How Can Neocons Defeat Iranians Without Defeating Their Buddies In Saudi Arabia, Too?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

Subscribe: Email | RSS

Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – ” Senator Ayotte says to Senator Bomb-a-lot: ‘After all these years of this ill-fitting alliance, the U.S. has demanded little in return.’  But Kelly, the U.S. does get a lot in return. Senator Bomb-a-Lot and his buddies at Martin Marietta and Raytheon and General Dynamics and Boeing and all the rest of them, that’s who gets the return. By the way, all those companies I just mentioned, they’re in the big circle. Much of what they do is in the big circle, described two days ago of what the political elite class is made up of and why you can’t reform it.” Check out today’s transcript AND CLIP OF THE DAY  for the rest….

FOLKS, a message from Mike – The Clip of The Day videos, Project 76 features, Church Doctrine videos and everything else on this site are supported by YOU. We have over 70, of my personally designed, written, produced and directed products for sale in the Founders Tradin’ Post, 24/7,  here. You can also support our efforts with a Founders Pass membership granting total access to years of My work for just .17 cents per day. Not convinced? Take the tour! Thanks for 18 years of mike church.com! – Mike

HERE’S YOUR FREE AUDIO PREVIEW OF THIS CLIP OF THE DAY – TO HEAR THE ENTIRE EPISODE JOIN FOUNDERS PASS NOW!

[private |FP-Monthly|FP-Yearly|FP-Yearly-WLK|FP-Yearly-So76|Founding Brother|Founding Father|FP-Lifetime]

[/private]

Begin Mike Church Show Transcript

Mike:  The point is that he was interrogating people.  He wasn’t taking for granted that he knew what Athenians thought – this is my point – and he lived among Athenians.  Do you understand this?  Are we all clear on this?  Socrates did not know and he was not clear on how and what Athenians thought and so he wanted to know.  He lived amongst the Athenians.  So how does Ms. Ayotte possibly know what Iranians want?  Has she interviewed them?  Has she interrogated them?  [mocking] “Mike, the whole world knows what they watch, and in the newspapers.”  Oh, you trust the media when they reveal that to you, but when they reveal facts about Sarah Palin, they’re liars.  Right.

Do you see the errors in reasoning here?  Which is it?  Is the media not to be trusted?  To me, that’s a blanket statement.  It’s either a universal or it doesn’t apply.  Or is the media to be trusted?  [mocking] “Well, it depends on what media you’re talking about.”  Right.  So if we just keep parsing this, we can argue from now until the end of, oh, wait a minute, the next election cycle.  [mocking] “Yeah, then we’re gonna seek some truth.  But then we’re going to start arguing about this” and we’ll keep dividing it and dividing it.  You haven’t really ever answered any questions.  How does she know this?  Kelley Vlahos now, commenting on what you just heard:

[reading]

Mere hours after the Saudis (armed with $90 billion in U.S. weaponry and more on the way) . . .

[private |FP-Monthly|FP-Yearly|FP-Yearly-WLK|FP-Yearly-So76|Founding Brother|Founding Father|FP-Lifetime]

[end reading]

Mike:  By the way, who paid for the $90 billion that we gave to our – Saudis-Muslim buddies?  So we have good Muslims and bad Muslims.  So these Muslims are to be trusted with $90 billion worth of your and my financed military hardware.  Wait a minute, I thought that we had this vainglorious Defense Department and Pentagon and all these vainglorious, corrupt weapons manufacturers to defend Seattle.  I thought we had all these weapons manufacturers and all these armaments in order to defend Charleston, South Carolina and her port.  I thought we had all this to defend the Port of New Orleans where I live.  [mocking] “Well, Mike, we have that, too, but we have to defend the Saudi port.”  Why do we have to defend the Saudi port?  These guys are driving around in nickel- and titanium-plated Mercedes-Benzes.

[reading]

Mere hours after the Saudis (armed with $90 billion in U.S. weaponry and more on the way) began pounding Shia Houthi rebel targets in Yemen, the two senators were lamenting that Washington had not been let in on the operation.

“The fact that the Arab coalition no longer trusts us, or feels they need to inform us as what they’re about to do, is chilling,” Graham said on March 26. “They no longer have confidence in the United States of America,” McCain enjoined. “The Saudis did the right thing.”

This has been a common refrain from the senior senators, who have become as predictable as the tides when it comes to blaming the president for “leading from behind,” or not showing the appropriate obeisance to certain foreign allies—whether Israel on the Iran nuclear deal or Ukraine in their struggle against Russia.

But that Obama should be admonished for a perceived laggardness in the Sunni Gulf states’ swift intervention in Yemen, in what has been called a battle for sectarian dominance in the region, shows how little these men think of the American public. After 14 years of fighting Sunni insurgencies with no end in sight (Iraq and Afghanistan, al-Qaeda everywhere, now ISIS), the idea the U.S. could be shamed into joining a coalition of countries espousing highly questionable motives and human rights records, in an intervention no one can rightly explain, should raise a few red flags.

[end reading]

Mike:  [mocking] “Why?  They’re brown people.  They’re over there.  They’re not here.  Bomb them.  What’s the question?”  Yes, yes, I know what they did.  Yes, but Mr. and Mrs. American citizen, there were civilians there, women and children.  [mocking] “So?  It’s not like women and children in Amarillo – those women and children live in the Middle East.  They don’t deserve to draw breath.  By the way, can I get ten dollars to support my pro-life causes?”

[reading]

There are, of course, two prevailing boilerplate explanations for why the U.S. should intervene more strenuously: 1) Yemen is boiling over in a proxy war in which the bad guys are power-hungry Iranians seeking to establish Persian-led Shi’a hegemony across the region, and/or 2) Washington must support “pillars” of stability like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, else the Middle East will go up in flames. Both claims have been deemed exaggerated and oversimplified in varying degrees by national security experts who see the events in Yemen as nothing more than a civil war that could turn into a sectarian blow-out across the region if airstrikes continue and Iranian proxies get further enmeshed in the situation.

[end reading]

Mike:  Folks, in other words, how long has this been going on?  How long has there been marauding, fighting, raping, robbing, murdering, enslaving in what we call the Middle East?  Please, can I get an answer from the student body?  No, you won’t answer that because it’s an inconvenient truth?  That’s right, it is inconvenient.  I’ll tell you, the year AD 643.  Oh, but because we have planes and bombs and millions of people, 8,000 miles away, but millions of people dedicated to stopping this, bringing it to an end (which they’re not), we can stop this forever.  Who’s we?  When has there not been marauding, raping, robbing, enslaving, pillaging in what you call the Middle East?  Why should the citizens of Nebraska be taxed to join the insanity?

[reading]

The Saudi government has just hired two top Republican political spin doctors for tens of thousands of dollars to ensure that the above narratives stick, however, and to make sure that U.S. elected officials react in a matter consistent with the Saudi point of view on Yemen and the Gulf states’ desire to see President Bashar al-Assad deposed in Syria.

[end reading]

Mike:  Why don’t we just go in there and do what we did in Ukraine?  Just send the CIA in there, start a coup, and get rid of Assad.  It can’t be that hard.  We did it in Ukraine.  We did it in 1952 or 1953 with Mosaddegh in Iran when British Petroleum stake in Iranian oil was about to expire.  These things aren’t hard to do.  We’ve been screwing up the Middle East since the 1940s.  We’re good at this.  Just think about the prior statement.  Remember the little circle and the big circle argument I told you about a few days ago?  The Republican political strategists that are hired by the Saudi Arabians are in that big circle that I told you about.  Just bear that in mind.  That puts a face on some of the people in the big circle, the one that’s impregnable, the one that’s not going to let you take your tax dollars back or let you constrict the size of government because it would constrict their corrupt livelihoods.  Just keep that in mind.

[reading]

While U.S. lawmakers and the constellation of Washington think tanks can always be persuaded, [Mike: Again, Washington think tanks, in the big circle described two days ago.] the American people are far from convinced that Saudi Arabia, a monarchy that beheads people for blasphemy, covers women from head to toe, keeps its people largely unemployed and poverty stricken, and exports the kind of terror-inspiring Wahhabism that makes suicide bombers out of boys, really has American best interests at heart.

Nevertheless, Saudi Arabia has done a stellar job at maintaining the fiction that even while it is everything that America is not, the kingdom is worthy of unconditional support. The same goes for places like Egypt and like Bahrain, which itself has largely escaped U.S. censure in its violent (Saudi-assisted) crackdown on the country’s oppressed Shi’a majority.

Aside from regional “stability,” the sword of Damocles ostensibly hanging over Washington until now has been oil (though the U.S. imports less oil from Saudi Arabia now than it does from Latin American countries and Canada), and U.S-global economic concerns linked to Saudi investments in the U.S. and the preservation of dollar as the world reserve currency. Those cringeworthy kisses and hand-holding with the man in the flowing robes weren’t for nothing.

After all these years of this ill-fitting alliance, the U.S. has demanded little in return.

[end reading]

Mike:  But Kelly, the U.S. does get a lot in return. Senator Bomb-a-Lot and his buddies at Martin Marietta and Raytheon and General Dynamics and Boeing and all the rest of them, that’s who gets the return.  By the way, all those companies I just mentioned, they’re in the big circle.  Much of what they do is in the big circle, described two days ago of what the political elite class is made up of and why you can’t reform it.

[reading]

Meanwhile, Washington continues to demur on the possible Saudi connection to 9/11, and has been tepid in its criticism of Saudi support of Sunni extremists in Syria and Iraq, including ISIS. All this makes the McCain-Graham insistence that Washington “prove” its loyalty so mendacious. Who should prove what to whom?

Conservative columnist Trudy Rubin raised these contradictions in an April 11 column about Riaf Badawi, the Saudi Arabian blogger whose case went viral after he was sentenced to 1,000 lashes for advocating free speech in the kingdom. He got 50 of those lashes before an international outcry forced the government to postpone the rest, yet he still languishes in a 10-year jail term and is in danger of being retried on apostasy charges, punishable by death (likely a public beheading, of which there have been 54 already in 2015).

[/private] “[Badawi] was trying to encourage the kind of peaceful debate that is essential if Arab nations are ever to emerge from the backwardness that fueled the failed Arab Spring,” wrote Rubin.

[end reading]

Mike:  They’re not going to emerge because they’re Mohammedans.  This is what people don’t understand.  This is why a study of theology in these matters is important.  It’s the missing piece.  A theological view of this would inform you that these people cannot be convinced to do certain things by simply dangling the things that Westerners covet in front of them.  In other words, yeah, they like their Mercedes-Benzes, but they’ll give them up.  They’ll choose Mohammed and jihad over the Mercedes is the point.  In other words, the carrots you can dangle in front of these people are minimal, they’re limited.

When Andrew Bieszad was on this show, last time he was on, he said something that those of you that had previously admired and loved the Muslim scholar that is our frequent guest, then decided after you heard that that he wasn’t so scholarly any longer and now he’s just another crackpot Catholic.  Bieszad said: If you want to beat the Mohammedans, you have to treat them the way the French, the Spanish, the Italians, and the rest of the Europeans did.  Number one, you don’t make friends with these people.  Number two, your clergy is actively and always trying to convert them to the faith and out of the alleged faith, the faith of Mohammed.  Number three, if that fails, then you become defensive and warlike.  That’s the process.  You have the theological position from the start, that it is the Mohammedan’s religion that drives him.  If he’s truly faithful to his religion, he’s not going to abdicate it because you take his Mercedes-Benz away.  He might want to become a martyr after that.

End Mike Church Show Transcript