Judging Freedom - Max Blumenthal: More Lies on Syria.

Episode Date: January 9, 2025

Max Blumenthal: More Lies on Syria.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Big shout out to you for making it through the hectic holiday season. This new year, get clean, quality pregnancy nutrient support off your to-do list, including Ritual's best-selling Essential Prenatal Multivitamin, designed with 12 traceable key ingredients to support a healthy pregnancy. With big changes coming up, take the small steps now and start today with 30% off a three-month supply at ritual.com slash podcast. These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose,

treat, cure, or prevent any disease. so hi everyone judge andrew napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Thursday, January 9th, 2025. Our dear friend Max Blumenthal joins us now. Max, always a pleasure. I know it's early in the new year, but I thank you again for everything you've done for us, you and Aaron and Anya in 2024. It's a joy to become your friend and your professional collaborator and hope we can continue all of this, maybe even more so in 2025. But thank you very much for all your time. Thanks for being one of the few shows worth watching. Oh, thank you. I want to talk to you at some length about the New York Times and the word genocide and CNN and the nonsense with these fake reportings.

But before, let's get into some of the latest about Ukraine and Israel. General Kellogg has recently stated what purports to be the Trump administration position now, which is that instead of ending the war in 24 hours, Trump will actually threaten President Putin with increasing the military aid to Ukraine. Now, he can't do that theoretically without congressional approval. And morally, it's the exact opposite of what he said he would do. Should Kellogg be believed? Does he know what he's talking about? Is he making things better or worse? Well, Keith Kellogg's a terrible choice for Ukraine envoy and signals that Trump does not intend to end the war in 24 hours as he promised his base. And I think the Trump base is going to experience what a lot of progressive Democrats did after

Barack Obama was elected, a lot of buyer's remorse, especially for those who saw hope in J.D. Vance's selection, hope for peace between Ukraine and Russia. And everyone knows there's going to have to be a deal. But what are they going to do to get to the deal? General Keith Kellogg, or ex-General Keith Kellogg, in the past has suggested that NATO should actually put boots on the ground in Ukraine. At the same time, he's called for the US to be prepared to American soldiers to be prepared to wage a nuclear conflict over the Taiwan Strait, which would possibly result in the destruction of Hawaii and several other frontline Pacific islands that are territories of the US. He is a dyed in the wool warmonger. And I thought his selection as Ukraine envoy signaled that Trump was going to pursue the failed policy of trying to pry Russia and China apart as allies by making nice with Russia and incentivizing them to pull back from importing so many goods from China and having such close political ties

with Xi, welcoming them back a little bit into the global economic order. But it doesn't seem that that's even where Trump is going. He's deploying the same tactic he deployed on the Korean Peninsula before entering failed negotiations there for peace, which was the Kissinger madman theory, where Trump issues, he barks out some wild threats, hoping that the adversary or whoever's on the other side of the table will stand down and reduce their demands. And he's doing the same thing with Hamas in the Gaza Strip, where he said he's going to make all hell break loose in the Gaza Strip unless Hamas just unilaterally releases all their collateral and releases all the captives they have, all the Israeli captives. What hell could possibly break loose in Gaza that wasn't already imposed under the Biden administration? Well, I was going to ask you about that. What could Trump possibly be threatening? I have asked our military people if they can foresee American troops on the ground

fighting with the IDF. And to a person, they've said no. And they've also said the IDF doesn't want American troops on the ground. I don't know if Trump, no surprise, even knows what he's talking about. No, and you know, Mike Pence and all kinds of clowns in Washington proposed sending Delta forces in to release the captives. It would lead to a bloodbath. It would lead to a bloodbath of Palestinian civilians. As we saw every time Israeli special ops tries to go in and spring four or five captives. They killed over 250 people in a marketplace in, I think, Dera'a Bala last year. And if US troops get

involved in that, well, they could lose their lives. They could also get involved in war crimes. So they definitely don't want to do that. But I don't know what Trump thinks they can do after not just the destruction visited on Gaza, 80% of structures destroyed, over 50,000 people, probably a lot more than that dead. But all of the operations, the gruesome scorched earth operations that Netanyahu executed on Rafah or the killing of Yahya Senwar that were supposed to bring this to an end and force Hamas to the table. None of it worked. They're not going to stand down after October 7th. This was an existential war for Hamas and for the Palestinian resistance factions in Gaza. I want to get back to Ukraine, but apropos of what you're discussing, and this is the

paradox of Donald Trump, Jeff Sachs, one of our friends and collaborators, Professor Sachs at Columbia University, gave a lengthy and brilliant speech at the Cambridge Union, Cambridge University in England two or three months ago. And in a two and a half minute clip, blasted Netanyahu to the skies and referred to him as a deep, dark son of a bitch. Donald Trump posted that or references to it on Truth Social on his own Truth Social account. I'm scratching my head. I don't know what to make of it. Yeah. I mean, Donald Trump just had Miriam Adelson as his personal guest at Mar-a-Lago. It's hard to understand Trump, but my sense of him always was that he didn't like being pushed around by foreign leaders and that he realized that he was going to have to be pushed around by Netanyahu to avoid dipping into whatever's left of his own fortune to fund his campaign. So I don't I don't I don't I wouldn't assign too much meaning to it. Although it's funny. It's hilarious to watch the freak out. Yeah, within the Israel lobby.

And what Jeff Sachs was saying was not only that Netanyahu is a dark figure that he's responsible for sabotaging all the negotiations that would have led to a ceasefire and prevented where we're going, which is regional war, something I think Trump wants to avoid at the beginning of his term. But he also talked about how Obama, and this is what I think might have appealed to Trump, Obama was responsible for the disaster in Syria with the Operation Timber Sycamore, dirty war, secret funding of Al-Qaeda. I agree with you. That type of criticism of Obama would very much appeal to Trump. Back to Ukraine. This will aggravate you a little bit, but I'd like you to watch it. In one of his end-of-the-term interviews, Secretary of State Blinken spent about an hour and a half with the New York Times. Here's 90 seconds of it. Watch or listen for him saying, and we put, yes, this is

crazy, Ukraine on a path to NATO, but I'll let you listen to it. Sonia, cut number one. Where the line is drawn on the map, at this point, I don't think it's fundamentally going to change very much. The real question is, can we make sure that Ukraine is in a position to move forward strongly? That the areas that Russia controls, you feel, will have to be ceded? Ceded is not the question. The question is, the line as a practical matter in the foreseeable future is unlikely to move very much. Ukraine's claim on that territory will always be there. And the question is, will they find ways,

with the support of others, to regrain territory that's been lost? I think the critical thing now going forward is this. If there is going to be a resolution, or at least a near-term resolution, because it's unlikely that Putin will give up on his ambitions. If there's a ceasefire, then in Putin's mind, the ceasefire is likely to give him time to rest, to refit, to re-attack at some point in the future. So what's going to be critical to make sure that any ceasefire that comes about is actually enduring is to make sure that Ukraine

has the capacity going forward to deter further aggression. And that can come in many forms. It could come through NATO, and we put Ukraine on a path to NATO membership. It could come through security assurances, commitments, guarantees by different countries to make sure that Russia knows that if it reattacks, it's going to have a big problem. That, I think, is going to be critical to making sure that any deal that's negotiated actually endures and then allows Ukraine the space, the time to grow strong as a country. He's in an alternate reality, Max. Hey there. Ritual here to give a big shout out to you for making it through the hectic holiday season. The magic of those family moments? That was you. And now there's new milestones to prep for in 2025.

This new year, check clean, quality pregnancy nutrient support off your to-do list with Ritual. We've done the research to create science-backed pregnancy support like our prenatal multivitamin, natal choline, and fertility support, all designed to be taken alongside each other. But don't just take our word for it. They're also third-party tested for microbes and heavy metals and Clean Label Project certified. So whether you're trying, thinking about trying, or already there, we don't have to tell you that prioritizing yourself can be the hardest part. That's why we're helping you get started today

with 30% off a three-month supply for a limited time at ritual.com slash podcast. These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. Well, he's been there next to Biden throughout this whole process of paving the path to war with Russia. And now it's so clear why the war took place, which is that Tony Blinken wanted to NATO-ize, along with Joe Biden and the whole gang, wanted to NATO-ize Ukraine. This was Putin's principal complaint. This was what Bill Burns, current CIA director, outgoing CIA director, warned would take place back in 2008. Jack Matlock, U.S. ambassador to Russia, warned that the NATOization of Ukraine and putting Ukraine on the path to NATO would lead to direct

war with Russia. And on his way out, Tony Blinken said, well, if we're going to have a deal for a ceasefire or peace, the NATOization will have to continue, which means there would never be a deal. Russia would never accept that because Russia understands putting NATO at its doorstep would lead to the destruction of Russia. As Kissinger said, that if we control Ukraine, Russia will be balkanized. So, I mean, Blinken cannot pry himself away from the dream of destroying Russia, even as he discusses an inevitable peace deal or ceasefire deal. It's completely crazy. And if you read deeper into that interview, I don't know if it's deliberate or not, but he misunderstands what Putin's objectives in Ukraine were. This is a war about the Donbass. That's what it was about. And Blinken declares victory and said, we actually prevented Putin

from taking total control of Ukraine and taking over Kiev, which is something that never, I mean, if Putin had wanted to do that, why did he just send like the equivalent of an expeditionary force of like 80,000 towards the Kiev Oblast, which was quickly swamped? Why did he do that if he wanted to take over the whole city and fight Ukraine in like a kind of a fortress warfare? It wasn't going to happen. Is there any evidence whatsoever that Putin wanted to take over Ukraine? I think the answer to that is no. And the line from the Biden administration, which I think is propaganda for the consumption of the American public, or at least those parts of the American public that have no political

education, is that Putin wanted to restore the glory of the Soviet Union or actually restore the Soviet Union itself. And it's just a fundamental misunderstanding, a willful misunderstanding of Russia's position, where it's just simply a country that is under siege and has been under siege since the collapse of the Soviet Union, when the first Bush administration violated its verbal agreement with Gorbachev to not expand NATO past Germany. I mean, and it began with the destruction of Yugoslavia, and you just slowly have this malign military alliance creeping towards your borders. Would the United States, I mean, the academic Vladimir

Posner put this really well to a class. Would the United States tolerate China and Russia placing advanced dual-use missile systems on its border with Mexico? What would the United States do? It would immediately carpet bomb Mexico City. Right. You're right. You're right. Are you surprised that the New York Times rejected a full page ad from American Quakers who wanted to encourage the government to cease, American government to cease funding genocide in Gaza, the Times objecting to the word genocide and thus rejecting the ad? Well, it's funny because in that interview with Tony Blinken, his interviewer, Lulu Garcia Navarro, repeatedly comes very close to accusing him of being involved in genocide. Okay, stop right here because it's a very quick clip. This will make your blood boil, although you've seen it. Sonia, cut number six.

Do you, Secretary Blinken, worry that perhaps you have been presiding over what the world will see as a genocide? No. It's not, first of all. Second, as to how the world sees it i can't um i can't fully um answer to that um but they everyone has to look at um look at the facts and draw their own conclusions from from those facts And my conclusions are clear. Look at that body language. Wow. Go ahead, Max. Well, it speaks for itself. And if Tony Blinken is unable to muster a response to the charge of genocide and does not immediately deny, he doesn't take issue with the term genocide. He just squirms because he's afraid of it because he knows something horrible has happened.

He has a guilty conscience if he has one. He pauses. He didn't have a pre-prepared response, even though he knew that the question was coming. And yet the New York Times as an institution refuses to allow that word to be featured in a paid advertisement. That says that the New York Times is siding with Tony Blinken, a political official who was implicated in the Holocaust of our times over the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court, which is accusing Israel's leadership of crimes against humanity, and its own reporters who have used that term. And it's doing this against the Quakers, the American Friends Service Committee, which is on the front line of the fight for justice for Palestinians,

as it was during the fight for abolition of slavery in the United States. And I think it's clear who's on the right side of history. It's not the New York Times, which has published lie after lie after lie, which just yesterday featured a headline declaring that Israel might have actually had just cause to destroy and burn the Kamal Adwan Hospital in northern Gaza and arrest its entire staff, including its director, Hossam Abu-Sofia, who is being tortured right now in an Israeli dungeon in State Teman, because they acquired testimony from the Israeli state security of one of the staff who said that Hamas was inside the hospital or operated within the hospital. How did Israel get that testimony?

Through torture. So the New York Times is basing a headline off of coerced testimony through torture, which is a violation of the Geneva Conventions. And at the same time, refusing a paid ad from the Quakers to accuse Israel of genocide. The New York Times as an institution has just completely been morally destroyed, along with the rules-based order articulated by Tony Blinken that its editorial board supports by this Holocaust that we've witnessed since October 7th. Has CNN been morally destroyed by the, it's hard to say with a straight face, the nonsense and fake news, literally faked, created, crafted, that it has put out about Syria? I mean, it's like CNN as an institution is sociopathic. I don't think

anyone there except maybe lower level employees care or have any sense of shame. And they're performing a very specific task, which is as a force multiplier for US imperial objectives. They basically are the mighty Wurlitzer of the CIA and the State Department. And so CNN in Syria for years has been spreading every possible lie in order to bring to power what I call the Islamic State in Suits Administration, or ISIS, which currently rules in Damascus. And right now they're not telling the public about the implications of this regime change operation. They're using their $800 million annual budget to just spin out more lies. I mean, most notoriously, the prisoner liberation hoax, which looks really ironic, not only because the prisoner who Clarissa Ward, CNN's top international

correspondent, liberated turned out to be a corrupt local government official who was just faking it, but because HTS, or what I call the Islamic State in Suits, the junta that's in power in Damascus, is now on a hunt for all of the prisoners that it let free from all of these prisons because they turn out to actually be, many of them, murderers and rapists who are causing crime on the streets of Syria right now. nomination of terrorist organization from HTS at the same time that his state department and his central intelligence agency are interacting with them as if they're normal Western diplomats. They've given them a six-month sanctions waiver, which is amazing. I thought the sanctions were about three things. One, taking down the quote-unquote Assad regime. And two, democracy and three, human rights. But now you have the former deputy head of ISIS, founder of Syrian al-Qaeda in power, presiding over the slaughter and repression of Alawites on the coast and in the Homs countryside.

Hideous repression is taking place in Syria. Torture, all on camera. There's no democracy. They came into power through force and have suspended the constitution for three years and said it'll take another four years for elections. Jolani is placing in high positions. The justice minister of Syria is someone who oversaw on-camera executions of women in the streets of Idlib for the alleged crime of prostitution. They were just shot in the head after he read out sentences. I mean, this is like a medieval character. Jolani's putting Uyghurs and Tajik jihadis who are on the State Department sanctions list in senior command positions in his defense ministry. And the U.S. has just granted a sanctions waiver. And HTS has responded, this is Jolani's government, by stating that the sanctions, if they're extended after six months, will hurt the Syrian people and prevent the Syrian economy from developing. But this was hurt Assad and his gang of bad guys. No, it turns out that they've impoverished the entire Syrian people. And it was just about strangling an

entire country in order to achieve the desired result. So why are sanctions being lifted? Why are US officials meeting with these characters as they turn the Syrian government into the planet of the apes. Because they've agreed to allow Israel to expand in the south, Israel has taken 40% of Syria's water supply, six major reservoirs. It's setting up checkpoints in the south. And Syria's totally powerless to resist the U.S. presence in the northeast, from Al-Tanf all the way up. So that's why. It's not about democracy. It's not about human rights. And it was always harming the Syrian people. Here's Jelani making a plea to President-elect Trump to lift the sanctions.

Sonia, cut number eight. Syria cannot continue without relations with a large regional country like Iran, but they must be based on diplomatic relations, respect for the sovereignty of the two countries, non-interference in internal affairs, and only relations that are compatible with the interests of the two countries without interfering in the matters of sectarian hatreds. We hope that the new American administration will not follow in the same approach as the previous administration in continuing these sanctions and will lift them without entering into negotiations or bargaining. Might have been part of the deal, who knows?

There definitely was a deal, a very cynical deal. But after the holiest shrine of the Alawites and Nusayris was vandalized by Jolani's men early on after they had seized Aleppo. And the video was released in, I believe, late December. And the guards of the shrine were massacred. Alawites rose up in protest. And Jolani then initiated a campaign of incitement against Iran and against religious minorities, including Shiites in Syria, blaming Iran for these protests and basically accusing Iran of trying to inspire some kind of color revolution, as if people weren't just genuinely indignant about what was done to their shrine, you know, it would be like if, you know, someone had dropped a bomb on Mecca. I mean, that's what it was like to see that level of desecration for Alawites.

And they are just, they are facing extinction now in Syria. and Jelani's blaming Iran for the whole thing. So we're talking about an existential threat to Iran on its borders developing in Damascus. Let's see how they respond. We don't know how they're going to respond. How do Jelani's people treat Christians, and are there Jewish Syrians? And if so, how are they treated? Well, most Jewish Syrians left after the establishment of Israel because Pinchas Lavan, actually recruited Egyptian Jews as spies to carry out bombings in Egyptian theaters, which they would then blame. on the Muslim Brotherhood and the Egyptian communists so that the British would reoccupy the Suez Canal. And they found out that was the end of Egyptian Jews. In Iraq, bombs were planted in Jewish community centers

by the Zionist underground in order to compel Jews to leave Iraq. And there was a similar process in Syria. Jews bombing Jews. Well, Zionists bombing Jews. And what we're experiencing right now is Zionists spiritually and politically bombing Jews around the world with the poison they're spilling out on social media. So it's one process. So there are very few Syrian Jews. However, Syrian Jewish heritage, what's left of it, was protected under the Assad government, and Jews were still able to visit a synagogue in Damascus.

And Christians, obviously, were very well protected and were part of the government. Syria was pluralistic. And Jolani has attempted to meet with Christian bishops and patriarchs and to try to prevent the dissolution of relations between his government and Christians because it would fatally damage his soft power and his relations with the West. It would be fatal. So the burning of a Christmas tree by Uyghur jihadists who have been brought into Syria on the back of Jolani's Turkish-supplied armor in the village of Al-Saklabea in the Homs countryside, that was a terrible spectacle for Jolani, and he's trying to cover it up. They are seen as a direct existential security threat. There's incitement against them, including in Western media. You had BBC's top correspondent in the Middle East. It was just on Democracy Now! claiming all the Alawites were complicit in crimes against the rest of the Syrian people.

And Syrians are just getting their, you know, they're getting their just desserts now. So I think we're seeing a very muted response to the possible extinction of this ancient religious minority community from the West. And it's because they're seen as a stronghold of Assadist loyalism, which isn't true at all. If you talk to Alawites, they're not crying because Assad left. There isn't a personal cult-like attachment to him. They just want to live on the land that they've been on for hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years. Max Blumenthal, thank you, my friend. You're such a wealth of knowledge. It's almost like a graduate school class and what's going on over there

and the history that led up to it. But I appreciate it deeply and profoundly. All the best. We hope we'll see you next week. Thanks. See you in class. Okay, okay, professor. Coming up later today at one o'clock this afternoon, Ambassador Ian Proud

at two o'clock, Professor John Mearsheimer at three o'clock, Colonel Larry Wilkerson, Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. I'm out. you