PRESSTV — broadcast
20260914 103000 UTC
340 transcript segments
Google Speech-to-Text API Automatic Transcription (Chirp)
Data courtesy of The GDELT Project (https://www.gdeltproject.org/), from the Internet Archive TV News Archive.
Machine transcription. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a verbatim quotation record.

[00:00:00] actually that the sequence began with the US attacking Iranian positions on larak
[00:00:03] island and which was followed by Iranian retaliation and
[00:00:07] a followed by then another US retaliation so even CNN's own
[00:00:10] reporting is contradicting the simplistic framing of Iran as
[00:00:14] the initiator okay which makes the headline particularly
[00:00:18] revealing uh sema i mean the um audiences or audience
[00:00:22] sees Iran attacks Jordan as Fuad is highlighting
[00:00:26] Bahrain and Kuwait but the report itself describes
[00:00:29] of the cycle triggered by a US attack, the contact is buried
[00:00:33] of beneath the
[00:00:34] a headline in the story, and this is actually miraculously how
[00:00:38] propaganda can continue to operate without inventing facts, so you selectively
[00:00:41] frame them, the words that are spoken during the report tell one story, but the
[00:00:45] headline its own is priming viewers to absorb another, even if
[00:00:49] you're presenting them with reality, which is let's say the US initiated, yes,
[00:00:53] sailors arrive after 200 days at
[00:00:55] me sea, so the story reports that
[00:00:57] of thai authorities basically prepared additional patrols. and conducted
[00:01:01] of raids ahead
[00:01:01] of the USS Abraham Lincoln's arrival in Pataya, detaining
[00:01:05] 40 to 50 people over suspected prostitution, so let's watch
[00:01:09] that.
[00:01:26] of
[00:01:33] of
[00:01:44] of
[00:01:52] You no, it's actually ironic that uh, it's just ironic,
[00:01:56] like foreign city preparing and police patrols, because thous...
[00:02:00] of US sailors are arriving after more than 200 days at
[00:02:04] s yes, mean indeed,
[00:02:06] من when a military visit requires authorities to prefer specifically for
[00:02:10] a prostitution crackdown, it raises uncomfortable
[00:02:13] question about the conduct and reputation
[00:02:16] accompanying America's global military footprint which they're
[00:02:20] very proud of. yeah, mean this dates back a long time, but perhaps this is another
[00:02:24] measure of
[00:02:25] you know further imperial decline, not
[00:02:28] of simply losing influence abroad, but increasingly exporting the
[00:02:31] social and moral baggage and decay of an overstretched military
[00:02:35] presence. okay, so from distorted headlines
[00:02:38] a about who started a war to the extraordinary precautions surrounding a
[00:02:42] military port visit. today's stories show how media narratives
[00:02:46] and military culture can reveal far more than their headlines
[00:03:00] from resignations at the army's highest levels to explosive revelations of
[00:03:04] military descent over the war against the Islamic Republic of
[00:03:07] Iran. Cracks are widening across the Trump administration's national
[00:03:11] security establishment. Here are the headlines. The
[00:03:14] army in turmoil Hexeth clashes trigger resignation at
[00:03:18] the top pentagon in uproor. Classified leak
[00:03:22] exposes military descend over Iran
[00:03:25] war.
[00:03:32] As storm wire deepens inside the Trump administration, new
[00:03:36] reports are raising serious questions about leadership, military
[00:03:39] command and growing descent over the war against Iran.
[00:03:52] to be taking a turn for the worst in the Trump
[00:03:54] a administration with the Army secretary Daniel P. Drisco,
[00:03:58] handing in his resignation and simultaneously the pentagon is
[00:04:01] erupting over this classified leak exposing military descent
[00:04:05] over the war on Iran. So let's begin with the New York Times with this
[00:04:09] article that they've published titled army secretary resigns after clashes with
[00:04:13] hexeth over firings by Helen Cooper and Greg Jav
[00:04:16] so this title alone tells us that disagreements have actually reached the
[00:04:20] highest
[00:04:20] of levels in I've actually reached the highest levels
[00:04:23] of in a long time so the article reports army
[00:04:26] secretary Daniel P. Drisel the services Top Civilian
[00:04:31] Who clushed repeatedly with defense secretary Pete Hegset over the Auster of a
[00:04:34] swath of key combat tested leaders handed in his
[00:04:38] resignation on Monday according to administration officials, so the resignation comes amid
[00:04:42] a series of
[00:04:43] of firings and feudes that have left the army essentially rutterless as it struggles to deal with
[00:04:47] the threat posed by cheap, deadly drones and missiles that have pounded
[00:04:51] US bases in the middle east, so the article
[00:04:54] of continues: the army has not had a
[00:04:56] of chief of staff, the services top officer since Mr. fired.
[00:05:00] Randy George without explanation back in April, and there are no signs that
[00:05:04] he is close to filling the position, officials said, so Heck has
[00:05:07] forced out at least three senior officers who had been viewed as
[00:05:11] potential successor. to general Randy George, and when
[00:05:15] senior generals is being removed, while the army lacks
[00:05:18] a permanent chief of stuff, this
[00:05:22] goes beyond an internal political dispute, actually it raises
[00:05:26] major question, seem about command and also about
[00:05:30] control a moment when American forces are facing actually two
[00:05:34] things, an active and expanding regional
[00:05:37] conflict, exactly, and you have experience commanders being pushed out, senior
[00:05:41] positions. vacant and strategic disagreements basically
[00:05:45] reaching the top the chain of command, so this is a really dangerous combination during
[00:05:49] wartime specifically, and the turmoil does not stop at the army, actually, so the
[00:05:53] hill reported also an article that was titled pentagon erupts over classified
[00:05:57] leak of Iran war descent that top military leaders warned
[00:06:01] Hekseth against extending these large scale operations as they
[00:06:05] call them against Iran, so the article says, the warnings appear in the August
[00:06:08] 14 edition the Secretary of Defense Orders Book, SDOB,
[00:06:12] detailed by the heads the army, navy and air force and the four star commanders
[00:06:16] overseeing US operations throughout Europe, Asia and Latin America. It
[00:06:19] continues, people familiar with the classified assessment prepared for Hegs have
[00:06:23] told the Washington Post that several combatant commanders have advised the
[00:06:27] defense chief that prolonging operations against Iran is
[00:06:30] unsustainable and it risks weakening the US's ability to address
[00:06:34] threats elsewhere, including on US soil. Pentagon
[00:06:38] spokesperson Sean Parnel condemned the report saying publishing highly
[00:06:42] class fid assessments from the secretaries orders book is a crime, it's a
[00:06:45] betrayal the forest, and he added that the Pentagon wants candid advice and
[00:06:49] that disagreements are common, but if military commanders
[00:06:53] themselves actually are warning that prolonging this war is
[00:06:56] unsustainable, um, that suggests actually that this agreement
[00:07:00] may be far more consequential than ordinary internal
[00:07:04] debate, don't you agree, fd? yeah, that's right, and when descent, leadership, purges
[00:07:08] and classified leaks emerge simultaneously, the bigger story.
[00:07:12] is institutional strain and the question is whether political leadership is
[00:07:16] listening to its military professionals or overriding them? okay, so also
[00:07:20] therefore, from resignations at the top to military leaders warning
[00:07:23] against prolonging the war, the reports point pentagon
[00:07:27] under extraordinary pressure, semant
[00:07:39] clashes with reporters, the controversial statements on
[00:07:42] Israel top Trump administration officials are facing mounting
[00:07:46] scrutiny online over whether Washington's foreign policy is really serving
[00:07:50] American interest. Here are the headlines. America first
[00:07:54] or Zionist first. Social media takes aim at
[00:07:58] Trump officials Washington under fire. The
[00:08:02] Trump administration's Israeli entity allegiance parks
[00:08:05] online.
[00:08:06] Fury.
[00:08:14] "As American politicians increasingly appear to speak for Zionist
[00:08:17] Israel rather than the American interest, social media users
[00:08:21] are asking just how far this alignment can go, joining us
[00:08:25] to
[00:08:32] Thank you fadah, so neticizents have been frantic actually this past
[00:08:36] week over the audacious way that senior figures in the Trump
[00:08:39] administration are speaking about Zionist Israel and..." us policy
[00:08:43] with Pete Hegseth, the Secretary of War, and the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio
[00:08:47] at the center of this criticism. So let's begin with a post that's questioning the
[00:08:51] priorities of America's military leadership, and it's controversial actually,
[00:08:55] because Americans are asking whether US forces should be, serving
[00:08:59] US interests first, maybe, yes. So, JBC
[00:09:02] press wrote, Pete Hegseth exploded in
[00:09:06] anger at reporter who asked him why our military serves Israel for, so let's
[00:09:10] watch that video together. "the American people also want to
[00:09:13] know what they're sending their men and women to war
[00:09:17] for, are is there a concern of this spiraling into a
[00:09:21] longer war and then one for the chairman when you're done? Did you not
[00:09:24] hear my remarks? I mean, we're ensuring the mission gets
[00:09:28] accomplished, but we are very clear eye as the president has been, unlike other
[00:09:32] presidents uh about the foolish policies the
[00:09:36] past that recklessly pulled us in to things that were not tetherd
[00:09:39] to actual clear objectives."
[00:09:54] question goes directly to the heart the controversy, I mean, who exactly
[00:09:58] is washington accountable to, that's right, and the reaction is very significant,
[00:10:01] because dismissing the question doesn't make the underlying concern
[00:10:04] disappear, it reinforces the perception that criticism the
[00:10:08] US-Israeli relationship itself is becoming politically unacceptable.
[00:10:12] Yes, yeah, there's a reason for that. Yeah, the next post actually focuses on Rubio
[00:10:16] and a disputed account of how Washington became involved in the war on
[00:10:20] Iran, so for Americans, the controversy lies in whether their government is
[00:10:24] being trans transparent or not about the decisions that could send them
[00:10:28] to war, so Morgan J Freeman, MJ Free
[00:10:31] wrote, porter says, he told us yesterday that Israel was going to strike
[00:10:35] Iran, which is why we have to intervene, and then rubio says, that's
[00:10:39] not true, were you there yesterday, and then the reporter says, yes, I asked you the
[00:10:43] question, let's take a look at that video,
[00:10:44] yes, yesterday you told
[00:10:48] us that Israel was going to strike iran and that that's why we
[00:10:52] needed to get involved, today the president said that. Iran was going to get,
[00:10:56] yeah, your statement is false, so that's not what he, I was asked very specifically, were you there yesterday?
[00:10:59] yes, question, wait a
[00:11:02] minute, there absolutely was an imminent threat, and the imminent threat was
[00:11:06] that we knew that if Iran was attacked, and we believe they would be
[00:11:09] attacked, that we knew that if Iran was
[00:11:13] attacked, and we believe they would be
[00:11:16] attacked, that they would immediately come after us. No, did you, were you the one
[00:11:19] that cuz somebody asked a question and said, did we, you from that follow up, and I said,
[00:11:23] no, are you from
[00:11:24] that follow? and I said, no, I told you this had
[00:11:27] to happen anyway. The president made decision, and the decision he made was that Iran was not
[00:11:31] going to be allowed to hide behind its ballistic missile program, that Iran was not going to
[00:11:35] be allowed to hide behind its ability to conduct these attacks. That decision had been
[00:11:39] made. The president systematically made decision to systematically
[00:11:42] destroy this terroristic capability that they had, and we carried that out. I was very
[00:11:46] clear in that answer. This was a question of timing, of why this had to happen as a joint
[00:11:50] operation, not the question the
[00:11:51] intent. The... exchange raise
[00:11:55] much bigger even question that what we're trying to analyze about
[00:11:59] accountability, for example, when decisions involving ward
[00:12:03] are being challenged even publicly, exactly, and social media
[00:12:07] magnifies that confrontation because millions can see how officials are
[00:12:11] being directly questioned and judge the answers for themselves.
[00:12:14] yeah, definitely, and our third post actually is even more
[00:12:18] disturbing, presenting the statement attributed to an Israeli
[00:12:21] entity minister addressing soldiers before entering Gaza, because...
[00:12:55] לגבי תחום הציונות אנחנו מתחילים שתחילת התדריך, אנחנו היום עושים
[00:12:59] ציונות בהפתעה,
[00:13:00] אניך להתקשר עכשיו באיזשהו סר מהכנסת, עושים לו
[00:13:04] טלפון בהפתעה. אנחנו עושים פה ציונות בהפתעה,
[00:13:08] אתה שומע? יפה, יש לי פה, סתכל, חבורת
[00:13:12] לוחמים מדהימה, הולכת להילחם, להיכנס פה
[00:13:16] בשי הכוח, אני צריך 30 שניות של ציונות, יש לך על
[00:13:19] השעון, אני פותח השעון, 30 שניות, שר בהפתעה זה נקרא,
[00:13:23] אין בעיה, שומעים אותי?
[00:13:55] the United States itself, yes, so
[00:13:59] Marco Rubio officially announce is the GBC press again, that anyone who
[00:14:02] dares to criticize Israel will not be granted a US
[00:14:06] visa, by the way, this doesn't apply if you criticize the US
[00:14:14] Trump, the United States will stand with the Jewish
[00:14:17] people. We have implemented a vigorous new visa
[00:14:20] policy
[00:14:21] that will prevent foreign nationals from coming to the United States. to foment
[00:14:25] hatred against our Jewish community. We are holding international
[00:14:29] organizations and nations accountable for rhetoric against Israel that
[00:14:33] resurfaces in the manifesto of monsters like Aron and
[00:14:36] Sarah's killer. But we do see eventual light
[00:14:40] at the end of this long tunnel of suffering. One can imagine a middle east
[00:14:44] in which the Abraham accords eventually
[00:14:55] collectively are reflecting ever growing online argument
[00:14:59] over whether US foreign policy is being driven by US interests
[00:15:02] strictly or of course by this unwavering loyalty that we've seen
[00:15:06] develop over the years to zionist Israel. okay, well - social
[00:15:10] media continues challenging Washington's official narrative. the
[00:15:14] real question is whether American citizens are still being allowed to
[00:15:17] question the policies carried out in their name. simf.
[00:15:30] From missiles raining over Jordanian territory to soring coast and
[00:15:33] battered tourism sector. The numbers tell a story of a country.
[00:15:37] paying the price for hosting America's military footprint in the region.
[00:15:41] Here are the headlines. Jordan pays the price
[00:15:45] 119 projectiles, 14 injured and
[00:15:49] economy under pressure. America's war, Jordan's
[00:15:53] bill, the hidden cost of hosting US
[00:15:55] forces.
[00:16:03] As Jordan absorbs the economic and security fallout the.
[00:16:07] sinist aggression against Iran. The numbers reveal the price of
[00:16:11] allowing foreign military operations to
[00:16:23] very striking story of a country caught between the dependence on
[00:16:26] Washington and the consequences of Washington's regional
[00:16:30] wars. Now Jordan has faced 119 missiles and
[00:16:33] drones launched toward its territory during the escalation with its. air
[00:16:37] defenses intercepting the fast majority, but interception
[00:16:41] does not mean there is no cost, falling debris and shrap
[00:16:45] have caused 14 reported injuries along with localized damage and
[00:16:49] disruption, military installations hosting US forces, including the
[00:16:52] moaf salty airbase and have become
[00:16:56] targets and then comes the economic price right,
[00:17:00] right, tourism, which accounts for nearly 15% of Jordan's
[00:17:04] GDP has been badly hit, fuel and gas.
[00:17:07] prices rose by roughly 11% after the complicated
[00:17:11] complications of trade and investment prospects around.
[00:17:14] okay, so obviously Jordan is effectively uh paying a
[00:17:18] price for hosting the military infrastructure that makes it part
[00:17:21] the conflict, and as you're highlighting emium, while it's
[00:17:25] economy is deteriorating according to your article.
[00:17:34] remains heavily dependent on Washington, receiving up to two. 2 billion
[00:17:38] annually in US military and economic assistance, yet when missiles
[00:17:41] and drones begin reaching Jordanian territory, that
[00:17:45] relationship does not necessarily shield ordinary Jordanians from the
[00:17:49] consequences and this creates a painful contradiction actually, because Jordan is still
[00:17:52] benefiting from the strategic relationship with Washington, but at the same time this relationship is
[00:17:56] exposing it to retaliation and which is connected to a war that it did not
[00:18:00] initiate, absolutely, and this kind of brings
[00:18:04] us back to the responsibility the Jordanian regime itself,
[00:18:07] yes right? it if it permits US forces to use Jordanian
[00:18:10] territory as a platform for operations against
[00:18:14] Iran, it also has responsibility to protect its
[00:18:18] population from the consequences, the public should not be expected to
[00:18:22] absorb the risks of American and Israeli entity regional adventures
[00:18:25] while receiving little protection from
[00:18:28] the call and the 90 119 projectiles that
[00:18:32] you are actually highlighting make the risk intangible medium
[00:18:36] because this is no longer. simply geopolitical um
[00:18:40] calculation taking place on maps every now and then it is reaching
[00:18:43] Jordanian communities affecting the economy as you previously highlighted,
[00:18:47] infrastructure and also livelihoods. Yes, precisely, and these figures that you're
[00:18:51] presenting are exposing this imbalance. Jordan is bearing the immediate security and
[00:18:55] economic costs, and then at the same
[00:18:57] time it's dependence on Washington is making it very difficult to pursue any kind of
[00:19:00] independent course. Exactly, so we're talking 14 injuries,
[00:19:04] 119 incoming missiles and drones. 11% rise
[00:19:08] in fuel and gas prices and tourism sector representing
[00:19:12] 15% of GDP under pressure, all point
[00:19:16] to a country paying the price for its strategic and uncalculated,
[00:19:20] and as the regional war expands, the question becomes
[00:19:23] whether Jordan will continue absorbing the consequences of foreign
[00:19:27] military presence its soil.
[00:19:38] and a striking conversation on the daily showed two Jewish voices
[00:19:42] confront the devastating transformation of power, challenging the
[00:19:46] familiar David and Goliath narrative in the context of
[00:19:50] Zianis Israel's war of genocide on
[00:19:53] Gaza. Peter Benart, editor at large, a Jewish
[00:19:57] currents, author the Benart notebook on
[00:19:59] Sopstack, and professor at the New Mark School of Journalism
[00:20:03] joins host John Stewart for a conversation that
[00:20:07] cuts through political
[00:20:13] when David becomes goliath? and
[00:20:17] the responsibility there, is that what troubles
[00:20:20] you? yeah, I mean, our responsibility is to
[00:20:23] remember, is to remember what was done to us, to remember
[00:20:27] what we would have wanted people around the world. I'm
[00:20:30] not saying
[00:20:30] that what's happening in Gaza is the equival the holocaust or anything like that, but what's happening in
[00:20:34] God, it may be slow, you I saw...
[00:20:38] an article in the Times, Brett Stevens, I think, and his argument was this can't be a
[00:20:41] genocide, because Israel's so strong they could kill them much quicker, right?
[00:20:45] And I thought, well, that's the most cynical description of a
[00:20:49] military... siege and a purposeful starvation that I've ever seen
[00:20:53] in my life, right? I mean, even Israel's leading human rights organization, Ballam has
[00:20:57] just come out with report saying, they believe this is genocide,
[00:21:00] so it seems to me, if we want to remember our history, if we
[00:21:04] want to honor those in our own families and of our people
[00:21:08] who were slaughtered and who were genocided, who were starved to death while
[00:21:12] nobody in the world cared, our obligation is to care, our
[00:21:15] obligation is to risk something,
[00:21:18] listen, "this
[00:21:22] has this has rocked my, i feel like crazy person, i
[00:21:26] feel like i'm watching something that is so
[00:21:29] self-evidently
[00:21:32] inhumane and horrific, and
[00:21:35] to be told that i have to shut up
[00:21:39] because i risk the Jewish state by
[00:21:43] speaking out, i would say the opposite, i think not,
[00:21:47] i think they're putting the likelihood of a survive" Jewish state
[00:21:50] much more at risk with this type of action, I think
[00:21:54] they're the ones that are that are
[00:21:58] being anti-if you want to,
[00:22:01] but with the definition of anti-semitism would probably have to bomb
[00:22:42] هذه حرب قاسيه كثير كثير كثير قاسيه
[00:22:44] بنيات يشوفوانا الدول العربيه
[00:22:47] يحلونا
[00:22:49] شيء نحن
[00:22:56] الخيمه
[00:22:56] منيحه احسن ال الخيمه القطريه بالعكس
[00:23:00] القطريه والشوادر كله كله هذول مش نفعات مش الواحد الا
[00:23:03] زي بيته السجود ازspecting arabs
[00:23:06] constantly you know in her interview she's calling out to them come and see
[00:23:10] our lives
[00:23:11] you know come and save us of course this arabs are not gonna do anything they are
[00:23:15] complicit aren't they think they have defense but they're
[00:23:18] not a military country so... They they just want to keep the status
[00:23:21] quo for themselves, whatever's going on around
[00:23:24] them.
[00:30:00] and reminder of our top stories the
[00:30:04] international atomic energy agency for referring Iran's nuclear file to
[00:30:08] the security council saying that the move had no legal
[00:30:12] basis.