Judging Freedom - Ray McGovern: Israel’s Extremist War Agenda

Episode Date: May 6, 2024

Ray McGovern: Israel’s Extremist War AgendaSee 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, May 6th, 2024. In a moment, Ray McGovern on Israel's extremist war policies. And are NATO troops showing up in Ukraine? But first this. You all know that I am a paid spokesperson for Lear Capital, but I'm also a customer, a very satisfied customer. About a year ago, I bought gold and it's now increased in value 23%. So $100 invested in gold a year ago is now worth $123.

If you have $100 in the bank, it still shows $100, but you can only buy $76 worth of goods with it. Why is that? Inflation has reduced all of your savings, all of your buying power and mine by 24%. And gold is largely immune from that. Gold keeps its value and goes up. If you want to learn how gold will soon hit $3,200 an ounce, call Lear Capital, 800-511-4620 or go to learjudgenap.com get your free gold report same experts who predicted the 23 percent rise that i've enjoyed have predicted this 3200 an ounce gold learn about how to transfer this to an ira protect your savings 800-511-4620 learjudjudgenap.com. Tell them the judge sent you. Hi, Ray, my dear friend. Welcome back to the show. What are you learning from your sources about, if at all, NATO troops or troops from any NATO countries arriving or about to arrive in Ukraine? There are troops from the French Foreign Legion.

Whether that qualifies as troops from France or much less troops from NATO, of course, which it doesn't, is sort of immaterial. This is a notch up on the ring on the ladder of escalation. The French government has announced that these troops now have been sent to Slavyansk, which is a key holdout by the Ukrainian forces in the western part of the Dniester province. Now, what's going to happen? Well, the Russians announced just an hour ago that they killed seven of them. Okay. Will the Russians take this an hour ago that they killed seven of them. OK, will the Russians take this seriously? Of course they will, because Macron has gone off his rocker.

He says, you know, we can't let the Russians win. And if they start winning and I get an appeal from Zelensky, we've got to send our troops in or otherwise we're not worth anything. We Europeans. Well, the Russians have long since started to win. What seems absent, at least this morning as we speak, is this call from Zelensky. I see no call from Zelensky. This is Macron. Now, why he's doing this, that's best left to Chinese, perhaps, and French specialists. But the European Parliament elections are coming up next month. Maybe that has something to do with it.

It doesn't really matter because he has done that. He's thrown down the gauntlet. And the Russian Ministry of Defense has made a very ominous statement three hours ago. And that says, we are readying the units that are responsible for tactical nuclear weapons. We're getting them ready for exercising, and they will be exercising in the next few days. Whoa. Now, that coincides with certain warnings that very influential people in Russia are saying, look, we can't babysit this thing anymore. We have to go toward active deterrence. So this is getting pretty messy. The more so since President Xi from China is in Europe right now.

He was in Paris yesterday. Today he's in, I think, Belgrade. It's all very much in flux. But my bottom line on this is that it's real, that it's only a handful. Seven of them have already been killed. What Macron is doing is crazy. And we expect, and I expect, the United States and NATO to say, look, Macron is going off on his own. And if his troops get killed, well, that's no NATO business here.

Article 5 will not be invoked. I know you weren't in the room, but don't you suspect that when President Xi of China was in Paris yesterday, Sunday, with President Macron, and I saw a picture of the young Prime Minister of France as well, three of them, that President Xi was saying, don't do it? Don't send troops? What would President Xi be doing there? Well, that's a really good question. I think that was part of the reason for his trip. Now, I thought that that fellow, that young guy was kind of, well, there's Macron, but the fellow who met Xi at the airport seemed to be Macron's grandson. In any case, it didn't seem like a very warm welcome. Now, Macron had already come out with a statement five days ago in The Economist saying,

we're going to have to do this. If we, you know, we're friends, the rest of you allies, that kind of thing, we're going to do it. We need to send troops to Ukraine. Now, it's really interesting, because I would have thought, as you suggest, Judge, that she would say, that's crazy. You go ahead with that, that's crazy, and we're in with the Russians as we have been for two and a half years, this close. So, Macron did it anyway. What the it is, is all important here. If it's 50 troops and seven have already been killed, well, it might not be such a big deal. And Macron will have to climb down from this. But if the United States doesn't make it clear that NATO is not behind this, that even if the

Russians put up tactically nuclear planes that are able to carry tactical nukes, we're not going to do the same. We're not going to escalate like the Russians today, two hours ago, actually have. Unless that happens, the escalation keeps going up. My God, no one knows exactly what's going to happen. Do you think that President Macron would have done this without alerting the White House? And do you think the White House tried to stop him? This is a real good question. The way I would answer it is, who in the White House? Probably Sullivan.

Yeah. Or Newland has been found in the women's room of the West Wing recently. I make a joke. But there are factions in the White House. There are people that would encourage Macron to do exactly this. There are a little bit more sensible people who would say, Mr. Biden, this is not a good idea. We'll have to see what the U.S. says today. They'll probably have their press conference at the State Department in a couple hours. We'll see how they react to this. Is there some difference other than terminology between the

French Foreign Legion, which to me, I don't know, connotes Algeria in the 50s and Humphrey Bogart and all that and those movies of the World War II era and the regular French army. Is there some difference between the two? Well, yeah, it's a distinction without a difference, I think. They wear different color hats, those fancy hats, you know, really nice hats, okay? And they speak French with foreign accents. So what you have is French officers leading these legions, but you have a whole potpourri of people from other nations serving in it, adventurous people, mercenaries, people who want to serve in the French Foreign Legion. So it's not the French army, although they will be supporting units of the Ukrainian army.

So it's one of those borderline cases. If the Russians want to make a federal case out of it, well, I would be surprised. That first step has already been taken, exercising non or actually with next exercising nuclear capable aircraft to do exercises right at this particular juncture. Is this just hair splitting over the meaning of words like Lloyd Austin, the secretary of defense, telling Congressman Gates, we don't have boots on the ground because they're standing on a dock that we built 300 yards off the ground. They're in uniform and they're armed and they can shoot, but we don't consider them boots on the ground. Now we don't consider the French Foreign Legion to be boots on the ground because it's a bunch of foreigners under French command. It's not NATO. Do people accept this hair splitting? Well, it's up to the Russians as to whether to accept it or not.

These troops so far are no threat at all. They're going to be an extreme embarrassment to Macron if push comes to shove. Unless some NATO nations join Macron, the Baltic states or Poland, they're capable of doing that. The big thing is whether NATO leaders, the US and others say, look, Macron, you're on your own. This is not NATO. And don't even think about appealing for NATO as an organization to come to your aid when you get bloodied. So if I were Putin, I would see how this plays out. I would send my drones and everything else right to Slovyansk and make sure that the French don't have a comfortable luncheon today, or dinner, I suppose it is their time, and see where it plays out. And besides that,

what's he going to do? He's in Belgrade. Then he goes to Hungary. I mean, NATO is already divided on this. Nobody thinks Macron has done the right thing. So you see a splitting of NATO once again on this very important question. I don't know who this fellow is, former U.S. Deputy Undersecretary of Defense Brian. You know the name? Francis sent its first troops to Ukraine. This must be what we're talking about, the French Foreign Legion. This was the initial media announcement. Now, Byron has a checkered reputation. He's been wrong several times in recent months. On the other hand, he's had some scoops. Now, he's got some ties with the Defense Department, but that does not mean that he's right in this case.

He inflates the numbers and he does some other things that are not just justified by what we see the Russians saying and what we see the government of France saying. So you believe the 1500 number, French Foreign Legion in or on their way to Ukraine? Well, I think some are already in there. Whether they build up to 1,500, altogether likely. How many will come back? Not too many, in my view. I think the Russians are really serious. And this business about nuclear-capable exercises worries me sick because the Russians are not. They are not in the style of advertising

this potential escalation. This time they have. Our colleague Alistair Crook informed us this morning, I didn't know this, and like you I read a lot and go to a lot of websites that the Paris police were very heavy handed with demonstrators in Paris. And Alistair's view from what he observed, they were peaceful demonstrators with no property destruction and minimal interference with the movement of persons and vehicles in Paris, but the police were rough. Why are Western governments so aggressive in suppressing either pro-Palestine speech or speech condemning genocide and war crimes? They're making a big mistake, Judge. It's the reaction that causes the revolution. In other words, the reaction to peaceful demonstrations. So over the long run, this is not going to work. Macron has even bigger problems than we have here in the United States

on the campuses. And on the campuses, it's transparent that these outside agitators happen to be people like Naila El-Arian, a good friend of mine, a grandmother. She was never convicted of anything. Neither was her husband, Sammy El-Arian, a professor at the University of North Florida or South Florida in Tampa. And she showed up at one of these, well, at the Columbia demonstration. Two of her daughters, Layla and Lama, are alumni there. They're press people. They were covering it. And they said, come on, Mom, come along.

And Layla said, sure, she'll come along. Well, Sammy had a picture of her taken at that demonstration. What did the media do with that picture? Aha, outside terrorist, outside terrorist. There she is, that grandmother. And she looks as sweet as I know she is. The El-Aryan family is very close to me. I used to visit Sammy when he was under house arrest just a few miles from where I live in Northern Virginia. I mean, I'm almost afraid to go to my reunion at Princeton because if I go down there, I'll be supporting the demonstrators. And that's verboten on the Princeton campus, so says Chris Isengroober, a colleague or an acquaintance of mine, who happens to be a former professor of

constitutional law and is the president of Princeton University. And on and on and on this goes. Do you think these students will affect change in the atmosphere of Western governments? Do you think Western governments may be prodded by the Israelis? Are they actually afraid of the effects of free speech and not afraid of the consequences of silencing it? Of course they are, and that includes the legislature. After all, Congress has passed a bill which says if you criticize Israel, you're anti-Semitic. There's a law against that, okay? So all of us who have criticized Israel are, if so facto, anti-Semitic, and we're in violation of that law. I think Biden still has to sign that one, but I think it's gotten through both houses of Congress.

So things are getting pretty bad. The worst, of course, is that things are not going well for Benjamin Netanyahu in Gaza. What's going to happen now? Overnight, a lot of people in the southern city of Rafah in Gaza have been killed. Whether Israeli troops go in there or not, and I suggest they probably will, Netanyahu quite used to asking for forgiveness afterwards rather than permission beforehand. Are his wartime decisions now to invade a helpless, defenseless group of 1,250,000 refugees jam-packed in this city, animated by the extremists in his war cabinet and his fear that if they leave the government, the government will collapse and he'll have to call new elections and he'll lose. Both, yeah. I don't know how you separate out the motivation, but he will go to jail if he's

removed. I mean, they have the goods on him. The other news that I would point out is that Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, north of Israel, and the Houthis are not going to stop. Hezbollah has mounted some major offensives over the last day or two. They're not going to stop no matter what happens. And so Netanyahu and the rest of them are going to be faced with a two-front, really a three-front war if the Houthis continue to block the Red Sea. And the only savior can possibly be the United States of America. And will Biden support him full-throated as he has so far? My God, probably. What happens then when Hezbollah, when the Houthis,

when other like the Iranians, maybe they won't stand for this, we'll have to see, but he's taking a big chance. I wonder if Netanyahu has his own problems in Israel with the freedom of speech, because we'll run this clip in just a second. He banned Al Jazeera from publishing and pulled the plug and confiscated their equipment. Cut number four chris after discussion in the political security cabinet and following my guidance the government will today discuss the closure of al jazeera broadcasts in israel al jazeera reporters harmed israeli security and incited against idf soldiers it's time to remove it's time to remove the Hamas from our country.

And I thank Communications Minister Shlomo Kari for his action on the matter. The government has now ordered the closure of the incitement mouthpiece of Hamas in Israel to the channel of Jazira the Turtles. They were just signed. We are putting them into practice. A mouthpiece of Hamas, anyone who infers against the state of Israel, anyone who harms the security of Israel, and the soldiers and fighters of the IDF will no longer be broadcast here from Israel, and his equipment will be confiscated. Anyone who broadcasts against the policies of the Netanyahu government will be silenced and have their equipment confiscated? Just an authoritarian impulse or a serious concern that the Israeli public might change its mind

if it learns what is truly happening in Gaza? What do you think, Ray? Well, I think, again, it's a both end. When you look at what Al Jazeera has been producing, it's the only major outlet that has been showing film and interviewing people that have been telling the other side of the story. So when Netanyahu does this with the blessing of the cabinet, it reminds me of Zelensky. It was done pretty much the same thing. It reminds me of the Soviet Union when I was there in the 70s.

It reminds me actually of the United States government banning Russian outlets like Archie. Authoritative people, of course. And are they afraid that if the truth gets around, are they afraid that people like us might corrupt the minds of people to see some truth and put an end to all this foolishness? Well, yeah, they're afraid of that too, but they will not shrink from authoritative methods. And the notion that either Zelensky's government or Netanyahu's government is a democracy, well, that mocks the word democracy, which means rule by the people. Do you think that the CIA, present as it is in Israel, the relationship between the head of Mossad and Bill Burns, the head of the CIA, has any influence on the extreme behavior

of the Netanyahu government? In other words, do they gin it up? Do they dial it back? Or do they do whatever Netanyahu asks them to do? I don't believe they have much influence at all, Judge. Even the information that we traditionally used to get from the Israelis, I doubt that we're getting the full scope or the full scoop of what they're trying to do. So yeah, the intelligence channels are simply as corrupt as the government channels. You get the word, you're going to cooperate fully, and you're going to support whatever yarn comes up, whether it's babies being baked in ovens or babies with slit throats or whatever, just to justify the continuance of this genocide.

And I use the word advisedly genocide in Gaza. This, by the way, is a large crowd outside of Netanyahu's house demanding a ceasefire, return of hostages, and Netanyahu's resignation. Now, I don't know if he fears these crowds getting any larger, and the Israeli populace, notwithstanding its attitude about war is generally a highly educated populace what do they think when a means for them to look at what their government is doing through a different lens is shut off

when they're treated like children by the Netanyahu government well Netanyahu will ape what the US government does when it suits him. And when the U.S. government in the person of the President of the United States says, these demonstrations are not going to affect my decisions in any way, well, that gives Netanyahu carte blanche to have the same attitude, he's a little bit more a little bit smarter than that to say that right out loud uh most of the Israeli people support the genocide I'll say that again it sounds awful the Israeli population 68 at the last poll

support the genocide support the extermination of Palestinians from Gaza, okay? That gives Netanyahu carte blanche to do what he wants. Do they like him? No. About 68% of the people don't like him, but the former supersedes the latter. They just want to do vengeance on the people in Gaza. They don't make any distinction between Hamas and the Palestinians. And it used to be that people would think about this saying from the Bible, vengeance is mine, says the Lord, not yours, Benjamin Netanyahu. Does the CIA, you and Larry have told us since the beginning of this show, almost three years ago, that the briefing that makes its way to the president, not when you gave it, but now, is tailored, colored, sugar-coated so that the briefing is what the briefers think the president wants to hear.

Is that the same today for Israel and Ukraine? Or has Bill Burns and has the White House grown up and decided to reveal the truth? Does the president know Ukraine is on its last leg? Does the president know the IDF is slaughtering innocents, tying them up, stripping them naked and putting bullets in their heads and burying them in mass graves? Does Joe Biden know that from the CIA briefings? Well, no. And that's the sad thing. What he knows about are babies baked in ovens or babies with their heads slipped. What he knows is from Blinken that Ukraine will become a member of NATO. What he knows

is from the CIA director that Russia has suffered a strategic defeat and its armed forces have been embarrassed for the whole world to see. Now, those two comments go back to July of last year. So does any media person say, wait a second, I want these briefings. I thought Putin had already lost. I thought that was all over last July. What's going on here? Well, no, no, it wasn't, but nobody's held responsible. So what the president knows, I don't know for sure, but he's got Blinken and Sullivan on one side and he's got, I don't know of any reasonable heads on the other side. So take that for what it's worth. If there were some grownups, we had hopes for Bill Burns. He's grown up, for God's sake. He's almost as old as I am, for God's sake. But as you get old, sometimes you get pretty decrepit, and you fit very neatly into the cog of the machine, and that's precisely what Bill Burns, to his discredit, has done. Weekend, the ceasefire negotiations in Egypt presided over by the Qatari foreign minister.

The Israelis stormed out. And here is the Qatari spokesman. You may know him or know of him, Dr. Majid al-Ansari, who was not very happy about that. Cut number five. I won't comment on individuals on this because I think this is bigger than individuals. But what I can tell you is that there is a lot of political posturing. There is a lot of very narrow political calculations that are impeding the negotiation process. From the Israeli side? Again, from both sides. And we have taken very clear positions on this and we showed very clear statements on this

because we believe that this is not the time for political calculation. This is not the time for political posturing. This is not the time to put your own personal political future ahead of the lives of the hostages and the civilians in Gaza with the terrible situation, humanitarian situation we have right now. We hope that all those involved, just like the officials here in Qatar, would have only one thing on the top of their mind, which is the humanitarian loss and the humanitarian cause within ending this conflict. That's about as critical as you can get of Netanyahu without mentioning him by name. And that's from a channel called All Israel. They put up

the image of Netanyahu in front of an Israeli flag as the foreign ministry spokesperson was obviously referring to the Israeli prime minister. So I guess they're going to, back to where we started, I guess they're going to invade Rafah, and they don't care about world opinion, and there'll be no ceasefire. The release of the hostages, don't make any mistakes about it, is very, very central to this problem. Do we have a non-passionate and an objective person helping this process? Well, we have Bill Burns, and who's he taking orders from? Biden, Blinken, and Sullivan.

So we have the head of the CIA, who's supposed to be apolitical, making judgments about what's really going on, personally involved in the enforcement or in the operations part of this thing, negotiating or trying to negotiate a piece here. That's poison. The CIA has no credibility if its head, Bill Burns, is detimately and personally involved in this. So the hostage thing is only going to be solved if somebody tells the Israelis, look, stop fooling around. We can get a deal here. We want people not to starve anymore, and we want you not to commit genocide anymore. You do that, the hostages have a reasonable prospect of being released, at least half of them. But if you don't do that, no deal. Nobody. Last of all,

Bill Burns is going to take that rather principled attitude and say, look, I'm out of here. I won't negotiate here. The solution is very simple. Do it. Do it. Don't expect us to support genocide. And don't expect us to support the continuing imprisonment of hostages when they could be released tomorrow for the right signals from Biden and Netanyahu.

Thank you, Ray. Thanks very much. My dear friend, no intelligence round table this week, cause I'll be on the other side of the world, but I appreciate your time. As always, we'll see you back here early next week. Have a good trip. Thank you. Thank you so much, Ray. Still to come today, Larry Johnson in this order, Aaron Matei, Anya Parampil, Matt Ho, Phil Giraldi, Scott Ritter, Professor Jeffrey Sachs, and tomorrow at lunchtime, Colonel

Douglas McGregor. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Altyazı M.K.