Israeli Nuclear Panel Supports Iran Deal

Israel’s Atomic Energy Commission has endorsed the Iran nuclear agreement, finding that on a technical level it will prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. Are cooler heads beginning to prevail?

Ron Paul: Hello everybody and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report. With me today is Daniel McAdams and it’s good to see you today Daniel.

Daniel McAdams: Good to see you Dr. Paul.

Ron Paul: There is an article out of Israel which caught my attention. I found it on antiwar.com, that brings up the subject of the nuclear deal with Iran and we’ve heard a lot of propaganda in this country, this is horrible, it’s going to start World War III and all these kind of things and a lot of fear-mongering and we’ve sort of taken a position that anything that would encourage communications and maybe even trade would be very good and it looks like this is what’s happening. Where this argument is getting support is interesting. It’s coming not from the politicians, but from a scientific organization. It comes from the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission and they approached this not from a political viewpoint, and not from a more strategic security viewpoint too, as well and their conclusion is this does not hurt Israel and they are not a bunch of peaceniks either. These people know and understand it and they say they endorse this and it’s probably not what they would call absolute perfection, but it would help Israel monitor what’s going on in Iran.

Daniel McAdams: And that’s something you really don’t see here in the debate in the U.S. How many top Israeli security and intelligence professionals, former head of the Mossad, Efraim Halevy has been on record many times talking about the deal and as you say he is no dove. He says Iran is a great, great threat to Israel, but nevertheless this agreement is a step in the right direction. Ami Ayalon is the former head of the Shin Bet, which is the Israeli Internal Security Agency and he says this deal is the best option for Israel and he’s no dove either, but he says there’s a long list of Israeli intelligence officials who are supportive of this deal, so you wouldn’t really know that here in the debate, but in Israel there is much more of a debate.

Ron Paul: We have talked to some former CIA agents and some current ones on occasion that give us a different spin, but they seem to be handicapped more in this country to get their message out, but another part of this is so exciting to me and should excite anybody who cares about working toward peace and that is getting people to have economic associations and already it looks like the sanctions that we led the charge on and told other people, if you don’t put sanctions on Iran you are going to be punished, but already it looks like it is conceded, even though it looks like there’s this debate going on here, is it going to pass, are we going to endorse it and all. Around the world they are saying it has passed and they are having delegations over there, but I am not sure we are really involved in this yet, but there are several other countries very much involved in wanting to talk and trade with Iran, out of their own best interest.

Daniel McAdams: And the U.S. is pressuring foreign companies to not go in, we still have our sanctions. By all effect, the sanctions are dead, just looking over the past couple of months, the French and the British are sending their biggest delegations to Iran ever, trade delegations. The Italians in November are going. The Japanese are there this month. The Poles were there last month. Iran is sending a huge delegation to India for trade, so really trade is taking over, peaceful commerce is taking over and unfortunately for American companies, the U.S. government is still forcing them to stay out.

Ron Paul: Not doing any favor. This whole debate, which has been going on for quite a while, as a matter of fact years and years dealing with Iran. There’s a lot of propaganda put out on this, especially over here, because our media has one story, but then again if we think about this deal, what Netanyahu did in the United Nations to warn the people of this bomb, we are on the verge of this bomb, watch out it may explode any minute. I wasn’t disappointed that Netanyahu was knocked down a couple of points, because he is the one that is the most adamant in opposition to this, even though he has security people disagreeing with him. He’s saying that we still have to be careful, we can’t do this, but I think that this idea that Netanyahu has really lost credibility when he started talking about an Islamic leader in 1941, talking Hitler into killing the Jews.

It was a far cry. It is true, this leader happened to have been talking to Hitler and who knows what his position might have been. The Jews and Islamists have disagreed for a long time, but this idea that he’s using this in this age and therefore what is he doing? He’s beating the drums for more hostility and he’s a negotiator in the world to come for a more sensible approach on how they treat the Palestinians?

Daniel McAdams: I think he’s lost a lot of the little credibility he had left. You remember even starting in the early 90s, Iran was just months away, days away from a bomb and now this gaff about this Imam. Even Germany had to say, no, no it was us, it was us.

Ron Paul: It was our idea.

Daniel McAdams: He’s become a laughing stock, so probably that is not a bad thing.

Ron Paul: I think it’s good and the frustration I have is that there is a better debate in Israel, they had their shortcomings, but at least there is a better debate in Israel than we are permitted here. Politicians are especially aware of this. I can remember being on the receiving end of nasty things like the first week I was in Congress, back when I wasn’t even really a whole lot, back in 1976, into foreign policy, but it was used, it was demagoguery and it was makeing sure that you were pointed out if you are against foreign aid you are anti-Semitic.

This is really pretty good news and let’s hope the trade works. I’ve always argued that trade with China was a great idea, I’ve argued for good many years that we ought to be trading with Cuba. I guess nobody especially on the Republican side wants to find and say anything even slightly decent about Obama, but if we end up trading with Iran, if we end up trading with Cuba, going back and forth and if you look at the numbers of the military personnel that were killed in the previous 8-year administration versus this one, it is hard to argue that this is worse. Of course, we’ve complained a whole lot that Obama is deceptive, he will say things, he can win the Nobel Peace Prize and all, but he is still out there, going along with producing problems in Libya and Syria and all these things.

I think the most important thing is the opening up of trade and I remember very, very clearly when trade was opened up and when Nixon did it, he had to do it in secrecy, but it happened. I think the world is better off with what we do with China, yes they have a lot of problems and they violate civil liberties, but do we violate civil liberties? How do we treat our troops? Taylor is here, our whistleblower, so not very well. I would think that if we were looking for positive things, I think there’s some positive things here.

Daniel McAdams: The neocons continue to control the debate about this issue in the U.S. and when you look how they have been wrong about everything else, yet you turn on any news show and there will be a neocon up there, as the great expert. You have to wonder at what point are they going to be finally discredited, but here’s the thing with all these trade delegations, everyone sees great opportunity. Is the U.S. going to be able to tell all these countries no, no, you got to back off again and isolate Iran> It’s not going to work. The sanctions regime is over, it’s dead.

Ron Paul: The other thing that would help us and our argument would be the recognition that even if our intentions are well motivated, we are there for humanitarian reasons and all this, even if that was their honest motivation, it doesn’t work, it’s a total failure. They are killing Christians, we got to go in there and change their government. If you look at it, I wish we had more stories of the countries over there when they were least involved with foreign countries, because there are stories, there are examples. As a matter of fact, there’s some examples in Iran right now, Jews live in Iran and Christians live there. Just think about how propaganda was used against Saddam Hussein, he had a Christian in his Cabinet.

Daniel McAdams: His Vice President, yeah.

Ron Paul: And this whole thing, when they are left alone, there are examples where the Christians and the Jews and the Muslims live together, but then there’s always elements and they say that religion is a bad religion and all they do is preach hate and killing, which can be applied to just about every religion. When people are given a chance they will live together, but I think actually it’s ironic since I have strong religious beliefs, I think the answer is secular, I think the secular answer to these problems and this hatred that goes back and forth is the accepting of the universal religious principle of don’t kill. Thou shalt not kill. Most great religions endorse that, thou shalt not kill and don’t steal and don’t hurt people and then all of a sudden that means if somebody has a different religion I am not supposed to hurt him, I am not supposed to kill him? That’s what it says. I think that’s a distortion of so much in religion, but I think the distortion by a small minority and all religions have done that and they provoke this kind of hostility toward a country like Iran and perpetuate it. Maybe we are seeing some breakthrough?

Daniel McAdams: As you always say trade brings peace.

Ron Paul: There you go and I didn’t create that thought, I think I stole it from the Founding Fathers, the more you trade with a country the less likely you are, you have trade crossing borders, less likely you are going to have troops less likely crossing the border. I am also a believer that you can make progress and even though the Founders have done a good job, I think we can even develop a better system. The idea of personal liberty started with the Magna Carta and it was ups and downs and it was not inclusive. I think the understanding is that it is more inclusive, I think we certainly are a nation that liberty is a more inclusive issue than it was even when we started this country, we had slavery and these sort of things and then we morphed into Jim Crow laws.

I think now some people don’t understand is non-aggression principle and they think the correction for the abuse in the past is using that aggressive principle by government against somebody else. No, it has to be voluntary and we have to recognize that non-aggression means that all associations, social and commercial are done voluntarily and ten that applies to religious principles as well. In this sense I certainly believe that the young people are realizing this and they are more tolerant and right now let’s cling to the hope that opening up trade with Iran will lead to much better times, not only for us, but for the whole world.

Thank you very much for tuning in today to the Liberty Report and come back soon.