Judging Freedom - Nordstream - Worse Than We Thought w/Karen Kwiatkowski fmr USAF

Episode Date: September 27, 2023

Nordstream - Worse Than We Thought w/Karen Kwiatkowski fmr USAFSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Thank you for coming to us. 23, Lieutenant Colonel Karen Putkowski joins us now. Karen, always a pleasure. Thank you for coming to us. Since we talked last, a lot has happened, of course, that crazy scene in the Canadian parliament, which we'll get to in a minute. But Cy Hirsch is out with a new piece on the explosion of the Nord Stream pipeline. He argues that nobody really accepts the government's version of it, in part because of the A, threats that Joe Biden made long in advance. And now it turns out that Joe Biden, President Biden, threatened to blow up the pipeline before

the war in Ukraine began, and B, in part because of CIA sources that have told him that Chancellor Scholz was informed in advance that the pipeline would be blown up and accepted what they said. Could you imagine Chancellor Scholz saying to President Biden, we're going to blow up the Keystone pipeline that runs through Northwest New Jersey? And Biden said, well, go ahead and do it if you have to do it for foreign policy purposes. I mean, when will the world recognize that the CIA can be a gaggle of terrorists because that's what they and the Navy SEALs were when they destroyed the pipeline? Yeah, it's true. Absolutely. I mean, are you surprised that Cy Hersh has come out with this information?

Are you stunned that Chancellor Schultz knew about it and assented to it? Actually, the way Schultz reacted to when it happened, I guess a year ago, he was not overly upset, like you would expect a national leader to be if their main source of you know clean energy really had just been you know evaporated and all that work investment and German contracts and relations with Russia it's as if he knew and had consented to it his behavior is consistent with what Seymour Hersh is saying now. So I think the suspicion was there that he must have known and he must have consented to it. Or I thought they bought him off in some way, but I don't know what we'll find out.

But certainly the idea that this had to be done, and this is what Hersh writes about, that the destruction of those pipelines needed to be done to keep Germany from wavering as we continue on. And that was talked about by people who not so much Americans, but people who looked at that at the time said, you know, why would we why would why would America make Germany dependent on American energy and totally cut the ties from Russian energy? Well, why wouldn't we do that? I think, you know, an average economist would look at that and say, oh, that kind of makes sense in a marketplace that's run by governments. You know, this is almost like, you know, ancient warfare, really. You know, you have to buy your stuff from us and we're going to make sure that you do.

It did look like that. And I think what Seymour has come up with, but what it also tells me is that his contacts, and of course he has so many good sources, but these people are upset, angry, betrayed, and they're talking to him. And I think we're going to hear more. And some of the people that are upset, angry, and betrayed are CIA officials who are aware of this and obviously didn't approve of it. But Cy Hersh quotes President Biden as saying on February 7, 2022, seven days, one week before the invasion in Ukraine began.

If tanks roll into Ukraine, the pipeline will go. I don't think that's new. It now fits into the puzzle that the government's deniability is vapid and simply not believable, that the plan was set in place long before the explosion occurred, that all they had to do was put the last piece of the puzzle in, which didn't even involve humans going down there. Cy talks about the great lengths through which they went to sneak American operatives into Norway. And still the government would have us believe that this pipeline was destroyed by a couple of people in a sailboat. That's right. that you made, that this was not done to hurt Russia, to prevent Russia from selling natural

gas to Germany and Germany reselling it to other countries in Northern Europe, but to keep Germany in line. This is more totalitarian than any foreign policy I know of, short of war. Yeah, it really is. I mean, you know, it's funny, we talk about China and China's totalitarian government and their policies as being so awful, and yet we model them. We have been modeling them for some time, and the way we treat other countries, you know, we are very imperial. I hate to use that word. It's been overused, but we are an imperial nation, and we behave really as the worst of the worst historically have done, and this is a prime example of that. When will we learn that the American lust for empire, empire achieved not by democratic example,

but by force from the end of weapons, will not succeed and will have the opposite effect by undermining us. Yeah, well, I think that lesson's going to get taught to us pretty soon. This is something we actually didn't talk about, but just in this past week or very recent news, a major ship transport company, Maersk, who had many defense contracts with our with the Navy and the Army to move equipment, weapons, whatever, particularly in the Pacific, has spun off a small portion of the company to do the business under the Jones Act and whatnot, to do the business with the U.S. military. The rest of their resources, they are focusing entirely

on the rest of the world. That's the Pacific world, the BRICS world, South America, Africa, wherever you can think. They're not supporting us. And so, you know, we have an inability to produce or to outproduce the Russian military. We cannot outproduce the Chinese military in terms of our weapons production. Our technology cannot match theirs in terms of hypersonics or any other advanced technology. I mean, the story of what happened to our F-35 not long ago in South Carolina. I mean, this is putting a face to the reputation of what modern military technology has done to us. It is not making us stronger, better, faster.

So, you know, if we can't logistically go other places, and we can't even, and if we could go with these ships, and we don't have the stuff to put on the ships to bring, to fight a war, to bring a war to other places like China, like Russia, anywhere else, we are not a force to be reckoned with. And it doesn't matter what you tell the American people, oh, rah, rah, we're great, we can do it. In reality, the folks that are our near peer competitors or anybody else on this planet, they have access to the same information that you and I do. And they are drawing these conclusions. So our empire is near. Karen, you're underlining and strengthening the argument that the Russian military and

the Chinese military is stronger, better, faster than ours, and yet we spend more money in the Defense Department than the next 12 countries combined, which includes Russia and China, what the hell are we wasting the money on? And how can they possibly be stronger, faster, or better? Doesn't the American public understand this? Doesn't the Congress know about this? Or Congress just wants to get reelected, And if there are people in their congressional districts who were employed by the military, industrial, congressional, banking, deep state complex, whatever you want to call it today, they're going to vote in favor of this stuff. Yeah, well, that's right. And this is exactly what Eisenhower was talking about. He said that the technical sector, the military industrial

conflict, and I think he used those words, he also included Congress in it, I think in previous drafts of his final speech, his farewell speech. And he warned that these sectors of society, linked as they were politically, linked as they were to national spending, would set the agenda. They would set the stage. They would make the priorities. And they would not represent the people or the interests of the people. They couldn't. But they would represent their own interests. And it would grow and grow. And it would be very difficult to either take back power from them or even to change the direction that they're evolving into. And the way we make weapons, and historically we've made some great weapons, and we have been leaders in technology.

There's no doubt about that. But what it has evolved into today is not good. It is kind of maturing in a way that is kind of like Biden is. I mean, Biden, you could say, well, he's an old man. He knows a lot, sure. But he also can't walk, and he can't remember where he's at or what he's saying. That's kind of how our defense industries are in their relation with government and Congress. They are in decline, performance decline, cognitive decline, and it's because the system doesn't produce, it doesn't

reward the right kinds of things, and it can't be changed from within. You know, it's not like you can say, well, if I could just get a different contractor, I could make a better weapon. You have all the contractors are the same contractors for all intents and purposes. Gary, I think we have this. Here's President Biden in February of 22 threatening to destroy the Nord Stream pipeline. Do we have that clip, Gary? We don't. Okay. I thought we did. In any case, it's at a presser with Chancellor Schoen. there with uh uh with chancellor uh if russia invades uh that means tanks or troops crossing the uh the border of ukraine again then uh there will be uh we there will be no longer a north stream too we we will bring an end to it. How will you do that exactly since the project and control of the project is within

Germany's control? We will, I promise you, we will be able to do it. Obviously it was planned, orchestrated and and begun by then, and they were just waiting for the appropriate time to pull the trigger. Who would believe the government denials after a statement like that from the White House? Asai Hirsch reports that the White House said, we want everything to go until you get a command from us, and then you pull the trigger, and that's apparently what happened. So I don't know who would believe the denials. Over the weekend, the president said that what would happen to aid the Ukraine, when

he asked what would happen to aid the Ukraine if the government shuts down next weekend. An intrepid band of anti-war Republicans in the House are preventing the Congress from enacting a budget because it includes aid to Ukraine. They have other objections to the budget as well, with which I fully agree. The president apparently said, we will continue to pay Ukrainian salaries. Now that's because the 113 billion is in what's called a presidential drawdown authority,

PDA, presidential drawdown Authority, which allows him to spend that money when and how he sees fit. And PDAs are not subject to presidential drawdowns. So let me get this straight, Lieutenant Colonel Kwiatkowski, how would your former colleagues react to this? No veterans benefits in the United States, but Ukraine military salaries paid by the American taxpayer. You can't make this up, Karen. You really can't. You really can't make it up. And I think headlines I've seen that relate to that comparison, the fact that our government could shut down bureaucrats, all

kinds of people dependent on government cash flow, will not get paid or will get paid less or will have their pay delayed. Meanwhile, there will be no impact on Ukrainian bureaucrats. And I think the number of Ukrainian bureaucrats, it's like over 100,000 people that we're funding over there to keep the Ukrainian government running. I think it speaks to where our priorities are as an empire. You know, the American people, you know, there's a reason Trump's America first message resonated.

Most Americans recognize that they are last. They are the very last in this possibility and certainly the headlines that you're speaking of tell us that we don't matter. American people, American workers, people that have given their entire lives, devoted themselves to producing and paying taxes, we don't matter to the empire. And it's powerful. It's a powerful message. Not a good message, but it's a powerful message. Yesterday at the, I think it was yesterday, at the State Department, a formal portrait of a former First Lady, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was unveiled. We're going to run a clip of her comments. The clip says she's at the White House, but apparently she wasn't. She and the portrait were at the State Department. But

I'm anxious for your thoughts, Colonel Kwiatkowski, on what Mrs. Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, says about NATO. Take a listen. An invasion of Ukraine that instead of driving a stake between us and our allies brought us closer together in order to support the right of the Ukrainian people to defend their liberty and freedom and democracy. People might have doubted that because we had burned so many bridges with our allies and our friends. So reinstating a foreign policy that plays to the best of American values, that puts our interests and security front and center but does it in a way that actually brings people to us, not pushes them away, would have been thought to be extremely difficult.

And indeed, it was. In looking across the globe, defending democracy in Ukraine, expanding NATO, just as an aside, too bad, Vladimir. People are not forced to join NATO. People choose and want to join NATO. People choose and want to join NATO. Russia wanted to join NATO, and of course, NATO said no. So to her, the best of American values is $100 billion in cash that slaughters a generation of young Russians and a generation of young Ukrainians. As Senator Romney and Senator

Blumenthal said, this is despicable what they said, best bang for the buck, best dollars we ever spent because we're killing people and nobody's killing our own. Yeah. Well, she's certainly the icon of death in America. I mean, her whole career has been, you know, she's happy to kill. She is a, she is a, she worships the state. She believes in the state and the power of the state. So she hasn't changed for the better. Some of what she's saying really is wordsmithing. This idea that we've united somehow, that the U.S. and Europe have united in support of Ukraine. Really, what has happened is we've strengthened Russia. We've pushed Russia and many other countries into an alignment with China that would not have really existed had we not done this.

And we're losing NATO and EU support as those countries actually bear the burden of what we've done in promoting this proxy war. I mean, the number of refugees, the cost, the continual having to listen to all these countries have to listen to Zelensky spit in the face. This is getting old. It is not building soft power or credit for the United States in any way. So I don't know what she's talking about, but I do know what she's talking about. She's speaking to a very narrow audience that loves war. She's not speaking to the American people. She is speaking to her own neocon audience.

I have to chuckle a little bit. You know, she's the 81st or the 82nd Secretary of State of the United States. She's the successor to the first Secretary of State of the United States, Thomas Jefferson. My God, how low we have gone for her to suggest that this killing, killing is the best of American values. Here's Matt Gaetz, Congressman Gaetz. I know you love him or hate him. On this, I love him. Standing on the floor of the House of Representatives, guiding the Democrats and fellow Republicans for giving away borrowed money to Ukraine. This Congress has authorized $115 billion to Ukraine.

My amendment would ensure that this defense appropriations bill sends no more. $115 billion is an astonishing amount of money, especially when you consider that our nation sits atop a $33 trillion debt and we are facing $2 trillion annual deficits. And it is not as if the $115 billion has brought this conflict any closer to an end. In fact, the massacres and the killing and the death continue. The next statement is so obvious, I can't even believe I have to say it out loud. It does not make the United States of America stronger to borrow money from China to give it to Ukraine.

I hear a lot of the war hawks in this Congress stand up and say, well, we have to send a message to China by fighting for however long it takes at whatever cost in Ukraine. The message we're sending to China is that they are engaged in a leveraged buyout of Russia and increasingly of our own country. Brilliantly put. It is. Brilliantly put, but it's going to fall on deaf ears because of the war party, Karen. We know that that war party is 90% of the Congress from both parties and in both houses. He's articulate, he's right on the mark, but he's banging his head against the brick wall. Yeah, well, I'm glad he's doing that. I mean, even though because it's not completely falling on deaf ears. He is getting play in the heartland and he's getting play, you know,

this message is getting through, especially when they can put it in small soundbites, like, you know, we borrow from China to give it to Ukraine. And as you know, there's so many places in our country where people feel like federal money could be spent to make the cities better, to make the roads better, whatever it is that they're seeing. And when they see us throwing it away on war in Ukraine for some fantasy of standing up to Russia or preventing some global thing from happening, they agree with what Matt Gaetz is saying. So I'm glad he's saying it. It's important. And he reminds me a little bit, not in the way he looks, but remember Ron Paul used to stand like that.

And he used to talk about so many things. And many of the things he talked about. The C-SPAN camera is not allowed to pan the audience. I fear he was speaking to an empty house chamber, just as some of Ron Paul's greatest speeches, regrettably, were to an empty House chamber. Why do you give them? Well, they get recorded. They're part of the record. They're in the congressional record.

And maybe the clip is played on your local news station at home so your constituents see what you're doing. I got to show you this clip from the Canadian Parliament. I don't think you've seen it. It's been all over the place. It's absurd and it's deeply troubling. We're going to play both clips back to back. The first is the Canadian Parliament. It's being narrated by a reporter.

So it's from a Canadian television station reporting that President Zelensky, and you can see him at the very beginning at the clip all the way over to the left, was interrupted many times by the Canadian parliamentarians. He went there after he left D.C. last week. And then the camera spans to the galleries where they give a standing ovation

to a 98-year-old former SS stormtrooper. And then right after that, it happened a few hours later, we'll play, excuse me, President or Prime Minister Trudeau, critical of the decision to do this. And you can guess who he blames it on. I'll hold that, a lot of people have seen this, but I'll hold that who he blames it on until after you hear the words that come out of his mouth. Knowing you, you've guessed already. Both clips in a row, Gary. His speech received at least a dozen standing ovations. There was also one for this man, a 98-year-old Ukrainian-Canadian

who fought for Ukrainian independence against the Russians during the Second World War. Obviously, it's extremely upsetting that this happened. against the Russians during the Second World War. Obviously it's extremely upsetting that this happened. The Speaker has acknowledged his mistake and has apologized. But this is something that is deeply embarrassing to the Parliament of Canada and by extension to all Canadians. I think particularly of Jewish MPs and all members of the Jewish community across the country who are celebrating, commemorating Yom Kippur today. I think it's going to be really important that all of us push back against Russian propaganda, Russian disinformation, and continue our steadfast and unequivocal support for Ukraine. As one of our commenters wrote,

hey, dude, Putin didn't invite this creep to the Canadian parliament, you did. What is not shown in the first clip, Karen, is that standing next to the Speaker of the Canadian parliament and right behind President Zelensky was Justin Trudeau. It was right there. You know what was happening. The guy had to clear security to get in the balcony.

Well, you know, what brings to mind, and I did read about this, I did not see it, and I appreciate looking at it and watching it, but you know, Trudeau and many people, reporters, they don't know what happened in World War II. We allied with the Russians. If you were fighting against the Russians in World War II, you were fighting for the Nazis. So even the reporter, when they're describing this guy fought against the Russians in World War II, next thing on your mind ought to be, yeah, so he was fighting for either Japan or Nazi Germany. Those were the guys we were fighting against when Russians were on our side. So I don't get it.

It's a total lack of historical awareness amongst all people watching it, including the people that signed this guy up, that arranged it, the reporters that talked about it. So, you know, but then at the end, trying to turn it into a Russian thing, I don't know, Chodos was so lost. He's so lost and such a tool. You were in the military for a good chunk of your career. You were in a chain of command. You issued orders.

People complied with them. Orders were issued to you. You complied with them. But when leaders said things that were patently irrational, foolish, frivolous, absurd, like what Prime Minister Trudeau just said, who the hell would have give him any credibility? Somehow this is Vladimir Putin's fault. No, it's totally random. I mean, it's a throwaway line, really. They add that to everything. It must be the Russians or the Russians did this.

And, you know, Hillary is still harping about things the Russians did in her mind when we already know, I mean, with so much evidence, even the Post and the Times and all have admitted it, that they didn't do it. And yet she still says it. And it's a shame that our country has gotten to the point where we really don't. It's probably good that we don't believe what politicians in our government tell us, because if we did think it was true, most of us are not equipped to find the truth. We don't know history. We forgot it if we ever learned it. I don't know. It's a problem. I see from a number of commenters,

they're upset that we ran the Hillary clip. Look, I feel the same way that you guys do about her. I just wanted you to know what she's up to and that she's out there and she still has her coterie of followers in the State Department. Everybody in that audience, the camera didn't show the audience. It was huge. Everybody in that audience works for Tony Blinken. They do. They do. And Hillary has been popping up frequently. I have an article coming out on Lou Rockwell probably this week. And I have a theory which I'm not going to share here, but it relates to Hillary Clinton. And I will say my comment in looking at that, not listening to her words because she's talking nonsense, but she has campaign hair.

Just telling you. Wow. Well, the buzz is that old Joe is going to say that his age has caught up with him and it's time for him to go back to Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, and then there'll be a free-for-all. I mean, Fox News is doing a debate between Gavin Newsom and Ron DeSantis. The governor of New Jersey's been throwing barbs at Gavin Newsom, but he's as far left as Gavin Newsom is. New Jersey is as woke as California is, except that Phil Murphy's rich enough to finance the campaign on his own. I don't know where this is going to go. Parents of pleasure, Mike. Go ahead, please. No, I mean, I can see a Clinton-Christie alignment very easily in my mind. Forget about the parties. They are aligned,

and you would have a neocon party, and we kind of have one with the uniparty. You're talking about Hillary Clinton and Chris Christie? I'm just putting putting it out there that's not what i'm writing about but all right karen karen i love you but do you know do you know something the rest of us don't i'm saying they're they're neocons and yes how do you get the vote you need you have to get the war party chris chris chris christie and i have been friends for 30 years. We disagree on so many things. We're still friends. I'm loyal to my friends. I obviously don't support him for president, but he is a neocon. He does want to use Ukraine like Hillary as a battering ram to drive Vladimir Putin from office. It ain't going to happen. Karen, thank you very much, my dear friend. It's always a pleasure. Thank you so much for joining us. My friends, just to tell you what's

coming up Thursday at nine o'clock, Alistair Crook from the hills outside of London and at two o'clock in the afternoon, these are Eastern times, of course, is Scott Horton. And then on Friday, we have our roundtable at two in the afternoon. Larry Johnson and Ray McGovern become very popular at three in the afternoon, even though I have a crazy day Friday, three in the afternoon. Ask the judge, type in any question you want about the things we've been talking about, and I will do my best to answer it right here. Eventually we may get an interactive thing going where you can actually do a follow-up question to my answer. We'll see if we can make that happen. More as we get it, judging freedom,

looking out for your liberty. MUSIC