The spirit of this revolution is not going away.
This is the Ron Paul Liberty Report with Ron Paul, Daniel McAdams, and Chris Rossini.
We are all ambassadors of the Ron Paul Doctrine, and it's a symbol just to tell the truth.
An idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government.
Everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report. With us today we have Daniel
McAdams, our co-host. Daniel, good to see you this morning.
Good morning Dr. Paul. How are you this morning?
Doing well, doing well. Good, good.
So let's talk about what's in the news. I think there was a speech that a few people watched,
and I don't know how many people were pleased with it, but I guess the amount of people were
really excited. But there were a lot of reports and a lot of analysis about the speech, and
it's pretty much a mixed bag. The loyalists are still loyal, but there's a lot of other people
now asking questions about exactly how we got into this war and how are we going to get out
of this war, and there's a lot of concern. Soon it's going to cost some money on us,
you know, it's into the billions, but who knows if they stay there much longer it'll
be $2 billion before we know it. But I think the people are watching it closely,
but I watched the speech and I wasn't too impressed. I didn't hear a whole lot of
saying, well, at least Mays were going in the right direction. I thought it was just,
this may be too strong, a lot of gibberish, you know, just gabbing away saying things.
I didn't learn anything. I didn't know what they're going to do, but it was the same old thing,
and it was a rehash. A lot of rehash, I thought, we've heard this story once before,
but others have been critical of the speech because it doesn't lay out anything. They show
that, oh, when is this likely to end? I looked at the markets pretty closely, and the markets
were all over the place, but I think some of the markets were telling us, this whole mess is not
going to go away quickly because the oil prices, it looks like they're going up and most people
aren't overly optimistic about oil going down in price again. And I think this is absolutely insane
that, you know, a few months ago, oil, although high, was not sky high, because I remember it's
not that long ago, it was $70 a barrel, and now it just keeps going up, and that's a reflection.
You know, gold is up sharply, down sharply. I don't know exactly what's meaning there because
we still have a debt, so I predict that's a short-lived thing, and I didn't look exactly what
the dollar did today, but I don't know why that speech would say, oh, this is good for
the dollar, it's still kingpin. So we'll see, and one thing I do notice that I think is significant
is the instability, you know, up and down, and catching up with it, and your stock markets,
you know. I think it'd be really pretty tough if you were an investor that had to respond
on a daily basis, buy, sell, buy, sell, because, you know, there's a lot of emotion in markets,
the people who are trying to make a living and make a living for other people,
they have to interpret all this, but it would be a heck of a thing to make a major decision
on last night's speech and say, well, looks like they're scumming. A week from now,
everything is going to be all right, and everything is going to go back to normal. I don't think that's
the case. Yeah, I mean, there was a lot of expectation. Nobody knew what he was going to say.
Was he going to say, hey, the hostilities are over, we've achieved our goals, they're obliterated,
we're going home, or was he going to say the troops on the ground have started their
invasion? The fact is, he said neither, and in fact, I don't remember, I was reading a lot
this morning as you can guess, but someone had a good quip. It looked like someone took,
what this person said, it looked like they took all of his true social posts about the war,
fed it into AI, and said, spit me out a speech for 20 minutes, you know, and that's kind of what
it was, and I think that pretty much sums it up. Now, our friend Larry Johnson kind of said the
same thing. He had a pretty strong reaction to it on his Sonar 21 blog. He called it
Donald Trump's Attled Speech on Iran. I go to that next one. Here's what Johnson said,
and I think it makes sense. He said, wow, that was awful. Was Trump sedated? His monotone
delusional delivery reminded me of the character Dustin Hoffman played in Rain Man. Trump plowed
no new territory. Instead, he provided a Reader's Digest summary of his recent
truth social posts, i.e. Iran is defeated, the Iranian Navy and Air Force were destroyed,
victory is ours, but we're going to bomb the hell out of them for the next three weeks,
is essentially what is what Johnson's take on it. So I go to the next one, though. He didn't
back down from his previous threats to attack Iran's power grid, and this is important. If he
does that, if he does that along with Israel, Iran will turn off the lights in Israel,
Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and Kuwait. Iran's ability to do this is a direct
consequence of the depletion of U.S. air defense systems, i.e. the Patriot missile batteries and
the FAD. Iran will also retain its chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz, even if the U.S. decides
to put troops on Karg Island or some other piece of Iranian territory. So what Larry
John is saying here, I think, is essentially that Iran has escalation dominance. Trump can
threaten all sorts of things. He can try to do all sorts of things, but nothing is going to get
Hormuz out of Iranian hands now, and nothing is going to get better if they do start bombing
this critical infrastructure because the other countries in the region will lose
their electricity, their drinkable water, and all sorts of things.
I see this whole episode as preventable because it was created by the United
States. I don't know how people could argue against that. You go a little bit before summer,
nobody was on pins and needles that they were on the verge of having a nuclear weapon.
Only BB. Only Netanyahu. He's been saying it for 30 years.
Co-presidents, he had a word to say about that. So it was preventable, but here they go.
How did they scare the people into? How did they even get started? Because Congress supported
it. They send them money. They send them the bombs. They wouldn't even vote against
any of this thing. So they said, well, we have to stop the nuclear bomb being built.
And I thought that was stopped in 2003 or 2004, but we're still after the bomb makers.
So that was a big deal. So that was some initial bombing. And that was the real start of all this
current things going on. And there's still no proof that they were on the verge of a nuclear
weapon. And the information that you can rely on, they said, yes, there was no operation like that.
But the other tool they use is terrorism. I get so hard of it. I think the Iranians are a long
way off from perfection and on civil liberties and all these things. But they're not exactly the
monsters portrayed in the media. I mean, they must have murdered just because of street crimes,
10,000 people last night, that kind of thing. It's just to build up the thing. The worst,
I bet if you did a poll in the United States, who's the worst country in the world that commits
terrorism? I think terrorism would get accused of doing this, but I think there's more and more
people are starting to be more analytical because there's a few people now that are coming out that
have had the experience in the military and even in the administration that are getting
disgusted with this. And they're starting to see it the way we're seeing it. This was
unnecessary. It's not based on sound policy or sound information that they have. So on and on.
That's what's disgusting about it. It was preventable. Oh, they were protecting our national
security. No, we're more vulnerable than ever. Oh, it's good for our economy. Our economy
is in shambles because of deficits run up. They just throw that money around and they hardly
even say it's sound. Oh, yeah, we'll watch that. We have to take care of that. But they never
address the subject. Where do they get the money? Where do they get the authority?
We blame a lot of people, but I never like to do this. But the people have a responsibility,
why do they send these guys into Washington to spend them? If you do, what happens? You become
the evil deodorant. If you actually stand up for what is right. And this is the part that
disgusts me and especially since I truly believe this whole episode of the last six months or
plus more, the harm done was preventable. And yet we on and on, we continue with it.
I don't think that some people could hear that in a speech last night that we were
changing tune, but I'll believe it when I see it. The thing is, you don't have to be on Team Iran
to note the hypocrisy of the U.S. accusing Iran of being the chief sponsor of terrorism.
We have a leader in Syria who was literally the head of al-Qaida in Syria, and he's welcome
in the White House. This is a guy whose hands cut off heads. This is terrorism. He's welcome
in the White House. And then you had JD Vance playing the role of the neocons during the
run up to the Iraq war when he said, well, Iran could get a nuclear weapon and strap it
to its vest and kill a lot of people. A, it's impossible. That's not how nuclear weapons work.
You should know that. You'd think if you don't have to be a nuclear scientist to know,
you don't strap it on and pull the cord like in a wildly coyote. It doesn't work that way. But
what he was trying to do is exactly what Condoleezza Rice did. We don't want a smoking gun to
be a mushroom cloud. And it was such a low level. But this is the hypocrisy of the whole
thing. But on the whole idea of them two weeks away from a bomb or almost ready to have a bomb.
So on the one side of that equation, you have Iran that says we're not building one.
There's a fatwa against it. You have IAEA who up until last June were inspecting Iran regularly
and said there's no suggestion that they're building a bomb. There's our own CIA from 2003
saying we have no evidence that they're reconstituting their nuclear weapons program.
And you have the NDI under Tulsi Gabbard saying we have no evidence that the Iranians are building
a bomb. So all of these institutions say no. And on the other side of the ledger,
you have Bibi Netanyahu, a guy who's been lying for 30 years about Iran being on the verge of it.
And so what does President Trump do? Unfortunately, instead of listening to all these institutions,
they don't listen to Iran. That's fine. But listen to all the other ones.
Instead of that, he lets Bibi Netanyahu whisper in his ear and boom,
we're in a disastrous war that's only going to get worse. The effects on the global economy
haven't even started yet. They haven't manifested yet. But they will. It'll be like in COVID
on steroids, I think, when it comes to that. Yes. But we did see a statistic today at a poll
that I think is encouraging because the assumption is that all fundamentalist
Christians support Zionism and all this nonsense as well as that if you're Jewish,
you have to support this as well. But I find out that this is a misconception. I don't know
whether it's shifting. I think it is shifting. At least they haven't even been doing the polls
before. But there's a poll analysis. Most Americans Jews now strongly oppose war on Iran.
But the assumption is, oh, no, Netanyahu speaks for them. My suggestion when we were talking about
Netanyahu, I said, well, what could we do about this? Well, we have a responsibility for our own
action. But I think prominent American Jews in this country, since Netanyahu comes to this
country all the time, he ought to. But they don't like the war. Yeah, I think they should have dinner
for them. Sit down and have dinner and say, well, you know, don't take us for granted. You know,
we also have a brain and we don't have to do this. Yes. But the president invites me to the
White House and I get to go to the House floor and give speeches almost any time I want.
So this somebody has to talk to. But that that's just daydreaming. Yeah, obviously.
No, he doesn't want to talk to those types. Now, I do have those that clip. I just wanted
to show a couple of things before just from Trump's speech because I do have that poll.
But I just real quickly go through a couple of things because I think it's important
from his speech, President Trump said, if you put that next one up,
we are going to bring them back to the stone ages where they belong.
That's what he said in the speech. Now, that is a horrible thing to say.
He didn't say we're going to take down their military or we're going to defeat the government.
We are going to bring them, the Iranian people, back to the stone age where they belong.
And Glenn Deeson, you were on his show a couple of weeks ago, I think, Dr. Paul,
professor out of Norway, he pointed out, keep in mind that the initial justification for the war
was to help Iranians, right? It goes from we got to help you guys get on the street,
we're going to help you to now we're going to take you back to the stone ages where you belong.
Now skip the next one and go to the bridge one. This is what happened today,
Dr. Paul, a major bridge in Iran. Civilian infrastructure has been blown up by the
U.S. Israeli coalition. And the Iranian American scholar and intellectual Sina Tusi,
he made a good point if you go to the next one. He said,
this is what it looks like when a war isn't going to plan. Unable to stop Iran's
missiles and drone fire, the U.S. is escalating by bombing more civilian infrastructure,
like a major bridge linking Tehran to Karay that millions rely on.
So much for the ludicrous claim that anything about this war was to help the Iranian people.
This is a brutal campaign to break a country of over 90 million people.
All while Hormuz remains closed, global economic costs mount,
and Iran continues striking targets across the region.
That's something that we don't see often, but they continue. They launched,
I think, 100 missiles yesterday. There's no strategy here, just desperation.
Trump is escalating toward more barbaric attacks and rhetoric to mask a war that is not going his
way. And if you go to the next one, Dr. Paul, I said, I know this is going to hit you.
Personally, this is the Pasteur Institute in Iran. It is not a military
by any stretch of the imagination. Heartbreaking, cruel, and despicable,
and utterly outrageous. The American Israeli aggressors have attacked the Pasteur Institute
of Iran, the oldest and most prestigious research and public health center in Iran,
and the entire Middle East founded in 1920 through an agreement between the Pasteur
Institute of Paris and the Iranian government. This is not merely another war crime committed
as part of an illegal war. It's a barbaric assault on basic human core values. Remember
how shocked we were, Dr. Paul, when the Israelis started blowing up hospitals in Gaza?
This is exactly what we're doing with the Israelis over here in Iran, and it's despicable.
But no, I'm sorry, I just wanted to take a little detour, but go over to that. This is
what you were saying. This is not a responsible straight craft. Go to the next one, wrote this
up. In this space, as you say, Dr. Paul, it may surprise some people who view, as you said,
American Jews as a monolith, but in fact, they're not. Most American Jews oppose the war
on Iran according to a new poll done by J Street, which is a more left-leaning Zionist group.
Go to the next one. A new J Street poll finds that 60 percent of American Jews oppose the U.S.
war on Iran. They also found that 77 percent of the respondents do not believe that Trump
has a clear plan and a mission for the war. And then two-thirds agreed that concerns about Iran's
nuclear program were best solved through diplomacy and sanctions. So American Jews, again, as you
said, Dr. Paul, they're not a monolith. You know, interesting because of the argument
who controls our media. Yet the media is not exactly favorable to this group of the Jews that are
telling us the truth. But it's good. People will become aware of this and things will change
because it's inevitable that you cannot print money forever and tell everybody everybody's
going to get rich. And all of a sudden, the payment has come due. So it's the bankruptcy that
is going to limit all this nonsense. And what people have to realize, there's a lot of people
hurting. And even though those people that were hurting, if they listened to that speech last
night, I wonder if they're hurting less. You know, the ones who are financially squeezed
on all this because the lower half of the population, they're the ones who have to pay
all the bills and the inflation problems they have to help. So if the American people would
realize that they have to realize it to have a shift in attitude, and that is it's the American
dollar. You look at all the bombing and what we've done in Gaza, it would not have happened
without the American people. Totally complacent. Go ahead, do it or we don't do it and we don't
want to be anti-Semitic and, you know, all this they listened to. And they should ask the question,
where does the money come from? How do they manage to do this? And who gives them the authority
to do it? Is there a moral authority? Is there a constitutional authority? They don't even talk
about it, you know. And they've made it de facto now that if the Congress votes for the money,
that's all you need. You don't need to debate the bill, you know, whether or not we should
go to war or not. And that has to become a reality. And then the people will start
setting up. They have to connect that. So right now the people are very much aware
of inflation. That is what they call inflation. Prices are going up for various reasons.
But they have to realize it's the dollar going down in value and it's building all these bombs
that they have and killing people. And I just imagine now that how many civilians
in the last 10 years where we've done some bombing never even got counted, you know,
suffered from this, whether it's on Gaza or around or whatever. So it to me boils down to a
moral principle. And the people have to share in that because they tolerate and I have to admit
it is messy because they've been indoctrinated. And you know, they're intimidated. And some
of this stuff is new. Nobody told them that they can just print money like monopoly money
and people take it as money. And I think the American people are waking up and they know
there's a connection. I think it started under Ukraine and people started saying,
hey enough, what are we doing in Ukraine? And now they're doing it with
right now what we're doing. But it's a mess. It's confusing. A lot of different messages
from different people. And if you if you disagree, you know, you have to suffer the consequences
of being dishonored and called a treasonous person. And so back to my old song, people
need to understand the connection of just destroying a monetary system and trying to
maintain an empire. That's where the real problem is. Absolutely. Well, there's another
poll that's out that also shows that a group that a lot of people may assume is overwhelmingly
in favor of the war. Well, that's actually not true. Go to the next one. The National Iranian
American Council did a poll with the Zogby organization of Iranian Americans. Now you think
that the Iranian Americans, well, they probably left after 79. They probably hate the current
government in Iran. Some of them may want to shaw back. Maybe a few of them are MEK supporters.
You don't know. But nevertheless, there is this perception and I have it myself that they're
overwhelmingly in favor of this war. Well, that's not the case. Go to the next one. Now this is
the main question in the poll. What is your position regarding the U.S. initiating a war
on Iran? Now this is closer than Jewish Americans. But nevertheless, 49.3 oppose. Oppose this
initiation of the war as opposed to 48.9 who support it. So an even split almost but with
the slight edge going to those who oppose it. These are Iranian Americans who have a strong
view to a large degree about what's happening in Iran. So this is every bit as surprising
as the Jewish American vote. I think this poll. This should be a strong message for people.
Even though I would like to think of this as not always putting it into the group,
yeah, group thing, because you know, some of the people that support us are because we're
very ecumenical, you know, a lot of people come from different viewpoint. And I think, you
if you take even the libertarian movement as a whole, and you compare the intellectuals that
came to the libertarian movement versus the typical professor that went to most of the
government paid colleges, there was a complete difference. It had nothing to do with really
nothing to do with religion and Judaism. It had to do with just plain,
plain old economic study and understanding. Yeah, absolutely. Well, I'm going to close
out with one final clip. If you put on that last one, now this I'm putting it up for a reason.
I think what he says is very interesting. But I'll tell you the other reason. This is Joe
Kent, the recently resigned head of counterterrorism in the office of National Intelligence O&I.
And he has a very good point here. He said the purpose of the system is what it does.
Israel is targeting the negotiators to ensure that we can't end the war and to assure that
the Iranian leaders who come next will be more extreme, thereby ensuring that the war goes on.
The first step to ending the war must be restraining Israel. It's a very important observation. Of
course, that's what Israel did when it created and helped finance Hamas. They didn't want to
be the representative of the Palestinians. They wanted to have these
knuckle-dragging terrorists. They're doing the same thing here with Iran. And Joe Kent
recognizes this. And the reason I'm pointing this out is that Joe Kent will be with us in a couple
of weeks, Dr. Paul, at our conference down here on the Texas Gulf Coast. We are right
now rearranging the tables because we're trying to squeeze a few more seats out of the
venue. We're at about 90% capacity right now. So I do have a link in the description if you
want to get one of those final tickets if you can. And we would definitely appreciate it and look
forward to seeing you at the event. So over to you, Dr. Paul. We do have a Canadian, two Canadian
dollars as a super chat coming in from Gerald's son, and we do appreciate that support. So over
to you, Dr. Paul. Very good. You know, one point that I think we're making here maybe subtle,
but that is, why do we always have to think of people belonging to a group? If you belong to the
group, you vote a certain way. I've always been annoyed when the polling is done and when the
votes come in, they immediately say, well, how did the minorities vote? As if they're
monolithic. And maybe there was a time they were more so. But you know, that just, I
hate to see them exclude people because as a libertarian, you get invited in and you get to
be friends with people of all persuasions. That's the whole person. Purpose of liberty
is bringing people who have different viewpoints together and sorting out the differences in a
voluntary way. So I think that you have to do it and you have to realize that it's probably
a practical benefit in campaigning in this sort of thing. But I do not like the idea that you're
supposed to be because you're Jewish, that you're going to support everything that Yahoo says.
You know, that sort of thing. That's what it leads to. And that's not thinking through.
And that's why it can be simplified by unifying and narrowing and making it clear that we
defend the cause of liberty. And everybody as an individual, the founders worked real hard
to try to make that case. And at this time, I think it's under attack again, but in a positive way
because the current system is becoming unglued in a way that means there's an opportunity
to fill some of these vacuums. The vacuum that has been created by our universities
and our economic system. And yes, the opposition is to look into this. You know,
truly Marxist is playing this game that the chaos is what they want. They want to play
with their more authoritarian system of government. So if there's going to be chaos and it's coming
and there's a bit of that right now, that's why the opportunity is there for us who believe in
volunteerism and individual liberty and a system of government that if you truly are interested in
peace and prosperity, I don't know any other way you should go other than you, you know,
being organized to promote that message. I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the
Liberty report. Please come back soon. Like and subscribe to help spread the message. And until
next time, live free.