Judging Freedom - Ray McGovern: Israeli False Flag - Killing US Troops

Episode Date: January 29, 2024

Ray McGovern: Israeli False Flag - Killing US TroopsCould the recent attack on Tower 22 be a meticulously crafted false flag operation? Join me as I sit down with former CIA analyst Ray McGovern to untangle the complex web of international intrigue that's emerged in the wake of this tragic event. As American casualties mount, we question the veracity of intelligence reports and consider the forces at play in the Middle East's shadowy corridors of power. Ray brings a wealth of experience to the table, dissecting the potential for intelligence manipulation by Central Command and the extent of Israeli influence on U.S. policy in Syria. Our discussion isn't just about the geopolitics—it's a candid look into the chess game where deception often masks truth.Moving beyond the smoke and mirrors of covert operations, we turn to the broader strokes of U.S. foreign policy. President Biden's strategies, the hawkish narratives of politicians like Lindsey Graham and Nancy Pelosi, and the freedom of domestic movements are all scrutinized through a critical lens. A special preview awaits, too: an Intelligence Community Roundtable featuring insights from Ray McGovern and Larry Johnson, alongside the unique perspectives of recently discharged Lieutenant Colonel Matt Holmeyer on military corruption and Kevin DeMerit's clear-cut approach to economic principles. This episode promises a thought-provoking journey into the heart of current world dynamics, offering clarity amidst the chaos.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Thank you. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Monday, January 29th, 2024. Ray McGovern joins us now. Ray, no matter what we talk about, it's always a pleasure when you let me pick your brain for your ideas. Thank you so much for joining us. You're welcome. did 34 others at this place called Tower 22 out in the desert in Syria or Jordan or Yemen, depending upon which side of the border you're on at the moment. I do not, but CENTCOM does, the Central Command. The intelligence out there is so good that they They have to know where those rockets and missiles came or drone charges came from.

That means that if CENTCOM tells the truth, we might get to the bottom of this. But CENTCOM's reputation has been that they tailor the intelligence to suit the policy. And no one was more guilty of that than General Lloyd Austin when he was commander-in-chief of CENTCOM, when he lied through his teeth about successes by the moderate rebels in Syria. So it's the same complex. It all depends on whether there are any honest analysts left at CENTCOM. And I would remind people that 50, 50 CENTCOM intelligence analysts and DIA analysts, the Department of Defense Intelligence Agency, 50 of them went to the Inspector General of the Pentagon complaining about how their intelligence was being doctored and falsified

at the very top by, guess who, General Austin. And there was an IG investigation. And of course, it was done by a one star, Austin being a four star. You don't know how that came out. Okay. But that's unprecedented. 50 intelligence analysts. I wonder if there are any honest ones left down there at 10 Centrum. I mean, could this have been, I suppose the answer before I even say what I'm asking is yes, because anything is possible. Is it probable that this was a false flag, either by the Israelis or the Americans, or some entity wanting to start a war there and make it look like someone else's fault? Well, if you look at Cui Bono, it was very clear. Even the New York Times about 10 days ago said the president is really interested in making sure that we prevail there. And if an American soldier is killed, well then, you know,

okay. So the warning was there, whether it was a false flag or not, I give it a 50-50 chance. As you know, Judge, I've been thinking that the Israelis will resort to this in any case, and they would be supported by that part of the koshery in Washington that we rightly call the neocons, the people who see no difference between the interests of Israel and the interests of Israel at Paramount right now, and the interests of the United States. So I don't know the answer. So CENTCOM does, I just hope and pray, hope against hope, that the analysis will come up and not be doctored this time and not be used as a casus belli to go after Iran.

Now, the location of this place is very important and the location of the attack is important. The United States will say it was in Jordan, which is a place where we are welcomed by the government and lawfully there. It probably was in Syria, where we are invaders, trespassers, interlopers, whatever you want to call us, criminals. We don't belong there. The government doesn't want us there. We have no right to be there, but we are there. Why are we in Syria? There's no national security purpose served by us being in Syria, but it is in Jordan. And we have 2,000 other troops in Jordan. And you're right. They are sort of acquiesced in or invited, the ones in Syria not.

Now, when you ask what are those troops doing in Syria, it goes back to Obama when he said we have to overthrow Bashar al-Assad. Oh, how are you going to do that? Well, you're going to create moderate rebels, okay, good guys, that will cooperate with guys like al-Nusra and other al-Qaeda affiliates, and we'll just overthrow Assad. Now, that didn't work out really well. We spent a billion dollars developing these people. Where? Al-Tanf. How close to this Tower 22 is Al-Tanf? It's just a matter of

some kilometers. It's just on the other side of the border. So you're right. This thing was supporting Al-Tanf and the training mission for our moderate terrorists. And of course, we've been doing that since Obama without any prospect of success. And now, of course, Assad, Bashar al-Assad has consolidated his gains. And the only remaining real problems are up north, where there are another 900 U.S. troops. So what are they doing? Well, they're stealing the oil, according to President Trump. And they're also guarding Chevron's oil things.

And they're up there to kind of just support those remnants who want to get rid of Bashar al-Assad. Lastly, you can't understand U.S. policy toward Syria, of course, if you don't understand U.S. policy toward Israel, okay? When in 2013, it became clear that the flag was going up, the New York Times bureau chief in Jerusalem went and talked to several Israeli top senior officials. If you're the bureau chief of New York Times, you get to do that, okay? She said, what's your preferred outcome in Syria? And Adelon Pincus, who we referred to before, former consul general in New York, high Israeli diplomat, says, well, Jody, her name was Jody Ruderin, this is sort of awkward to say, but I prefer outcome is no outcome. As long as the Sunni and Shia are fighting each other to

their death, Israel has no fear of what happens in Syria. So that's the name of the game. They're there to stir up unrest so Syria cannot present any problem to Israel, even though Israel has occupied part of Syria, and that Trump has recognized that occupation up on the Golan Heights. Wouldn't the DIA, I think I have that right, you mentioned them earlier, the Defense Intelligence Agency, have known that this attack was coming, whether it was a drone or whether it was a I forget what Larry said it was. I think he said it was a sophisticated missile rather than a drone, even more easily identifiable. Wouldn't there have been a warning that it was coming? Wouldn't there have been the ability to shoot it down before it killed three people and wounded 34 others? You must have been a judge at some point. You ask all the right questions.

It's in my blood. This is a real question. What about the celebrated air defense? Right. I mean, are they sitting ducks there? Do they have the ability to defend themselves? Yeah. So is it possible that the people out there were blissfully unaware that incoming was coming in? I don't know. It's possible because of the gross malfeasance all around.

Is it probable? I don't know. It's possible because of the gross malfeasance all around. Is it probable? I don't think so. So you're left to your own devices to figure out cui bono. And I would just suggest, you know, without arguing post hoc ergo proctor hoc, you have the New York Times saying if a U.S. service person is killed, Joe Biden's going to change his options and he'll have to retaliate. So who does it profit that three Americans or five, if you count those SEALs, have been killed? Well, it profits people like Senator Lindsey Graham and other hotheads who say, now we have to go after, we have to go after, we're bomb, bomb, bomb Iran, like Senator McCain used to say. So that's the

name of the game here. And lastly, I'd simply add that it was about 20 days ago, our representative at the UN, you know, the subject was the Houthis and all the damage that they're doing to traffic and so forth in the Red Sea. And she said, you know, we know that Iran approves the plans of the Houthis, okay. Well, I would really like to see that evidence, you know, because that is the question. U.S. intelligence has said before that we're really nebulous. We can't really figure out how much control Iran has, not only over the Houthis, but over these dissident groups in Iraq and in Syria. How compatible is the CIA with the DIA? Meaning, would the Central Intelligence Agency have known of the likelihood of this attack? And if so,

would it have informed its colleagues in the military and the Defense Intelligence Agency? Do they work hand in glove or are they incompatible? It's really hard to say in this case. You have not only DIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, but you have the intelligence apparatus of CENTCOM, the Central Command. They would be in the first instance in knowledge of what happened and how it happened and what lacks there were in the air defense system. DIA would be monitoring that, but the CENTCOM would have the action on that. CIA would be, again, monitoring what DIA did. So CIA has not been in this business. This is one major lack. It was forfeited by Bobby Gates, the director of the CIA in the 90s. He gave the military intelligence component of the CIA,

okay, not under military control, kit and caboodled to the Pentagon. So if you're looking about military intelligence, the CIA has no residual capability to make an independent judgment. And that, my experience in Vietnam will show that that's a terrible sin because that's the way the CIA was set up to have an impartial, to have an objective view on military intelligence as well as the other aspects of foreign intelligence. What, in your view, is the likelihood that the U.S. will overreact and this will expand or widen the war. And if that happens, it might be to Prime Minister Netanyahu's delight if the U.S. is involved in hostilities in his neighborhood. That's correct. He would delight in it. Now, Larry and I were talking with you just on Friday,

and Larry mentioned that hopefully some saner heads would prevail in Washington, saner heads that would say, Mr. Biden, if you attack Iran and this spreads, that's the end of Israel. I believe that to be true. That would be the end of Israel, because even though Iran is not working on a nuclear weapon and doesn't have one, it has such an array of sophisticated missillery, and so does Hezbollah, that would be the end of Israeli cities. Now, that would be a sane voice in the mix. Are there any? I think Larry had to admit, I can't identify any. So what's the answer to your question? It's more likely than not that Biden will authorize a kind of a strike that will try to provoke Iran into an open exchange. I still think that the Iranians have been playing this really cleverly.

They're on the winning side of all this with the Houthis, whether they control them or not, and with others that feel strongly about genocide, I think the Iranians would be able to restrain themselves and not rise to the bait and get involved in an open conflict with the U.S. It would depend on what the U.S. does. If Senator Graham has its way, yes, there'll be open war. Big picture now, you're 50 years, maybe longer, of observing all this. How do you explain the American lust for war? Remember that famous one-liner, no matter who you vote for, for president, you end up with John McCain. Well, you know, Judge, it's the feeling of, you know, the antiquated feeling now that we could do what we want to do and we will prevail.

We have always prevailed since World War II, since the fall of the Soviet Union. We've always prevailed. Now, the most recent manifestation of this was President Biden himself when he turned to that 60 Minutes interviewer and he said, huh, we can't prevail on two fronts? Come on. We're the United States of America, the most powerful nation in the world. In the world, you understand that? No.

Pretty good imitation, Ray, and verbatim, as I recall it. I'm persuaded that he really believes that and that Biden and Sullivan are not up to saying, you know, we've just found out, Mr. President, that, you know, it's a little different now. We can't work our will, especially in the Middle East. We're still losing and Ukraine is going south. So let's trim our sails here and figure out how we can deal with these things rather than have it go really south and take it over defeat in both areas. I don't know if there are any wise people around that could tell them that,

and that is really the problem. But what motivates, other than a wish to enrich some of his constituents in the military-industrial complex, what motivates somebody like Lindsey Graham always to want somebody else's blood to be shed? His first reaction, I don't expect you to be a shrink on this, and maybe it's unfair to focus on just him because there are many, many others who feel this way, and they have the president's ear, always to want to resort to bloodshed, heedless, heedless of the likely and probable response to that resort to bloodshed.

Ignorant, and I shouldn't say you that people from that part of the U.S., U.S. of A., as we used to say, take General Westmoreland. Where was he from? Oh, I think he was from South Carolina. Where was Jimmy Burns, Secretary of State for Harry Truman from? Oh, he was from South Carolina. Okay, so what am I saying here? Well, Westmoreland talked about the Oriental. The Oriental is not the same as us.

Life is cheap in the Orient. They don't put the same value on life as we do. That's Westmoreland. Jimmy Burns? cheap in the orient they don't put they don't put the same value on life as we do that's west marlin jimmy burns jimmy burns was the only advisor to truman and said let's go drop those bombs there in hiroshima and nagasaki macarthur eisenhower the general admiral leahy all of them said this is crazy don't do it and j And Jimmy Burns said, no, we got to do it, especially because it's sotto voce. These folks don't look like us. And the American people tolerate it if we lie about how it's going to shorten the war. So you have Lindsey Graham. Now, where is he from? I think he's from South Carolina.

I don't know. There may be something in the water down there. He has nothing really to fear in terms of getting reelected. If he takes this really hard stance and, you know, he was, he was an air force officer, you know, he was,

he was in combat areas in the barracks as a lawyer. Yeah. Prosecuting GIs that didn't want to fight anymore. That's, that's, uh, Lindsey Graham's military experience. So don't be deceived by how great an Air Force officer he was in the reserve. That's Lindsey Graham for you. So these are just speculations.

But I think that, you know, if you take Westmoreland, you take Jimmy Burns, you take Lindsey Graham, there's something in the water down there in South Carolina. I'm convinced. All right. Here's another in the water down there in South Carolina. I'm convinced. All right. Here's another lunatic, and she's from California. This is a little off what we're talking about, but it's Mrs. Pelosi yesterday saying that this is what she said, and you'll hear it in a second. Vladimir Putin. Vladimir Putin is behind the pro-Palestinian protests in the United States, and she wants the FBI to investigate. Listen to this.

And what we have to do is try to stop the suffering and gossip. This is women and children, people who don't have a place to go. So let's address that. But for them to call for a ceasefire is Mr. Putin's message. Mr. Putin's message. Make no mistake, this is directly connected to what he would like to see. Same thing with Ukraine. It's about Putin's message. I think some of these protesters are spontaneous and organic and sincere. Some, I think, are connected to Russia. And I say that having looked at this for a long time now. You think some of these protests are Russian plants? I don't think they're plants. I think some financing should be investigated.

And I want to ask the FBI to investigate that. Judge, I wish I could laugh at that. Well, it's sad. I mean, initially, her heart is in the right place. The Palestinian people are suffering, but now she wants to suppress free speech and she wants the FBI to investigate who's expressing free speech because she thinks Vladimir Putin's behind it. This is crazy. Well, I've talked to my really good Jewish friends and justice people who are at Grand Central Station, thousands of them demonstrating and holding up the works. I asked them, how do you feel about being in Putin's pocket? Did you guys, do you have any messages that you've got from Putin? We'd really like to see them.

This is so sad. You know, she's playing whether consciously or instinctively on the Trump derangement syndrome. Trump was in bed with the Russians. The Russians hacked into the Democratic National Committee emails and revealed it to WikiLeaks, who showed that Hillary Clinton stole the nomination from Bernie Sanders, pure and simple. So it's the Russians, it's the Russians, it's the Russians. And this is just the latest example of this on the part of Pelosi. I remember a week after January 6th, 2021, she was on Hillary Clinton's program for a while. And they were talking about how this all went down. And Hillary said, you know, I would really like to have a recording of the instructions that Trump was taking from Putin during that period, those crucial hours before the Capitol. And Pelosi said, yeah, I would too. And Hillary said, yeah, I would investigate that., oh, yeah, that's a good idea.

That's what we're going to do until we get the investigation such as it was. You know, it's Hillary Clinton with Pelosi and the rest of them on a string. And I don't know why they have such deference to this person that is admittedly not a good person when you look at Libya and all the other things she was responsible for, and especially for Russiagate. Last thing here, Judge, Russiagate is incredibly noxious. Why? Because my best friends in New York, highly educated, read the New York Times, and they're convinced that they can't let Putin win in Ukraine, that would be the end of Europe. Okay, why? Because the New York Times says so. So this is consequential. Blackening Russia, making Putin the devil that they portray him as, would grease the skids for open deployment

of US troops fighting as Russian troops in Ukraine, mark my words. Yeah, you know, I said earlier, at least her heart is in the right place. I don't think her heart is in the right place because her heart is manipulated by her head, which is off the wall, which wants to further the war in Ukraine for the reasons you just articulated. She still thinks we can use Ukraine as a battering ram to get rid of Vladimir Putin. She still believes in demonizing him as if he could care one whit about domestic American politics. Last area to explore with you. Do you think it is even possible for Netanyahu to save the hostages without a ceasefire? Some of them I believe would be possible. Bill Burns,

lousy CIA director, is a good hostage negotiator, okay? So I would say some of them being released, not all of them, not unless the Israelis agree to release all those political prisoners in jail in the West Bank and elsewhere. So I don't think, bottom line, I don't think Netanyahu gives a rat's patootie about the hostages. It's difficult for me to say, but look at what else he's doing. He's not doing anything at all that would down to the benefit of the hostages. What he's doing is, despite the UN, despite the ICJ ruling on Friday, he's upping the war and there's no indication that Biden will come to his senses or listen to this putative, wiser advisor and do anything other than to have this passionate attachment to Israel and go down that drain. Ray McGovern, thank you, my dear friend. I don't

know what's going to happen this week, but we will catch up with you and with Larry Johnson in our Intelligence Community Roundtable at the end of the week. Thank you so much. Thank you, Judge. stated Larry Johnson at two this afternoon. A new guest is going to tell us how rotten to the core of the American military is recently kicked out. Lieutenant Colonel Matt Holmeyer and at three o'clock economics 101 with my friend Kevin DeMeritt, Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Altyazı M.K.