time, but
Speaker 1: they found some These were This was technology, These were precursors.
Speaker 1: This was technology and targeting and stuff that the United
Speaker 1: States gave to Saddam Hussein. Oh, he's worse than Hitler,
Speaker 1: but we were giving him technology to underwrite his war
Speaker 1: with Iran. We encouraged it, provided him resources, illegal resources,
Speaker 1: I might add, to pursue that war. And I don't
Speaker 1: remember the number after all these years it was I
Speaker 1: think it was at least two hundred thousand Iranians. They
Speaker 1: had to send kids out in the battlefield. The population
Speaker 1: was being drained so much by our and we don't remember.
Speaker 1: I remember, you remember the Iranian air bus that was
Speaker 1: shot down with two hundred and ninety thousand civilians killed
Speaker 1: by the USS. Vincennes and Bush had the nerve to
Speaker 1: award the captain of that awful incident. I think some
Speaker 1: kind of medal of commendation. Oh, it was an awful event.
Speaker 2: I've talked about that many times, you know, That's what
Speaker 2: this Iranian official was saying. So I've told the kids
Speaker 2: and he still believes that that that was deliberate, deliberatey
Speaker 2: done by the US. And I said, well, you know,
Speaker 2: I've said for the longest time, I didn't think it
Speaker 2: was deliberate. I thought it was accidental because I thought
Speaker 2: they did the same thing with Flight eight hundred, having
Speaker 2: naval exercises. It's just that when it happens over American
Speaker 2: tech territory, they can cover it up, but they couldn't
Speaker 2: cover it up there. And I said, you know, I
Speaker 2: thought it was remarkable restraint. Of course, what could Tehran
Speaker 2: really do about that. But the key point that you're
Speaker 2: making there about Saddam Hussein is that after they had
Speaker 2: suffered for a couple of decades under the Shaw, which
Speaker 2: basically just means it's Persian for king, after we overthrew
Speaker 2: their republican their democracy and we installed a king who
Speaker 2: had a secret police that tortured and killed people for
Speaker 2: the longest time. We did two decades of that, and
Speaker 2: then after that we i think helped to instigate Saddam
Speaker 2: Hussein attacking them because as it was a new government
Speaker 2: and new revolution, thought they would catch them at a
Speaker 2: weak point. And yet Saddam Hussein really wasn't doing very
Speaker 2: well with that until we in with additional equipment and
Speaker 2: intelligence and other things like that, and then the tide
Speaker 2: started turning towards the Iran, towards Iraq versus Iran. And
Speaker 2: so all that history is just ignored, and all the
Speaker 2: history of our intervention, our preemptive attacks, our empire, wars
Speaker 2: of lies, all that stuff is just forgotten. We don't
Speaker 2: have any contact for this at all. It's totally forgotten.
Speaker 2: And the subtitle of my book is, well, it's Empire
Speaker 2: of Lies. Fragments from the memory Hole. And as people
Speaker 2: will remember from reading nineteen eighty four by George Orwell
Speaker 2: in high school, in this dystopian future, the Ministry of
Speaker 2: Love is where dissidents went to be tortured. They took
Speaker 2: them to the Ministry of Love. Everything was inverted. The
Speaker 2: Ministry of Truth is where the protagonist in the novel
Speaker 2: his job was rewriting history, and he'd take the old history,
Speaker 2: we rewrite the history, put out the new truth, and
Speaker 2: then the old truth was consigned to an incinerator that
Speaker 2: was called the memory Hole. I want to mention, since
Speaker 2: we were on the topic, the US Embassy in Iran,
Speaker 2: and I talk about this an Empire of Wise. There
Speaker 2: is a it is now a museum of what the
Speaker 2: people there went through under the Shah of Iran and
Speaker 2: the spying CIA they took. Oh yeah, at the time,
Speaker 2: at the time that the embassy was stormed, the employees
Speaker 2: began shredding documents furiously. Imagine this, the students they were
Speaker 2: supposed to be, these crazed out of their mind students.
Speaker 2: They went through the laborious process. I think it must
Speaker 2: have taken them years of pasting all those shredded things
Speaker 2: together and reconstituting all the destroyed documents that the CIA
Speaker 2: and the embassy staff destroyed about what had gone on there.
Speaker 2: And you see case after case they have, you know,
Speaker 2: rooms where there were the eves dropping room. This is
Speaker 2: where they did this, This is where the CIA did that,
Speaker 2: and so on. And they have reconstituted those documents so
Speaker 2: that the people in Iran can familiarize themselves with the
Speaker 2: politicians that we were paying off, the freedom movements, that
Speaker 2: we were subverting, the measures that would liberate the country,
Speaker 2: the measures that would empower the central government more at
Speaker 2: the expense of the people, or engage them in warfare
Speaker 2: at the Iranian people's expense. All those shredded documents of
Speaker 2: CIA spying for years and running the government and bribing
Speaker 2: and paying it off are all there for the Iranian
Speaker 2: people to see. Now, the American people don't know anything
Speaker 2: about that. Yeah, but it's been reconstituted. And so when
Speaker 2: you wonder why, you know, they say death to America,
Speaker 2: they have within the within the recall.
Speaker 1: Of living Americans, they have an idea of what we
Speaker 1: were doing at that time.
Speaker 2: That's amazing, that's amazing. Well, maybe they could do us
Speaker 2: the same favor. For the Epstein documents.
Speaker 1: So I think.
Speaker 2: Students like I'm over here and piece together.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry Epstein the nigh rings of Bell, but I'm
Speaker 1: not sure I remember. It's slipping down the memory hole
Speaker 1: too well.
Speaker 2: I guess they can't put together those shredded desk drives
Speaker 2: that are.
Speaker 1: But that's a different challenge. Yeah, that's right now.
Speaker 2: Tell us a little bit about the book The Empire Lies.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the book is it's not just a collection of
Speaker 1: the sequential lies of the Empire. It also covers the
Speaker 1: media and the media as the lap dog press that
Speaker 1: furthers the deep State. I'm pretty clear about these terms.
Speaker 1: I don't toss them along casually. The deep state is identified.
Speaker 1: I identify the deep state as the executive arm of
Speaker 1: the global American Empire. My executive arm. I mean they
Speaker 1: call the shots, and they are a collective. They are
Speaker 1: like bees in a hive. They don't sting one another,
Speaker 1: but they have different jobs. The deep State is not
Speaker 1: coordinated by a central authority, but they all work like
Speaker 1: the bees in the hive, for the good of the hive.
Speaker 1: And of course it is a mistake. It's common enough
Speaker 1: for people to believe that the deep state is consigned
Speaker 1: to a few actors, you know, like Brennan and Clapper,
Speaker 1: who both lied to Congress, by the way, and felt
Speaker 1: no repercussions for having done so. I remember Clapper. Clapper said, well,
Speaker 1: when he was when he was caught lying about the
Speaker 1: US's surveillance on American citizens, illegal surveillance, he answered under
Speaker 1: oath in Congress. I think it was Senator Widen that
Speaker 1: asked him, no, we don't you know, we don't do that. No, no,
Speaker 1: we don't do that. And when he was caught up,
Speaker 1: he offered this excuse, Well, I gave the least untruthful
Speaker 1: answer I could give. But when these people are when
Speaker 1: these people are sworn in, they're not sworn in for
Speaker 1: the least untruthful answer there. They're sworn in for the truth,
Speaker 1: the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. But it's
Speaker 1: not just those guys. The deep state works its way
Speaker 1: all the way down through a bureaue crisy of minor
Speaker 1: petty bureaucrats. And one of them that I cite just
Speaker 1: to represent the case is Lieutenant Colonel Arthur Vinman, who
Speaker 1: is on Trump's National Security Council in the first term,
Speaker 1: and he's the one that set the wheels in motion
Speaker 1: for the first Trump impeachment And what was his what
Speaker 1: was the graviman of his complaint against against Trump? It
Speaker 1: was this and he told he said this to Congress.
Speaker 1: It was well, the problem with Trump, he said, is
Speaker 1: he is not following the UH the interagency consensus on Ukraine.
Speaker 1: And we have to ask ourselves what is an interagency
Speaker 1: and where does that appear in the constitution, and how
Speaker 1: does it operate? And does it vote? And who gets
Speaker 1: a vote? And where does it fit in the balance
Speaker 1: of power and the checks and balances, and who's a
Speaker 1: member of the interagency? And can I be a member?
Speaker 1: And who do they benefit? And where are the records
Speaker 1: of their meetings and so on. I mean, it's pure balderdash,
Speaker 1: but that the deep state, and that's not just the
Speaker 1: heads of the CIA, in the NSA or the FBI.
Speaker 1: That is all the way down the bureaucracy. And yet
Speaker 1: it's it's so typical. And then, if you'll indulge me,
Speaker 1: one more thing is the role that the lap dog
Speaker 1: press plays in this thing. And there is a I
Speaker 1: identify this. I think it's very worth reading. Just if
Speaker 1: it were just this alone, is this this syndrome. You
Speaker 1: won't find this in any standard psychiatric diagnostic manuals, but
Speaker 1: I have identified it, and I think it should be
Speaker 1: in the manuals. And I call it combat envy. And
Speaker 1: it's very, very ubiquitous in the halls of government, this
Speaker 1: combat envy syndrome. You know, you could run into a guy,
Speaker 1: I suppose at a bar at some point in your
Speaker 1: life that tells you tales of daring do about you know,
Speaker 1: I was a navy sealer or greenberry in Vietnam and so,
Speaker 1: and it doesn't do it any really any harm. But
Speaker 1: when these elected officials are leading newscasters and opinion makers
Speaker 1: in the United States make up these lies about where
Speaker 1: they have been and what they have done and cheering
Speaker 1: on our wars for national television audiences, it's pretty destructive.
Speaker 1: Fox News had a guy named Wayne Simmons that they
Speaker 1: used for years, and he was a national security former
Speaker 1: CIA expert, and he came on there with the most nonsensical, warmongering,
Speaker 1: crazed advice and they liked him, and that's why they
Speaker 1: brought him back year after year because he fit the
Speaker 1: network's agenda. He'd come up with stuff about you know, well,
Speaker 1: you know, we need a ground it's ten fifteen years ago.
Speaker 1: We need a ground invasion of Iraq. So eventually, I
Speaker 1: guess some of the real CIA guys got a little
Speaker 1: tired of his balder dash and they blew a whistle
Speaker 1: on him. And it turned out he wasn't a national
Speaker 1: security guy, and he wasn't a former CIA guy. He
Speaker 1: was a doorman and a hot tub manager and a
Speaker 1: felon too, so they had to get rid of him.
Speaker 1: But look, you had Brian Williams on NBC. Brian Williams
Speaker 1: made up his own personal tales of close calls, talking
Speaker 1: about well, in the first Iraq War, I was part
Speaker 1: of this helicopter assault and we flew in and then
Speaker 1: the RPGs were flying at us and it was harrowing
Speaker 1: and we had to do a corkscrew landing and I
Speaker 1: came within. And then with each retelling he would embellish
Speaker 1: the story, and it got worse and worse. Oh, I
Speaker 1: saw an RPG and it was headed right down and
Speaker 1: I could see the tube and it was headed right
Speaker 1: at us, and it was this, and it got bigger
Speaker 1: and bigger, and finally the guys that were actually on
Speaker 1: the mission and by the way the name of the
Speaker 1: mission was Big Wendy. I guess they anticipated Bryan Williams
Speaker 1: role in it, but the guys that were actually the
Speaker 1: men in the mission told the story to the Stars
Speaker 1: and stripes. So Brian Williams got found out for his
Speaker 1: embellished tales of combat envy. And when he was found
Speaker 1: out he said, oh uh I uh I must I
Speaker 1: must have had a brain tumor as he tried to
Speaker 1: excuse himself. And the network that you know, we trust
Speaker 1: feeding us reliable news and information, having known now that
Speaker 1: their primary anchor was lying to us, they suspended him
Speaker 1: for a while. They didn't care enough about the credibility
Speaker 1: of their network or their news anchors, or the trust
Speaker 1: that the American people might lodge him to get rid
Speaker 1: of him, to apologize for him. They suspended him, and
Speaker 1: then they gave him back another slot. I think he
Speaker 1: anchored MSNBC for years after that. So this stuff goes on.
Speaker 1: You know, there are countless officials that engage in this
Speaker 1: combat envy stuff. There are commentators the next time we visit,
Speaker 1: or maybe people want to just buy the book and
Speaker 1: read the story of Oh there's a good one, Bill
Speaker 1: O'Reilly on Fox and his combat envy. It's borders on
Speaker 1: the ridiculous. So I charged some of these things so
Speaker 1: people can see this is the deep state and now
Speaker 1: it works. This is the establishment, the American political stabling,
Speaker 1: This is their role. This is the lapdog press. But
Speaker 1: the point of it all I tried to tried to
Speaker 1: direct people too, is if we do not begin to honor,
Speaker 1: to demand and to honor the truth of our press,
Speaker 1: of our public officials, of the so called American establishment,
Speaker 1: if we don't demand the truth of them, then this
Speaker 1: is our fate. And I walk you right up to
Speaker 1: the ragged edge. This is our fate if we don't.
Speaker 1: And there is no sign yet that the American people
Speaker 1: have turned to maybe this Iran war will be the
Speaker 1: last strong people wake up.
Speaker 2: Well hope so, And it is good to go back
Speaker 2: and to remind ourselves of how we got here and
Speaker 2: this long trail of lies and deceptions, which is what
Speaker 2: your book does you know we're hearing this week. We've
Speaker 2: got the psycho chamber throughout media, both left and right
Speaker 2: of the short term pain, long term gain, and they're
Speaker 2: on this slogan all the time. It's like you talk
Speaker 2: about the complicity of the media. And you talk about
Speaker 2: people who present themselves as intelligence experts. I worked at
Speaker 2: a place where that person was steep that kept coming
Speaker 2: back on and he was selling one lie, crazy lie
Speaker 2: after the other. It was much worse stuff than what
Speaker 2: you were talking about from the NBC anchor. But again,
Speaker 2: nobody ever pays any penalties for that. The people they
Speaker 2: know that if they lie to people, and if it's
Speaker 2: sensatial enough, they get viewership, and they know that once
Speaker 2: they're caught in that lie, that it's not going to
Speaker 2: affect them whatsoever, because you know, people are entertained by it,
Speaker 2: and I think there is a certain aspect of it
Speaker 2: that they don't really care if it's true as long
Speaker 2: as they're entertained by it, right.
Speaker 1: Right, They don't they don't really care if it's true.
Speaker 1: You know, you mentioned earlier and we didn't really talk
Speaker 1: about it, but you mentioned earlier twa flight eight hundred,
Speaker 1: and it was so peculiar amidst all the misinformation. Eyewitnesses
Speaker 1: to the event testified that they saw a streak of
Speaker 1: you know, come up from the horizon or come up
Speaker 1: from the sea and hit the aircraft and stuff, and
Speaker 1: they gave they gave statements to the FBI. They were dumbfounded.
Speaker 1: Later at the end of the investigation when they're they
Speaker 1: got a chance to see their statements that they had
Speaker 1: given themselves the FBI and they'd all been changed. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they were a little dumbfounded by it. But the CIA,
Speaker 1: this was unprecedented. The CIA actually put out a video.
Speaker 1: I remember seeing it on YouTube, and it was this
Speaker 1: comical nineteen fifties announcer style and they said, and it
Speaker 1: was in like, you know, all caps, red letters, underscored
Speaker 1: and stuff. In this video they put together, the people
Speaker 1: did not see a missile take down TWA eight hundred
Speaker 1: and Okay, whatever you say, Sure that that works. Magic
Speaker 1: bullet too, bullet too, that's right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they got Voice of America. They're used to that
Speaker 2: kind of that kind of broadcast style. It just doesn't
Speaker 2: cut it anymore with most people. It also doesn't help
Speaker 2: when you've got people who are air traffic controllers saying
Speaker 2: the FBI came by and stole the records that we
Speaker 2: had showing what was going on.
Speaker 1: With this missile.
Speaker 2: So yeah, the FBI. I refer to them as fed's
Speaker 2: blocking investigation, because that seems to be what they're doing
Speaker 2: more often than not. But thank you so much for
Speaker 2: reminding people again. The book is Empire of Lies, fragments
Speaker 2: from the memory hole. We need to be reminded of
Speaker 2: this long history that we have. It's bipartisan and it
Speaker 2: is what the true government of our country is. Forget
Speaker 2: about these elections. It's the true government that's running it,
Speaker 2: which is the deep state of shar Hone about this
Speaker 2: bureaucracy that remains there from whoever wins the election. They're
Speaker 2: the ones who really calling the shots and calling the
Speaker 2: coups and the wars as well. Thank you so much
Speaker 2: for joining us, Charles Goyette. And you have a website
Speaker 2: I do.
Speaker 1: It's Charlesgoyette dot com. Have another one, Empire Offlies dot com.
Speaker 1: You can find a little bit of information about the
Speaker 1: book there and links to buy it, like on Amazon.
Speaker 1: So great. That would be great, and I think everybody
Speaker 1: will find it very compelling. It is I actually, I'll
Speaker 1: tell you, actually, David, it's pretty juicy too.
Speaker 2: Certainly sounds like it. I'm anxious to see it myself.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much for joining us, Charles. Yeah, thank you, David.
Speaker 2: I appreciate you very much. Thank you the common man.
Speaker 2: They created common Core and dumbed down our children. They
Speaker 2: created common past, track and control us their Commons project
Speaker 2: to make sure the commoners own nothing and the communist future.
Speaker 2: They see the common man as simple, not sophisticated ordinary.
Speaker 2: But each of us has worth and dignity created in
Speaker 2: the image of God. That is what we have in common.
Speaker 2: That is what they want to take away. Their most
Speaker 2: powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire to know
Speaker 2: everything about us, while they hide everything from us.
Speaker 1: It's time to turn that around.
Speaker 2: And expose what they want to hide. Please share the
Speaker 2: information and links you'll find at Thedavidnightshow dot com. Thank
Speaker 2: you for listening, Thank you for sharing. If you can't
Speaker 2: support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. Ddavidnightshow
Speaker 2: dot com