PRESSTV — broadcast
20260915 033000 UTC
389 transcript segments
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text API (Chirp) + Gemini 2.5 Flash Non-Thinking
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] administration. Well, President
[00:00:00] about the foolish... policies of Trump certainly does not sound
[00:00:03] like a man in a hurry to get this conflict over with,
[00:00:07] despite uh the spike in oil prices and despite concerns from many of
[00:00:10] his republican allies that this could hurt them in the midterm
[00:00:14] elections. This latest round of tensions
[00:00:17] began on Sunday when the US attacked Iranian
[00:00:20] positions on Larach Island that it said were preparing to
[00:00:24] launch uh mines into the straight of hormous. That prompted
[00:00:28] Iranian retaliation, which prompted. prompted US retaliation, which prompted
[00:00:32] Iranian retaliation back to this familiar pattern
[00:00:35] of back and forth strikes that has drawn in almost every country in the
[00:00:39] region uh that houses those tens of thousands of
[00:00:43] US
[00:00:43] troops.
[00:00:47] so the headline places Iran at the beginning of the chain of aggression, but
[00:00:51] if you listen carefully to CNN's own reporter, you hear the contradiction.
[00:00:55] yeah, actually, you now, Kevin Liptach, CNN's reporter,
[00:00:58] acknowledges actually that... sequence began with the US attacking Iranian
[00:01:02] positions on larak island and which was
[00:01:05] followed by Iranian retaliation and followed by then another US
[00:01:08] retaliation so even CNN's own reporting is contradicting the
[00:01:12] simplistic framing of Iran as the initiator okay which makes the
[00:01:16] headline particularly
[00:01:19] economic and security fallout of revealing uh sema i mean the um audiences or audience
[00:01:22] sees Iran attacks Jordan as Fuad is highlighting
[00:01:25] Bahrain and Kuwait but the report itself describes the cycle
[00:01:29] triggered. by a US attack, the contact is buried
[00:01:32] beneath the headline in the story, and this is
[00:01:36] actually miraculously how propaganda can continue to operate without
[00:01:39] inventing facts, so you selectively frame them, the words that are spoken
[00:01:43] disagreements basically reaching the top of during the report tell one story, but the headline its own is
[00:01:47] priming viewers to absorb another, even if you're presenting the reality, which is
[00:01:50] let's say the US initiated, yes, so
[00:01:54] now let's move from war narratives to another remarkable story,
[00:01:57] actually, the independent published thailand, issues prostitution
[00:02:01] warning as 5,000 US sailors arrive after 200 days at
[00:02:05] sea, so the story reports that thai authorities basically prepared
[00:02:08] additional patrols and conducted raids ahead of the USS
[00:02:11] Abraham Lincoln's arrival in pataya, detaining 40 to
[00:02:16] a joint operation, not the question of 50 people over suspected prostitution, so let's watch that:
[00:03:01] You know it's actually ironic that uh,
[00:03:04] it's just ironic like foreign city preparing uh police
[00:03:08] patrols because thousands of US sailors are
[00:03:10] arriving uh after more than 200 days at see, yes I mean
[00:03:14] indeed, see when a military visit requires authorities to prefer
[00:03:18] specifically for a prostitution
[00:03:20] crackdown, it raises uncomfortable question
[00:03:24] about the conduct and reputation
[00:03:27] Iran, it also has a accompanying America's global, I mean this dates back. a long time, but perhaps this, I mean, this
[00:03:31] dates back a long time, but perhaps this is another measure of you, further
[00:03:35] imperial decline, not simply losing influence abroad,
[00:03:39] but increasingly exporting the social and moral baggage
[00:03:42] and decay of an overstretched military presence. Okay, so from
[00:03:46] distorted headlines about who started a war to the
[00:03:49] extraordinary precautions surrounding a military port visit.
[00:03:52] Today's stories show how media narratives and military
[00:03:56] culture can reveal far more than their headlines suggest.
[00:04:11] army's highest levels to explosive revelations of military descent
[00:04:15] over the war against the Islamic Republic of Iran. Cracks are widening
[00:04:18] across the Trump administration's national security
[00:04:21] establishment. Here are the headlines. The army
[00:04:24] in turmoil Hexeth clashes trigger resignation at
[00:04:28] the top pentagon in. uprore, classified
[00:04:31] leak exposes military descent over Iran
[00:04:34] war.
[00:04:42] As storm wirele deepens inside the Trump administration, you
[00:04:45] reports are raising serious questions
[00:04:49] command and growing descent
[00:05:04] army secretary Daniel P. Drisco, handling in his
[00:05:08] resignation, and simultaneously the Pentagon is
[00:05:11] erupting over this. ified leak exposing military
[00:05:14] descent over the war on Iran. So let's begin with the New
[00:05:17] York Times with this article that they've published titled army secretary
[00:05:21] resigns after clashes with Hekset over firings by Helen
[00:05:24] Cooper and Greg Joff. So this title alone tells us that
[00:05:27] disagreements over how the military is being run have
[00:05:31] actually reached the highest levels in a long time. So the
[00:05:34] article reports army secretary Daniel P. Driskel
[00:05:38] the services top civilian leader who classed repeatedly with defense
[00:05:41] secretary. tegset over the ouster of a swath of
[00:05:45] key combat tested leaders handed in his
[00:05:48] resignation on Monday, according to administration officials, so the resignation
[00:05:51] comes amid a series of firings and fudes that have left the army essentially
[00:05:55] rudderless as it struggles to deal with the threat posed by cheap deadly
[00:05:58] drones and missiles that have pounded US bases in the middle east, so
[00:06:02] the article continues, the army has not had a chief of staff,
[00:06:06] the services top officer since Mr. Hags fired Jen Randy
[00:06:10] George without explanation back in April and "there are no signs
[00:06:13] that he is close to filling the position," officials said, so
[00:06:16] heckssef has forced out at least three senior officers who had been
[00:06:20] viewed as potential successors to general randi george, and
[00:06:24] when senior generals is being removed, while the army lacks
[00:06:28] a permanent chief of staff, this
[00:06:32] goes beyond an internal political dispute, actually it
[00:06:35] raises major question, seem about
[00:06:38] command and also about control, a moment when
[00:06:41] American forces are..." of facing actually two things, an active
[00:06:45] and expanding regional conflict exactly, and you have
[00:06:48] experienced commanders being pushed out, senior positions remaining
[00:06:52] vacant, and strategic
[00:06:55] the chain of command, so this is a really dangerous combination during wartimes
[00:06:59] specifically, yeah, and the turmoil does not stop at the army, actually, so the hill
[00:07:03] reported also an article that was titled pentagon erupts over glazified
[00:07:06] leak of Iran war descent that top military leaders warned
[00:07:10] Hexeth against extending
[00:07:12] these large scale operations as they call them against Iran, so the article
[00:07:16] says the warnings appear in the August 14 edition of the Secretary of
[00:07:20] Defense Orders book, SDOB, detailed by the heads of the
[00:07:23] Army, Navy and Air Force and the four star commanders overseeing US operations
[00:07:27] throughout Europe, Asia and Latin America. It continues,
[00:07:30] people familiar with the classified assessment prepared for Hags have told the
[00:07:33] Washington Post that several combatant commanders have advised the defense
[00:07:37] chief that prolonging operations against Iran is unsustainable
[00:07:41] and it risks weakening the us from the secretaries orders book is a
[00:07:44] crime, it's a betrayal of the forest, and he added that the Pentagon wants candid
[00:07:48] advice and that disagreements are common, but
[00:07:51] if military commanders themselves actually are warning that
[00:07:55] prolonging this war is unsustainable, um, that
[00:07:58] suggests actually that this agreement may be far more consequential
[00:08:02] than ordinary internal debate, don't you agree f? yeah, that's
[00:08:06] right, and when descent, leadership, purges and classified leaks
[00:08:09] emerge simultaneously, the bigger story
[00:08:12] is institutional strain and the question is whether political leadership is
[00:08:16] listening to its military professionals or overriding them. okay, so so
[00:08:19] therefore from resignations at the top to military leaders warning
[00:08:23] against prolonging the war, the reports point
[00:08:26] ap from explosive clashes with
[00:08:29] reporters, the controversial statements on zyinus Israel,
[00:08:33] top trump administration officials are facing mounting
[00:08:36] scrutiny online over whether Washington's foreign policy is really
[00:08:40] serving American interest. here are the headline. America
[00:08:43] first or Zionist first, social media takes
[00:08:46] aim at Trump officials
[00:08:49] Washington under fire, the Trump administration's Israeli
[00:08:53] entity allegiance parks online
[00:08:56] fury.
[00:09:03] As American politicians increasingly appear to speak for
[00:09:07] Zionist Israel rather than the American interest, social
[00:09:10] media users are asking just...
[00:09:25] actually this past week over the audacious way that senior
[00:09:28] figures in the Trump administration are speaking about zionist Israel and
[00:09:32] US policy with Pete Hexeth, the Secretary of War and the
[00:09:35] Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the center of this criticism, so let's begin with
[00:09:39] a post that's questioning the priorities of America's military.
[00:09:42] leadership and it's controversial actually, because Americans are
[00:09:45] asking whether US forces should be, serving US interests
[00:09:49] first, maybe, yes, so uh, JBC press
[00:09:53] wrote, Pete Hegseth exploded in anger at a reporter
[00:09:56] who asked him why our military serves
[00:10:04] sending their men and women to war for, are is there a
[00:10:08] concern of this spiraling into a longer war and then one
[00:10:11] for the chairman? Did you not hear my
[00:10:14] remarks? I mean, we're ensuring the mission gets
[00:10:18] accomplished, but we are very clear eyeed as the president has been, unlike other
[00:10:22] presidents uh
[00:10:25] the past that recklessly pulled us in to things that were not
[00:10:29] tetherd to actual clear objectives um
[00:10:32] so we we know we have
[00:10:35] plans we have generals we have chairmans we have commanders sent commanders admiral
[00:10:39] cooper
[00:10:43] and that question goes directly to the heart of the controversy mean who
[00:10:47] exactly is Washington accountable to that's right and the
[00:10:50] reaction is very significant because dismissing the question doesn't make the
[00:10:53] underlying concern this It reinforces the perception that
[00:10:57] criticism of the US-Israeli
[00:11:05] actually focuses on Rubio and a disputed account of how Washington became
[00:11:08] involved in the war on Iran, so for Americans the
[00:11:12] controversy lies in whether their government is being transparent or not about
[00:11:16] the decisions that could send them to war. So Morgan J Freeman
[00:11:20] MJ Free wrote porter says, he
[00:11:22] told us yesterday that Israel was going to strike.
[00:11:28] that's not true, were you there yesterday? And then the reporter says, yes, I
[00:11:32] asked you the question, let's take a look at that video,
[00:11:34] yes,
[00:11:36] yesterday you told us that Israel was going to strike iran
[00:11:40] and that that's why we needed to get involved, today the president said
[00:11:44] that Iran was going to get, yeah, your statement is false, so that's not what, I was asked
[00:11:48] very specifically, were you there yesterday? Yes, I ask
[00:11:50] question, wait a minute, there absolutely
[00:11:54] was an imminent. threat and the imminent threat was that we knew that if Iran was
[00:11:57] attacked and we believe they would be attacked, that we knew
[00:12:01] that if Iran was attacked and we
[00:12:04] believe they would be attacked, that they would immediately
[00:12:07] come after us. Now did you, were you the one that cuz somebody asked me a question said, did we go
[00:12:11] in because of Israel? And I said, you asked me that you that follow up, and I said
[00:12:15] no, I told you this had to happen anyway. The president made decision, and
[00:12:19] the decision he made was that Iran was not going to be allowed to hide behind its ballistic
[00:12:23] missile program, that Iran was not going to be...
[00:12:25] allowed to hide behind its ability to conduct these attacks, that decision had been
[00:12:28] made, the president systematically made decision to
[00:12:31] systematically destroy this terroristic capability that they had, and we carried
[00:12:35] that out. I was very clear in that answer, this was a question of timing of why this had to happen as
[00:12:41] the intent.
[00:12:44] The exchange raise much bigger even question that what we're trying to
[00:12:48] analyze about accountability, for example, when decisions
[00:12:51] involving war are being challenged even
[00:12:55] publicly exactly and social media magnifies that confrontation because
[00:12:58] millions can see how officials are being directly
[00:13:01] questioned and judg the answers for
[00:13:09] statement attributed to an Israeli entity minister addressing
[00:13:12] soldiers before entering Gaza, because of this content, actually it has triggered
[00:13:16] outrage online and internationally. so mo
[00:13:20] Abusalah, a historical scandal that the whole world
[00:13:24] must see,
[00:13:34] Good evening everyone, we are about to enter again for the war effort of the
[00:13:38] purple brigade, the Givati brigade, since I received comments every
[00:13:42] time regarding Zionism, we start the briefing today with
[00:13:45] Zionism. by surprise to call
[00:13:49] now some minister
[00:13:52] from the Knesset, we call him by surprise.
[00:13:59] Beautiful. I have here a wonderful group of fighters
[00:14:03] who are going to fight to enter here with full force. I
[00:14:06] need 30 seconds of Zionism. You have it on your watch.
[00:14:09] I'm starting a 30-second count for you. Minister by surprise. This is
[00:14:13] called no problem. Do you hear me? Do you hear me, dear
[00:14:17] and brave fighters? Not only the eyes of the people of Israel are on
[00:14:20] you, but the eyes of generations upon generations
[00:14:24] are.
[00:14:55] granted a US visa, by the way, this doesn't apply if you criticize
[00:15:05] will stand with the Jewish people. We have
[00:15:08] implemented a vigorous new visa policy that will prevent foreign
[00:15:12] nationals from coming to the United States to foment hatred against
[00:15:16] our Jewish community. We are holding international organizations
[00:15:19] and nations accountable for rhetoric against Israel that resurfaces in
[00:15:23] the manifesto of monsters.
[00:15:37] Thank you for the opportunity to address
[00:15:39] you,
[00:15:43] so these posts actually collectively are reflecting ever growing
[00:15:47] online argument over whether US foreign policy is being driven by US
[00:15:51] interests strictly or of course by uh this unwavering
[00:15:55] loyalty that we've seen develop over the years to
[00:15:58] Zionist Israel. Okay, well, social media continues challenging
[00:16:01] Washington's official narrative. The real question is
[00:16:04] whether American citizens are still being allowed. question the
[00:16:21] territory to sing coast and battered tourism sector.
[00:16:25] the numbers tell a story of a country paying the price for hosting America's
[00:16:29] military footprint in the region. here are the
[00:16:31] headlines. Jordan pays the price
[00:16:35] 119 projectiles. 14 injured
[00:16:38] and economy under pressure. America's
[00:16:41] war, Jordan's bill, the hidden cost of hosting US
[00:16:45] forces.
[00:16:53] As Jordan absorbs the
[00:16:56] the US Zinist aggression against Iran, the numbers reveal the
[00:17:00] price of allowing foreign military operations to be
[00:17:14] country caught between the dependence on Washington and the
[00:17:17] consequences of Washington's regional wars, now Jordan has
[00:17:21] faced 119 missiles and drones launched toward its
[00:17:25] territory during the escalation with its air defenses intercepting the
[00:17:28] fast majority, but interception does not
[00:17:31] mean there is no cost, falling debris and shrapn have
[00:17:35] caused 14 reported injuries along with localized damage and
[00:17:38] disruption, military installations hosting US forces,
[00:17:42] including the salty airbase and al-azraq have
[00:17:46] become targets and then comes the economic price,
[00:17:49] right, right, tourism, which accounts for nearly 15% of
[00:17:53] Jordan's GDP has been badly hit, fuel and
[00:17:57] gas prices rose by roughly 11% after the
[00:18:00] complicated complications of trade and investment prospects around,
[00:18:04] okay, so obviously Jordan is effectively.
[00:18:07] paying a price for hosting the military infrastructure that makes it
[00:18:11] part of the conflict, and as you're highlighting, medium, while it's
[00:18:14] economy is
[00:18:21] political responsibility cannot be ignored, right? Jordan remains heavily
[00:18:24] dependent on Washington, receiving up to two billion annually
[00:18:28] in US military and economic assistance, yet when missiles
[00:18:31] and drones begin reaching Jordanian territory, that
[00:18:35] relationship does not necessarily shield. ordinary Jordanians from the
[00:18:38] constituence and this creates a painful contradiction actually, because Jordan is
[00:18:42] still benefiting from the strategic relationship with Washington, but at the same time this relationship
[00:18:46] is exposing it to retaliation and which is connected to a war that it did not
[00:18:50] initiate. Absolutely, and this kind of
[00:18:53] brings us back to the responsibility of the Jordanian regime itself,
[00:18:57] it if it permits US forces to use Jordanian
[00:19:00] territory as a platform for operations against
[00:19:05] responsibility to protect. its population from the
[00:19:08] consequences, the public should not be expected to absorb the
[00:19:12] risks of American and Israeli entity, regional adventures while
[00:19:15] receiving little protect, regional adventures while receiving little
[00:19:19] protect 90, 119 projectiles that
[00:19:22] you are actually highlighting make the risk intangible, medium,
[00:19:26] because this is no longer simply geopolitical
[00:19:29] calculation taking place on maps every now and then it is reaching
[00:19:33] Jordanian communities, affecting the economy as you previously highlighted,
[00:19:37] infrastructure and also livelihoods, yes, precisely, and these figures that you're
[00:19:41] presenting are exposing this imbalance. Jordan is bearing the immediate security and
[00:19:44] economic costs, and then at the same time it's dependence on Washington is making
[00:19:53] injuries, 119 incoming missiles and drones,
[00:19:57] 11% rise in fuel and gas prices, and tourism
[00:20:00] sector representing 15% of GDP under
[00:20:03] pressure, all point to a country paying the price.
[00:20:07] strategic and uncalculated, and as the
[00:20:10] regional war expands, the question becomes
[00:20:13] whether Jordan will continue absorbing the consequences
[00:20:30] daily show to Jewish voices confront the devastating
[00:20:33] transformation of power, challenging the familiar
[00:20:36] David and narrative in the context of Zianis
[00:20:40] Israel's war of genocide on
[00:20:42] Gaza. Peter Benard, editor at large, a
[00:20:46] Jewish currents, author of the Bernard notebook on substance.
[00:20:50] and professor at the New Mark School of Journalism joins host John
[00:20:54] Stewart for a conversation that cuts through
[00:21:03] David becomes Goliath,
[00:21:06] and the responsibility there, is that what
[00:21:09] troubles you? Yeah, I mean, our responsibility is
[00:21:13] to remember is to remember what was done to us, to remember
[00:21:17] what we would have wanted people around the world. I'm not saying... what's happening in Gaza is the
[00:21:21] equivalent of the holocaust or anything like that, but what's happening in Gaza is
[00:21:24] bad, but it may be slow. you now, i saw an article on
[00:21:28] the times, bret stepens, i think, and his argument was, this can't be a genocide
[00:21:31] because Israel's so strong they could kill them much quicker, right? and i thought, well
[00:21:35] that's the most cynical description of a military
[00:21:39] siege and a purposeful starvation that i've ever seen in
[00:21:43] my life, right? mean even Israel's leading human rights organization, buttsallam has
[00:21:46] just come out with a report saying they believe this is gene.
[00:21:50] so it seems to me, if we want to remember our history, if we want to
[00:21:54] honor those in our own families and of our people who were
[00:21:58] slaughtered and who were genocided, who were starved to death while nobody
[00:22:02] in the world cared, our obligation is to care, our
[00:22:05] obligation is to risk
[00:22:13] feel like a crazy person, i feel like i'm watching something that
[00:22:17] is so self
[00:22:51] you how with the definition of anti-semitism would probably have to bomb
[00:23:30] God willing, in the coming days and weeks, we will announce
[00:23:33] a restricted area outside the
[00:23:36] Strait of Hormuz, which starts from the
[00:23:39] blockade line of the US Navy
[00:23:43] and comes to the same area of the
[00:23:46] Strait of Hormuz and from here goes into the Persian Gulf.
[00:23:51] What is this area? We declare this area
[00:23:54] a prohibited area, meaning any ship
[00:23:57] that intends to pass through the
[00:24:01] Strait of Hormuz and enters this area and is identified
[00:24:04] will be put on our sanctions list.
[00:24:07] That means if we see
[00:24:11] from now on ships
[00:24:14] whether on the side of the strait, meaning
[00:24:17] the western side of the Strait of Hormuz, or on the
[00:24:21] eastern side of the Strait of Hormuz, or on the western side of the Strait of
[00:24:24] Hormuz
[00:24:26] moving, has not entered the Strait of Hormuz yet,
[00:24:29] but wants to come and stop somewhere to then pass,
[00:24:33] we will inform it to stop right where it is.
[00:24:36] If it violates, we have the ship's name,
[00:24:40] we have the ship's owner, we have the person who
[00:24:43] chartered the ship. We will put this on the sanctions list
[00:24:47] and inform it that it will have a problem with
[00:24:50] insurance. In terms of insurance, its cost will
[00:24:54] be extremely high, and then it knows that if it passes
[00:24:57] through here again and returns here, it's in our
[00:25:00] hands. Many of these ships, mostly 80-90%
[00:25:04] of these ships, do not pass once and leave,
[00:25:07] because here
[00:25:10] a large part of world trade, especially oil and
[00:25:13] gas, is here. Well, what is the difference now with the current situation? Even
[00:25:16] now, if a vessel wants to pass, it must be in coordination with the Islamic Republic of Iran.
[00:25:20] What is the difference with it being on the sanctions
[00:25:23] list? Those who want to use
[00:25:26] this area outside of Iran's management,
[00:25:30] whether for smuggling or causing
[00:25:33] problems, we put them on the sanctions list, because before
[00:25:37] closing the Strait of Hormuz, and even before these wars, daily
[00:25:41] over 100 ships passed through here.
[00:25:45] It pays a lot of dollars. It tries to turn off all
[00:25:49] these devices at night, it lets 56
[00:25:52] ships pass. Usually these also hit.
[00:25:55] Of course, we have not yet decided
[00:25:59] to sink them because they contain
[00:26:03] and carry
[00:26:06] oil products, and if they
[00:26:09] pollute the entire Strait of Hormuz and the Persian
[00:26:12] Gulf, then it will cause problems for us.
[00:26:16] Therefore, any violation, any
[00:26:19] actions that in our opinion will be criminal,
[00:26:22] we can put them on our sanctions list,
[00:26:26] and if they ever want to pass through the
[00:26:30] Strait of Hormuz, we will freeze them here. we cling. And this
[00:26:33] will take time. This area is forbidden, meaning that this area will be forbidden until a certain time
[00:26:37] or this area is forbidden until the siege of the American
[00:26:41] Sea is
[00:26:43] against what Trump says, the range is completely closed
[00:26:47] and on the other hand, we are looking for
[00:26:50] a heavier pressure on the US to be able to pay
[00:26:54] the rights of the Iranian
[00:26:55] nation.
[00:27:12] The embroidered
[00:27:13] fabrics
[00:27:18] are plain.