Glenn Greenwald
Politics • Culture • Writing
Glenn Reacts to Breaking News: American Pope Chosen, Trump and Netanyahu Split Over War with Iran, MAHA Drama, and More
System Update #451
May 12, 2025
post photo preview

The following is an abridged transcript from System Update’s most recent episode. You can watch the full episode on Rumble or listen to it in podcast form on Apple, Spotify, or any other major podcast provider.  

System Update is an independent show free to all viewers and listeners, but that wouldn’t be possible without our loyal supporters. To keep the show free for everyone, please consider joining our Locals, where we host our members-only aftershow, publish exclusive articles, release these transcripts, and so much more!

AD_4nXcDUAthJ2oJl8LOYhSPNrikTBSxiDQyh67uUlB3y840_2fvFEiLkJ8wcqVd9RiHiNwzLJ3MuuAtpVl8s_uOnn8JpLfD9au4NScaPHc3oM5zcfZsdIxAJYXtAqBi8TZ84O3I0VrmhRCDdo4L3rrYofM?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

 The headline news in most countries in the world is the selection of Cardinal Robert Prevost to be the new leader of the Catholic Church, replacing the prior Pope, Francis, who died late last month. Prevost is now known as Pope Leo XIV. 

Born in Chicago, he is the first-ever American Pope in the history of the Catholic Church, though, as a fluent Spanish speaker, he has also done substantial work in the church in Latin America. He's widely viewed as a close ally of Pope Francis and, to some extent, at least likely to follow in his footsteps. 

I do think the reaction of political and media figures in the U.S. to his selection is worthy of attention. As is true for almost everything now, his life and worldview were instantly reduced to a handful of tweets, and then grinded through the ideological and political prism to instantly determine whether he's good or bad – a very strange discourse, especially for someone that nobody who was commenting on him knew anything about prior to the moment he was unveiled. We'll tell you all about it. 

Then, we have several other topics. It was a big news day including all sorts of significant movements and events taking place in the Middle East with reports of a clear split between Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu and thus between the U.S. and Israel and Trump's selection of the close RFK Jr. ally Casey Means as Surgeon General, which caused far more indignation and accusations than, at least, I expected. Time permitting, we will also explain the withdrawal of Ed Martin to be U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. Moments ago, Trump announced his new selection and that person is Jeanine Pirro, better known to Fox News viewers as Judge Jeanine. So, we'll tell you about all of that. 

AD_4nXcDUAthJ2oJl8LOYhSPNrikTBSxiDQyh67uUlB3y840_2fvFEiLkJ8wcqVd9RiHiNwzLJ3MuuAtpVl8s_uOnn8JpLfD9au4NScaPHc3oM5zcfZsdIxAJYXtAqBi8TZ84O3I0VrmhRCDdo4L3rrYofM?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

AD_4nXdAiw44784N3JQuQmzHRKvIuPLNCM_In4UkxfARji67YOU8zib1uik6Rom0Xe2RLUy6Go-ADhWNidWSAR89QzMLPSFTLnRvoaIutQsWPriYFXOElelmY6BmDbTs5A0ib6039T8FNp-H7TO_H4x6Xg?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

Early this morning, white smoke emitted from the Vatican, which, as most of you know, signifies that the conclave of cardinals assembled in the Vatican has chosen a new pope. The new Pope that they agreed on is the first-ever American pope. He was born in Chicago, he is fully American, he obviously speaks English in an Americanized way, which would be very strange hearing the Pope speak in Americanized English, but, obviously, that's his first language – although he speaks several others as well. 

As I said at the start, he was a close ally of Pope Francis who was regarded as a reformer or on the more progressive wing of the Catholic Church, although the progressive wing of this Catholic Church is still quite conservative, it's a very conservative institution by its very nature, by its age, by its function, by its purpose, by its dogma. But one of the things that Francis did was he was very, very outspoken about the growing income inequality in the world, the need to be humane to immigrants. He was also, I suppose I could say, a critic of the destruction of Gaza, but certainly a defender of the rights and suffering of the Palestinian people. Whether Pope Leo XIV follows some of that or all of that remains to be seen; he's been a little bit of a cryptic figure, not really seeking out those kinds of controversies. It's a little bit unclear, I think, even to Church Insiders, where he stands on them. 

Here is the scene at St. Peter's Basilica early this morning, you see the new Pope standing on the balcony with people cheering. This is his first public appearance as the new Pope. 

Video. Pope Leo XIV, St. Peter’s Basilica. May 8, 2025.

The faithful of the Catholic Church are always going to welcome a new pope with that sort of extremely happy, welcoming, loving and positive emotion, and that's what you saw today. 

I'm not a theologian, I'm by no means a historian of the Catholic Church, but the pope always does have this religious role. Obviously, he's the head of the Catholic Church, this 2,000-year-old institution, but he also typically has a political profile. I mean, he's the head of the Vatican, which in theory is an independent state inside of Italy and popes have always played a significant political role. I talked about some of Pope Francis's views. I remember growing up in the 1980s when Pope John Paul II was aligned very much with Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. 

There were times when the pope followed the Church's longstanding opposition to and contempt for communism, given that communism, by its dogma, seeks to eradicate religion, it's the opioid of the people, as communists see it. So, there was always a strong political alignment between some popes and conservative politicians. Then, recently, there has been a greater alignment – I don't want to say with left-wing politicians because certainly on social issues, the Church still has very positions widely considered conservative on things like abortion, which they vehemently oppose, as well as same-sex marriage which though they've softened a little bit the rhetoric about obviously they still oppose that but they also have been traditionally associated with certain I guess you could say left-wing positions. After all, if you read the gospel, the gospel is not a teaching of support for elites or for venerating the wealthy. Jesus spent his time, according to all four books of the gospel, ministering to prostitutes, lepers and the most downtrodden, so that has always been part of the church's mission: to minister to the poor, to care for the poor. 

Then, also the same position that makes them so opposed to abortion, namely the sanctity of human life and the sin of extinguishing it, has also led them to be opposed to the death penalty. That was certainly Pope Francis' position, and I believe it's Pope Leo XIV's as well. 

Here is Donald Trump's reaction, because, again, I understand why people want to put him immediately through a political prism of saying, Oh, is he like MAGA, is he like Republican, is he Democrat, is he liberal? Even though the Church really does transcend those kinds of characterizations, especially just trying to reduce someone who's been in the Church their whole life to a few tweets you found and then want to place them on the political spectrum. It almost is like a non-sequitur, but that's what a lot of people were doing. Donald Trump did not do that. He posted this:

AD_4nXfqWrFF4yalYC-zDFtCh1tORjtO3edrOGVJbvl4exjI_oWPtMa0fT7I3W9XnkY1qUFXUIJ_C_wHmexUoSZBNoYzicPxWLC0cTIuPm-XyMTB9p3FppBiclSZAdY_a5Ne4aAq511o8z4vUx4sBjtxCgI?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

I saw somebody satirizing Trump by saying, “Tomorrow he's going to say, ‘Hey, there are a lot of people who are saying the reason an American pope got chosen for the first time is because of me. I don't know if it's true, but it probably is.’ That's a very Trumpian way to say it, but obviously that was satire. What I just read to you is what he said, I would say very proper and well-crafted congratulations that were appropriate for a president. 

His Vice President, JD Vance, interestingly, is somebody who this new Pope has criticized on social media, at least twice in the last six months, and here is what JD Vance said, also an appropriate statement, no acknowledgement of the fact that the Pope has criticized JD Vance personally and things he believes in and things he has said, JD Vance is Catholic and so, obviously, he is expressing the sentiments of what I would assume are the sentiments of most Catholics around the world, where he said, quote:

AD_4nXdCiPd_fkXIavhNvBaIGhDmqLlWMQmoYJE12QO9TvAMolm59JHoqH3Y2Wiqinyob22NKbWIHfqCh-InviujpSVYxSiR5D-yo9ZQeE28OkY8EXM_1v4uTW9_8wmNcGCWbdxgzEVWy5nsdDd25w8Oco8?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

 I was online when this happened. I went online, actually, when I heard that there was a new pope selected. It's a significant moment for anyone who pays attention to world events, world politics and also religion, obviously. 

There was this hour period between when the white smoke was emitted, signaling the selection of a new pope, and before the pope was announced, during which a very conservative cardinal, for whatever reason, people started assuming that that's who was selected and in the betting markets, he just skyrocketed to like 70%, 80%, and everybody else who were the favorites or dark horses started dropping. And so, people were very happy because he was a conservative choice. But then, when they unveiled the pope, it wasn't him. It was instead Robert Prevost. And at first, American politicians and pundits were celebrating the fact that we now have an American pope for the first time in the history of the Catholic Church and the history of the United States. 

Immediately, people started to find tweets. He didn't tweet often about non-Church matters. He tweeted very sporadically about the Pope, the Pope's health and just generalized kind of conventional sentiments that cardinals express in behalf of their Catholicism, but he did actually have some political tweets as well that, one after the next, every sort of 20 minutes, emerged and a lot of MAGA people, a lot of right-wing people went from celebrating this choice to immediately panicking almost, or at least denouncing the choice on the ground that this is not somebody who aligns with their political ideology. 

So, here's something he posted in February of this year, so just two months ago. The tweet that he wrote says:

AD_4nXcwMBg0541p5emYS15_EkW5Oyp1GEGvlp6fehK9ZTnJWwJbxVN4kUgonW_LXhYZU00UcUm2ZG15oGdx4-oFZIZLbGgvMBhyLbnEwub4AN8ocJwv1yteK41hLIVGqwKL6uniGSAzGzl3MDf2MVocA5Q?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

And then it links to an article that he didn't write, that's not his sentence, that's really like the headline to the article, but he's obviously endorsing it. 

What happened there was that JD Vance had given an interview where I think somebody asked him about the religious mandate, the Catholic imperative, to care for immigrants and to care for people who are expelled from the country or stateless. To defend on a religious ground why he believed in a hardline stand, JD Vance said there's a Catholic doctrine that says, first, you take care of your family, then you take of your community and then you take care of your city, your state, your country and then after that, only then, you care about the rest of the people in the world. 

There is a Catholic doctrine that was affirmed more or less that way, but it's been rejected by the Church, it's not the prevailing view of Catholicism, it doesn't really reflect Catholic action in terms of how it reacts in world and this is what the new Pope was pointing to, an article arguing why JD Vance's views of what the teachings of Catholicism are when it comes to prioritizing who you care about and who you don't is Catholic dogma. The new Pope said Jesus doesn't ask us to rank our love for others; your love for humanity, for other human beings, is just the love of Jesus. That was his view. 

In 2015, when Donald Trump was running for the first time on a very anti-immigrant platform – not just a platform, but the way he was speaking about immigrants, it didn't sit well, apparently, with the new Pope either – because, on that date, he cited an article by Cardinal Dolan. 

AD_4nXcpTI5eTFYzEfyMORGKZTWDGmYAoeEfRtTY8gCM6PTzylGXxmm4NZ1wpu0ndx66xGd_QpGJPkIJOBSwMQ9zdisdIZHooYn57l1y8N4kFmuddmwXmvkmO4QAbLFnglSHr2nI9h8Cidqw9UV9DvHZRiU?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

And then Laura Loomer, the quite effective influencer, I guess you could call her Trump whisperer, I mean, she's one of the few people who gets away with constantly bashing the administration of the White House. Still, the more she does it, the more her influence and credibility seem to grow with Trump. When she complains about people, they often end up being dispatched or fired in the case of some people as well, but she replied to that tweet today with this comment:

AD_4nXf9Lbye7MWYLhbqPzBQ1IicsUEcZodDFOJ_PrOC1bzQqUDBq8EPeAi6aW4oGAUo5EVwkoW40JWogop2BtVjtNAWMB9_ZBTmNfXEZ8xlkf6BVE0-Jhqj2YaGPjJISlIml4zo8AZsvF4Enw284yDCy_Q?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

So, I guess she thinks the Pope is both woke and Marxist. She's Jewish, but within like, I guess two hours, she was able to summarize his entire worldview based on a few tweets. And she's here to say that this Pope is both Marxist and woke. It's kind of odd for a deeply religious figure, someone who's devoted his entire life to spreading the word of Jesus, to simultaneously be a Marxist. It's sort of an incompatible doctrine, but who knows, maybe she's right. I don't think there's a lot of evidence for that, but she seems to think so. 

Here's Sean Davis, a very smart right-wing commentator and analyst who is also Catholic:

AD_4nXc2i8__q2LejKqllZxxc5FOV5Xj2BldMbCVZAkcT5CN5N-UL95zxuerMS0L7CP3PR3XIaqrO2VvXLOWC1ygQZc_rrf6kjglOWQcbBhSTH8Zgu4LWkTs9UtvmkochKOVYM0zOXciW1N7iybIilV2kQs?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

Which, again, if you look at just these disconnected tweets, you could put those together and make a lot of leaps of reasoning and maybe assume that. But certainly, he's pro-immigrant. I mean, the Catholic Church has always been pro-immigrant, and you can go back hundreds of years and you're going to find that. 

Megyn Kelly, who is also Catholic, said after all these tweets emerged:

AD_4nXd8ecjj1XqQGO-DCh7fOVPx27ydgR4LabgWTOW2mbZC93qmNbFOCPRcgI-53NAMUQJle40h2XS5dHPAlXB4Fgv_AKaphpgGY3le8aTjHqMzYCkw_QSLuPj9S8Ub24BnIb6CyLk8Oso2z-yJ-dwKP6c?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

That doesn't seem likely to me, to put it mildly. And again, I'm not really sure why people are finding these sentiments surprising; they seem to align extremely well with what the Catholic Church is often – I don't want to say always, but often –represented. 

Mike Cernovich, another right-wing influencer whom I also often find insightful, said:

AD_4nXejtDD9Em607YjmWf2aK1EiBO4abxp6_yoyr4qpOj-q1H39PAvFtlbAFzJraNq5snKI1c8gnAeBHuAmIzaFtHT_kMx9TM07nNFAbLKuY3tFVm1947wk83JhRMLyvCtL9G1OcxDAs9fd7MnjJwogEkQ?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

There has been this sense for some time – again, I’m not a theologian – but there has been this sense that the Catholic Church, since the reforms in the early '60s, has basically been sacrilegious or even satanic, not true Catholics. Those sentiments have sometimes grown among the Orthodox wing of the Catholic Church. I guess that's what's being channeled there. 

Here is Jack Posobiec. He is Catholic. He was in the Vatican, and he said this:

AD_4nXdk16-7ptmDuwT-bZft6jFrASGX845eNNWmCPefdfEtdJwTh18NkCoftlQYvSLZSXqdVomdJzGE_YEDlQNuwZs7Y0LA01nCQM9CLNLqNoRfoLx5uvZHRjD0ZY4qL5z6irTn3riWe9P91cL7vUusVTo?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

And I do think that's an interesting observation because, as I said, the Pope in the modern world and actually in the ancient world going back many, many centuries to the time it began, always had this dual function of being the interpretive body that defines the meaning of God's word through Jesus Christ. But then, also obviously playing a very political role, the Church is very powerful, it's very wealthy and it influences a lot of people. It's inherently a political position as well and this is what you often hear from Catholics. If the pope says something they dislike, they're like, “That's political, that's not canon. You don't have to assume that's the word of God.” 

Amazingly, a lot of this was based on a handful of tweets that they were trying to reduce this Pope to being, oh, he's not MAGA, he is anti-Trump. They found some voting records that they claimed proved he was a Republican, so maybe he was like an anti-Trump or a never-Trumper. But then, obviously, some of them thought he was a woke Marxist as well. 

Here's Matt Walsh, who is not just Catholic but someone who speaks a lot about the Church and Catholicism. He did not react well to this attempt to reduce the Pope to nothing more than someone who you can just place on the American ideological spectrum. And he said this:

AD_4nXeELLHnh0ql4BbjCNgMcVEWHjCZpoHtXdP2pO_ccbsfn89OyyHpAu_dMTixcK8omXWxSyFjfgk9ohLTwvgArOjL4QbCB3AfGDjYlPUmfzYvIizlpb5EvT_BpuV8ufOt6MloGXwUfM6ZuAQnf6ZjHjs?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

And there were other tweets as well that we didn't include here. The new Pope retweeted a tweet from Democratic Senator Chris Murphy from 2017 when Trump just got elected, where Chris Murphy was basically saying, “We need to do everything possible to fight against and resist this new authoritarianism,” so the new Pope retweeted Chris Murphy, the Democratic Senator. He also retweeted very recently, I think it was one of his last tweets, a different cardinal who was reacting to the meeting between El Salvador’s President Bukele and President Trump in the Oval Office where they kind of mocked the whole notion of court-stopping immigrants being sent to El Salvador. The cardinal reacted with horror and indignation that they seemed to be so cavalier about the fate of these people, who hadn't even been given due process, that they were just putting them into dungeons for life in a country they'd never been to and the new Pope retweeted that indignation from a cardinal in response to that policy of sending people to El Salvador. 

Again, I'm not surprised personally that the Pope is conservative on social issues, anti-abortion, opposed to same sex marriage, opposed to the death penalty, which is not a conservative view. I'm not surprised that he teaches compassion and empathy for immigrants, including people who are illegally entering countries. This seems very consistent, very compatible with the Catholic Church to me, as somebody who has not paid the closest of attention in a scholarly way, but certainly as someone who understands Catholicism to the extent I do, so, I don't really understand all this acrimony, all this kind of panic, this antagonism.

Also, when you're a cardinal or when you were within the Catholic Church, he rose pretty quickly as a result of his relationship with Francis, there's not always total freedom to express your worldview or who you are and what you believe and what your priorities are. And so, we'll see with this new Pope what he decides to make of his position and I think only then will we really know his ideology or place on the ideological spectrum if a pope can even be placed on that.  I think as Matt Walsh actually said, and I basically agree with it, in a way, the idea of the pope and the Catholic Church transcends modern political debates, even though they sometimes have an impact on it. 

AD_4nXcDUAthJ2oJl8LOYhSPNrikTBSxiDQyh67uUlB3y840_2fvFEiLkJ8wcqVd9RiHiNwzLJ3MuuAtpVl8s_uOnn8JpLfD9au4NScaPHc3oM5zcfZsdIxAJYXtAqBi8TZ84O3I0VrmhRCDdo4L3rrYofM?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

AD_4nXdDa7Dcjzt_vGLMnueYCnPJgY8KxSnqMxrPYDo6FFngopvkqZ_J95HnPl_qsaSRN3_Jj4jDprSxqYx60cIMa4ctK5hOtUUXFsXGtz19GtVAGryOloVVl0h0IrJZGiAxSN_U7unxLJAFmmCcABMBi48?key=Dh58bm1mhZCrarukbBA_LQ

All right, let's move to the next topic, which is these reports that there has been a breach in the relationship between Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
1
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Answering Your Questions About Tariffs

Many of you have been asking about the impact of Trump's tariffs, and Glenn addressed how we are covering the issue during our mail bag segment yesterday. As always, we are grateful for your thought-provoking questions! Thank you, and keep the questions coming!

00:11:10
In Case You Missed It: Glenn Breaks Down Trump's DOJ Speech on Fox News
00:04:52
In Case You Missed It: Glenn Discusses Mahmoud Khalil on Fox News
00:08:35
Listen to this Article: Reflecting New U.S. Control of TikTok's Censorship, Our Report Criticizing Zelensky Was Deleted

For years, U.S. officials and their media allies accused Russia, China and Iran of tyranny for demanding censorship as a condition for Big Tech access. Now, the U.S. is doing the same to TikTok. Listen below.

Listen to this Article: Reflecting New U.S. Control of TikTok's Censorship, Our Report Criticizing Zelensky Was Deleted
U.S. Bombs Iran: Live Reaction & Analysis SOON

Glenn will be livestreaming on YouTube around 1:30pm ET. You can watch live here: https://www.youtube.com/@GlennGreenwald. The reaction will also be posted on Rumble later today.

Dear GG,

I'm concerned that our attacks on Iran and the predictable blowback will be used by the US government as an excuse to expand its already-excessive incursions into our civil liberties. This prompted me to look up the Patriot Act, and I find very little explanation of where we stand on it – apparently it was finally, technically allowed to expire, but "federal law enforcment agencies retain most of the powers granted by the act."

I suspect I'm not the only one who's unclear about what governmental authorities are currently actually up to and how much of it is actually authorized by current law.

Perhaps you could do a show on these questions, perhaps also trying to anticipate what further expansions of "security state" powers might be anticipated and how best to push back? E.g., is anyone still pursuing legal challenges, or have "standing" requirements proved an insuperable obstacle? Etc.

Many thanks for all you do.

Sometimes, all we can do is pray for peace -- and meditate on peace. Here's a link to a beautiful 15 minute meditation on peace.

Or just incorporate this affirmation into your own meditation practices:
I am in the temple of quietness
Peace fills my body, peace fills my heart, and dwells within my love
Peace within, without, everywhere.
Infinite peace surrounds all the moments of my existence
Peace unto myself
Peace unto my family
Peace unto my nation
Peace unto my world
Peace unto my cosmos

post photo preview
Trump Declares the War in Iran to Be His Own; Journalist Ken Klippenstein on Trump's War Plans, DC Dems, and More
System Update #470

The following is an abridged transcript from System Update’s most recent episode. You can watch the full episode on Rumble or listen to it in podcast form on Apple, Spotify, or any other major podcast provider.  

System Update is an independent show free to all viewers and listeners, but that wouldn’t be possible without our loyal supporters. To keep the show free for everyone, please consider joining our Locals, where we host our members-only aftershow, publish exclusive articles, release these transcripts, and so much more!

AD_4nXenaRUShX16c-8ECc5F7vr3o6g11DYk7RV5pH8U-qyBXy-zYmuW7z-wzaxDuUQpIyLzcKQkC0YU8HhJoikoXpgvcmZuo0-zubGScgwcsRiz81y2Xid4-t20jRk9xtc5TzLC_nvn6hzSs8GJ6-nJHqo?key=BBSJ3M5xBKO2EWGYp7BseA

Ever since the Israelis attacked Iran on Thursday night, many of Donald Trump's most passionate supporters have raised questions about the extent to which Trump knew or was involved in this new war. In one sense, that concern is understandable. Many of them believe Trump's repeated promises for years to keep the U.S. out of new wars, especially new wars in the Middle East, and they did not want to believe that he had violated that promise so radically and so quickly, less than five months in office by sanctioning and involving the United States in a new war with Iran. 

But those denials have grown increasingly implausible every day as Trump has now boasted of his involvement and repeatedly made clear the central role that he and the United States played in the planning, launching and coordinating of this war. Whatever remaining doubts still lingered about whether Trump's role was as significant as he claimed were completely crushed by Trump himself today, as the President issued a series of tweets – one more unhinged and war-drunk than the next – proclaiming that we – "we" meaning the United States – now dominate and control the skies over Tehran. He also ordered the Iranians to accept the deal that he told them to sign, threatening them with serious devastation if they refused. 

We’ll also talk to the independent journalist Ken Klippenstein, who breaks many stories, genuinely breaking stories on his Substack, where he went after wisely deciding to quit the Intercept last year. He receives many leaks from sources inside the intelligence community – not the official and authorized leaks: those are for Barack Ravid at Axios – but he gets the unauthorized ones from mid-level or even low-level employees of the U.S. Government. 

Ken has a new story out tonight about war plans of Trump for Iran that were leaked to him, regarding the Israelis and the Americans' designs on Iran. We’ll discuss that as well as a variety of other issues concerning this brand-new war, various happenings in Washington, and more. 

AD_4nXenaRUShX16c-8ECc5F7vr3o6g11DYk7RV5pH8U-qyBXy-zYmuW7z-wzaxDuUQpIyLzcKQkC0YU8HhJoikoXpgvcmZuo0-zubGScgwcsRiz81y2Xid4-t20jRk9xtc5TzLC_nvn6hzSs8GJ6-nJHqo?key=BBSJ3M5xBKO2EWGYp7BseA

AD_4nXedPOPXABw2AyO5MpGM1pvqg9021WUEs0aICXKUuhKfXxoA2SLhFgi-itdRHV3kUFFMX26GgzRFJDbBb3ZRxgG4iJhWmenMtpIRs5PDzUUmFlUKvltb8awGWtbXtfuMRztR5HN8nMzNJo8rkeA6PR0?key=BBSJ3M5xBKO2EWGYp7BseA

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
U.S. and Israel vs Iran: Repeating War on Iraq Scripts; Overwhelming Bipartisan Consensus for Israel's Wars
System Update #469

The following is an abridged transcript from System Update’s most recent episode. You can watch the full episode on Rumble or listen to it in podcast form on Apple, Spotify, or any other major podcast provider.  

System Update is an independent show free to all viewers and listeners, but that wouldn’t be possible without our loyal supporters. To keep the show free for everyone, please consider joining our Locals, where we host our members-only aftershow, publish exclusive articles, release these transcripts, and so much more!

AD_4nXeYkVcgzcgVgwTH4HsgQ-PsjfJnkkerEMKzJUBNbex49ctiCfUGCSwgs9h6Vn3qKESfxyvgEpfVQz8nobvNvfVrE9z8iBrAZvKRdf7iPZ-2Qov6I426kA0Sqc0Yy6Oh5amLisL1-RzSK5ykf5mGHyE?key=aMiM9imCrTsNamRKd6Vfew

The war initiated by Israel against Iran last Thursday was dangerous from the start and has each day only become more dangerous. President Trump has boasted of his pre-war coordination with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He's already been using U.S. military assets to protect Israel. He's now even re-deploying aircraft carriers in the Pacific, where we're told they are guarding against America's greatest enemy – China – now to the Middle East, where Israel has demanded they go to support its war. 

Just a few minutes ago, President Trump ordered the 16 million people who live in Tehran to immediately evacuate a city where it's now 2 a.m. 

With Israel, as always, demanding more. Now, they want the U.S. planes and bombs to destroy Iran's underground nuclear facilities for them. The former Israeli defense minister went on CNN just an hour ago and told President Trump in the U.S. that it's our obligation to fight this war with them. And for them, President Trump has repeatedly opened the possibility of even greater U.S. involvement in the war. 

There are so many aspects of this new conflict worth covering and dissecting –and we will do so throughout the week – but tonight we want to focus on the amazing ease the U.S. government has in convincing its population to support whatever new war is presented to it. Over four years ago, intense war propaganda from the U.S. political class and media persuaded Americans to want to fund and arm the war in Ukraine – a war that is still dragging on with no favorable end in sight – and overnight huge numbers of people in the United States have suddenly become convinced without having ever said so previously that war with Iran is some sort of moral imperative as well as a strategic necessity for the survival of American citizens of the United States. 

No matter how debunked, discredited and disgraced that Iraq war narrative has become, as long as one just waits 20 or 25 years, then, apparently, that same script just works like magic all over again. You just haul it out, fearmongering, and huge numbers of people respond by saying, "Yes, let's go to war, let' kill people." 

We'll examine all of that, as well as the standard bipartisan unity in support of new American wars and especially wars involving Israel, you hear Democrats almost unanimously, either staying quiet or praising President Trump, with just a few exceptions from both parties. And we'll look at that as well. 

AD_4nXeYkVcgzcgVgwTH4HsgQ-PsjfJnkkerEMKzJUBNbex49ctiCfUGCSwgs9h6Vn3qKESfxyvgEpfVQz8nobvNvfVrE9z8iBrAZvKRdf7iPZ-2Qov6I426kA0Sqc0Yy6Oh5amLisL1-RzSK5ykf5mGHyE?key=aMiM9imCrTsNamRKd6Vfew

AD_4nXdXi3PHhIfI5UY5jue2s_VN_Dre1s5GH_qzxPS39EBWpyASwtOnszEASDMpdRuJzVlrD4idh5uDoPcdU38-w-kpHnSvAo9rtxSpcN4lW-sAiALyp2wxVRGqfHoLUqaYrKPxb_-HZMv3-aKzQLw90g?key=aMiM9imCrTsNamRKd6Vfew

If you're an American citizen as an adult, you have seen the United States repeatedly go to war. Anyone 18 or over has seen the United States involved in all sorts of wars and that's after the Iraq war, which is now 22 years ago. Essentially, if you're American, it means forever, for a long, long time, for many decades, that you are a citizen of a country that's always at war. 

After World War II, there was a very visible and clear pattern, which is that the U.S. government convinces its citizens, enough of them, to support the war at the beginning. They deluge them with war propaganda, which is extremely strong, primal, tribal and enough Americans initially support the war to let the U.S. government politically go and drop bombs or finance some other country to go drop bombs for it. Then, after six months, a year, or two years, or four years, polls show that Americans overwhelmingly oppose the war that they were convinced to support. Going back to the war in Vietnam, throughout the 1980s’ wars, the War on Terror in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Syria, in Libya, the financing of the war in Ukraine, Israel's destruction of Gaza, bombing Yemin and now this new war that the United States is becoming increasingly involved in, in lots of different ways and we're only on the fifth day.

You just see so many Americans on a dime the minute a new war is presented to them, with whatever pretext can be conjured, even if they're exactly the same pretext that most Americans lived through watching proved to be complete lies the last time it was used in 2003, even though it's exactly the same script, exactly the same pretext, coming from exactly the same people. You can get enough Americans to immediately stand up and start cheering for death and destruction and bombing. Not all, a very substantial minority oppose it, I think if the U.S. overtly gets even more involved in the war in Iran, obviously anything resembling ground troops entering Iran, but even perhaps prolonged bombing of Iran as well through U.S. jets and bombs, as President Trump has indicated and Israel has demanded, maybe some of that will erode, that support will erode. But all that's needed is enough support at the beginning of the war to let the government start it. And once the U.S. government enters the war, it doesn't matter anymore whether the people continue to support it; then it's just already done. All the normal arguments are assembled about why we can't stop, why we can't cut and run, why that would be appeasement, etc., etc. All the same scripts all the time, used over and over, and even though they get proven to be discredited, or unpersuasive, or full of lies, you just use the same ones each time. And that's how the United States stays as a country at war.

We've been hearing a lot of people saying, “Look, I'm happy that Israel is bombing Iran, as long as the U.S. has no involvement in the war, we don't enter it, we don't have to pay for it. As long as it's not our war, I'm fine with it.” But, of course, the entire Israeli military is funded by American taxpayers. Every time Israel has a new war, the weapons that it uses come from the United States, transferred to Israel. We pay for their wars, we arm their wars, we support diplomatically those wars and we use our military assets every single time and our intelligence apparatus to support and enable the war, as the United States is already doing. We already have multiple new U.S. military assets ordered to the region by President Trump. They're already active in protecting Israel from retaliation. President Trump openly said that he is considering the possibility of involving the U.S. even more directly in this war with Iran: "We're not involved in it. It's possible we could get involved. But we are not at this moment involved," the president said. (ABC News. June 15, 2025.)

That all depends on what you mean by ‘involved.’ We're paying for the war, we're arming the war, we've deployed military assets that are actively now trying to shoot down missiles coming from Iran as retaliation for the Israelis launching a completely unprovoked attack on Iran, based on the claim that Iran was about to get nuclear weapons, just weeks away, something they've been saying for 30 years, as we've shown you many times, same thing that was said in 2002. 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
U.S. Involvement in Israel's Iran Attack; the View from Tehran: Iranian Professor on Reactions to Strikes; CATO Analysts on Dangers and War Escalations

The following is an abridged transcript from System Update’s most recent episode. You can watch the full episode on Rumble or listen to it in podcast form on Apple, Spotify, or any other major podcast provider.  

System Update is an independent show free to all viewers and listeners, but that wouldn’t be possible without our loyal supporters. To keep the show free for everyone, please consider joining our Locals, where we host our members-only aftershow, publish exclusive articles, release these transcripts, and so much more!

AD_4nXd1VoS9xg7si8ZviLBfSqd9c5_FMQdODz9RYxLWVBvtebHFOs0oWtttaWP_7qvL_VZdS0enruALLjYbkU-CdLQUDxNECHRbc5Y9OjrLuK-6y6Uq602-Q9fTzTYkN5_S0oVACoqvAhTWU86eCRc8vZU?key=lmRJixp6Jlz5wRA3fSBDAg

Today's most important news is obvious: Israel last night launched a major military assault on Iran, targeting residential buildings in Tehran, where military commanders and nuclear physicists live with their families, as well as bombing multiple nuclear facilities throughout the country. 

Triumphalist rhetoric flooded American and Israeli discourse almost immediately, until just a little bit ago, when a barrage of Iran's ballistic and hypersonic missiles began hitting Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and other major population centers. Escalation seems virtually inevitable at this point. The level of escalation – always the most dangerous question when a new war has started – is most certainly yet to be determined. 

Then there's the question of the role of the United States and President Trump in all of this. News reports from both the U.S. and Israeli media suggested this morning that Trump was working hand-in-hand with the Israelis to pretend that he was still optimistic about a diplomatic resolution with Tehran, but did so only as a ruse to convince the Iranians that Trump intended to restrain Israel and thus lure Iran into a false sense of security when, in fact, Trump was not only green-lighting the attack but actively working with the Israelis to launch it. President Trump's own statements today proudly boasting of the success of the attack, along with his own concrete actions such as ordering U.S. military assets into position to yet again defend Israel, strongly bolster those reports and clearly indicate a direct U.S. involvement in this war between Israel and Iran, a U.S. involvement that already exists and will almost certainly continue to grow over the next few days and perhaps few weeks and even months. 

We’ll speak to Professor Mohammad Marandi, who is in Tehran and has heard and witnessed a lot of what happened but also has some unique analysis from his role as an American Iranian scholar of foreign policy and to scholars Justin Logan and Jon Hoffman, from the Cato Institute, one of the very few think tanks in the United States, which has long counselled restraint and non-interventionism in U.S. foreign policy. 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals