Speaker 1: Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal.
Speaker 2: Here, independent media just played a truly massive role in
Speaker 2: this election, and we are so excited about what that
Speaker 2: means for the future of the show.
Speaker 3: This is the only place where you can find honest
Speaker 3: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
Speaker 3: not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
Speaker 2: go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
Speaker 2: you'll access to our full shows, unedited, ad free, and
Speaker 2: all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 3: We need your help to build the future of independent
Speaker 3: news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
Speaker 3: dot com.
Speaker 4: All right, speaking of who's going to fill this vacuum,
Speaker 4: let's put this element up on the screen, the first
Speaker 4: of what hopefully will become many co broad lines with
Speaker 4: my colleague Saga and Jetty. This drop site news article
Speaker 4: of headline Trump's and a seed director for Israel and
Speaker 4: Iran previously worked for Israeli Ministry of Defense. That headline
Speaker 4: is what it says it is. Well, you're like, wait
Speaker 4: a minute, you can do that. You can work for
Speaker 4: the Israeli Ministry of Defense and then you can work
Speaker 4: for the night I said, well, of course you can.
Speaker 5: Why did you think that you couldn't.
Speaker 3: Well it's very interesting, isn't it. Ryan, Yeah, let's break
Speaker 3: some of this down for the audience.
Speaker 1: So this is very important.
Speaker 3: So, as I explained previously about the NSC, we just
Speaker 3: talked about power vacuum. So not only do we have
Speaker 3: Mike Wallace, who we know advocated for war with Iran
Speaker 3: when the Israelis were here, we now know that he
Speaker 3: put in charge of the Israel and the Iran portfolio,
Speaker 3: combined that portfolio under this woman, Marav Saren, now Marev
Speaker 3: Saren is the director for Israel and Iran at the NSC. Now,
Speaker 3: what we know from her own background publicly reported let's
Speaker 3: put that up there on the screen, please shall we,
Speaker 3: is that she admits quote worked at Israel's Ministry of Defense,
Speaker 3: where she participated in negotiations in the West Bank between
Speaker 3: Israel's coordinator for government activities and the territories and palesinating
Speaker 3: authority officials. So this is a person, Ryan, who literally
Speaker 3: worked for the Israeli Ministry of Defense.
Speaker 1: Basically we were just talking about the Pentagon.
Speaker 3: He Israeli version of the Pentagon who is not working
Speaker 3: in the United States government to develop policy visa VI
Speaker 3: that person. I should also mention there that that biography
Speaker 3: comes from the Foundation for Defensive Democracies. What is the
Speaker 3: probably single most pro war with Iran organization in the
Speaker 3: United States today.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and so what was so that was previously known.
Speaker 4: What wasn't known is that she's working at the NSC.
Speaker 4: There was ever a public announcement made about that, but
Speaker 4: the NSC has confirmed it to us.
Speaker 5: We can read this.
Speaker 4: NSC spokesperson Brian Hughes says, the following. Morav is a
Speaker 4: patriotic American who has served in the United States government
Speaker 4: for years, including for President Trump, Senator Ted Cruz, and
Speaker 4: Congress and James Comer. We are thrilled to have her
Speaker 4: expertise in the NSC, where she carries out the President's
Speaker 4: agenda on a range of Middle East issues, because I
Speaker 4: had asked, do you have anything set up in place
Speaker 4: to mitigate potential conflicts of interest, because you know, she
Speaker 4: is overseeing policy with a country where she previously served
Speaker 4: that country.
Speaker 5: And this is why this matters so much.
Speaker 4: That country, Israel, is currently trying to blow up our
Speaker 4: negotiations with Iran and between Iran and the United States.
Speaker 4: We are involved, and we're going to talk about those
Speaker 4: more in a moment. We're involved in these direct talks
Speaker 4: with Iran because the President of the United States has
Speaker 4: repeatedly said he believes that negotiations are a better resolution
Speaker 4: solution to our problem with Iran than an attack. Israel
Speaker 4: disagrees Israel wants us to attack. Yes, Israel has argued
Speaker 4: internally that it wants us to attack. So the NSC
Speaker 4: director for both of those countries previously worked for Israel.
Speaker 3: How do you get a security clearance if ver former
Speaker 3: employee boggles the mind and inevitably ran, what are we
Speaker 3: going to be smeared as anti semi? It's calling in
Speaker 3: to question somebody's loyalty. No, I would say this about anyone.
Speaker 3: I'm Indian descent.
Speaker 5: Religion doesn't matter, this about the country.
Speaker 3: If the guy running the NSC India desk is a
Speaker 3: Indian citizen.
Speaker 5: Or who worked for the Indian worked.
Speaker 1: For the Indian military, I would say absolutely not.
Speaker 3: How can you trust this guy's judgment? And then even worse,
Speaker 3: if you're in charge of the Iran portfolio, that's like
Speaker 3: taking a former Indian military official who appens to have
Speaker 3: US citizen and put him on the Pakistan desk. What
Speaker 3: saying the vice versa, you're gonna put somebody in charge
Speaker 3: of the mortal enemy of a government if you used
Speaker 3: to work for and by the way, mortal enemy. I'm
Speaker 3: using their language, the Israeli languages. That's so they see them.
Speaker 3: I'm not saying I believe that, but that's how.
Speaker 1: They view it.
Speaker 4: And in fact, the general policy of the US government,
Speaker 4: and I've seen this with friends firsthand, is to not
Speaker 4: send somebody of a particular nationality to serve in a
Speaker 4: particular country. Let's say you are and I've seen this firsthand.
Speaker 4: Let's say you're Iranian American and you're born here in
Speaker 4: the United States. You are as American as I am.
Speaker 4: They will not have you work on Iran inside the
Speaker 4: CIA or the State Department, even though you might speak
Speaker 4: Persian and know the country.
Speaker 5: That it's a little too close.
Speaker 4: It's it's there's some suspicion in orderline racism. If you're
Speaker 4: Pakistani American, you're born here in the United States, they
Speaker 4: will not have you serving Pakistan. Ecuadorian American, they won't
Speaker 4: send you. I think there are exceptions.
Speaker 1: I will defend that's actually a good policy.
Speaker 5: I think it's fine too.
Speaker 4: I get it, like I understand where it's coming from,
Speaker 4: because it's like, all right, look, we're all we're all
Speaker 4: Americans here, and there's a lot of places we can
Speaker 4: send you. We're gonna send you know, we're gonna send
Speaker 4: the Iranian, the ecuador Ecuadorian into Iran. Right, But so
Speaker 4: that's there, like it or not. That is the general approach.
Speaker 4: You can find exceptions, but that is the general approach
Speaker 4: that the American government takes to foreign countries and your
Speaker 4: place of birth that those are now, those are not
Speaker 4: people who worked for the Iranian Ministry of Defense or
Speaker 4: the Equadorians. Their parents or parents are from there. She
Speaker 4: personally worked for the Israeli Ministry of Defense.
Speaker 3: By her own admission again and by the way, at
Speaker 3: the FD the Foundation for Defensive Democracies whose chairman Mark
Speaker 3: Dubowitz is the chief opponent right now of any Trump
Speaker 3: negotiation with Irani. So you have Trump who wants to
Speaker 3: deal with Iran, and then the person running his White
Speaker 3: House's Iran desk is a former employee of the organization
Speaker 3: who wants to kill the American organization which wants to
Speaker 3: kill an Iran deal.
Speaker 1: And of a government which also wants to kill that deal.
Speaker 3: Truly, do not preach to me about how you can't
Speaker 3: say that this is a most obvious conflict of interest,
Speaker 3: And yes, dare I say an accusation of dual loyalty
Speaker 3: is in order, because you don't just go work for
Speaker 3: that government if you don't have at least some allegiance
Speaker 3: or something to it, and then to come and work
Speaker 3: for our country, shall we?
Speaker 1: You know this is one where they have would be.
Speaker 4: Strange if she worked for the Ministry of Defense in
Speaker 4: Israel and wasn't loyalty of course.
Speaker 3: Even weirder So then what what so that the only
Speaker 3: alternative where this somehow works is that she's a US
Speaker 3: double agent who was working for secret about that and
Speaker 3: then going out in the Yeah, something tells me doesn't
Speaker 3: seem to be true, and that, by the way, inevitably
Speaker 3: this is going to cause a massive freak out, even
Speaker 3: just you and I reporting on this.
Speaker 4: For our Washington audience that's watching this and wondering, Uh,
Speaker 4: the answer to your question is she related to Omri Sarah? Yes,
Speaker 4: that's right, that's her brother.
Speaker 3: Yeah, omriy is a long time, no long known person
Speaker 3: here in Washington works for Senator Ted Cruz, one of
Speaker 3: the most vociferous pro Israel voices probably in the United
Speaker 3: States opponent of the around you. That's fine, listen, you know,
Speaker 3: yeah he works her Ted Cruise. That those are tech
Speaker 3: Cruises views.
Speaker 1: I don't have any problem. I don't know problem.
Speaker 3: Absolutely, I have no problem with that. Absolutely, even her
Speaker 3: working for Ted Cruise. Yeah, a little weird, you know
Speaker 3: previously in my opinion, but you're not running the countries,
Speaker 3: you know, foreign policy, and uh, you know, to step
Speaker 3: back a little bit again and just for to explain
Speaker 3: some Washington terms. So we're in the middle of this
Speaker 3: Pentagon power vacuum.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 3: But the thing is is that the NSC's job is
Speaker 3: to develop options.
Speaker 1: It's genuinely a staff agency.
Speaker 3: So when Donald Trump tells his National security advisor in
Speaker 3: Mike Waltson says I need options on Israel and run,
Speaker 3: the person Mike Waltz turns to is her. So her
Speaker 3: job is to coordinate from all of the different agencies CIA, Pentagon, DIA,
Speaker 3: you know, GEO and Spatial Intelligence Agency whatever, bring them
Speaker 3: all together and say we need to prepare strike packages
Speaker 3: or whatever. The person who's in charge of that has
Speaker 3: an immense amount of power because they're controlling the actual
Speaker 3: stuff that goes to the President's desk. Let's say here
Speaker 3: on the Hooty strikes, things like that, Well, if you
Speaker 3: have this type of ideology and you previously worked for
Speaker 3: this government, what do you think the mindset that you're
Speaker 3: going to bring? And that doesn't even bring into question.
Speaker 3: Remember there was this huge story. Do we have that
Speaker 3: New York Times story? I have no inside information around this,
Speaker 3: but this says Trump waived off this really strike after
Speaker 3: Division's emergency administration. The pro Israel side was adamantly convinced
Speaker 3: right that the America firsters on the NSC are the
Speaker 3: people who leaked this. I no longer am so sure.
Speaker 3: Let's say you're a former employee of the Israeli Mystery
Speaker 3: of Defense, and your former employer didn't get what it wanted,
Speaker 3: and you wanted to make it clear to many people
Speaker 3: on the outside about what your employer, Donald Trump is
Speaker 3: now currently doing and is stifling some of the ideology
Speaker 3: that you have now pushed for and believed in for
Speaker 3: the better part of a decade. Well, I don't know, Ryan,
Speaker 3: maybe I would leak it to the New York Times, Yeah,
Speaker 3: and wouldn't I.
Speaker 4: And this Times article is fascinating because it includes Tulca Gabbard,
Speaker 4: Director of National Intelligence, saying that she is against the
Speaker 4: US striking Iran. It includes Jade Vance, the Vice President,
Speaker 4: saying that he is against striking Iran. It includes Pete Hegseith,
Speaker 4: Secretary of Defense, saying he is against striking Iran.
Speaker 5: And in it even Michael Waltz.
Speaker 4: Acknowledges in the meeting that the Israeli plans won't work
Speaker 4: without US support, and he offers little skepticism. Now, he
Speaker 4: and Carrillo, the Stentcom commander, had previously engaged with Israel
Speaker 4: on these war plans, and and they're they're clearly the
Speaker 4: most open to it of any of the top administration officials.
Speaker 4: And while Sager and I were writing the story, the
Speaker 4: editor was like, Okay, in this meeting, like who is
Speaker 4: Who's who's taking this support for Israel side and saying
Speaker 4: that we should bomb around Because clearly you've got everybody,
Speaker 4: the head of the Intelligence Community, head of the Pentagon,
Speaker 4: John Ratcliffe, everybody is saying don't do this. So it's
Speaker 4: a meeting, there's it's a debate. Tell us, who is
Speaker 4: on the yes side, And the ironic answer is Israel,
Speaker 4: Like there actually weren't American officials in the meeting. Who
Speaker 4: are as who think that it is in America's interests
Speaker 4: to launch this strike? Yet the entire echelon from the
Speaker 4: President across all of his leadership is debating this issue.
Speaker 5: Look, who are you debating? Why are you debating?
Speaker 4: Like, if nobody inside the United States thinks that this
Speaker 4: is in the interest of the United States, why.
Speaker 5: Are we even having a meeting about it?
Speaker 1: Which is Wow, it's completely nuts.
Speaker 5: And they might get their way, and yet.
Speaker 3: I want to be very clear here, they may win.
Speaker 3: In fact, I would not bet against these people.
Speaker 5: I wouldn't want to be a run.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you're living here and working on this stuff.
Speaker 4: Imagine you're a run in these negotiations and they're like,
Speaker 4: you know, you just met with witcough and now you're
Speaker 4: moving on to the technical side. And you sit down
Speaker 4: across the table in your trading paper and you look
Speaker 4: up and it's somebody from the Israeli ministries.
Speaker 1: You're like, wait what You're like, you're supposed to be
Speaker 1: working for them? How does that work? Yeah? I mean,
Speaker 1: would you be serious?
Speaker 3: Would you trust that person to negotiate or develop policy
Speaker 3: and good faith, absolutely, especially.
Speaker 5: After we don't have a great track record of sticking
Speaker 5: to our deals.
Speaker 1: Yes, it's a different things.
Speaker 5: It deals with China, deals with Mexico, deals with the run,
Speaker 5: you name it.
Speaker 1: And look, that's why Ryan and I wrote the story.
Speaker 3: It's important the public needs to know about the people
Speaker 3: who are actually working on this stuff. And there are
Speaker 3: a lot of patriots who still work in the United
Speaker 3: States government. There are a lot of patriots who look
Speaker 3: at this and say, I have no idea how you
Speaker 3: can get a security clearance. I can't believe that you
Speaker 3: can to work here. That you and your boss, Mike Wallas,
Speaker 3: your boss literally caught including Jeffrey Goldberg, and you get
Speaker 3: to stay right and he gets to continue to be
Speaker 3: in the Oval, and you know, push for war with Iran,
Speaker 3: and just to show everyone that's the edifice that is
Speaker 3: being protected here behind the scenes. America deserves to know.
Speaker 3: I don't want to war. I don't think most people
Speaker 3: do either. But people who do, they're in power right
Speaker 3: now and they could win. They could very easily win.
Speaker 5: They could absolutely all right.
Speaker 1: So with that, let's get over to the Israel section.
Speaker 4: The Israeli military is out with its own report on
Speaker 4: the massacre of fifteen paramedics in Gaza, which happened on
Speaker 4: March twenty third, shortly after the Israel broke it cease
Speaker 4: fire with Hamas and Gaza. You can put this element
Speaker 4: up on the screen. This is from our drop side
Speaker 4: of news Twitter account which go through goes through kind
Speaker 4: of the full report. I put up E three while
Speaker 4: we're at it. This is the video footage that later
Speaker 4: emerged that kind of forced this report out. So what
Speaker 4: we have from the Israeli military report is effectively a
Speaker 4: complete whitewashing of the incident. They they they say that
Speaker 4: it adds up to accountability because one deputy commander was
Speaker 4: removed from his post as a result of the findings
Speaker 4: of this. But for those who didn't follow a Hamas,
Speaker 4: I'm not sorry, not not Hamas. They claimed it was Hamas. Later,
Speaker 4: a Red Crescent medical vehicle was was fired on by
Speaker 4: Israeli forces. We interviewed one of the only the only
Speaker 4: known survivor of that. He said he said that they're
Speaker 4: just driving along the road and all of a sudden,
Speaker 4: gunshots ring out, and the two people in the front
Speaker 4: of the vehicle killed. He was then he was then grabbed,
Speaker 4: dragged out, beaten ruth sleeve for many hours, and then
Speaker 4: he witnessed what happened next which you just saw on
Speaker 4: that video, which is the other vehicles coming, medical vehicles
Speaker 4: coming to try to figure out what happened to the
Speaker 4: ones that they had lost contact with. The Israelis then
Speaker 4: opened fire on all of them, and according to the
Speaker 4: Red Crescent, based on autopsies of them, there are a
Speaker 4: lot of headshot wounds and wounds to the torso that
Speaker 4: indicate that.
Speaker 5: They were executed.
Speaker 4: We know then they were buried in a mass grave
Speaker 4: and tried to bury the even even the vehicles with them.
Speaker 4: So the Israeli report says that they don't have any
Speaker 4: evidence that they were shot point blank range, that's one thing,
Speaker 4: but they make that claim without evidence. They criticize the
Speaker 4: commanders for burying the ambulance with bulldozers under the sand.
Speaker 4: They say that they said there was no reason to
Speaker 4: do that. They say burying the bodies in a mass
Speaker 4: grave was acceptable.
Speaker 5: Now finally at the end, then a UN.
Speaker 4: Vehicle approaches the situation and the Israelis fire on the
Speaker 4: UN vehicle as well. That they say was a breach
Speaker 4: of protocol. So that is the only thing and everything
Speaker 4: that I've just laid out, other than the burring of
Speaker 4: the ambulance by a bulldozer, that the Israelis hear say,
Speaker 4: constituted something that they were at fault for and as
Speaker 4: a result, deputy commander relieved from his responsibilities.
Speaker 5: One thing that hasn't gotten anywhere.
Speaker 4: Near enough attention in the western press coverage of this
Speaker 4: is a startling video that Israel's Channel fourteen obtained, and
Speaker 4: we can roll some of this here. So the Golani Brigade,
Speaker 4: which is known as a fairly reckless brigade in Israel
Speaker 4: even among other Israeli forces, is the one that carried
Speaker 4: out this masacre. This is a deputy command. This is
Speaker 4: a commander speaking to the Golani Brigade. He says, go out,
Speaker 4: kill a lot of enemy, take a lot of territory.
Speaker 4: And that's how up until now we have returned hostages.
Speaker 4: Everyone we meet is an enemy. We identify a figure,
Speaker 4: we open fire, eliminate it, we move on. So that
Speaker 4: is a commander of the Golani Brigade speaking to Golani
Speaker 4: Brigade forces. This is before this incident with the paramedics.
Speaker 4: He says to them, everyone we meet is an enemy,
Speaker 4: kill them and move on. They then encounter these fifteen paramedics,
Speaker 4: they kill them and they move on. Israel's response is
Speaker 4: that they are going to remove just one figure.
Speaker 5: From this Sagar. This was.
Speaker 4: To a global community that is pretty inured to the
Speaker 4: violence and the carnage going on. This one broke through
Speaker 4: because of its kind of horror film esque nature of
Speaker 4: it and because they are targeting people who are just
Speaker 4: out trying to do trying to save people's lives. Israel
Speaker 4: immediately came out and claimed that they had killed some
Speaker 4: Hamas fighter.
Speaker 5: His body was not found.
Speaker 4: They named the Hamas fighter they said was with them,
Speaker 4: body was not there.
Speaker 5: That was a lie. Then they said that were well six.
Speaker 4: Of them were Hamas, Like you couldn't tell these were ambulances,
Speaker 4: but you could somehow tell it.
Speaker 5: These dead people, well, I think it's were Moss members.
Speaker 3: Ryan for you to break down the chain of how
Speaker 3: this all happened. So, if it was not for outlets
Speaker 3: like drop Site and independent journalists, I do not believe
Speaker 3: that this would have come to life.
Speaker 1: Because the legacy press covered it as is.
Speaker 3: They were like Israel says they killed so and so
Speaker 3: they didn't even remember you flag this. The New York
Speaker 3: Times did not even call up the Red Crest asked
Speaker 3: what actually happened with all this and the fact that
Speaker 3: it was on video and you know, literally there's a
Speaker 3: horrible video of the guy who died recording his last
Speaker 3: words to his mother. If it wasn't for that, I
Speaker 3: don't think any of this gets picked up, if no
Speaker 3: investigation even happened.
Speaker 4: The first Palestine reporter I saw break this was Hin Kaudrey,
Speaker 4: who I don't think we've had her on the program,
Speaker 4: but she's a terrific journalist in Gaza who she was
Speaker 4: one of those those who kind of blew up on
Speaker 4: Instagram and TikTok very very early on, and she has
Speaker 4: a huge kind of global following. And immediately on March
Speaker 4: twenty third, she started hearing what had happened, and because
Speaker 4: of her, another Palestinian reporter, some of which went on
Speaker 4: to report for drops the news about this that version
Speaker 4: was out there. Then the New York Times comes out finally,
Speaker 4: like two Times didn't even want to cover it, and
Speaker 4: there was an internal fight within the Times about whether
Speaker 4: they should even do an article on it, and they
Speaker 4: buried it in one unrelated article, and then when they
Speaker 4: finally did cover it, they said, you know, who's to
Speaker 4: say what happened? Because the Israelis said that the ambulances
Speaker 4: were quote advancing suspiciously, which is just an absolutely comical
Speaker 4: addition to our new lexicon. How does an ambulance advance suspiciously?
Speaker 4: The Israelis claimed that there were the sirens and the
Speaker 4: lights of the ambulances were not on, and that might
Speaker 4: have been the end of the story if one of
Speaker 4: the assassinated medics had not filmed his own death. So
Speaker 4: he had his phone going as he's as he's going
Speaker 4: through this rafa area, and you all of a sudden
Speaker 4: and you see, so he's filming the entire thing. You
Speaker 4: saw his that was his view, that was his video
Speaker 4: that you saw at the top of this segment. You
Speaker 4: see that the lights are on, lights are obviously on,
Speaker 4: and all of a sudden, you hear the gunfire erupt
Speaker 4: and you hear him say before he is killed, forgive me, mother,
Speaker 4: forgive me. All I wanted to do was help people.
Speaker 4: And you can just sense that guilt, the guilt of
Speaker 4: a son that is not rational because nobody should feel
Speaker 4: guilty for being murdered because you're trying to help people.
Speaker 4: But you know that his mother said to him so
Speaker 4: many times, be careful, be careful, and he told her,
Speaker 4: don't worry, Mom, I'm gonna be careful.
Speaker 5: I'll be fine. I need to help other people.
Speaker 4: And now in his last moments, he's realizing that these
Speaker 4: just promised that he made to his mother that he
Speaker 4: would be fine and that he would come home. Uh,
Speaker 4: he's going to break that promise by being executed at
Speaker 4: the hands of these Israeli forces that he hears getting
Speaker 4: closer and closer and then finally killing him buried by him,
Speaker 4: burying him in a mass grave, right and if And
Speaker 4: then they forgot to steal his phone and destroy it.
Speaker 4: And so when he was unearthed a week later, because
Speaker 4: the Israelis were blocking the un from going and get
Speaker 4: and clearing the scene, uh, they discovered his phone and
Speaker 4: fortunately they were able to, I guess get through his
Speaker 4: pass code. And then and they found this video and
Speaker 4: they're like, oh, everything Israel said about this was a lie.
Speaker 4: The sirens were on, there was no Hamas fighter, nobody's
Speaker 4: shooting back.
Speaker 5: You killed these people in cold in cold blood.
Speaker 4: And you go back and read the drop site interview
Speaker 4: with the only survivor. He watched them bury these people.
Speaker 4: He watched them bury the vehicles, which is like what
Speaker 4: compels you to take a bulldozer to an ambulance and
Speaker 4: try to bury it under sand other than.
Speaker 5: Trying to like completely cover up this scene.
Speaker 4: And it also shows the scale of the sense of
Speaker 4: impunity that is felt by some Israeli forces any other
Speaker 4: force on this planet. At this point, if you kill
Speaker 4: fifteen paramedics, you know the world is going to know
Speaker 4: about this. You're not even like you're cancox some story
Speaker 4: about what happened, but you're not going to try to
Speaker 4: cover it up like that, like bur by.
Speaker 5: Burying the ambulances.
Speaker 4: But there's so much impunity that they have gotten away
Speaker 4: with so many things that they thought it was in
Speaker 4: the within the realm of possibility that they could get
Speaker 4: some bulldozers out there and bury these ambulances under the
Speaker 4: sand with the bodies and move on.
Speaker 5: At the end, they're correct.
Speaker 4: One guy is getting removed from his job and celebrated
Speaker 4: in the in their report, and there's really report.
Speaker 5: They celebrate the guy. He had an amazing career, he
Speaker 5: was wounded.
Speaker 4: But you know, he shouldn't have fired on the They
Speaker 4: shouldn't have allowed them to fire on this one vehicle.
Speaker 3: At the same time, Ryan, we have this story. Let's
Speaker 3: put it up there on the screen. Can you describe
Speaker 3: for us what happened here?
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 4: So Fatma Hosana was who is a photo twenty five
Speaker 4: year old photojournalist in Gaza who had also picked up
Speaker 4: a lot of international attention for her for her own
Speaker 4: kind of charisma and confidence and courage and all also
Speaker 4: for her photographs, just absolutely compelling work. She is the
Speaker 4: focal point of a documentary that was just accepted into
Speaker 4: Khan So, how you said, a huge achievement in the
Speaker 4: world of documentary filmmaking. The day after her film was
Speaker 4: accepted into Khan the Film Festival, her homes is hit
Speaker 4: with a targeted strike, which kills I believe at this
Speaker 4: count ten members of her family.
Speaker 5: Of course, they're.
Speaker 4: Saying which so they're saying that they were aiming for
Speaker 4: some Hamas fighter or something.
Speaker 5: Let's say that that's true just for a second.
Speaker 4: It means that they're willing to kill ten innocent people
Speaker 4: for one Hamas fighter in his home, which is a
Speaker 4: violation of the laws of war, like even if a
Speaker 4: person and was previously a combatant, when they go back
Speaker 4: to their home, laws of war say you don't attack
Speaker 4: somebody in their homes, particularly you don't do it with
Speaker 4: nine of their family members surrounding them. The coincidence to
Speaker 4: me is too stark. They have targeted so many people
Speaker 4: have who have risen to global celebrity.
Speaker 5: That and target we're not talking about.
Speaker 4: They hit a huge apartment building and they happen to
Speaker 4: be inside the apartment building. Hit her home like a
Speaker 4: direct hit on their home, just like they hit when
Speaker 4: they killed the poet ray fat Alarier.
Speaker 5: He was in a second floor apartment they hit.
Speaker 4: They hit the second floor apartment only with a direct hit,
Speaker 4: killed him, a bunch of his family, family members, the
Speaker 4: I forget, I forget his name of the Instagram and
Speaker 4: TikTok star in the Northern Gaza, who was famous for
Speaker 4: as a chef cook just cooking for people and because
Speaker 4: of what he was able to do, he developed his
Speaker 4: global audience, killed him direct post on Shabot our reporter
Speaker 4: killed directly. There's not accidental killings. These are people who
Speaker 4: sit around make a decision to target somebody. Send that
Speaker 4: up the chain and it is signed off on and
Speaker 4: then it is executed yep.
Speaker 3: And you know, every once in a while somebody like you,
Speaker 3: somebody like Trey Yanks at Fox News will try and
Speaker 3: bring attention to this, but by and large completely ignored.
Speaker 4: And they have to now that the director said, they
Speaker 4: they're changing the ending now, like not the ending, but
Speaker 4: the end card. The end card said, uh, you know,
Speaker 4: Fatma is alive in Gaza and continuing her pursuit of photojournalism.
Speaker 4: They now have had to add a new card to
Speaker 4: the end of that documentary and there won't be a
Speaker 4: dry eye in the house. And when the movie comes out,
Speaker 4: you'll have pro Israel forces complaining about it, trying to
Speaker 4: shut down theaters that will play it, and then asking
Speaker 4: why the world hates them?
Speaker 5: Yeah, why is the world so against us?
Speaker 6: Right?
Speaker 1: No clue, Let's break the Iron deal down? What do
Speaker 1: you got for us on.
Speaker 4: That despite all of the obstacles thrown up in their
Speaker 4: way direct us around, talks are preceding with some significant momentum.
Speaker 4: Let's put this treat of Parsi post on the screen says,
Speaker 4: So the teams met in Rome on Saturday, and what
Speaker 4: is surprising coming out of this is that they said,
Speaker 4: all right, the technical meeting coming out of this will
Speaker 4: be in four days, and we're going to meet just
Speaker 4: a couple of days after that for political meetings again
Speaker 4: and to give people a sense of how these go.
Speaker 4: So you get the political people in a room and
Speaker 4: they kind of draw the political outline of what the
Speaker 4: deal is going to look like, and you don't need
Speaker 4: the necessarily the technical experts in there. So in this case,
Speaker 4: the big fight between and Israel, as continues to insert
Speaker 4: itself into this into these negotiations, they want there to
Speaker 4: be zero nuclear program in Iran, no civilian nuclear program
Speaker 4: at all, Whereas the US and Iran have said at
Speaker 4: this point we're okay with a civilian nuclear program with
Speaker 4: the Atomic Energy Agency monitoring it and you know, verifying
Speaker 4: that there is no capacity for a breakout. Israel says,
Speaker 4: if you allow them to have that, that gets them
Speaker 4: too close to being able to break out to a
Speaker 4: bomb if the deal collapses. So that's the political argument.
Speaker 4: So by setting up the technical meeting just a few
Speaker 4: days after the political one, suggests that the political meeting
Speaker 4: went well, because now you need the technical folks to
Speaker 4: come in and say, okay, what does it mean to
Speaker 4: have a civilian program that is under this level of
Speaker 4: you know, enrichment threshold. And it also means that the
Speaker 4: technical details. The fact that they schedule the next political
Speaker 4: meeting soon after the textical one suggests that they think
Speaker 4: the technical dealers aren't that complicated. They should be able
Speaker 4: to sit down, hash this out and get on with it.
Speaker 4: Nikki Haley put up He's six here sees this happening
Speaker 4: as well good sign that things are moving apace that
Speaker 4: Nicki Haley is freaked out. She says Obama two point
Speaker 4: zero because she thinks, I think rightly that the only
Speaker 4: reason Trump well, Trump ripped up the Iran deal for
Speaker 4: two reasons. First it was called the Obama Nuclear Deal,
Speaker 4: and second, his pro Israel hawks insisted that he ripped
Speaker 4: it up. So Sel Madilson didn't like it. And it's
Speaker 4: called the Obama Nuclear Deal.
Speaker 1: Day one.
Speaker 5: Get it out.
Speaker 3: And what we just discussed about this former ID, you know,
Speaker 3: Israeli Ministry of Defense employee, her old boss, Mark Tubowitz.
Speaker 3: Here's I want to be clear about what these people want.
Speaker 3: It's not that they object to a deal. Here's what
Speaker 3: he had to say, just yesterday. The Islamic Republic is
Speaker 3: weaker than ever, hated by most Iranians, hammered by.
Speaker 1: The IDF and mosade that part's true is terror. It's terror.
Speaker 3: Army's air defense's missile production capability are in ruins. Never
Speaker 3: a better time to dismantle its nuke program and finish
Speaker 3: off the regime.
Speaker 1: Will whoa whoa? Hold on a second, So we're not
Speaker 1: talking about the deal.
Speaker 5: Do we have the retchers?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 5: Yeah, yes, yeah.
Speaker 3: It's like you're like, oh, so this isn't about the
Speaker 3: nuclear program at all. This is about finishing off the regime.
Speaker 3: This is not about Obama. This is about regime change.
Speaker 3: And they finally are being forced to say the quiet
Speaker 3: part out loud because they can't even rely on getting
Speaker 3: the whole right wing ecosystem jammed up around Obama. They
Speaker 3: have to now counter signal Trump. The way they're doing
Speaker 3: it is how Nikki Haley is on, Oh, this is
Speaker 3: all about Obama and all this, but let's not, like,
Speaker 3: let's be honest about their goal. They want a straight
Speaker 3: up regime change war. That strike by Israel was not
Speaker 3: about the Iranian nuclear program. That was a pretext to
Speaker 3: suck the United States and into a war of total
Speaker 3: annihilation and regime change in Iran?
Speaker 1: Period? Now, did you sign up for that? Do most
Speaker 1: people want that?
Speaker 3: I don't think so. I think it would be a
Speaker 3: complete disaster. And it's pretty clear the agenda that's happening inside.
Speaker 3: And while I want to hold these up, I just
Speaker 3: don't think you can or you can understate how colossal
Speaker 3: the campaign against this is.
Speaker 1: So for example, let's put this up there on the screen. Please.
Speaker 3: Trump has now appointed Mark Levin from Fox News to
Speaker 3: quote lead the Homeland Security Advisory Council. Now, Mark Levin
Speaker 3: is one of the most anti Iran deal forces in
Speaker 3: the American conservative commentariat. This guy is straight out of
Speaker 3: the FDD playbook. He's somebody wants regime change. He attacks
Speaker 3: anybody who previously is not like Holy subservient to the
Speaker 3: State of Israel, who's been appointed previously to the Pentagon.
Speaker 3: He's actively led that against him. Trump of course respects him.
Speaker 3: Why because he's on television and now he's putting him
Speaker 3: on this advisory council with more access to Trump. Well,
Speaker 3: this individual that's a very strong voice. Mark Levin has
Speaker 3: also targeted Tulsi Gabbard. Why because Tulsi Gabbard had the
Speaker 3: audacity Ryan to present US intelligence saying if we bomb Iran,
Speaker 3: if Israel bombs aren, we're going to be drawn into
Speaker 3: a war. And he said she needs to be fired
Speaker 3: and retract that evidence. This is the Iraq war level shit.
Speaker 3: You know, this is Dick Cheney going to the CIA
Speaker 3: to meddle with the national intelligence estimate about Iraq's nuclear
Speaker 3: weapons program. That's what we're dealing with here. And again
Speaker 3: I'm not betting against them.
Speaker 1: I think they're going to win. That's the terrifyable.
Speaker 4: And there was just an intelligence assessment that came out.
Speaker 4: And remember when Tulsi and Ratcliffe were testifying before Congress
Speaker 4: recently and the whole hearing devolved into fighting over the
Speaker 4: Jeffrey Goldberg signal chat. So the reason that those were
Speaker 4: scheduled were actually to talk about the new intelligence assessment
Speaker 4: for the annual Intelligence Assessment. The assessment that they presented
Speaker 4: to Congress was that Iran has made zero move toward
Speaker 4: a militarized nuclear program, and that their intelligence assessment is
Speaker 4: that they have zero interest in moving to a military
Speaker 4: nuclear program, a weaponized nuclear program, none whatsoever. They did
Speaker 4: say that because of all of the bellicost rhetoric from
Speaker 4: Israel and from the United States that there were some
Speaker 4: hardline figures in Iran who advocated for a military nuclear
Speaker 4: program in ways that they had not done so before,
Speaker 4: so that the politics were changing a tiny bit as
Speaker 4: a result of all of the pressure. They said from
Speaker 4: the Ietola and elsewhere, there were no interest at all.
Speaker 4: That's that's the American intelligence assessment. And what Dubs is
Speaker 4: saying is, how dare you? I want different facts again?
Speaker 3: This is this literally is out of the Iraq War like.
Speaker 3: It's not a joke, it's it's reality. This is exactly
Speaker 3: how it all went down, with the politicization of the
Speaker 3: intelligence and the meddling and making sure that it said
Speaker 3: exactly what they wanted so they could present all this
Speaker 3: bullshit the Congress and the Secretary of State. This is
Speaker 3: the same playbook that's happening right now. I would be
Speaker 3: remiss if I didn't at least give like some good news.
Speaker 3: Let's put this up there please on the screen.
Speaker 1: At e eight.
Speaker 3: Adam Boehler, who will all recall, was sidelined for several
Speaker 3: months for having the audacity to what was it again.
Speaker 1: Talk with oh right, that's to say that we're not
Speaker 1: a audacity when.
Speaker 3: On television and said we are not a client state
Speaker 3: of Israel, and for that was benched for several months.
Speaker 3: Has now been appointed to an expanded hostage on V
Speaker 3: royal role after the Hamas tawks uproar. Allegedly he has
Speaker 3: put in for you know, an application or whatever to
Speaker 3: try and restart some negotiation with Hamas or or continued
Speaker 3: cease fire and you know, hostage release. We wish him
Speaker 3: the best of luck, but also if that happened to you, Ryan,
Speaker 3: are you ever going to open your mouth again about
Speaker 3: the usum band fines that it is?
Speaker 4: No? Yeah, okay, sorry, so correction right, they are, we
Speaker 4: are clients my fault.
Speaker 1: Yeah, oops, yeah, so you know that.
Speaker 3: Look, Steve Wikoff lives, He lives to fight another day,
Speaker 3: Bowler survives. These are all good things, but there's a
Speaker 3: lot of other.
Speaker 1: Bad stuff that's happening.
Speaker 5: They have everything.
Speaker 3: I think the danger is what they want to do
Speaker 3: is because Trump wants to get this done quickly, and
Speaker 3: Trump also is not paying that much attention. So for example,
Speaker 3: on the Ukraine thing, well he told us to be
Speaker 3: wrapp by day one.
Speaker 1: Okay, well's day ninety whatever.
Speaker 3: Marco Rubio just the other day goes, hey, if Russia
Speaker 3: and Ukraine don't sign a deal soon, America will lose interest.
Speaker 3: So they're trying to do bilateral trade negotians with seventy
Speaker 3: five countries, wrap up the largest land war in Europe,
Speaker 3: and wrap on Irani nuclear all in a three month period.
Speaker 1: Well, if all.
Speaker 3: That happens is it just drags on, right, then the
Speaker 3: more political capital that the pro Iran war caucus has
Speaker 3: to say to them, Hey, we tried negotiations, they're not
Speaker 3: coming to the table.
Speaker 1: Let's go ahead and bomb them. That is the real
Speaker 1: danger here.
Speaker 3: Yeah, Trump wants an accelerated timeline. Maybe Iran will give
Speaker 3: it to him. I'm not so sure I would. If
Speaker 3: I were there, right, I would. I would have wanted
Speaker 3: a lot of trust and a lot of verification before
Speaker 3: hour ever in or something.
Speaker 4: The number one thing that iron is asking for is
Speaker 4: an ironclad guarantee that they will not rip up this deal. Yes,
Speaker 4: and are you gonna You can't really blame them for
Speaker 4: doing that, like they they interestingly abided by the terms
Speaker 4: of the Iran deal for a significant amount of time
Speaker 4: after Trump walked away from it. And remain in the
Speaker 4: deal with the Europeans and the Russians because it was this,
Speaker 4: you know, there was a large global deal that with
Speaker 4: the on. So they're like, just promise us you're not
Speaker 4: going to break it this time, and we're like.
Speaker 5: I'm not so sure about that, right, that's right?
Speaker 1: Have a hard bard, guys. Yes, you know, not not
Speaker 1: an ideal situation. I'll just put it that way.
Speaker 3: But listen, we remain relatively optimistic here, and we'll continue
Speaker 3: to track it. Finally, final segment or actually, no, we
Speaker 3: still have to cover the pope too, we'll get that later.
Speaker 3: Let's start with Douglas Murray catches some straits in the
Speaker 3: latest Joe Rogan podcast episode.
Speaker 1: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 7: Have you been there? Right?
Speaker 5: That's a good point.
Speaker 1: Have you even you haven't been?
Speaker 7: By the way, how is he and all these wars?
Speaker 5: Can I just go to wars?
Speaker 7: By the way, how are you let Are you allowed
Speaker 7: to just go to wars?
Speaker 1: Can you just go to what to see of going?
Speaker 7: Can I just go to wars? Or do I have
Speaker 7: to come back and say what people want me to
Speaker 7: say about the wars? Can I go to the wars
Speaker 7: and have my own opinions or do I have to
Speaker 7: have the opinions?
Speaker 5: Not if you want to go back.
Speaker 7: That's right that it's very interesting this war tourism. How
Speaker 7: do I get all this war tourism. I'd like to
Speaker 7: go to the Ukraine.
Speaker 5: I want to go. I want to go.
Speaker 7: I want to go to all this war tourists.
Speaker 1: Do you have any awards that they can melt down
Speaker 1: and make bullets out of?
Speaker 7: Joe, think about this. Do I seem like a guy
Speaker 7: that has a lot of awards.
Speaker 5: Didn't you get one of those.
Speaker 1: YouTube plaques when you hit a hundred thousand?
Speaker 5: I don't even know where they send it. I don't
Speaker 5: know where.
Speaker 7: I don't know where they're sending those YouTube plaques those.
Speaker 7: But I like this idea give your tourism. I like
Speaker 7: the idea of going to a war and then coming
Speaker 7: back having having a very black and white views. I
Speaker 7: been there, I get it, and I know and and interesting.
Speaker 1: Okay, I like that. I like that.
Speaker 5: I love that you feel better than the other people.
Speaker 7: Well, of course there's a lot of people. It gets
Speaker 7: very murky. Most people I know that have been to
Speaker 7: war have a very murky.
Speaker 5: Complex view of things.
Speaker 7: But it is good to go to a war and
Speaker 7: then come back and be as sure as you were
Speaker 7: before you came. You don't have to go for very long.
Speaker 5: No, you go for an hour, a couple hours.
Speaker 7: It's a lunch.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's lunch.
Speaker 1: On flack jacket that says press. That's rough there, Ryan
Speaker 1: for Douglas.
Speaker 3: If for anybody who doesn't get the photo reference, let's
Speaker 3: put that one on the screen. Our producer Griffin's been
Speaker 3: dying to show everybody this photo for quite some time now.
Speaker 3: This is the chair where sinwar what was killed by
Speaker 3: and Israeli drone And as you could see, Douglas there
Speaker 3: on an IDF sponsored tour with his big press flack jacket,
Speaker 3: not really in danger because again he's on a you
Speaker 3: know you IDF military sponsored thing. TI Tim actually made
Speaker 3: the best point, and that's something that I immediately texted
Speaker 3: Dave about is I was like, dude, he keeps saying,
Speaker 3: you've never been there. The only reason he gets to
Speaker 3: go is because he's a pro war propagandist, and so
Speaker 3: the government is allowing him to go. If you or
Speaker 3: I tried to set foot in the crossings, we're done,
Speaker 3: all right, We're done. I don't even know if they'll
Speaker 3: let us in the country, all right, And having been
Speaker 3: to Israel before before I was ever made any public statement,
Speaker 3: Holy shit, I have never been put through the ringer
Speaker 3: any other country in the world.
Speaker 1: Why are you here? What are you doing?
Speaker 3: What is your dad in Muslim? You know it's wild
Speaker 3: and that's just a normal visitor to the country that's
Speaker 3: not made up those actual questions.
Speaker 1: So nowadays, oh.
Speaker 3: Man, Yeah, if you and I try to set even
Speaker 3: one hundred miles foot in Gaza, not gonna happen.
Speaker 4: A lot of people who've been come back with a
Speaker 4: far worse impression of the situation on the ground than
Speaker 4: they have been than they had before.
Speaker 5: But yeah, it was.
Speaker 4: It was quite strange to hear Murray say it, because
Speaker 4: anybody who's casually followed the conflict knows that Israel has
Speaker 4: banned Western journalists from getting into Gaza.
Speaker 5: So then how on earth did he sneak in?
Speaker 6: Oh?
Speaker 4: It turns out the IDF, you know, put him in
Speaker 4: their own little flat jacket and drove him to this
Speaker 4: scene for this this photo.
Speaker 1: Op.
Speaker 4: I don't think you should be able to wear a
Speaker 4: press vest in that circumstance. In what way are you
Speaker 4: press you're not You're not You're just completely.
Speaker 1: You're just play acting. It's you know, Tim made a
Speaker 1: funny joke about Ukraine.
Speaker 3: I mean it's the same thing, like what you think
Speaker 3: you are getting anywhere close to these really to the
Speaker 3: Ukrainian front line.
Speaker 1: And obviously the same thing about Russia.
Speaker 3: You know, if Russia was like, hey, you want to
Speaker 3: come in to it, it's like, no, I'm not being
Speaker 3: used by you, you know, to show me what you
Speaker 3: want in your little dog and pony show. And this
Speaker 3: is the same for anybody. You know, as you and
Speaker 3: I know covering the Pentagon beat, you only get to
Speaker 3: see what you want, what they want you to see.
Speaker 3: You get to ride around with the secretary. Yeah, that
Speaker 3: make you feel important in a humvy or whatever, but
Speaker 3: you're never going off the base. You don't get to
Speaker 3: go in bed with troops. Actually, one of the interesting
Speaker 3: things is that in the early days of the war,
Speaker 3: during I Rock in Afghanistan, they actually did let journalists
Speaker 3: do that, and they started to pull back those you know,
Speaker 3: so that you don't have Remember that documentary Ristreppo, I
Speaker 3: mean that changed a lot of people's minds, where that
Speaker 3: book generation kill having the guy literally in the front
Speaker 3: Humby and people were like, oh, this is a clusterfuck.
Speaker 3: I can't believe that this is what's happening. They shrank
Speaker 3: that stuff way down. So and it's our military, which
Speaker 3: is relatively relatively more open. Now we're talking about the
Speaker 3: Israelian military, Ukrainian and other things. So that was the
Speaker 3: preposterous nature of his argument. But there's also like a
Speaker 3: personal thing happening there where Douglas he opened his segment
Speaker 3: with Joe by being openly antagonistic, being like concern trolling
Speaker 3: him over not having enough people.
Speaker 1: Came to the expert there.
Speaker 4: The specific moment that he was challenging Dave Smith about
Speaker 4: have you been there? Was about when Dave Smith said
Speaker 4: they're not letting in humanitarian aid. Yes, and he's and
Speaker 4: he said, well, have you been been to the crossings?
Speaker 4: And what's so insane about that is that Israel has
Speaker 4: announced that since March second. I don't know when he
Speaker 4: did his little tourist trip there, but Israel announced on
Speaker 4: March second that they're not letting in aid. They said
Speaker 4: it publicly. They have repeated that many times since then.
Speaker 4: They have publicly said they're not letting in aid in
Speaker 4: order to put pressure on the Palestinians through starvation to
Speaker 4: get them to reach a different deal than the ceasefire
Speaker 4: deal they've reached before. All you need is you don't
Speaker 4: even need a subscription to new papers. You can just
Speaker 4: read the free versions and you can read these quotes
Speaker 4: from it. You don't need to go to the crossing.
Speaker 4: In fact, if you go on a an Israeli sponsored
Speaker 4: trip to a crossing and you observe anything different than
Speaker 4: what they are saying they're doing, then you are being
Speaker 4: lied to separately. The idea that you could just stand
Speaker 4: at a crossing and look at some trucks and that
Speaker 4: gives you any indication of what the humanitarian condition is
Speaker 4: inside of Gaza is also preposterous. The idea that you
Speaker 4: could sit in Sinwar's chair and know what the prices
Speaker 4: of eggplants and tomatoes are at the market is absurd.
Speaker 4: The way you find that out is you talk to
Speaker 4: Palestinians who go to the markets. There are more than
Speaker 4: a million of them. You can talk to them. So
Speaker 4: reporting can be done without going inside there. Reporting can
Speaker 4: be done by Palestinian journalists who are inside Gaza. But
Speaker 4: the notion that you have to be there in order
Speaker 4: to see that is undermined by the fact that what
Speaker 4: he was saying that Aid was getting in was a lie.
Speaker 5: He was wrong.
Speaker 4: So yes, he's been there, but he's either a liar
Speaker 4: or an idiot, exactly right.
Speaker 3: And yet him and Bill Maher had to further concern
Speaker 3: troll together on Bill Maher's show, Let's take a listen.
Speaker 6: You were on Joe Rogan a couple of days ago,
Speaker 6: a week ago, something like that. I got a lot
Speaker 6: of press, and I'm glad you said what you said,
Speaker 6: which is I mean, I mean, I like Joe, but
Speaker 6: he has on people who entertain these crazy conspiracy theories
Speaker 6: and doesn't really push back on them. It's okay to
Speaker 6: have I mean, I'm a free speech absolutist pretty much,
Speaker 6: but there seems to be no pushback on this.
Speaker 5: The reason I did this pushback, I mean, you just
Speaker 5: have to. I mean, you just have to. In my view,
Speaker 5: it's basic social hygiene.
Speaker 8: If you've got somebody who's coming along who pretends to
Speaker 8: be a historian, who then can always do the thing
Speaker 8: of saying, oh, I actually don't call myself a historian,
Speaker 8: it's just other people I allowed to call me a historian.
Speaker 8: I'm not a car mechanic, but if I kept on
Speaker 8: being introduced as a car mechanic, I would say, oh no,
Speaker 8: you got the wrong guy. So they don't mind it.
Speaker 8: They don't mind it. They have this slipout. These people
Speaker 8: that are trying to call out on Joe's show, they
Speaker 8: are doing things like Hitler wasn't that much of an
Speaker 8: anti semi main problem in the twentieth century was Winston Churchill.
Speaker 8: Winston Churchill was the warmonger. Adolf Hitler wanted peace, and
Speaker 8: I just look, it's a matter of social hygiene. Don't
Speaker 8: feed me this shit. What they're watering and what's going
Speaker 8: to come up underneath them are going to be people
Speaker 8: who believe this Rod and a lot of people you
Speaker 8: can clearly see on the right at the moment, are
Speaker 8: very happy if you can denigrate the tradition of Winston
Speaker 8: Churchill and pretend that Adolf Hitler wasn't so bad, because
Speaker 8: then you can do things like Christian nationalism. You can
Speaker 8: do really really tough nationalist stuff.
Speaker 6: They basically by Kane album.
Speaker 5: That's the lost stage.
Speaker 3: So straw maning, he's like equating Dave Smith, Darryl Cooper
Speaker 3: and Ian Carroll all in one. As he showed on
Speaker 3: the show, he did not even really know that much
Speaker 3: about Cooper and nor Ian Carroll whenever he was trying
Speaker 3: to denigrate them. But you know, let's just come back
Speaker 3: to the final point about having been there and about gatekeeping.
Speaker 3: This is a guy who, again when he was in
Speaker 3: is what mid twenties wrote neo conservatism and why we
Speaker 3: need it in six when the Iraq War was a disaster,
Speaker 3: has since written books about migration, about wokeness, and now
Speaker 3: about whatever. His latest in Defense of the West book
Speaker 3: is he is just as unqualified and as lack of
Speaker 3: an expert as any of those individuals, and to be honest,
Speaker 3: actually less informed obviously from you know, his public comments
Speaker 3: that are all on the subject.
Speaker 1: They're so reductive.
Speaker 3: And then finally, you know, for these two free speech
Speaker 3: non gatekeepers and all those people bullshit, you're obvious you're
Speaker 3: indicating right there for gatekeeping. And you know, when's the
Speaker 3: last time anybody interesting was on Bill marshow be serious, Like,
Speaker 3: let's be honest.
Speaker 4: And on the point of him not being informed, he's
Speaker 4: really playing weird games with this line where he was
Speaker 4: saying that people quote unquote downplay or Hitler's anti semitism.
Speaker 4: So apparently, like what he complained about on Rowan, He's like.
Speaker 1: You were going to get into that, we can, but yeah,
Speaker 1: we should just do.
Speaker 5: A second because like what he's saying.
Speaker 4: So Darryl Cooper and others have said that at various
Speaker 4: times throughout Hitler's rise to power, he downplayed his own
Speaker 4: anti semitism and his true designs for the Jewish people
Speaker 4: in Germany and throughout Europe because those views were unpopular
Speaker 4: with the German public and abroad in particular abroad, and
Speaker 4: he had to smuggle those views in and then once
Speaker 4: he got power, then he carried then he and people say, well,
Speaker 4: he wrote my comp Yes. So it feels like this
Speaker 4: shouldn't have to be explained to people, but apparently apparently
Speaker 4: it does. Politicians often will say something earlier in their
Speaker 4: career that is the truth, and then as they rise
Speaker 4: through power, they downplay that correct say, I don't really
Speaker 4: believe that. You know, I'm not for not for one
Speaker 4: hundred and fifty percent tariffs or not for pure free
Speaker 4: trade and whatever is that in your interest in the
Speaker 4: political moment, you say that he's not saying that Hitler
Speaker 4: was not a thorough anti semi through and through with
Speaker 4: designs on a genocide, a holocaust.
Speaker 5: That's not what he's saying.
Speaker 1: Let me just lay this out for people. Chapter one.
Speaker 3: I was doing a rereading chapter one, Volume two Ian
Speaker 3: Kershaw's Hitler nineteen thirty six to nineteen forty.
Speaker 1: Five, called Nemesis.
Speaker 3: There's a citation chapter one about the nineteen thirty six
Speaker 3: Berlin which year was the Olympics, I think it was six, Yeah,
Speaker 3: nineteen thirty six Earlian Olympics. They took down all the
Speaker 3: anti Semitic signs specifically to do what to make sure
Speaker 3: to downplay the antizis. So this is a matter of empirical.
Speaker 5: Fact because they thought it was embarrassing.
Speaker 3: This is a matter of fact fact that they and
Speaker 3: they even admitted it in documents that her Kershaw is
Speaker 3: able to review.
Speaker 1: And by the way, Kershaw is about as like. Kershaw
Speaker 1: is not a quote unquote objective biographer. He hates it.
Speaker 1: So he hates and he makes it very quick.
Speaker 3: And you know what's funny is he actually does the
Speaker 3: same thing in his introduction of his book that Daryl does,
Speaker 3: where he goes I am I detest Hitler.
Speaker 1: I find him disgusting.
Speaker 3: However, I want to view with an objective, as a
Speaker 3: lens as possible as to how this person is ideology
Speaker 3: was able to rise in Germany, and with that we
Speaker 3: must have some empathy and to try and to understand
Speaker 3: from which this arose so that it may never happen again.
Speaker 4: Right, And if you listen to Douglas Murray, ye, then
Speaker 4: your view of Hitler is that he always was from
Speaker 4: his chest expressing his full anti Semitic viewpoint, and he
Speaker 4: came to power anyway. The reason that Douglas Murray's view
Speaker 4: is dangerous is because it is wrong, and because it
Speaker 4: would lead you then to say, Okay, a future Hitler
Speaker 4: who we're going to try to prevent from coming to
Speaker 4: power is only someone who was always screaming their anti
Speaker 4: semitism from the rooftops, and that if they downplay it
Speaker 4: at any point, that's not Hitler, and so we can
Speaker 4: then it's okay, Okay, they've toned down some of their rhetoric,
Speaker 4: so let's give them a second chance. What the actual
Speaker 4: reading of the actual Hitler is is that you have
Speaker 4: to figure out what they're going to do on your own,
Speaker 4: not just from their own rhetoric. Because if you allow
Speaker 4: their rhetoric to control what you think of them, they're
Speaker 4: just going to fool you, like Hitler fooled the German public.
Speaker 4: So Murray's interpretation, which is a historical and illiterate, is
Speaker 4: actually the dangerous one because it could cause people to
Speaker 4: then miss the next person totally.
Speaker 5: Yeah. I mean yeah, I could go.
Speaker 3: On this forever, but it's just ridiculous to me that
Speaker 3: somebody who is supposedly an expert, I mean, this is
Speaker 3: you know, what makes them It's funny. I'm talking about
Speaker 3: this book as if someone No, I'm reading.
Speaker 1: The that's the most possible.
Speaker 5: That's the historical that is, like.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's like reading Band of Brothers for the first
Speaker 3: time about World War Two.
Speaker 1: Okay, that's it.
Speaker 3: That's the research historiography that it takes to be able
Speaker 3: to cite something like this, and he's not even aware
Speaker 3: of a basic reference. Okay, all right, Finally, let's talk
Speaker 3: about the Pope, Pope Francis. We'd said at the beginning
Speaker 3: with the Pope sadly passed away this morning, eighty eight
Speaker 3: years old. Just yesterday met with Senator jd Vance. I
Speaker 3: believe we have a sorry for Vice President JD.
Speaker 1: Vance.
Speaker 3: A matter of habit, we've got the Vice President, who
Speaker 3: himself is a practicing Catholic, meeting with the Pope. Vance
Speaker 3: put out a statement today about his passing. Let's see
Speaker 3: what he said. He said, I just learned the passing
Speaker 3: of Francis. My heart goes out to the millions of
Speaker 3: Christians all of the world who loved him. I was
Speaker 3: happy to see him yesterday, who he was obviously very ill.
Speaker 3: I'll always remember him from the below homily he gave
Speaker 3: in the early age of the early days of COVID.
Speaker 1: It was really quite beautiful. May God rest his soul. So,
Speaker 1: you know, unfortunate timing. Therefore, the Vice president, I think
Speaker 1: we can say.
Speaker 4: That, well, there were reports that the Pope had snubbed
Speaker 4: him and said, well, now it's obviously he was just
Speaker 4: like sent his deputy out to give him a lecture
Speaker 4: about morality and particularly in the context of the creeping
Speaker 4: authoritarianism and the treatment of migrants. And yeah, so I
Speaker 4: think you can forgive the Pope for not making the
Speaker 4: broader we for our meeting. You know, this was a
Speaker 4: pope who I'm sure from the right people are not
Speaker 4: a big fan of. You know, he came in at
Speaker 4: the beginning of the kind of greater Wokening, the global
Speaker 4: great Awokening did and one of the so he you know,
Speaker 4: he he had a lot of left wing instincts well
Speaker 4: back like that for the you know, support for the poor,
Speaker 4: support for migrants. What really ticks people off is when
Speaker 4: he came in and said nice things about gaining lesbian people,
Speaker 4: and towards the end allowed the Catholic Church to even
Speaker 4: bless you know, gay marriages.
Speaker 1: Did he? I forget exactly. It's there's always controversy.
Speaker 4: And then uh loosened the loosened the rules for divorced Catholics.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean there were there's a huge debate inside
Speaker 3: of the Catholic By the way, I know non Catholic
Speaker 3: I'm friends with some and they me doing some secondhand,
Speaker 3: you know, explanations.
Speaker 1: So if I get this wrong, I'm sorry.
Speaker 3: But I know that there are a lot of fights
Speaker 3: within Catholicism and this we we were talking earlier about
Speaker 3: the show The Young Pope, and there's like a big
Speaker 3: debate about modernization of Catholicism versus like returning to some
Speaker 3: sort of like Latin service and you know, Vatican two
Speaker 3: and some of the previous edicts that was meant to
Speaker 3: modernize the church and make it more accessible to millions
Speaker 3: of people, like quote unquote meeting people where they are
Speaker 3: as opposed to like sticking to the dogma and to
Speaker 3: the long held teachings and the structure. Now, I do
Speaker 3: think that the conservatives have been validated in that Catholicism
Speaker 3: remains down. You know, across the world, the number of
Speaker 3: practicing Catholics continues to decline. So the idea of like
Speaker 3: meeting people where they're at and being more socially transformed
Speaker 3: or whatever has not really worked.
Speaker 1: Out for them.
Speaker 5: Maybe the decline would be worse.
Speaker 3: It could be worse. It's unfalsifiable. But what I'm saying
Speaker 3: is like, for a lot of the more conservative elopments
Speaker 3: in the church, their belief is that their belief is
Speaker 3: that by trying to modernize, you've both betrayed like the
Speaker 3: base of like practicing conservative Catholicism, while also not even
Speaker 3: preserving what you meant to, which is like the throngs
Speaker 3: of people coming into the church, and also making sure
Speaker 3: that you have more people who are practitioners. Again, this
Speaker 3: is just my like outside analysis, but I do know
Speaker 3: it generally reflects like big fights within it and about
Speaker 3: who gets blessed or who gets cardinalship or whatever. And
Speaker 3: so within that that is the dynamic heading into what
Speaker 3: will inevitably be the next papal conclave and how they
Speaker 3: then respond to kind of the way that this pope
Speaker 3: decided to both guide the church and make himself obviously
Speaker 3: the face you know, as the Holy Father. And so
Speaker 3: what the policy is that flows from that is actually
Speaker 3: pretty interesting because it's also a direction that a lot
Speaker 3: of Christian churches in America are grappling with. Right, You've
Speaker 3: got Methodist Church. I mean, this is a huge schism
Speaker 3: about like BLM and pro gay friendly churches, and some
Speaker 3: people are like this is auretical right, and so there's
Speaker 3: like big fights and splits within the same argument I'm
Speaker 3: talking to you about right now, is like liberalization has
Speaker 3: not increased a more Christian country or any of that.
Speaker 1: There's fight.
Speaker 3: I mean, obviously it's Protestantism, so they can actually fight
Speaker 3: about the Word of Jesus. But it is interesting, you know,
Speaker 3: we'll see, I'm curious see which direction they go into.
Speaker 4: And I have a ton of Catholic family members, cousins
Speaker 4: really mostly like Oklahoma, but they've spread out, spread out
Speaker 4: from Oklahoma. Uncle who moved to Oklahoma to be in
Speaker 4: the Air Force converted and and so the Grim, the
Speaker 4: Grim family out in Oklahoma now. And my my, my
Speaker 4: sense of it is that there's more room room to
Speaker 4: move in a liberal direction because the more conservative Catholics
Speaker 4: they're kind of dug in, like like they're going either way.
Speaker 4: They're gonna grumble about it, but but they're they're sticking
Speaker 4: with it.
Speaker 5: And while we're doing it.
Speaker 4: One of my cousins, Christy, her boyfriend now Garrett, is
Speaker 4: a huge fan of the show Shadow. He like, it
Speaker 4: didn't even believe, No, what that's your cousin because her
Speaker 4: last name is not Grim.
Speaker 1: That's cool.
Speaker 5: It used to be.
Speaker 4: I know, it actually didn't used to be so anyway
Speaker 4: out the Garrett.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we love you guys.
Speaker 5: Okay, Oh one other, one other thing.
Speaker 4: The reason I'm here today and not and Crystal will
Speaker 4: be in on Wednesday is that my wife is getting
Speaker 4: surgery tomorrow. So I just wanted to say, you know,
Speaker 4: thank you uh to everybody for all the warm wishes,
Speaker 4: the prayers. Everything is as we've as we've gone through this.
Speaker 4: So her chemo is now all done. The battle is
Speaker 4: going well. Uh, we'll find out more after after the surgery.
Speaker 4: Then there'll be a little bit of radiation. And you know,
Speaker 4: the thing I've learned is like it's obvious, but this
Speaker 4: stuff is hell. And there's a lot of people who
Speaker 4: are going through this as we speak, or have have
Speaker 4: gone through it, and you know, we're we're with you.
Speaker 4: There are setbacks, there's uh, but you know there's there
Speaker 4: are triumphs and you know.
Speaker 5: It's it's helpful to have that that the community and
Speaker 5: so really appreciate it.
Speaker 1: Dude.
Speaker 3: Everybody is behind you, the team, the audience. It's inspirational,
Speaker 3: your data or mother for fighting cancer.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna tear up even talking about it.
Speaker 3: Having a kid, it's like even thinking about what you
Speaker 3: guys have to go through, it's it's crazy.
Speaker 1: So you're you're an inspiration to me and slush, So
Speaker 1: thank you, man.
Speaker 5: I'm looking forward to welcoming you into the Land of
Speaker 5: the Father.
Speaker 1: Yes, I'm excited to join. All right, We'll see you
Speaker 1: guys later.