All Episodes
Previous Next
May 14, 2024 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
31:33
Deranged Lindsey Graham: 'NUKE Gaza!'

Looking a little worse for wear, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) took to the Sunday talk show circuit to demand that Israel follow the US lead in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and drop a nuclear weapon on Gaza...where some two million civilians still cling to life. Also today: House Republicans actually threw a party to celebrate extending warrantless government spying on Americans! Finally, what kind of Republican Party will we see coming out of the July convention?

|

Time Text
Opposite Dedication Danger 00:14:37
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, we have Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you this morning.
Back in the studio, Dr. Paul.
Did you get rested?
A little bit.
The world hasn't changed a whole lot.
I got tired fighting mosquitoes this weekend.
They're about that big.
Yeah, they're going to go away.
I hope so.
But I don't know what month.
Well, it's a fight between the environmentalists and environmentalists.
You know, sprays could be bad for you.
And I believe that to be the case.
But they didn't say mosquitoes could be bad for you, too.
Because at one time, long time ago, I had encephalitis from the mosquito bike.
So anyway, we're not going to solve that problem today.
We have enough to take on.
We have Lindsey Graham to take on.
Little Lindsay, Lil Miss Lindsay.
He's been around a long time.
I wonder how long he's been running the military.
You see him, the head of the Department of Defense.
But he's the in-crowd.
There's no doubt about that.
So people stop and listen to him.
So he felt it was important to be on the air this weekend.
And, you know, to talk about the war.
And he got on the airboat.
I thought, well, Fox likes him because he's hawkish.
But he got on mainstream media.
So what does that mean that they're being more open-minded or are they being very consistent in promoting their warmongering?
So I sort of think it might be the opposite.
But Zero Hedge announced it.
Lindsey Graham suggests New King Iran and Hamas at the same time.
But immediate people said, how are you going to do that without killing a lot of innocent people?
But they have ended that we will be working with the Israelis to minimize the number of deaths that will occur.
So far, that hasn't worked so well.
It hasn't.
Even though the people in this country are saying no more bombs over there for Israel.
Too many people are dying.
And they say that, well, we can protect the people, protect the civilians.
We have rules.
It's so much BS, so often what they're doing.
But anyway, that was big in the news.
Fortunately, in our predictions, mine personally, is he's not going to have his way.
But the fact that he exists and he can do this under today's conditions.
But, you know, when push comes to shove, when it might, you know, if we have a financial crisis and, you know, some others start challenging us, not only in foreign policy, but in monetary policy, who knows how desperate it might be.
So under today's circumstances, I'll stick with my prediction.
This is not going to happen.
But it's enough to wake some people up.
The people with this much seniority in the Senate, in the government, have been around so long.
A lot of people listen to him.
A lot of people love that warmongering stuff.
But that to me is the danger that people like this are so dedicated to the opposite, essentially the opposite of what we believe in, especially on the foreign policy.
It's definitely the opposite.
It is.
Yeah, let's put on that picture of him.
He was on Meet the Press on NBC over the weekend.
And there he is, Lil Miss Lindsay.
Lindsey Graham suggests nuking Iran and Hamas.
And we'll play that clip in a second, but I was just going to say, Dr. Ball, before we start it, I mean, he's kind of single-handedly responsible for why much of the world hates the U.S. You know, because you imagine an elected senator stands up and makes terroristic threats.
I mean, that is, there's no other way, there's no other way to describe what he did.
He made a terroristic threat.
He suggested that a nuclear weapon be dropped on a population of 2.2 million people, civilians.
Now, there are some Hamas fighters there, that is true, but you're going to kill a couple thousand Hamas fighters and 2.2 million innocent civilians.
So it's a terrorist threat.
He's acting like Osama, worse than Osama bin Laden, you know, up there saying that.
And we have to realize it's already done a lot of harm.
Well, you think that it is his faction that's always ready and raring to go.
And just think, you know, the period of time when we spent the most time talking about this was in the Mideast wars, you know, under Bush.
How many people died under those circumstances?
Fortunately, you know, there was a lot less Americans dying than in Vietnam.
But the principle was still very, very bad.
You know, it was bad because a lot of people died, and we spent a lot of money.
We lost civil liberties.
So it didn't go away and say, oh, it wasn't too bad.
We didn't lose somebody.
But that is a big problem that he gets away with this.
And he is honored, you know, in many places as being, you know, pro-American.
I think you guys want to be isolationists.
Then you know they're really serious when they start throwing that word out at us.
And it does sound like he has Trump's ear, or at least he pretends he does.
So, well, let's listen to Lindsey Graham in his own words.
Here's what he said over the weekend.
Before we started, I would just say my own personal observation: he looks a little worse for wear.
It's a Sunday morning.
He may have been up a little bit late.
I don't know.
You judge his bloodshot eyes.
Tell me what you think.
But let's listen to Lindsey Graham's little tirade here.
Historians would say, why is it okay for Reagan to do it and not President Biden?
But let me ask you about the United States.
Well, why is it okay?
Well, can I say this?
Why is it okay for America to drop two nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end their existential threat war?
Why was it okay for us to do that?
I thought it was okay.
To Israel, do whatever you have to do to survive as a Jewish state.
Again, military officials say technology has changed.
But let me ask you about how it's going to be.
Yeah, these military officials that you're talking about.
Let me ask you something that I Lindsay is.
Yeah.
Well, you know, he has the history wrong, too, there.
They ended the war.
But, you know, there were many have written back then and even more so since that the Japanese were whipped.
Yeah.
Yet we still were determined to drop those two bombs.
And here he's saying, we saved Western civilization by this, and yet it was just another notch knocking down Western civilization because I'm sure there are some people who still realize we are the only ones.
They killed hundreds of thousands of people with nuclear bombs.
Yeah, I mean, you're right.
I mean, it destroys the moral high ground, is what it did.
It wasn't as if Japan was about to take over the U.S. and our last-ditch effort was to, you know, the click.
But I wanted to just say one thing about this because other people have commented on this.
Now, he's encouraged Israel or maybe the U.S. to drop a nuclear weapon on Gaza.
So I did a little bit of looking, you know, just to confirm things.
And I went to the EPA, which has a radioactive fallout for nuclear weapons testing guide.
And it says, and this is a quote from the EPA, even though there's very little fallout that exists in the environment, it's important to remember that recent fallout within about 10 to 20 miles downwind of the detonation can be very dangerous, 10 to 20 miles.
Well, the width of Gaza at its thinnest part is about three miles.
Three miles.
So basically, if the Israelis were stupid enough to take Lindsay's advice and drop a nuclear weapon on Gaza, they would essentially be poisoning a good chunk of the Israeli population with radiation poisoning.
Yeah, but I think that you don't know exactly what they're going to release and how the wind is blowing and other things happening that they're obviously a major catastrophe.
And, you know, Graham, his argument is we couldn't afford to lose this argument.
Expotential war.
We have to do that.
And I got to thinking, well, you know, by doing it, what did we lose?
And the word I came up with was humanity.
You know, the whole humanity issue of being able to drop those kind of bombs and wiping out tens of thousands of people immediately is pretty bad.
And then they do it in a patriotic sense.
And if you don't go along with it, for some reason, people buy into the argument.
You guys just aren't willing to spend the money.
Yeah, what money?
You just want to borrow more money from your buddies in China, you know, and prop them up because they're a good bank for us.
It's terrible.
We're printed out of thin air on the backs of the working people.
Yeah.
Well, we just wanted to bring that up because it's just disgusting and it's an embarrassment to the United States that someone like this is in the Senate of all places.
It's supposed to be a deliberative body where people are supposed to be a little bit smarter, but guess what?
He's not.
He's a little rough around the edges as well.
So let's move on to this is like going to be the revulsion day at the Liberty Report because this next story is also revolting.
Now skip that next clip and just move on to the third one about the there we go.
House Republicans threw a FISA fest party after renewing domestic spying tool.
Dr. Paul, you sent this over the weekend and I couldn't believe it was true.
I went and did some digging.
Believe it or not, it's true.
You know, I have a habit of taking my first impression.
When I see this, I write down a note for myself to remember the horrors of what they're doing.
This one was the evidence of the death of the Republicans.
To see people celebrating this and calling it a fest.
And that's just, it just blows my mind to think of how about that is.
But they'll come up, and I guess the slightest little benefit is they didn't extend it for the long period of time, but they did extend it.
And they'll worry about the next extension some other day.
They'll have some crisis that'll come up.
And it to me is so sad that the people go along with this.
And of course, the sad part here was how FISA was passed this year.
And it was passed by our speaker going out of his way.
And I think he's totally destroyed his reputation as a reasonable person.
And I don't know what is his reason.
Oh, he had a briefing, wasn't there?
He had a briefing.
Too bad that briefing wasn't briefer.
Yeah, really.
No kidding.
I got a briefing.
You know, he had the opposite reaction than Walter did, our friend Walter.
He finally found out that those briefings were based on lies.
And here, our speaker turns around and says, everything I've known about this, about trying to stay out of this mess, He claimed that's a lie and we have to believe the intelligence people because they're so intelligent.
Yeah.
Yeah, the same intelligence people who are plotting around to get rid of Trump.
Anyway, let's look.
So here's, it was from Headline USA.
We both read it.
I thought, I've got to dig because I've never heard of this publication.
Well, it turns out, go to the next clip here, it's from Wired magazine, which is a reputable, reputable magazine.
And the article came out just a couple of days ago.
Top FBI official urges agents to use warrantless wiretaps on U.S. soil.
So they say now that they've got the power, you've got to use it or you'll lose it.
But the point that we wanted to talk about today is a little bit down in the article.
You go to that next point.
This is the part that's so disgusting.
It said, well, the 702 program, that's the warrantless spying on Americans, has been widely criticized by privacy and civil liberties proponents.
The U.S. House Intelligence Committee is throwing a party Wednesday night to celebrate the recent extension of its 702 surveillance program.
The House Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Turner and Ranking Member Jim Hines blasted out invitations announcing a bipartisan celebration of the 702 program's continuation.
The event which the lawmakers have dubbed FISA Fest is being held in a reception room at the U.S. Capitol building.
A House Intelligence Committee spokesman did not respond.
So not only did they violate a Constitution, not only did they spit in our face, they actually held a party to celebrate it.
But you know, they'd say, well, we're protecting our republic and what have we respond on January 6th?
We took care of those insurrectionists.
They were exerting all this danger.
But they go and do this.
And when you compare the two, which does the most damage?
Of course, there's nothing positive really that comes out of January 6th.
There could be some good advice come out of it.
And you could do that without putting people to prison and rejecting the whole justice system and making sure that we don't have any crimps in the style of the FBI and the rest of them.
And lo and behold, they found out they were involved in life, like they generally are involved in so many of these things.
But the big thing is, FISA is the example of the type of bipartisanship that comes out of, you know, the more difficult it is and the longer it lags when you really need it, they'll come together.
And that's what they do on the budget all the time.
But they never come together and say, okay, the budget is out of place.
Let's cut the budget 1%.
Oh, that's treasonous as far as they're concerned.
Why?
We can print this money and pay it back or let the kids pay back.
America First Flexibility 00:08:42
Yeah.
I mean, it almost reminds you of Imperial Rome.
Here we are.
We're the victims of all this spying on us.
And here are our overlords in Washington.
And you know, some of those meeting rooms in the Capitol are very nice, very glitzy, very ritzy.
So you can imagine people like Turner, Representative Turner, sitting around with a cocktail glass or a nice glass of champagne, eating some fancy catered food, celebrating how they've trampled on our civil liberties, destroyed the Fourth Amendment, and thinking that they're patting each other on the back like they're actual heroes for doing it.
You know, it's repulsive.
You know, when I read the quote here about them reassuring us, and I mentioned it, they're defending their position on this, to continue to demonstrate why tools like this, and they're talking about FISA, and they're doctoring it up a little bit, essential to our mission.
We need to use them while also holding ourselves accountable for doing so Properly and in compliance with legal requirements.
Isn't that such a joke?
It's a letter of the law, yeah.
It's terrible.
That just shows the contempt that they hold for us.
So we're ready to move on to the last one here.
And this is kind of on a theme, and this one isn't as universally negative.
There's a little bit of optimism on here, but this is something that we saw in the American Conservative magazine.
If you can put the next clip on, now this is an article that's written by James Cardin, who's a pretty insightful person, I have to say, and he does a lot of work on the American Conservative.
He was, I think, in the State Department as an advisor.
Anyway, which way GOP?
July's Republican National Convention will be the stage for a showdown between America first wing of the GOP and the Warhawks.
Now, you had a reaction to this.
You said that was a little simplistic.
Yeah, that's for sure.
And, you know, the other thing about this is whose name do you find here?
Who's leading the Warhawks?
Graham's name comes up again, and Cotton's name comes up again.
Mike Johnson's name comes up again.
It's back to this bipartisanship.
But, you know, the big thing here is definitions.
You know, and I was mentioning it to you earlier because there's not a precise definition for populism.
I don't think it's a horrible word or intent, but if I ever use it, I use a word called populistic because I think libertarianism is populistic in the sense that the masses benefit from this and it takes all the power, the political power, away from the special interests, especially when they control the military-industrial complex, the pharmaceutical industry, the monetary system, the whole works.
And that is different than what it's like when you, and that to me is the true populistic thing, would be to have liberty.
But they don't talk about liberty.
And the one thing that most people now think of what populism is, is America First, which is okay.
The freer we are, the better it is for America.
But what they're doing is using it for a militant idea.
America First means nobody shows us around, you mess with us and we'll bomb you.
Of course, I've been arguing that case, the policy that we've been living with is you do what we tell you, we're the boss, we have an empire.
And if you don't do it, if you do what we tell you, you'll get lots of large ass.
We'll send you money and we'll trade with you.
But if you don't do exactly as we say, you may get bombed.
And that to me.
So they use that.
But the other thing that they use that they won't be using when they start talking about at the convention is we need to stop this gabbing about the purity of democracy because they're promoting the dictatorship of 51% of the people.
And the more I think about that, the more I'm convinced.
I used to think, well, you'll never change people's mind.
They have to do it.
But I think it's important people realize that because, you know, all the people who want big government are the ones that shout the most about democracy.
We do this.
Houston just destroy democracy.
So that to me is important.
But the definitions aren't likely to be mentioned because you could have populism, democracy, non-interventionism, volunteerism, liberty, but they ought to let people know what they're talking about.
But just to say it's the Warhawks against American First, there's a little bit of truth to that, but that's not, I think, the separation.
Because too often, somebody who says American First might be hitting the other side on occasion, too.
It's not one that they have a firm principle.
The firm principle that they all accept is interventionism.
Yeah.
That the government's responsibility to keep peace in the world and take care of the people who need help.
You have to intervene.
You have to do this.
And if you don't, you're hateful.
You're immoral.
You're unpatriotic.
You're promoting war.
You know, that whole thing.
And that's the problem: getting people to understand that I always, the best thing anybody could have said to me on occasion after a speech was, you know, what you say, you know, it's just common sense what you're telling us.
You know, it's sort of a light bulb goes on.
That sounds like pretty much common sense.
Yeah, the problem with the whole idea of the America First kind of conservative thing is that it's kind of a movable feast because we saw a lot of Republicans who are, we don't want to flush another $10 down the toilet of this Ukraine war.
And then the next breath, because we've got to go to war with China.
You know, I mean, so it's not really America first.
And this is the, you know, and you know this well.
I mean, this is the core problem with realism, you know, because it's who gets to decide.
You know, it's like, well, this is not in our interest.
This one is.
We've got to do this one.
You know, there's no real criteria.
There's no objective criteria.
There's no philosophical criteria for any of this.
You know, which is where non-interventionism, unless it's for you know for defensive purposes, it has a real clear intellectual criteria.
I mean, it has a real basis in reality.
Well, I think the statement you made, I think, is the key one.
Who decides?
Who decides all this complexity on economics?
Well, Adam Smith suggested there's an invisible hand out there and things will be taken care of.
So it's who decides on in a voluntary society.
It takes care of social problems, take care of religious problems, and the rejection of violence and aggression.
And all of a sudden, that's common sense.
And I think it's very appealing, but they just don't hear that message very often.
They probably squelch it in a university.
If somebody wanted to promote that and demonstrate for liberty, boy, they might be pretty tough on that individual, arguing a good case for the principles of liberty.
Yeah, well, let's look at how James Carter broke it down really quick.
And there's a lot to read.
I'm not going to read it, obviously.
But if you can put that next clip up, because he makes a couple of good points.
He says, in the two weeks since the passage of Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan A, the contours of an emerging split within the Republican Party have become too obvious to ignore.
And I think he's right to a degree, like you said, Dr. Paul, to some degree it's wishful thinking.
And I respect him for doing that wishful thinking.
I do too, and so do you, I know.
But he says on the one side of the usual suspects, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, we talk about him, and Tom Cotton, who never met a war they were not eager to fund, inflame, and send young Americans to fight in.
And if you go to the next one, so Cardin says, the Graham Cottonwing of the GOP can fairly be said to have the wind at its back.
And that's true, unfortunately.
And he references what you talked about earlier, is House Speaker Mike Johnson.
And Cardin says, as a backbencher, Johnson could have reasonably been described as America First friendly, but no more.
Johnson now finds himself with the only recent elected official to be seduced by the siren song of politicized intelligence, remarking after the House vote, and this is Johnson, I really do believe the intel and the briefings we got.
Heart Attacks and Personality 00:03:03
I think Vladimir Putin would continue to march through Europe if he were allowed.
So that's the one wing.
And then they go to the next wing, is he talks about JD Vance as a part of that wing and his principled opposition for funding the disastrous war in Ukraine.
So I think there is a square off like this, but the lines are not quite as clear.
And there are not enough people on our side.
That's half the other problem.
You know, the American First, I think that term probably originated trying to keep us out of World War II.
It might have been around, but that's when it became very well known.
And the article says, Taft, an early backer of the American First Committee, opposed the creation of NATO, criticized the scope of the Marshall Plan and Truman Doctrine.
But Eisenhower, you know, and I remember his eight years very clearly.
And it was personality as much, personality, a military hero.
And he was not pompous.
And his decorum was different.
So he was very, very popular.
And he, of course, left an impression, just an image impression, because it was during the time he was president, he had a heart attack.
And that was back when they treated heart attacks differently.
He went to bed and made these patients sicker.
So when he had his heart attack, they got him up to his farm in Gettysburg.
Everybody in Gettysburg knew about that.
So I was still in college when that was happening.
But the opposition to the American First position is the intelligence apparatus, including, among others, this was in contest in conflict with American First.
They bring up two people we talk about a lot.
And among others, Allen and John Foster Dallas.
They really set the standards for all this stuff going on.
So they would be very pleased.
And they initiated it because, of course, Alan Dulles is the one that I date for the 1963s and the assassinations.
And I think, you know, in many ways, I use the word a little loosely, but I think it was a true coup.
You know, as far as the respect and the theme of our country, you know, was changed dramatically.
And it hasn't changed.
It hasn't reversed the trend.
It keeps getting worse.
We've already just talked about how they do it.
They keep passing these laws.
You do it.
And Fiza Court.
I mean, who would have ever dreamed they would keep doing it?
Yeah.
Well, the thing about the Dulles, you almost could say that they are part, they created part of what we call the deep state now, you know, because, and you've said this too in the book that we've both read, it was Great Brothers, about how, you know, Eisenhower didn't want any visible wars, really, you know.
Isolationism's Rise 00:04:55
Well, and you know, and Dulles came in and said, don't worry about it, we'll take care of it under the surface.
Yeah, and Eisenhower believed in that because one of the first things he did, he participated in a coup in Iran.
Yeah, yeah.
You know, he got rid of Mossadegh.
And really, that was the one where somebody by the name of Bill, somebody you know, talking about, that when I brought that up, he says, I don't want to hear anything about history because I wanted to give an explanation of why the Iranians might have a justification.
That's the same way it is now.
To think that there's all good and all evil, and you can divide them up and perfectly divide them.
But if you say anything like that, do you understand that maybe, is it possible that the Palestinians have a beef?
Yeah.
And just sorting out the truth means that people should be willing to look at both sides of these things, especially if it could avoid some of this warmongering.
But right now, it looks like the wars are going to continue.
Well, until we go broke, which will be soon.
Well, I'm going to close out, Dr. Paul, with an announcement, and it's an important announcement, so grab your pencils.
I'm going to announce the date of the Ron Paul Institute's annual summer Washington, D.C. conference.
That date is August 31st.
We were going to announce it earlier, but we had some challenges to get the place we wanted to go.
But we'll be out by Dulles Airport for those of you who do not want to go into D.C., and I don't blame you.
But it's going to be a great event.
August 31st, Labor Day weekend.
We've got great room rates, especially for the D.C. area, trust me.
I will hope to have within a couple of days more information and tickets available.
But just plan ahead and see if you can spend Labor Day weekend, not just with us, not just with our great speakers, but with our great audience of fantastic people, get to know people.
It's always just a ton of fun.
I mean, we're tired at the end, but our batteries are recharged.
So mark that down.
Hey, and I'm going to finish by making a point again about what we were talking about, about the American First, and the Warhawks.
They use the term, and we've talked about this a lot, and that is the isolationism, that you guys just want to be isolationists.
Of course, that's based on a lie, because look at who's getting more isolated every single day.
The United States is becoming more isolated, and we've been able, because we were outrageously wealthy, and we did have a good system where we had more liberty than most countries.
But that is changing, and it's changing where, you know, educational systems, we might be down to 10th or something like that.
We are going downhill on this.
And the whole thing is, is the way we've handled our foreign policy, both by our management of the international financial system as well as our foreign policy, has led people to be very disgusted with us.
And we are being isolated.
So this whole thing is based on a lie.
You're a bunch of isolationists because a free society is one that promotes free trade.
The founders understood it.
They say that brings people together.
If you're likely to trade, if you trade with people, you're likely not to have a war with people.
But right now, there's too much internationalism.
If you're a non-isolationist, if you're for free trade and all, we don't need the United Nations and NATO and all this stuff going on because that's nothing more than political power.
Who, as you say, is another organization right now that is becoming domineering and they're getting ready for the next epidemic.
And that's the rejection of the free market and medicine.
So it is terrible.
Terminology is very important.
And a lot of the lies are told and put out there by just one word.
Oh, you're a bunch of isolationists.
And therefore, you should be discarded and not considered as understanding what's going on.
So there's a lot of techniques and a lot of things that go on that tries to destroy our mission.
But the message is it's a wonderful message.
The message of liberty is something that I'm surprised we don't do better with it because so much good could come from it.
But the immediate benefits coming from the welfare warfare state where there's immediate promises and everybody's going to do well is too tempting.
And then it's not until things get tough.
Like right now, things are getting tough because living beyond our means and printing the money has led to this inflation.
And right now, that is getting to be a bigger and bigger issue.
And we'll continue.
I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the Liberty Report.
Export Selection