wells in the u. a. this week the usa spending more in defense than the next 9 countries combined, commemorated its failure to defend new york city in washington dc 23 years ago. while the attacks originated in c, i a support the terrorist and comfortable and i've got a son. another $911.00 was commemorated on wednesday in the milton friedman economic neoliberalism flash going to chile. on september, the 11th 1973, the ca, and forced to create uh, that would see the elimination of democratically elected lead to salvador i and for decades it would be a template, an example for installing death, squads, torture, privatization, and us vessel states all around the global south this week though, the present boss of the c i a was not talking about mistakes ahead of the trump powers debates in philadelphia. he was in london backing israel and ukraine on the sofa with a supine and my 6 bosses. they congratulated zalinski on the ukrainian invasion of russia, and all this is comalla harris said she was proud to receive the endorsement of the man who 1st induced ronald reagan for president dick cheney trying me now from

washington dc. doug bondo former special assistance to us president ronald reagan. he is a senior fellow at the washington. think tank the cato institute dog, thanks so much for coming on as well as the debate between the 2 is really bankrolled candidates. that was the anniversary of $911.00 chile, of course, and the world trade center and the pentagon. what did you make just prior to that debate? all of us. oh, cool. well, certainly, muslims in michigan would call a holocaust harris, saying she was proud to get the endorsement of dick cheney george w bush's vice president. and someone who, you know, probably i was never a fan of the katie. i call him, you know, dick, i had other priorities, j, d, this is somebody who got 5 deferments to avoid going to vietnam. but then once you became a exceeded draft date, you suddenly became quite a hawk. so i think it's an embarrassment for the harris. i can pay, you know, democrats are rightly vilified to dick cheney back when he was running for office,

and he was promoting more all over the globe. now all of a sudden they've decided that he's a wonderful statesman and the to have him endorsing harris somehow is a promotion of democracy. the civility in america, to my mind, it's quite extraordinary. his record is an odious one. you would wish the democrats could uh, you know, put him aside, just frankly, as many republicans you will have done. so what's it like say i want to get back to reagan in a moment. i mean, you know, it on this show, i sometimes show the results of elk as a new york times is a piece here on the front cover. today's new york times or the new york times. here is simple act of pampering. let's ukraine's women show russia hasn't broken them. that's the tops. that's the main story on the middle says what is going on? i know blinking the this is being recorded before any decision on long range weapons, but he's given one another, a point 7 of a 1000000000 dollars worth of us public money. along with is

a british mass of public and state. what was the atmosphere they have? because i know you and many of the critical analysts, professors, academics, and presumably people who is keeping quiet in the security state from them and have grave doubts about the uh, the defense. all of the, as kamala has shut down, trump when he was talking about the chances of nuclear war, the washington establishment like that in brussels and many european capitals. it's all pretty much the same. i mean, it's very much a triumph fullest attitude. you know, i joked at the american monroe doctrine, you know, mean the u. s. is, has the right to interfere, you know, up to any other countries border and probably into other countries. i mean, the u. s. has an extraordinary sense of its mission, of, of its unique role in the world. you know, people in washington very much believed that. and they all of the kind of hypocrisies and sanctimony along the way. they just don't even recognize. so they

talk about the human rights in iran, and then they, you know, suck up to saudi arabia, provided with weapons to kill thousands of human beings. unfortunately, that is the size of the day on the, on the side of the blank, this piece. now breaking outside uribe are open to them to see in uh, in damascus. in the past 48 hours, there are deals with the rush, the u. s. as opposed us has been horrified by the fact that arab countries have decided that the way to deal with syria is to try to actually have a relationship with it. as opposed to try to your, your fun the guerrillas and tossed it out of office. and washington is verified by this process. do you believe that washington is disabled? lives in be a government here in the middle east, if any more, approachable or piece breaks out anymore. i mean, aside from what's happening to the opposite, why don't washington is hesitant to do that because it has an awful lot at stake with, you know, saudi arabia, it was cheaper oil painting of the relationship between the us and saudi arabia

long has been very close but they're unhappy with that and they weren't happy with the u. a. e and other countries that have also talked with, you know, syria and talked about your change in policy. you know, us as never happy when other countries don't obey the washington line. and what they found now is it, even in the middle east, it's very hard at times to convince their us closest friends to maintain a line that is viewed as harmful by those same countries. i mean your close observer, all of these things bend. if kamala harris gets in in november, will it just be more of the same? and you'll be told what to do by those a so called deep states. um, it saves us to hate voices. and would it make little difference actually have trump going in because it, when someone flatters trump, so we hear from member was he just does the e. and hans, is this one? broadband draining it. alright, kamala harris. i mean, i don't think she has much independent thought on these issues. it's not clear to

me. she has a lot of independent thought on any issues, but certainly on foreign policy have never been terribly interest or interesting to her. you know, she was a state attorney general, she was a senator who focused on domestic issues, international issues. i don't think i've ever been something she cared much about. i don't see a likely to have much change. she has said at least some words that suggest greater concern for palestinians, but this is an issue where it's very hard to get any of the establishment democrats to change their position. they are almost as bad as republicans interviewing committees. policy basically is focused on what the jerusalem and what reward wants and nothing else matters very much. younger progressives and the democratic party are challenging that, but i don't think it will make a lot of difference to her. i think trump is much harder to predict. you know, on the middle east, he showed me that he is going to do what israel wants, he's likely to do what saudi arabia wants elsewhere,

he might do something that is because those are opposites, according to statements coming from yet. oh, well, i mean i, of course, of course, but that, that's the i already the trump administration. his 1st visit when he was president, was to re all he participated in the famous sort doubts and seemed quite in trans though his son in law wandered over to saudi arabia and talked about doing business deals. at the same time. the trump, the fully embrace netanyahu, it came up with his deal of the century, which is a deal is essentially for israel knox, for palestinians. you know, so he played both sides of the last time. probably won't change that policy again. or frankly, we never know that i think the one thing about trump is he recognizes last time he got played by a lot of the people that he put into office. he wants to get out of syria. they lied to him about the other troops there. they wanted to get out of afghanistan and the entire military establishment that resisted. i think this time he might be more

willing to take action, but some people in the office to agree with them ahead of time. but i wouldn't want to predict, or all of that's going to go, i think there might be some good decisions and there might be some crazy decisions . i'll reduce very unpredictable calvert to determine the 2nd. but with do you think these uh, bite and harris officials? i'm come all there is a self, i'm jake sullivan, and that's the blinking. and these people where did they get the lack of fear of world war 3? from the most know how many minutes it would take of it for a north korean this out to hit los angeles, basically the, the russia has more nuclear weapons than the united states. how do they manage to have so little tab, functional fear that the, the united states could be threatened by the policies of using your up is a battle ground in their, um, in their grandiose schemes, as well as to make the 1st point is that they see politics of supreme, you know, so they care about re election. they care about making the case against republicans

. they make care about making the case against whoever they're running against. so that tends to be their focus. it's not america's interest of the world interest. it's their own political interest. i think 2nd, it's arrogance. it's the so standing assumption that america is an exceptional country. no one really can resist america. they cannot imagine that another country would be preferred to challenge the u. s. they view the us having and trembled. power, military power around the world, backed by the world's democracies. know for them, it's very hard to kind of credit russia with a willingness perhaps to challenge the u. s. same thing with china. same thing in the middle east. and i think, i think that's really the danger comes in. when it comes down to it, they tell themselves, well, look, the russians really haven't done anything. they are a paper tiger. they wouldn't dare act. nato's more powerful than them. you know, were really important. without a sense, in terms of how much this matters to rush to the fact that russia is not going to

allow itself to be pushed around. like other countries have been. i think it's extraordinarily dangerous. i think that the commentary by, you know, burns, you know, in his, uh, you know, financial times interview was extraordinary. he admitted that he thought in 2022. there was a chance. the russians would use tactical nuclear weapons, but he insisted we will not be intimidate, this is bill and head of this, the bill, the inside of the see a former ambassador to mosca. what would happen? i don't know whether you know and what, what would have happened to bill buns? is he being blackmailed? because i think he's being why be respected in moscow and around the world as the diplomat. what happened to him when he became the head of the c i. a in langley. the what's happened here is that he's walking a very narrow line. you listen to the rest of the interview and he was much more cautious on certain things and you would hear from blinking your from sullivan or from, by the way, i'm sorry, the way he uphold. it'd be a cost offensive this a,

by the time of visit interview being rude, customer obviously the that wouldn't be a coast defensive argument. equal to the significant achievement and said that the, yay ukraine is invaded. russia. how great because good symbolic place of course, because of the battle with the nazis by balloon predict exactly how it was going to turn out. i think that he played a game there. this is the problem, or you're going to serve and administration or not. i don't know him personally, so i can't speak to his personal views. but it struck me that if you listen to him, you listen to blank and you get a slightly different sense blinking, i think there's no sense of reality. burns, i think that there was the problem is he's out here to speak you on an international stage. it shows the problem. even if you're a fair share, a fairly sensible person, you get pulled into this kind of international machine, you get pulled into the establishment. what's been called the blog in washington. it's very hard to escape it. i love to know what he's saying privately. i'd love to believe that he's giving them serious advice as opposed to being

a cheerleader. i don't know, but i think this is the, there you look at the people who serve pro, what does it like to work for donald trump? you know, as president, i think this has to be a very strange experience. should you do it or not? you know, do you defend the president or not in washington? you're expected to be loyal. i think burns is doing that. my hope is that at least internally, this is something when you look back, it is 2008 nemo, it's quite famous. where he won the bush administration, expansion of nato is viewed by everyone in moscow. not just booting as being a direct threat to their vital interest released by we can name that have been released by we could out see he was, he told that admitted duration. that so we know that he understands these issues. yeah, it looks to me like he recognizes you can't publicly disagree. my hope is it internally he's presenting some of these views that he presented in the past. we don't know about it and the intent is to blink, and maybe privately he's saying,

as he's saying i actually i'm looking like other post other members of the body harris cabinet to post regime employment. again, holmes company, consultancies, is that really running the policy rather than the american, the benefits and it'd be happiness with the american people. so i think it's an important issue. i don't think american foreign policy is made, you know, by the kind of the industrial complex i call it indeed, the university military industrial complex. i mean that the media, the military industrial complex. but i think that it reinforces it. lots of your general officers guys with stars on their shoulders when they retire, end up as consultants, they end up as on boards of via kind of military contractors. these are people who end up on retainer or fox news and other things where they are expected to spout. you're very conservative, very hawkish views. i think it reinforces the process. if you want to be successful

after you leave office, you know, you end up, you don't dispute the party law and i've run into that myself of people. i have debated on tv who, after the lights went off and the cameras went off, they admitted that. what's your saying was a complete lot, doug banner that was randall, i'll stop you that more from the phone with special assistant to you as president ronald reagan after this. right. the

there's no end in sight over how you're going to continue to destroy the earth. is the case for the madness of the people. i tried to go to the gym, but i'm certainly not ready to fight russia. this is also absurd. this is the 3rd world lunacy re washington's 1st floor. so the funder lion likes to say, we have the tools while we just start with stability and business deal. so let me, let me on my have very quick propaganda. you know, a price here in new york. i think we don't know the aftermath any time that you're not allowed to ask questions, you should ask all of the questions. the more questions ask the better the answer is will be the welcome back to going underground is still here with the home is special assistant to you as president ronald reagan and senior

fellow at the cato institute, doug band to doug. i interrupted you in part one when you were explaining how people privately tell you that what they say in public as regards the, the total was of the united states is often quite different. what do you think then uh, is the next few months uh, as regards the war in your up. i mean, what, what do you think should happen? i know you're treated about this before with the disgraceful may british prime minister bars and young so much it happened to him. he's been cooling for uh, obviously uh, weapons, illegal weapons to israel. and he's also going for ukrainians more young ukrainians to join up and get killed. arguably in the meat grinder, why the village to that virus, johnson and listens and then skis, ami it was started, smooth people who won't worship your kind of enjoy the benefits of it. i think the same thing for lindsey graham, for example, us senator,

who favors basically every word that one can imagine. now these are the folks they want to send other people off into extraordinary damage around the world. and i think what's striking about these wars is the number of civilians who die in other countries. the united states, u. k. europeans are not the ones paying the price ukrainians are paying the price. russians are paying the price and the long term costs of this. i think you're just devastated. like we need peace there. you know, that doesn't mean i've been very clear. vladimir putin is an aggressor. i think he was wrong in attracting to craig. but we have to recognize allied leaders, united states, europe, nato, all share the blame unless they were utterly irresponsible expansion of nato. and despite the assurances they made to the contrary, despite the knowledge they had for people like birds, that this was an incendiary issue. the issue of extraordinary importance to russia, that essentially we are fighting to destroy russia by sacrificing ukrainian life. so i think it's disgusting. i think it's, it also policy and over the long term,

it's a destabilizing policy. we need to get the war over. i think that requires the us and europeans to talk to russia. these, the, your, what kind of a new security structure can be created? ukraine has to be neutral. i think that's the reality here. but protected sovereignty allow it to join the, you know, what kind of a system can we create the rush, it can live with the projects, the ukrainians. it ends the war. instead of pouring more money into it, more weapons into it and prolonging the fight. we have to be looking for ways to try to end the fight, even the joints you a memo released bi weekly, leaks about the now ca, direct the middle button, someone's a boot and should have gone in a little earlier to protect the people of the hands and don't yet, scott, you really? what about your up west and your, you know, there was some media speculation. i think a bloomberg that the, the united states is going to wrap. and the real is that the growing global south countries, the brakes countries, asia, this is the future. how have you been able to explain to your self as to be

suicidal, economic policies of western europe as a sales sanction and so on, on the altar of this uh, washington policy of war, proxy war in your as i said, just as a result of dependency on the u. s. as long as you expect the us to defend you as long as you're willing to turn your security over to the united states, suddenly you find yourself vulnerable. you don't want to view an alternative value away. you go along with the united states or you look at germany, you know, the, the rapid increase in your energy costs, the impact on the chemical and other industries. look at the fact that as far as we can tell you rein attacked the german, these north stream pipeline. i mean, this isn't our war bill burns and this a. yeah. so what that surprised me that together, that it was not just what it could very well have been more than one. i mean, that's an act of war yet germany has to swallow. the poles are told,

the german shut up. you know, a bill that'd be prime minister tuscan basically said you shouldn't, even, they're just shut up about that. so don't talk about it. oh, this is extraordinary. i mean, the europeans are, you know, what's happening to their economies, the political, you know, fighting with in the fact that, you know, you look at politics in germany today where the f d is number 2 and the polls look at your france with this fracture, electorate floor where the of the r n and the pen, and i'd be now ready to go. i mean, the next president could very well be more a little pen. the transformation of the political systems, europeans are paying a very heavy price. and there are, of course, the ones who most needs to bill it in europe. they're the ones who most need the board, and they are the ones who most need to have a positive relationship with russia in the coming years. it won't be easy, but for them this is critical to us as an ocean away is easier for folks in washington to say, would you be so kind as to rule in what we view as a competitor of ours. you guys pay the price and we give you directions from afar.

this is a disaster, frankly, from a european standpoint. yeah. how old is your luke miller showing friends and our wagon connective goes in in germany? i mean, i do have to ask you, as i said, you are a special assistant, ronald reagan and you written about how of the toner with the soviet union was opposed internally by very strong forces. he wanted to destroy ronald reagan and days, desires for a peaceful outcome and a kind of ending of the so called war presumably trump, uh, who's being the parading r f k junior. and you'll see gabbled around both of whom share your views. i suppose about the catastrophic consequences of wasting hundreds of billions of dollars of american public money on things to be blown up and over the bodies of 800200000 ukrainians. he will face huge pressures internally if he becomes president in january. should he wish to wind down this catastrophic

war in your telling me? i mean, i am not a fan of donald trump. i mean, there are lots of reasons to be very concerned about him. coming back to the presidency. i mean, i worry about a revenge presidency, but what i want to give to him is that unlike other presidential candidates in 2016, he talked about the us committing a gresh. you never hear that from other and when in the office it was clear at different points. he was hesitant to engage in killing people. and necessarily they propose to have a revenge or reprisal right or wrong downing a drone and it would have cause i know, killed a 100 people or something. and it has a report. is it internally? he asked, why should we kill a 100 or radians because they shot down to us drunk? so i do think that the trump is a very complex character. i think he's very flawed, but at least i do have one sense that at some point the humanity leaks through in

a way that i don't think the bike gives a flip. i think the vitamin you know, does not sit there and say, oh, i don't know, should we kill a 100? a radiance is quite happy to do so. you know that the, that at least gives me some hope that if trump is an office, that he is more amenable to the idea that we've got to end this more. i mean, we're not talking about a 100 that right. it's be dying. we're talking about thousands, tens of thousands of ukrainians die. these are supposed to be our friends. so my hope is that at least he comes from a some slightly different perspective. harris will be part of your stablish and that they're part of the blog. i don't see her really resisting it, try and if nothing else for the fact is contrary, might be willing to take it on. i think he learned from the 1st administration, you better appoint people who work with him, not those who oppose him. i mean, i still worry very much about where a trump administration would go, so i'm not endorsing it, but at least on foreign policy, there's some hope i think that he might try to be different in

a way that i think harris is going to be more of the same, this is what actually happened. do you personally dug because, you know, i mean the, i was looking up, but there was a scandal about jack admirable and you know, he's not someone famous back then for peace these days. by the way, it wouldn't be a scandal of regard to pay, but it's, i don't even know how that even is a scandal. if you look it up, what happened to you personally because you know that back in the day. so you were working with citizens or america festivals in fascist. you need to rank goler, supporting debt squads in latin america, all of this. and now you say the key issue, one of the key issues of the american people, i suppose apart from infrastructure investment. and they are related is piece a piece you don't have time. why is the, i got always actually been a piece that i didn't work for ronald reagan because he was hawk. i worked for him despite the fact he was a hawk. like, i'm

a political libertarian. i'm very much it i bought like free markets. i like to restrict you know, a small or your government. you know that from that standpoint a lot of what he said is i like i thought he was the best of the candidates who was out there. i wasn't happy with his foreign policy when i left the reagan administration. i edited the inquiry magazine if you can find it. i mean, we came out with a nuclear phrase, for example, we were against the invasion of grenada. so i have always been very much on the non intervention and side, you know, along the way i've worked with a lot of different groups on economic policy. i disagree with them on other things . i've long believed in drug legalization and run a lot of people who believed in that before recently when pop marijuana has been legalized. so i work with whoever i find, you know, these day over the years i've just come to believe much more that the issue of one piece is the critical issue. that all these other issues. yeah, well, you know, i care about them. i care more about the fact that people are being killed, americans and foreigners. my nephew is a seal. my father was in the us air force. i care about military personnel. i don't

think they should be sending the stupid words. and what i see today is the us government, us officials are utterly irresponsible and reckless and their foreign policy. they get americans killed, they get hundreds of thousands of foreigners killed, look at it wrong, look at the m. and so just over the years, i've grown much more convinced that that issue has to be addressed. lots of people in america argue for the free market. some i liked them some, i don't write nearly as many people to say pieces the priority. that's what i've tried to dedicate the rest of my career to, and i haven't even been amazed then, though the so called mainstream media may not reflect that by how your view point is now shed by more and more people we have a cavalcade of foreign ministry offices on this program, former us officials, we've seen that they, they're on social media or i suppose often pend, uh, more and more people are starting to recognize how it works with making america great again, is it what i know you understand of trump,

but how it is to do with making the united states a great a country getting away from these wars. but what i'm always found is the kind of middle officer court were always very serious about these issues. and you could talk to them. they took them seriously. these are the people who commanded troops. these are the people who lost people of the field. these are the people who wrote letters home to the families of soldiers who guide. i'm a very good friend who retired as a colonel and the marine corps was sent over to iraq center, afghanistan said throughout the goal. and he told me that the, over the years he became convinced of my views, that having serv, seeing what it was seeing what happened. and i think the military is a logical place for this. these are people who, for the most part, they don't want to die for stupid things, and they actually don't want to kill foreigners. they want to serve america, they want to do a greater good. and a lot of them have come to the realization us foreign policy is not directed to

that. so i'm very hopeful in that sense that we've seen military after 2030 years of disasters. a lot of these people are looking for a change and they're willing to speak up. you're right. very hard to break through the mainstream media at times, but i think they're out there and i think they are very important voice talk, brenda, thank you. thank you. so that's it for the show. i'll continue condolences to those very by u. k. u s u, i'm genocide here in the middle east. we'll be back turning to gaza and jerusalem on monday's show with his railey us holocaust and genocide. professor, oh my bottle of until then keep in touch by well, i social media. if it's not sensitive in your country and have to travel going, i'm going to give you a rumble. don't come to watching, you know the episodes of going on the grand. see you monday the, the slows know that he's got to see what we can

finish the some of the most economical slide the issue of the task. ok, do you guys, do you guys look to see the postal study a little quick look at just a sub you have more than enough storage. air conditioning well, and so total on the i got to go to the 15. yeah. well, the other stuff, and i do see there that there's a reason and they don't really mean. yeah. well those are just like, did i fit or the the,

or the united states respects and champions freedom expression. but we will not stand by as r, t and other actors, carrier corporate activities in support of russia's nefarious activities bar to slough with more functions and out on the precedent throughout act of censorship. from the u. s. south washington moves the silence. voices that challenge from the mainstream. doris, you've asked the question for matt, for months and months about the global south and why there's not more support for ukraine is because of the broad scope and reach of r t 4 will indeed have global reaction to that. plus the russian foreign ministry reacts to the latest measures against our channel, calling them the curious form pers.