You can literally scatter this stuff like dust
or embed it into a sheet of paper.
This was commercially released 10 years ago.
It's a tiny computer and it features data
for processing, data storage, wireless comms,
and it's probably as close to the true
smart dust vision from the early DARPA days
as we've come so far.
They're designed to harvest energy from the environment
around them and to communicate by our mesh
network.
Welcome to the daily wrap up, a concise
show dedicated to bringing you the most relevant
independent news as we see it from the
last 24 hours.
Saturday, September 28, 2024. Thank you for joining
me today.
Important developments in Lebanon that we're gonna discuss.
Pretty large kind of earth shattering movements that
we're gonna discuss that that will change the
direction of this ongoing war genocide, however, you're
looking at it.
Now we're gonna discuss the assassination of Nasralla
and and the importance of that move. I
know Robert's actually working on an article probably
right now to discuss what this means and
the kind of shifting of geopolitics.
But the important thing we're gonna get into
around not just that event and whatever you
think about the person or Hezbollah itself, but
what Israel is doing even if everything they're
saying is accurate is still just flagrant war
crimes, open genocide. And my point, the way
I framed it today is if you understand
how this is working in the Greater Israel
Project, their stated directions, and how little they
perceive the value of lives outside of Israel,
this is the extension, the the expanding of
this genocide. That's all this really is. And
there's many reasons we can get into around
why.
One thought I actually had just as I
was breaking the show up or writing the
show today
is the idea that it's certainly possible and
this is just, you know, thinking of why
they might so obviously shift into another direction
and and, you know, for most people, that's
really jarring. Even those that might have been
going along however possible with the idea that
what happened in Gaza was justified, that Lebanon,
it's a different location. There's different dynamics and
all this. But the thought came to me,
it could be simply that they want to
shift it in to somewhere else. So as
it expands,
you can't say it's the same genocide because
these are different people. And under the
definitions that, you know, the I I can
see how they might make this argument. My
point is that we have to ask ourselves
why
this might be happening. And when you do
and you take the time to look into
who these people are and what they've been
saying and their over our overarching
agendas, it's very clear.
There's no making this out to be about
defending yourself or about the idea that this
is somehow, you know, multi country battle against
the little tiny nation of Israel because they're
just the Jewish state, and that's all that
matters. None of that is even remotely,
I mean, even playing a part in this
conversation, quite frankly. We have to remember that
this is an illegally occupied territory. Yes. Lebanon.
And I've been saying this for a very
long time because it's the obvious, provable reality,
and it's I'm glad to see it starting
to get picked up in in other
conversations that aren't necessarily independent.
Because the reality is the occupied territory, just
like with Gaza, changes the entire conversation.
And they don't want you to know that
because it does
change the dynamic of who gets to defend
themselves and who has no right to defend
themselves,
or the displacement of peoples or the illegal
settlers and the occupation itself in regard to
the location of the buildings and where the
bombing's taking place and Israel's
official status given to these settlers. All of
which makes these things military targets or the
dynamic of how Israel has set itself up
in the first place.
Everything about this is at the fault of
Israel.
And that and and every crime that you
wanna let's say Lebanon bombs a civilian location
or Hezbollah in particular, that would be a
crime and we should discuss that. But we
also have to discuss in the full context
how Israel's been doing that for 75 years.
And that would change the dynamic, but both
would still be illegal. And that's what's called
being equal under the law. This game of
moral equivalence, there's a discussion to be had
about who might be morally in the in
the right, but it doesn't change the idea
of the law.
Whether you think you're morally in the right,
the law is equivalent. Now what matter you're
ISIS, Hezbollah, Hamas, or Israel, the United States.
But, of course, we all know that doesn't
actually work that way. So we're gonna go
through the dynamic, make sure we understand the
lies that are being said, the just
seeming desire to just flatten this area just
like Gaza and go after the individuals and
the act they took to go after Nasrallah,
which as far as I can tell, seems
like they weren't even sure he was there
until after the fact, which even more so
makes it a crime. The idea that they
flattened entire city buildings, multiple city buildings in
order to do this, killing lots of people.
Why is that any different, as somebody rightly
pointed out, than, let's just say, I don't
know, the Twin Towers?
Or as somebody else pointed out, the US
decided to bomb an entire area in Mexico
because the cartels live there. Like, realize that
in any other context, this would be just
like it should be, illegal,
disgusting,
outrageous,
even if everything they say is true.
We're gonna go to that in the latter
half of the show today, but we're gonna
start with the conversation of something that I
just couldn't put off. I put off a
few things actually for for another show. But
today, something that struck me that somebody just
comments underneath something else we did coming off
of our recent IMA
panel around digital IDs in particular. And that
is another point about smart dust,
which is actually really crazy.
Like, I like, it's it's you you been
if you've been following the show, you know
I've been
terrified, interested in the conversation around where this
nanotechnology direction goes coming off of I mean,
we've been talking about that for a long
time in other parts and not as deep
as we have since the COVID 19 illusion.
And since that happened with the idea of
lipid nanoparticles and the possibilities around it, the
different vectors, the MRA platform conversation, the more
I dug on this, the more it it
really does keep me up at night where
this goes. I mean, to be quite honest,
as you know and you watch this show,
where it's been for a long time that
we just don't seem to want to acknowledge
as a species and what that could already
mean. Maybe that's why we're getting sicker. I
mean, I these are real questions we should
be asking about a part of many different
things that are being done to us. But
I wanna talk about this in the context
of one specific concept of a a a
patent rather
from Wells Fargo.
And it is a patent for I mean,
explicitly, and we'll go through it, using Smart
Dust
to track financial
exchange.
And I mean, like,
we'll get into it before I go off
on it. The idea that they're using motes
smart dust motes that all play these like
the opening clip I just used from a
symposium that's over almost 20 years old now,
or 15. I'll I'll look at it when
we get there. About how this was readily
available 10 years before that. And we're talking
literal smart dust, DARPA level, which is where
it came from outside of other opera from
a US perspective, let's say.
And they're talking about this for you going
to take money out of the ATM.
And you're literally using Smart Dust in one
one discussion,
deploying it from where you're taking this from
to be able to make sure that you
are who you are, check biometrics.
And this sounds ridiculous to some people. Whether
or not I'll show you the patent and
whether or not they've been using this for
a decade,
people will act like this is crazy. Because
some of them just don't think it is
crazy, think it's conspiracy theory. But I think
the bigger conversation is people that just don't
want to acknowledge that this is actually what's
happening. And I I get that more than
anything else. But as always,
you can't solve a problem without first acknowledging
it. You can't actually engage with this without
admitting that it's actually happening to you. I
so I just think it's very important. Now
we're gonna go over another section here about
the 2 party illusion that I think kinda
bridges them both, but the importance of the
upcoming selection and the idea that
both sides, quite obviously, but one side more
than the other I think is being you
put up as what will be next in
my opinion but either way, both sides are
actively playing the same game. Lying to you
in equal ways, keeping you right in the
position they want. And And I want you
guys to I just wanna highlight some of
the people that are being risen up as
the heroes against the rising problem that are
I mean, just the let's just put it
like this. The 2 party illusion contradictions
in in many ways down to small things
like something people wore or openly talking about
things like c 02 or solar energy and
acting like this is not completely
aggressively against what most of their public base
is talking about. Or the idea that these
same conversations were floated by somebody on the
left, it would be examples of what they're
fighting. But when it's said by somebody, they
rise up as a hero, suddenly it's, oh,
okay. Well, maybe there is some thought to
them. Maybe there is a way to go
for it. And how about both sides are
wrong? And that's usually how that works because
it distills you down to one very clear
position, which all of your government ultimately wants.
So let's start today
with just the idea of the recent the
the discussion of the recent panel that I
don't want you to miss. Because it was
a really I I really enjoyed this one.
I mean, every time we've done this, only
twice now, it's been really
I'm I'm I'm incredibly
I'm I'm fascinated by the idea of having
this many minds in one place that I
think in my opinion, which is why we're
working with these people, are very, very intelligent
and very insightful. Oh, and many and different
opinions.
But I hope you'll check these out for
yourself because I really think there's something special
happening here with the different people that are
collecting in these panels and what is being
said and the different perspectives. And it's really
mapping this out for people. Now this one
was called Digital ID, the Foundation For Technocracy.
And it was with, myself, Ian Davis, Whitney
Webb, Catherine Austin Fitts.
And the conversation is important. But I'm gonna
play a clip from that of not the
actual panel, but the a clip that I
play in the beginning that I thought really
does does a really great job breaking down
where this is going
in a in a very specific way kinda
pulling together all the different parts. But also
just in general, I want you to see
this is our this is our last panel.
The one before this which was debunking the
false binary with the Independent Media Alliance,
which I also thought was an important conversation.
And then we all all include the announcement
we put out in case you haven't heard
of what the IMA or Independent Media Alliance
is and what we're doing with this, which
is there, you know, no financial mechanism, just
an a network of people that all see
the problems building and wanna overlap and sort
of keep, you know, like minds and to
defend against what we see building against anybody
in the independent media, which is the mainstream
alternative media pretending to be that and ultimately
boxing out the entire conversation
that can actually affect change.
But let's clip, I think, is oh, well,
actually, before we get to that, I I
just I forgot I included this.
Just hilarious to me. Eric Rose points out
today that our second panel,
which, by the way, was just the the
4 of us talking. There was no I
mean, actually, no. There was, I think 2
clips. None of which by the way had
to do with anything medical misinformation related. They
censored our entire panel. But, you know, not
like that matters. I'm not griping about YouTube.
I don't care about YouTube. Frankly, the only
reason I even put it there is to
kinda poke them in the eye because we
keep viewing our pirate streams, which I'm sure
people even forgotten about by now seeing as
how nobody cares that we're doing it. But
we're we're continuing to use other people's channels
to broadcast our pirate stream on YouTube. And
I know that they know about it because
I watch them change their tactics with us
in particular
almost every other show. But I'm gonna bring
it up because it's not important because who
cares about YouTube? But the point is that
they censored it. Of all the things we
do, and it's what's funny is, as was
Ian put I'll read what he put commented.
Help, sir, I defy anyone to watch this
discussion and identify anything that could be possibly
construed as conflicting with the interest of any
community.
Only an authoritarian regime could judge it unacceptable
and regimes don't build communities. They crush them.
His point is, 1, about the idea of
the community guidelines, but what he's saying
is the idea that if you actually watch
this, regardless of what you think in your
disagreement, if you don't think we're right, there
is literally nothing in this conversation that challenges
any historic understanding of what would have got
you censored. Anything. Even the current guidelines. We're
expli we're openly having a, you know, a
philosophical,
scientific, and research conversation about how we see
this building and what it might do. How
in the world is that something worthy of
censorship? But you know why. Because both the
IMA and what we're generally talking about is
threatening to the establishment,
which is a kind of a scary thing,
but it's actually a really positive step because
it shows you that we are making change.
And I I think that's why the 2
party establishment flipped out the moment we came
out this season and said, you know, this
selection season and said, hey, 2 party illusion.
You know, vote nobody. Voting doesn't matter. Like,
we do every single time. And oh my
god, did we get a crazy pushback this
time. And I think we all know why.
Because seems like even people in the paradigm
are starting to go, this doesn't make sense
anymore. Good. It never did.
But Oh, and I This is the image
I took because the the, you know, the
Go through the review process, which by the
way is just like a cut out empty
page these days where it says, here's what
you did wrong, empty space. Here's what you
can do, empty space. Like, this is like
such a fake process and it always was.
They're just going through the motions at this
point. Guess what? Digital ID, technocracy,
medical misinformation.
What? It's just hilarious to me. I mean,
they they they just stamp something on there
to get rid of it because nobody cares.
Nobody even thinks they have a reason anymore.
Everybody I think has acknowledged that they just
censored when they don't like the content.
Nobody tries to, you know, you get where
this goes. It's kinda sad and at the
same time, it is a win. You might
understand because we force this into the conversation.
It used to be fake news that anything
like this even happened.
Now include again the the previous discussions.
And Oh. I I thought I had one
other point.
Forgot where I was gonna Oh. That's what
it was. I wanted to play this clip.
Oh. I I see what I did. See?
I'm always ahead of myself. That's so funny.
I so you I for those that might
wonder what I'm saying right there, I what
I'll I sometimes I go through the last
maybe half hour and I look at the
organization and see if I can align things
any better to make it you know, and
as always, I try to build these shows
which I a lot of times why it
takes me all day to organize because a
lot of the research and organizing the different
lineup to make this kinda flat mesh in
a way
that connects the dots for people. Right? And
and and even if they're different conversations, finding
ways to sort of bridge them so it
kinda lines up for you. You know? Know,
and I think that's really important. Anyway, that's
just why I forgot that I moved it
around. So we'll come back I'm gonna play
that clip of Katherine in a second. You'll
see why it makes sense. But I wanted
to include, before we get into the deeper
conversation, something that we discussed in the panel.
Which was about, you know, generally digital IDs
and biometric data and where this all goes.
But I made this point many times. And
it it comes off the tail of Censored
Man breaking this down. Well, technically, I I
to pat you know, point out that we
were talking about this well before this was
a conversation even from him online. But I
think Censored Man with a 1000000 followers and
kinda being in the Elon orbit definitely got
attention to this. But I wanna point out
that we were covering this a long time
ago, that Authentics,
this Israeli unit 82 100 intelligence company, was
the one that is that Twitter was using
to
prove that you were who you were, which,
by the way, isn't one of the steps
to digital IDs. And he's a 100% part
of this despite all the people screeching about
how that won't be the case. I'm willing
to bet you, like, we'll get into, like,
every other time it's gonna be him presenting
his version, which will be the same damn
thing, and they'll fall for it. Whoever saw
it. It's the same thing as left or
right. It's never about one or the other.
It's in my mind, it's the government. So
everyone always tried to force this into you're
against this side or that. I see they're
the same thing to me. So I only
focus on where it seems like the attention
is needed, and sometimes it does aim one
more or the other. But in this case,
this is
the Twitter verification process that is still using
Authentix. This is just a a brave search
engine pointing out that, yes, they're still using
this. The process takes around 5 minutes and
involves
collaboration with Authentix, a third party company. Now,
this is still to this day. I just
checked it again recently because of the you
can use, a challenge for a what whatever
the last time. You challenge, basically, whether someone
has taken, you know, some kind of a
violation and takes you through the process and
you're and you have it makes you try
to confirm with them before you continue the
process. Which mean and if you read it
right there on the page, it says they
can take your biometric data. That's happening right
now on Twitter, and weirdly, Republicans don't seem
to care. The conservatives, by and large, do.
Team sport politics of either side don't seem
to care. Now why that's important,
as we covered here on July 29, 2024,
that they're still using Authentics is because he
promised that we're gonna go to Stripe.
And this was a public conversation after Censored
Man, again, because he had a lot of
following, kept pointing it out and Elon deflected
and said, okay. Well, now it's a problem.
We're gonna use they're still using this. At
a time when this Israel the Israeli government
who owns this entity, who's an Israeli unit
82100 extension of the Israeli, in intelligence apparatus,
who even their own conversations point out they
use this this for a lot of their
intelligence,
is currently committing genocide
in multiple places.
And what about Palestinians using this service? What
about people anywhere that Israel might have an
issue with using this service? Doesn't that matter
to any yes. It does to most people.
But, apparently, those that don't wanna see Elon
Musk and anybody else in the paradigm or
the machine for what they are don't want
to. Now why that's important to me is
because here is what Authentix posted on well,
for a 1000 reasons, but one that came
up in the show, July 23, 2023. Here's
Authentix.
Very small following, by the way, which usually,
you know, on Twitter, which means they're not
promoting themselves or Elon or anybody else, which
tells me something.
But it says, are digital IDs the ultimate
game changer for global identification?
Realize this is the same entity Elon and
Yacorino are using to right now to take
your biometric data even though Elon does not
need that. Twitter does not need that right
now. And they're the ones going, yes, digital
IDs. That's where we need to go. Join
the discussion on the current usage challenges hindering
adoption on the promising future of digital IDs.
And here's the main platform if you wanna
look at it. The rise of digital IDs
and their path to global adoption.
That's the Israeli entity, Authentix.
Just in case any of our publicans out
there actually care about consistency in the logic
here. Now here is what Katherine well, it's
a clip that doctor Ray put out. Shout
out to them and their and their work
here. And this is this is a a
a clip that really does kinda bring together
the different layers of this. Now I'm not
sure what where this happened. It was here's
the full link. But it's just her at
her desk and somebody kinda filming, like, a
documentary kinda thing. And she breaks it down
really well,
overlapping why they wanna hide this from you.
So if you look at what's going on,
we have the tech people building
the the clouds and the telecommunications.
We have the military
doing space
and operation warp speed, so they're putting up
the satellites.
Okay?
Then we have big pharma which is making
the injections
that are full of these mystery ingredients and
change modify your DNA and
for all we know make you infernal.
And then we have the media pouring out
the propaganda,
and then we have
the central bankers
engineering
the to to the crypto, the central bank
crypto systems.
So you have these different pillars and it's
very important when you look at what's going
on day to day, particularly in the media.
They're trying to keep them separate so that
you can't see how they're going to come
together
in a in a creative system
which is basically integrated into your body and
your mind. For what purpose?
To to institute the slavery system.
So in other words, if I am going
to do everything through a smart grid and
I need to run the smart grid into
your neighborhood and then I need to run
the smart grid into your body,
the question is how am I going to
build it out your neighborhood and build it
out in your body without you seeing the
trap.
Right? So
so that's why you try and keep these
different lines separate. So if you listen to
the central bankers,
they try as hard as they can
to stay away from these conversations.
So it was interesting, I was watching an
IMF presentation on cross border payments, and the
Federal Reserve chairman, the the head of the
IMF mentioned the digital,
global ID system.
And you would ask the federal chairman the
Federal Reserve chairman almost blanched, and you could
energetically
feel him moving like a galaxy away. It's
like, no. No. No. No. Because,
you know, there there are more there are
325,000,000
Americans, and there are more than 325,000,000
guns.
And he doesn't want everybody to see this
until
the trap is thrown. It's too late.
We've
been put in a trap this year? Yes.
Right. But the door hasn't shut.
It always cracks me up to see, you
know, her interviewed by, like, Normie interviewers, like,
to what end? And, like, you know, you
can almost see, like, it's it's him, but
it's almost a joke. And it's just hilarious
to me that, you know, it's just so
far above. Like, you're that whole in exchange,
how accurate her point is and his kind
of, like, blithe response. It reminds me of
the first time Whitney Webb went on Jimmy
Dore when I set that up. It was
hilarious to me how it was like a
dead face where she was, like, blowing the
doors off the narrative. And it's by the
way, it's now exactly what they're all talking
about too, but she was, you you know,
this was back when we were talking about
this in 202021.
And it was just hilarious to me, like,
it was just like, what?
Because she's just breaking it down. Same points
we're talking about now. And it's just funny
how people just have a hard time wrapping
their mind around
how real this stuff is. And this is
what we're gonna get get into. Now I
I wanna include with that the point about
the SAVE Act, and the Real ID 21
ID 2020, and Real ID, and the Real
ID compliant identification,
and the Digital ID point. And I'll include
the link. We talk about it because the
SAB Act is simply a Trojan horse for
digital ID. It's very apparent overlapping that with
the drive mobile driver's license point from the
Biden side of it, which they tell you
where's gonna be a one stop shop for
your paper. You know, now no longer paper,
all on your phone. And once those go
away, the same act becomes only Real ID
compliant. And boom, there you go. And they
both point at each other, and they act
like the other person did it, and digital
IDs are here nonetheless.
Everyone it's weird how the partisan loves the
partisanship. Well, love to just go on forever
in their tech to go out of prison
going, but it was only the Democrats. Well,
who who cares at that point? You're in
the prison. So who cares what side you
think caused it? At the end of the
day, both the point is both sides. It
matters, but both sides are driving you there.
So if you're okay letting it happen as
long as you could pretend the other side
did it, that seems pretty crazy to me.
Because the the reality is all very clear.
Oh, and I wanna include what Tim hit
Hencliffe pointed out here, and this is in
response to the the post of the actual,
panel.
He says regarding Real ID and digital ID.
And this is from the sociable.co
article. It says you may be interested to
learn that physical driver's license holders may soon
be able to apply for mobile driver's licenses,
the MDLs,
stored on your smartphones if they want to
move into digital IDs.
The point here is that this is always
how it starts.
Convenience. And I made this point in the
show. Right? At first it becomes you can
go to the front of the line. And
a lot of people will take that bait.
Here's a cookie. Oh my gosh. I'll do
whatever. And then, of course, it becomes, well,
if you don't have it, you go to
the back of the line. And that gets
a lot more people. Convenience
is more
move move it moves more than you think.
Then, of course, it becomes, well, if you
don't do it, then you're gonna you know,
you're at your grandma killing grandma. Whatever the
narrative is about what your you become the
enemy, the problem, the standout. This is always
how it goes. Mark my words. I hope
I'm wrong, always. But I think we all
know how this works.
So bringing that into the conversation of what
well, the first main point today. Shout out
to,
this is the first time I've seen the
account, but that they've commented this under something
else we did. Do you see what god
sees is the name of the account. So
thank you for pointing this out. This really
did as much as I like, I I've
been talking about this for a long time.
I'm well aware this exists, but it just
still blows my mind
how clear this is.
So he simply said or whoever the, you
know, the person said, do you know Wells
Fargo Bank has a patent on smart dust
usage? And I'm like, when I read that,
I'm like, really? Like, I almost didn't almost
like that. I'm probably more abstract than that,
but nope. It's pretty damn simple.
Systems and methods that facilitate authenticating a user
making a payment using micro electric micro electro
mechanical systems or MEMs, which by the way
is also kinda funny in the
met ms MSM, MAM kind of overlap. It's
just, I don't know. I was my mind
always finds patterns.
But thank you that and he posted the
link, which if he hadn't, I probably wouldn't
have called gave him a shout out. Not
because I don't I mean, the point is
people that don't include the links to things,
I rarely wanna give them a shout out
to the show because I think that's very
important. So good on you for including the
source material.
So let's get into it.
Because this is pretty wild. So here is
the actual patent on Google patents, which you
can find in any other location, and you'll
find the data banks of patents. And it
literally is assigned to Wells Fargo Bank.
It's crazy. I mean, I I it's I
guess it makes sense for what they're trying
to accomplish, but it's wild to me that
this kind of thing would just be a
patent for a bank. Which really does in
a bigger way show you that this is
it's they're not just a group that's holding
your money. There's something much bigger going on
in the financial industry which by the way
is what Catherine talks about more than anything.
And and really does have an amazing way
to tie it in for average people to
how clear this is, the control structure.
But I'm gonna go over the highlights because
of course it went away as it always
does. But I wanna point out and I
just on these I mean, the I took
pictures.
What I wanna show you is the first
it's a patent from 2016.
So one,
that a patent for something this broad. And
I just basically pointing out that it's a
system to authenticate you making payments using smart
dust, actual motes in the air aerosolized or
whatever word you would. Aerosolized is probably not
the right correct word, but, you know, that
kind of idea.
And right there says Smart Dust. And we'll
get into the specifics of it. But so
2016, showing you that a bank has a
patent for this in a real time usage
out in the world when you're at an
ATM pulling money out. In 2016, like, I
just think that in and of itself has
to kinda shock people out of how this
is not some 20 40 idea. This is
right now and it's been going on for
decades. I keep saying that, but it seems
that it's not connecting with a lot of
people. And the point is that it goes
back or it goes forward
to 2037.
And what that tells me is this is
not some old act you know, kind of
expiring patent that they floated and didn't really
flush out. No. This is happening
and they're working on it, and they've gotten
an extension
all the way to 2037.
Because, you know, these these can expire. They
have to kinda reapply. And the point is
that they got it it's as of 2022,
the publication of the patent itself, it was
granted, and now they've gotten adjusted ex expiration
all the way to 2037,
which means this is going on. That's important
to think about. It's being built. It's working
on right now, possibly being tested. And that's
again my point is not tested. Like, that's
all if you wanna have an example, which
I'll play the video for you yet again,
of an of a government associate entity
publicly discussing testing these things for, I don't
know, shipping routes across the ocean, I'll play
it for you. That goes back about I
think it was 20 years. That's wild.
That means that there are and what it's
what that means. We're talking about smart dust,
which I'll play a video for those that
can't wrap their mind around that, and I
understand why, to show you what it means.
Then we're talking dust. Things that you can't
even see blown in the air that then
can on air currents, float around and be
actively used to surveil, to watch you take
biometric data,
or any number of other much more alarming
things.
That may sound crazy as always, but it's
something that is very, very real. Now let's
talk about the patent first.
And I I should always point out, by
the way, that's I say it's real because
all the evidence success shows that. You have
government patents. You have government contracts. You have
videos of companies doing so. But I always
wanna include that somebody,
Jay Cooley, who I respect a lot in
his opinion, he's a very smart guy. I
I interviewed him and he had an opinion
that this might be more of a ploy,
which is very valid to consider that this
whole thing is sort of being floated to
make you think that. You know, he doesn't
believe that it's actually viable and happening. But
just to include the other opinion, I tend
to think that there's just too much evidence,
but he the very smart guy, smarter than
me. So going through this, it says the
disclosure the the disclosure disclosed and claimed herein
is oh, wait. Is this the make sure
I'm starting with the right one.
Yeah. This is the right one. Okay.
It says the disclosure disclosed and the clay
and claimed herein, in one aspect thereof, includes
systems and methods that facilitate authenticating a user
making a payment using Smart Dust.
Smart Dust as discussed herein is a system
of small micro electric mechanical systems or MEMs.
So watch out for that in the future
where you'll just
that term that acronym will be used and
you might not be you know, as a
way to kinda
subtly include something like that. But MEMs or
meh microelectric
mechanical system devices that can have sensors
that collect data and transfer it to a
base station device.
Now that doesn't mean via wire. That means
via any number of methods that are used
to take it from a or whatever the
autonomous or independently floating moat and taking that
data and then transmitting that to a central
location.
The MEM's devices or, just I'll stick with
that. MEM's devices can collect sensor information about
the person,
capturing audio data,
optical data,
temperature data, pressure data, and motion data, and
compare it to data associated with the user
profile to determine that the person making the
payment is the same person associated with the
user profile. You know, or just that they
have the password. You know? Of course, anybody
could blie and cheat, but instead, let's just
make sure they have a complete biometric makeup
of you that have nothing to do with
your financial data. Like, why would they need
everything the pressure data, temperature data, your heartbeat,
your bio your eye oh, really? Are we
really gonna pretend like that? What they're gonna
argue is because we just wanna make sure.
It's always for your safety.
Or this is just another entity getting in
on the gold rush that is your data.
Like, biometric is a huge step. As Corbett
said a long time ago, data is the
new oil. We've seen that with the social
media platforms.
This is a whole other step. The biometric
data is not just your social media searching
history. This is about things that I argue,
and I've said this more than once, that
I don't think as a society we fully
grasp what that means yet.
Getting into digital twins and the metaverse and
whatever goes beyond that. Even things like think
people do wanna don't wanna talk about even
though we know it's a real concept like
cloning.
What does this mean
in 30, 40 years from now when this
this
bank or whatever company we're talking about literally
owns your biometric data? What makes you up
as a person in that concept in that
context?
I don't know. And that should worry all
of us that they're rushing to get in
control of that data.
Banks, for crying out loud. And it says
the sensor
data can comprise biometric data relating to the
height of the person, weight of the person,
heart rate or pulse of the person, blood
pressure, and body temperature. Yeah. They sure need
your blood pressure to make sure it's you.
Right?
The sensor data all can also capture images
of the person. The facial recognition
can be performed to authenticate the person. Okay.
Why wouldn't you just do that? Why wouldn't
you just put a facial recognition scan on
the thing you're using? No. No. No. We
need floating smart dust to make sure we
gather everything. Obviously,
you think through this for one second and
this doesn't line up. Once the person's identity
has been confirmed and thus authenticated,
the per the payment request can be confirmed
and payment made via either the mobile device
or credit card. You know, of course, there's
a 1,000 things we can include in this,
which what happens when they decide that you're
no not that person because you've been boxed
out or because there's an error? What do
you do then?
You go talk to the bank guy that
the system knows. Like, we this is where
they keep telling you. Like Eric Schmidt said
in an interview. They eventually, we'll get to
a point, in paraphrasing,
that the AI will make decisions that we
think are morally wrong, but they'll the AI
will know better.
Whitney and I talked about this. In the
future, we'll have to lean the AI will
know and we have to make an
Absolutely not. Now not only, even if you
think that would make sense,
it it can always be manipulated by the
data and input of information from the human
source or just blatantly manipulated.
So we get to a point where this
thing gets to decide, how are we gonna
be able to vet that? If you think
they lied to you or the bank decides?
Or how about from a government level, they
just de bank you
and just claim it's some you're not the
person. You see where this goes. From a
government that we already know is acting this
way, all around the world for that matter.
Canada and the and the trucking convoy, the
United States. Right now, it's everywhere you see
it.
Anti semitism claims or whatever else. This should
be terrifying for everybody that understands how this
power is almost always used.
It says the me the MEM's devices can
be small enough that they can be suspended
in the air.
And in some embodiments, be self propelled.
So let's just dispel any assume any out
there people that don't, you know, pushing back,
this is exactly what it sounds like. Smart
dust motes, which we even use that word
as we go through it. Motes being the
usual term for something like this,
which they'll we'll show you these videos in
a second.
Suspended in the air or self propelled.
Very clear.
The res in response to determining that a
payment is being made and authentication
is required,
the base station device, and that simply means
whatever we're talking about the bank with the
central location where the data is being processed,
can activate the MEM's devices, which can proceed
to collect data to authenticate the user. Now
it very it makes it very clear in
the breakdown. So something that ex dispell
blows out a bunch of motes that s
floats around, or something that actually comes off
the device that you're holding,
this is what they outline. Now this is
all patent. It's hypothetical. Right?
But this is where it's going. This is
where they're all rushing. And remember, this was
put up at 2016.
For instance, it says audio sensors should detect
heart rate or breathing rate. May not be
activated when ambient sound levels are above a
predetermined level. So what they're trying to argue
here is that, well, we need all of
these different 47 different angles of your data
because, you know, one might not be applicable.
It says, similarly, optical sensors may not be
activated if light levels are below another pre
determined level. Don't worry though, we'll take everything
else.
Says the operations can also include authenticating the
user's access rec the user access request
based at least in part on biometric data.
She really, in my opinion, most all of
what they're talking about is biometric data, but
it's really about just
all I mean, everything that would make up
some kind of a data point that could
be used,
sure, to, I guess, authenticate you, which is
a wild overkill,
or in a thousand other concerning ways that
we're talking about as this goes into the
future.
Then it goes on to say, in an
embodiment this is more in the expanded definitions
or outline.
In in an in an embodiment
so they said what the with that the
term they use in this is just whatever
whether that's,
the device that is spitting them out or
rather the embodiment being in some cases, as
they discussed, the device you may be holding,
is basically where it's coming from. It says
smart dust
can be made of m of MEM's device
sensors
that can collect a variety of sensor data.
The MEM's device sensors can collect
optical data, infrared data, audio data, electromagnetic
field data, temperature data, air pressure data, location
data, and or motion data. The optical data
can include data used to perform facial or
body recognition.
The optical data can also be used to
gather biometric data. The electromagnetic field data can
also be used to measure magnetic fields and
or read any RFID tags that may the
user may carry. You know, just in case
you got that old archaic tech that we
used to put in you without you knowing,
we'll be able to check that too. And
since the location data can be GPS data
or other location data
that that can try to identify the location
of the smart dust. So just realizing like
every other thing we've talked about that it's
not just that it's you data relaying, but
it's actually real time location tracking everything. It
says the MEM's device sensors or motes
that make up smart dust
can be suspended in air and surrounded or
and surround or be near a user while
collecting data. There's just no that's as clear
as it gets. Floating around you, collecting what
data it needs. In some embodiments,
the motes can be self propelled
and able to move around. In other embodiments,
the motes may be move passive on wind
currents. So those are the differences.
Either way, they're floating around you, landing on
your skin as you'll hear in this symposium
will play. And then in some cases, using
your own body's energy to maintain that process,
or it could be self propelled. They'll decide.
In an embodiment, the motes can be released
by base station
upon activation.
The motes may also be carried by a
user and released when the user attempts to
make a purchase using a mobile payment or
a credit card payment. So in that case,
what they're talking about is we're still deciding
whether we wanna try to make this something
that you all carry with you all the
time,
you know, that you have to have in
order to exchange with this bank, like some
kind of moat dis dispensing concept,
or maybe your phone or, you know, your
new WeChat Twitter overlap app that goes whatever
we're talking about, just sort of being facetious.
But you see where this all kind of
come together in a one stop device they're
trying to build or app on one stop
device kind of concept.
But what ultimately the point being that it
could be something that you display there or
it could come from the station you're using,
Something that could you know, all these different
points. It all adds up to the same
idea. Because what I'm actually thinking is that
this is a moot idea in the first
place. That once this is something that is
actively deployed,
it's sort of like the idea of glyphosate
that is everywhere in the world all the
time no matter what you do now because
of the way that the world has been
drenched in it and it's never going away.
It's in your air you're breathing, the clothes
you're wearing, the water you're drinking. And if
you don't know that, that should scare you
because it's happened a long time ago. And
all of us were screaming about glyphosate and
Monsanto and you guys said conspiracy theorists. Well,
guess what? It's too late now.
It's an endocrine disrupting chemical. It is a
horrifying overlap to the COVID 19 medical side
of things as ste doctor Stephanie Sineff pointed
out. Or I mean, all these different dynamics.
The point is that it was being used
and it was dangerous and we all knew
that and nobody wanted to stop it.
Right? The they did urine tests in the
European Parliament and every single one of them
had glyphosate in their urine. They tested craft
beers in Germany, all of them had glyphosate.
Organic wines in Napa, all of them had
glyphosate. So they're not craft anymore. They're not
organic. But they just pretend they are because,
well, too late, it's everywhere. That's the kind
of idea I'm talking about here. That once
this becomes ubiquitous, which I'm guarantee is the
point, there's really no going back from that.
I'm worried that that might already happen.
Now there you get into the scary part
of the conspiracy theory frame.
Just my opinion.
And you know, obviously, if you can engage
with this basic reality, that obviously it could've
already happened, like, almost always in the past,
where they float these things and then it's
already there too late.
Just something to consider. I'm not trying to
scare anybody. I just think this is a
very valid and obvious point to make. Then
it says,
in an embodiment, the base station device can
be part of the point of sale system.
So at like I said, an ATM, a
register,
at a real retailer customer service establishment. In
other embodiments,
base station device can be carried by a
user or be a mobile device
carried by the user and store the motes
therein.
Very clear. It's exactly what I was just
talking about. And it says, in an embodiment,
the motes of the smart dust can be
provided by a financial institution
associated with the server.
Now I don't know about you guys, but
that seems pretty damn wild to me.
All this will be included as always. There's
the number and the information for those that
wanna check it out for yourselves.
Now, here is a,
this is called MakerCon.
Now, this is 10 years old.
In the video, he's talking about, that this
was readily available 10 years before that. So
20 years ago,
this was something that was already usable, and
I'll prove that with the next clip.
I've played this many times. This was the
opening I played. I'll play a little bit
more of it here to show you that
this now what you're looking at in the
picture right now are salt crystals.
Like, salt from a salt shaker. And those
little MU chips, or motes,
are the size of what this was 20
years ago.
20 years ago. Do you know how much
change and technological advancement happens and how fast
it does these days? 20 years ago. I'm
willing to bet you that 20 years ago
was a lie because of how all the
how this always goes the same way. Where
they they give you something and like I
talk about the joke today where they go,
look at this new chip and it's the
size of an acorn
or whatever. And it's like, that's ridiculous when
we know this stuff existed 20 years ago.
They're trying to keep you in a bro
it's you know, right now, a good example
is how I keep pointing out that we
seem to focus on things like secure, you
know, security cameras and surveillance and which matters.
But But if we start to understand, as
we've seen in WF, you know, WEF Symposiums,
World Economic Forum, that they're using Wi Fi,
signals to essentially 3 d map rooms, and
that's literally everywhere in the world, then I
don't think we're there anymore.
But I think they want us to be
stuck at a point where we think that's
the reality because we're so we don't really
grasp what's actually happening. They just being the
power structures we're discussing. So let's watch this
to make sure you can connect it with
something that has been going on a very
long time. And this ties back to DARPA.
As Whitney's been writing for TLAB and Unlimited
Hangout for a long time, the idea of
the internal
bio platform or, in nano platforms
or the smart gel, all these things are
nanotech concepts that they've developed for a really
long time. And then, of course, we come
out with this
clearly deadly shot that they force on everybody
that has nanotech and MRA platforms. I mean,
it's hard not to think there's some connection
there. I'm not saying you can prove them.
Quite frankly, there are provable there's provable evidence
to show that there's things in there that
we don't know or aren't supposed to be
there. I'm always skeptical about different dynamics of
yeah. Bottom line is, it's clear that there
are things in there that might be to
the level of that. And that's being broken
down by scientists around the world. But I'll
leave that for you to decide. My question
is simply that or my point.
It's obvious that that connection is there. And
if we're unwilling to consider that, there's a
block there that you should consider
or reflect on. We've just become invisible.
We're still essentially the banging the rocks together
stage for this sort of stuff.
And you haven't really seen anything yet.
So this is closer to the end of
the vision. This is this powder sized chip,
and that's a salt crystal. So this is
a small thing. It's something called the Mu
chip from Hitachi. It's the smallest
commercially available RFID system in the world,
and can be pulse powered by radio waves.
It doesn't require a battery. You can literally
scatter this stuff like dust
or embed it into a sheet of paper.
And you know what the really interesting thing
about this technology is? This was commercially released
10 years ago.
So
the inevitability of Smart Dust. So what is
Smart Dust? Well Smart Dust, of course, isn't
a new concept. It's the originated with DARPA
back in the nineties.
And it's In the nineties.
So what's hilarious to me and scary is
that it can be such a common fact
within the expert field, and yet you talk
about this stuff and people even people in
the independent media
are are, like, reflexively dismissed. I mean, like,
shout out to Kim Iverson. She had me
on the show to talk about this. You
know? But the point is that so few
people are out there willing to consider it.
I get it, though. I mean, oh, look.
I'll put it 2 2 ways. 1, I
there's a lot of crazy stuff happening. So
it's hard to even this, I had to
decide if I wanted to put time into
this today with what's real with everything else
going on. For me, I just find it
important to make sure we don't forget stuff
like this. But it's wild.
How could you know, it's the same point
they make everywhere else. We're watching a genocide.
We're watching them murder children, and it's wild
how people just pretend it's not happening. It's
the same damn thing. And what does that
need to show you?
My opinion? That there's something going on here.
Otherwise, we'd be talking about it.
General purpose computing, sensors,
wireless
network networking all bundled up into millimeter scale
sensor modes, drifting in the air currents,
flex of computing power settling on your skin,
ingested,
monitoring you inside and out. Terrifying. And if
you don't think that's possible,
this is the Michigan Micromote.
Just so you don't understand that. He's not
saying future. He's saying that's what we had
have.
You don't think it's possible. Here's something going
on 20 years ago.
Realize what he just said.
Ingested,
floating in the air currents.
That is there. 10 years ago in this
video, and then 10 years before that with
the DARPA and MU chip concepts. It exists
already.
Now, of course, to Jay's point, maybe this
is all an illusion. We should always consider
that. But we have to acknowledge that the
data and the evidence from the people acting
like this is conspiracy theory
is clearly showing you that they're at least
wanting you to think that it is there.
The patents, the data, the I mean, all
of it. Now that has to be something
we consider. There's no way we can disregard
that with the technocratic panopticon
that we'll be built that's building around us
right now. Like, if we realize that in
the digital ID and social credit, how is
this not a part of the conversation?
It's a cubic millimeter in size.
And in deference to the speaker before, yes,
it runs an ARM processor.
Yep.
It's a tiny computing Meaning that your own
body's energy can actually make this continue to
work. And it features data for, processing, data
storage, wireless comms.
Wireless. It's probably as close to the true
smart dust vision from the early DARPA days
as we've come so far.
They're designed to harvest energy from the environment
around them and to communicate by our mesh
network.
And of course the energy is the key
problem with it. Can make the computing small,
the energy is hard.
And I'll I'll leave it there for now.
Make sure you watch the whole thing. It's
only 20 minutes long, the entire clip or,
yeah, 19 minutes.
It's pretty scary.
I mean legitimately
that this is even there.
Now here, I'll just play a quick quick
quick couple quick parts of this.
This goes back around the same time.
Right? This is an old video,
about the idea of using this And the
company was literally called Dust Networks which seems
to I mean, they've shifted websites, it still
technically exists but it doesn't seem like it's,
at least that we can see,
doing much. I think we're arguably this kind
of stuff went, you know, military side and
we don't see what's going on.
But this is about using this to track
shipping
out in the open a long time ago.
My name is Chris Piester, and I am
the founder and chief technologist of Dust Networks.
I got started in this business way back
in the nineties when I coined the phrase
smart dust to describe the vision of the
future where wireless sensors become ubiquitous
and improve the quality of all of our
lives.
Now isn't it interesting how those moments happen?
Nineties, we're all lap talking about it. You're
having, you know, PBS documentaries about it and
all of a sudden just vanishes from the
conversation
and then suddenly it's regarded as a fake
story. It doesn't doesn't that seem like a
gigantic red flag? It should. SmartMesh IP is
a revolutionary
new product that brings all of the benefits
of reliability,
security, and low power that we've developed for
the industrial process automation market and brings that
into the world of the Internet protocol.
So first and foremost, SmartMesh IP is IP.
We use the IP v six Internet protocol
to send packets in the network and to
send packets out of the network to applications.
It's the hardware platform that underlies the SmartMesh
IP family. Low power and extremely reliable. Oh,
wonderful. I might have to take the wrong
one. An application,
and you can use the business line. The
the the bottom line, he's just talking about
exactly what we just discussed and what this
was all that time ago. And it's interesting
that he's the one that coined the term
smart dust. So it's a very real concept.
But there's another one that I'm gonna look
really quickly, make sure I didn't miss it
somewhere.
That basically I just it's a really quick
part of the of these videos. Oh, this
might be it.
Let's see.
Yeah. That's the one. Buildings So this is
the same group, just just one of their
kind of, like, advertisements. And all they wanted
you to see was his example
of what he's showing you that you shouldn't
how you should visualize it. For everyone watching,
it's probably already very clear. But for those
that might be still skeptical in the sky
are an intelligent
buildings suspended in the sky are an intelligent
use of future real estate. But in the
future, every square inch of every city will
be alive with intelligence.
Because every street and every building will have
a network of microcomputers
built right into them. Doctor Chris Piestter calls
it smart dust. Right there. A smart dust
particle or moat is a wireless sensor with
sensing, computation, communication, and power in one package.
These all in one micro Now those are
gigantic, even at this time, by the way.
So it's just that's interesting to note. Computers
will be small,
very small.
The size of a moat today is about
the size of a grain of rice.
Grain of rice. Now look, I at this
point in time, I think you could easily
show DARPA was have And the Mu chip
were way smaller.
So who knows why that was stated, either
way, maybe that's just what they're working on.
The point I'm showing you is simply the
idea of what he's showing you in his
hand. The idea of these obvious And we've
shown that we can make the circuitry small
enough and light enough that eventually,
it will be possible to make things that
are on a submillimeter size scale. Submillimeter
size scale.
They they already showed you pouring it. There's
this one right here. That's what it was.
What do you mean? You see them spreading
it in the orange.
And basically distributed everywhere.
Right. They're talking about this in cities, everywhere.
Now overlapping that with what Courtney was discussing,
the natural asset companies or what Derek was
discussing, the idea that this is going to
be used to track natural resources,
or at least under the guise of doing
so in the or and the monetization, the
commodification of all of these things for the
interest of the government and the globalist ideas.
That's what this stuff is one part of,
but there's much more going on around this.
So either way, the the point is to
understand how real this is. And if we're
talking about just some bank owning a patent
for some idea that literally dumps this stuff
out in front of you to make sure
to identify you, it's something that is clearly
in the works or possibly already there. And
if we know that this has been done
and they, in this video and in their
discussions, discuss how this was used to track
overseas shipments, how in the world is it
not possibly already out there ubiquitously?
Or with geoengineering or with the injection. A
thousand of the things we can consider that
there are anomalous things were happening. How why
are people getting this illness? Why do we
feel this I mean, it's interesting to think
about. I'm not saying I'm guaranteeing or I
think for a fact that that's what the
case is. But you know these are valid
questions. Now I'm gonna include some discussions I
had about this. This was January 20 22nd
2024.
Simply asking the same point now. Is smart
dust already in use to the population? Yes.
Undeniably.
And the question is, was COVID 19, in
quotes, an attempted
experimental next step? Very important to consider that.
As well as the same image used, go
back to May 1, 2023,
the Charles Lieber connection. From nanotechnology to COVID
19 to technocracy.
Now, I'll just include a general search for
the worst smart dust if you wanna check
that stuff out more. Now here's where just
another end this segment. What's this Orwell shared
with me today.
This is from September 26, 2024.
An edible toothpaste.
Edible toothpaste
toothpaste
based transistor.
Yeah. We're talking about nanotech here. That's this
is the nanotech. It's under nanotechnology.
They're talking about a toothpaste. Oh, you know
what's funny actually?
See if I have that clip
of Borla
talking about this sort of something like this.
Yep. There it is. So why keep all
this stuff? It is,
basically biological
chip that it is in the tablet.
And once you take the tablet
and dissolves into your stomach, sec sends a
signal that you took the tablet.
So imagine the applications of that compliance,
the insurance companies to know that the medicines
that patients should take, they do.
Now, of course, this gets constantly
clipped up to make it look like it.
It doesn't include an old conversation by people
that are even though they want you to
see that this is, like, you know, dishonestly
trying to trick you into seeing the truth,
which is just as bad in my opinion
as lying. But the point is that this
is about an old conversation. This is pre
COVID nineteen. They're they're always talking about, which
is just as alarming to me, is a
pill that would just simply notify some central
database whether you took it or not. His
argument is about schizophrenics or whatever, which, you
know, it's sort of like Elon Musk and
the brain chip. I oh, it's for people
having new limbs and so on. Yeah. Maybe
that'll be a part of it. Clearly not
the real point though. So why that's important
is that this is another angle of this.
So with edible toothpaste with transistors in it
that can, you know, do any number of
things. And that's the point is they can
sure they can break down logic to make
sure you brush your teeth, to make sure
that you're out whatever it is. But the
bottom line, whatever the narrative is, is simply
another way to get these things ingested.
Now to me, I'm all all I'm highlighting
here is that this is a real thing.
That it's out there. And we know that
there's a a lot of surreptitious concepts around
this, and so I'm just thinking it should
worry us. Here, this is the actual scientific
breakdown, a fully edible transistor based on a
toothpaste pigment.
And just to include that with another part,
David Miller highlights this and this is a
bigger conversation. Of course, it's not only about
Israel quite frankly. I think your government's doing
this more than anybody to you. But think
about this as well. If we're talking about
the overlap of this tech, which I guarantee
you Israel with the, you know, forward aspect
of their tech industry is involved with,
what are the how how is this being
used? Is it being used in their current
genocides?
Or with the idea of the obvious infiltration
of US tech, the idea of the recent
conversation of the pagers and walkie talkies that
were used,
the overlapping of that with the obvious problem
of the influence, like, we talked about Carbine,
carbon 901, com frame, the overlapping of you
of Israeli intelligence with Eric Prince and the
using this to get to the defense department
and the idea that all these things are
problems.
Openly stating that they're working for the interest
of Israel. These are intelligence connected companies acting
like they're American companies all around the country.
The point is that is it not possible
that that's the whether it's the toothpaste or
any number of other things that this could
be infiltrated? Yes. But to talk about that,
David Miller says, how does Israel infiltrate the
tech
used by 1,000,000 in order to target individuals?
One route which you might find interesting is
using VPNs, which people use to evade surveillance.
Apparently, in this episode from DP classified,
Palestine or p declassified
or p declassified. Excuse me. We ask why
people should be concerned about a group called
Cape Technologies,
which owns a number of the biggest virtual
private network providers or VPNs.
In their first report, they look at a
main a man behind Cape Technologies who apparently
is an Israeli businessman, which doesn't
verify
prove that he is somehow compromised, but it's
certainly concerning with the idea of how Israel
talks about using things just like this to
benefit the intelligence side of their apparatus or
just Israel in general by using
x in quotes, unit 800 people, or x
anybody military, which or even intelligence, which I
don't think is really a thing, to make
companies.
And they will state themselves they're doing this
for the interest of the Israeli agenda.
Says later in the show, we highlighted the
fact that the CEO of Cape Technologies is
the background with a covert Israeli military unit.
Guess which one that is, guys? Unit 82100.
Oh my god. What a surprise. So the
problem is that these are real, real things,
that they're using this and infiltrating tech and
governments and everywhere else, and the concern
is that they're using the very thing you
think you're using to keep you private
to actually track you or any number of
other infiltrated tech concepts. And I'll include these
articles on the show for you to read
for yourself.
And then, of course, with all of that
being said, the idea of smart dust and
biometric tracking and everything else, maybe it's worth
hearing what Trump said about biometric tracking one
more time.
Alright.
We will finally complete
the biometric
entry exit visa tracking system, which we need
desperately.
For years, congress has required
biometric
entry exit visa tracking systems.
Both sides of the government. But it has
never been completed. The politicians are all talk.
No action. Never happens.
So first, right there. Oh, see? They're all
talk. I'm an act I'm I'm I'm the
guy's action.
Just if these are basic social manip you
know, men they're he they're men he's manipulating
you into going, oh, then we're better than
them. Let's do it let's do it then.
It's like such a simple it's like reverse
psychology, like basic basic stuff, but it seems
to work. So same with the next point.
Ever happens. Hillary Clinton,
all talks
unfortunately, when there is action, it's always the
wrong decision. Do you have Oh, Clinton wouldn't
do it? Well, let's do it then. Let's
be you know, it's like the opposite. It's
really? How about none of us want that?
Whether or not the other side or whichever
game you're playing,
it's so basic, guys.
Notice?
In my end I think you have to
oh, no. This is this is point this
is point. Administration.
We will ensure that this system is in
place,
and I will tell you, it will be
on land. Mhmm. It will be on sea.
It will be in air. We will have
a proper tracking system. Which means it's
for everybody. It's for you. It's for everybody.
And, like, the immigration discussion is just a
vehicle for this to be used.
That should concern you. Now, maybe. Maybe he
doesn't know. Maybe he's being used. I'm not
it's never about trying to go bad guy
Trump because I think they're all stupid. I
think they're all it's just your government. All
of it.
But it's a fact and it's something to
consider that that shouldn't be a what we
want with the bigger conversation.
Now another point to include before we move
on to the next segment that you might
not have seen, hopefully you have since we've
covered it a lot. Derek's been breaking it
down since 2023.
Frankly, far ahead of literally anybody else that
I can see short of the Florida Action
Network
despite very few people pointing that out that
have known that work has been going on
now that it's a bigger story and I'm
talking specifically about the mainstream alternative media,
Florida Action Network posted this today. Or rather,
I get late last night. The trial evidence
in this case establishes, this is a direct
quote from the judge, federal court, that even
if there is some uncertainty as to the
precise level at which fluoride becomes hazardous, which
there's really not. This is a game being
played by the federal government knowing that it's
hurting you, but they don't care. He says,
under even the most conservative estimates of this
level, there is not enough of a margin
between the accepted hazard level and the actual
human exposure level to find that fluoride is
safe.
Otherwise otherwise it means that it's not. It's
dangerous. It's a neurotoxin. It's hurting you. And
everyone knows that. And this is even what
the judge put out. And Derek pointed this
out in his recent article.
And I simply said, you know, what was
that again about conspiracy theory? Of course it
won't matter because now it's gonna be like,
yeah, we all knew that. As it always
does. Despite the fact that 10 seconds ago
people were acting like you were a lunatic
for saying it was a problem. And by
the way, some people will just end up
continuing to say that. Sort of like geoengineering
is a fake story despite having literal programs
to carry it out. Harvard and California. But
no, it's fake news because they just can't
get past that pro programming.
But think about how crazy this is. If
you think if you're at least objective enough
to pay attention
to, you know, anybody's data coming your way,
whether regardless of the partisan narratives,
think about what else might
be real when they call it fake or
fake when they call it real. They being
literally anybody in power.
Because this is where we are now. How
many times do we need to see these
things be proven to be correct,
grudgingly so, until we ask ourselves what they
really care about you? Hopefully, you already got
there. Now one last quick point on this
idea I just wanna make sure we see.
I just think this is hilarious. Same kinda
general point of hypocrisy,
contradiction.
This is a new article from today, Reuters.
Got COVID?
Here's here are the new 2024 isolation guidelines.
Okay. So here's what's point important to point
out.
Based on their logic, and realize they didn't
change their standing. They just stopped enforcing what
they were doing before. Based on this logic,
shouldn't we be locking down right now? Shouldn't
we be all doing all the same? Well,
based on their logic, to their mind, yes.
Because it's not about whether it's dangerous now.
It could be. There could be a new
variant. We have to get ahead of it.
All the same BS we were shoo I
mean, again, this was halfway through the garbage.
In the beginning, they were going, this is
gonna kill everybody.
And then clearly, it started to be proven
that it wasn't, and they go, well, we
know what it could be. Gotta make sure
grandma's safe. Except it wasn't hurting anybody other
than the people who took the shots. You
know, who
being obviously
not anybody. But the point is there were
things out there bottom line
is that this, based on what they said
before, should be the same way. Right? Shouldn't
we be taking the same actions because it's
the same con it just shows you that
it's all about narrative. Even the people that
really believe this are just following along with
what the CDC says today without acknowledging that
this is contradictory.
Children following along like a teacher. Follow me.
It's it's so sad to see how many
Americans or people in the world have been
just lobotomized
by the by the 2 2 party paradigm,
by the idea that you're supposed to be
like, that we talked about recently, the idea
that following,
taking orders, doing quote what's right is somehow
the right the virtuous thing to do. Oh,
actually, that came from my interview with Larkin
Rose, which I'll be putting out in the
coming days. I just wanted to make sure
it came out of the day, would it
wouldn't get overshadowed by what's going on in
Lebanon and everything else because what we talk
about is important that it pertains to the
voting conversation elections. That will be coming out
soon. But just, you know, recognize that you're
lying, they're being lied to with everything they
do, all the time. These people don't care
about you. They're always trying to manipulate you.
And I'm talking about people in power. It's
just simply the way the world works. You
don't have to be sad about that. You
don't have to change. Just be objective.
When somebody tells you something, go maybe they're
lying. Maybe they're not. Maybe they're wrong. Maybe
they're confused. Or maybe they're right. Those things
all exist in every possible choice, including from
Trump, from RFK, from Biden or Koala. They're
not always lying because they're on the left,
or they're not always right because they're on
the right. It doesn't it's always back and
forth. Most of them are lying to you
all the time. And until we get to
that point, this will never change. Now let's
talk about
the 2 party illusion.
And, you know, it kinda stems from the
same conversation, but the idea of how clear
there is just so many contradictions right now.
And I think what that shows me more
than ever is that this thing is breaking
down.
People are seeing it. We Catherine and I
had a great conversation on the let the
8th September
entitled see beyond the duopoly and take responsibility
for your future. Don't think one of these
absolute
bought off, you know, whatever you wanna call
these stooges.
Don't let don't let don't let them convince
you that by picking one of them, you're
somehow gonna change the dynamic. They're the same
thing.
I'll include this other conversation, bar bipartisan digital
ID and the partisan managers circle the wagons
as the 2 party illusion begins to break
down. I was sensing it then.
But so let's get into these different contradiction.
Now this is not pertaining to one specific
topic, but I want you to think about
these different things. And it's not just Trump
or it's it's all of them. But I
think right now, as I was saying before,
it's more concerning to me that I see
more people believing that the Trump
Vance,
Peter Thiel, RFK dynamic is somehow going to
save us all from what they are actively
building.
They are. All of them. And I think
it's important to make sure because, honestly, on
top of that, I see the rep the
conservative
at base to be the the the
the most logical choice to resist all of
this from the constitutional
mindset, from the gun owner, and whatever we
wanna talk about. That's why they're seen as
the biggest threat, which I think they're being
focused on yet again like they were during
COVID 19.
Whatever reason you wanna add up to, the
point is that we need to recognize that
these are contradictions. And if you can't acknowledge
that, if you don't want to see it
because she's worse, then just acknowledge that you've
given up. That you just don't care about
the facts because you've been tricked into a
lesser of evil's ploy.
Michael Tracey points out, what the hell is
this? We played this clip recently. This is
Trump saying that he if he is president,
he would you know, if Iran does x
y z, we'll just blow the entire country
to smithereens, which is one of the things
that he said explicitly.
He says, Trump says if he were president,
he would if he were threatened, he would
blow Iran's largest cities and destroy the country
itself, which is explicitly what he says. There
is no more overused adjective to describe Trump's
rhetoric than unhinged, but this is genuinely unhinged.
Now whatever you think about that, whether you
think that's the case or not, the
point is that he's talking about Iran going
after him, going after the country, which by
the way is ridiculous
in regard to what's going on. If you
have any
interest in due diligence or just you know,
the point is this is a narrative, whether
you're left or right, that has always been
coming from the deep state or whatever you
wanna call it. You know, the thing that
Trump's supposed to be fighting. And as Michael
says, suddenly, it seems Trump and his sycophants
take deep state rumors at face value.
At least when it can be used to
whip up a war frenzy against one of
the designated enemy states. But please tell me
more about how Trump GOP have a principled
opposition to the deep state.
Of course, they won't wanna hear that.
The reality though is that the idea of
Iran and what they're do that's that's explicitly
what this comes from. Whatever you wanna call
it. The shadow of government, the deep state,
the unelected power structure, which has always been
aimed in this direction for Israel.
Right? There it's the left or the right
who's in the adminis who's in the big
White House.
So it's funny to me just like with
the shooting discussion where it seems that the
republicans are the ones that are using the
official narrative because it works. And all you
need to see there if you're objective enough
to realize they're all lost in the paradigm
and it's all the same thing, that they
are all there's not one side or the
other that's any different. They're all doing the
same thing. They're all acting for the interest
of the of the government.
Because the idea that Iran is going after
him is bet at at the very least
has no evidence behind it other than the
same go old government apparatus that lied about
it during Obama or Bush or the same
damn thing telling you the same lies with
nothing to back it up.
This point, I thought was actually pretty hilarious.
So as we're talking about Israel or the
idea that Trump and the right or whatever
are fighting communism,
fighting the evils of socialism or whatever you
wanna frame it as, and Israel is the
part of that, or despite the fact that
Israel is literally representing globalism
more than anybody, it seems, Despite the fact
that nobody wants to acknowledge that who are
talking about globalism, but not Israel. There's a
very clear category there that I know you
know who I'm talking about. The point
is that in this case, Israel,
apparently,
went on rounds to China like they do
did everywhere, by the way, over the years
to try to get everybody on their side.
And guess what they were trying to sell
the Chinese people on?
Look at what we're doing over here in
these caboots. It's communism.
Don't you like it?
So get this. So as we're pretending that
you're fighting communism, your chief ally is Israel
who was trying to convince China that what
they were doing was communism. Now it doesn't
even mean that they left the case because
in this point, they're gonna the the person
discussing this is gonna say they weren't. They
were just trying to claim that to get
us on their side. It was actually more
like the Roman time frame where there were
people at the top and then they had
their slaves do all the work. Yeah. Like
an apartheid state. Right? But what's funny to
me is that the right or anybody else
that wants to see it the way they
wanna see it won't care about that. The
reality is Kamala or the rest they're all
the same thing. She's not a socialist or
communist. There's obviously tendencies there or they'd like
just like Trump's not a fascist.
But that's the game. And apparently, you're only
an adult if you play into the paradigms
that you're handed from the deep state. But
the funny thing is I'll just read it.
This is this is brilliant.
Chinese star, Gao,
Chaosong
was brought on a propaganda trip to Israel.
Where on a visit to a kabutz, they
tried to convince him that this was a
perfect example of communism. And then he started
asking questions, leading him to conclude that it
was nothing like communism, but more akin to
the system of ancient Rome where you had
a small number of citizens who could vote
with a lot of slaves around them. Because
that's exactly what Israel's doing.
And you you can watch the clip. It's
it's about 5 minutes long. But I just
think it's hilarious to me. And and and
this is something that Israel went on the
rounds doing this. And and arguably trying to
convince people that they are exactly what their
other allies don't. I mean, you get the
point. It's kind of hilarious to me how
people will box out what they want. At
the very least, realize that Israel is using
everybody.
Now, on that note, here's an example of
that. Now, Visregard 24 has been caught, I
mean, more endless amount of times, just post
October 7th, just egregiously lying to everybody. They
are not a news organization, they are a
straight up Israeli propaganda platform. They've been caught
lying about food, the destruction of bakeries, the
starvation of children.
Or I mean, just on and on and
on and on. I mean, blatantly posting things.
How about even during the Venezuela conversation? They
shared something about lies, about the voting conversation
and turned out to be something they you
know, even Twitter fact checked it, put a
little box down below and said, nope. Those
are actually what was it?
Some other kind of device. It had nothing
to do with the voting process and it
was an older video. They shared it. Elon
Musk shared it.
You'd think you would learn from something like
that because everybody called it out, and then
you'd go, okay. Mental note. Version of God
24
at least doesn't do their due diligence. But
then he went on to share it all
the time, can check it ever since, which
to me shows you that it's not really
about being honest. It's about what suits the
narrative or possibly what Israel tells them to
do. You can decide for yourself.
I simply said and the the all they're
talking about here is
attacking the mainstream media because they simply had
a not terrorist view of Nasralla.
Oh my god. Because he wasn't. Regardless of
what you think, they all have their problems.
Again, government to me, including that because he's
simply another part of a government. And to
me, are the problem. They represent the problem
in a larger sense.
But if you wanna say he's a terrorist,
well, you damn well better call Netanyahu and
Biden and Trump terrorists because they're responsible for
a hell of a lot more death. But
you probably don't think that if you're blindly
following along with the deep state news, which
is left and right paradigm, Fox News, CNN,
whatever else. But I said that you still
share from this account,
that has already fooled you, and I should've
put that in quotes. He wasn't fooled in
my opinion. That's already fooled you twice into
sharing outright lies with its blatant Israeli propaganda.
And for those reading, I mean, the literal
propaganda operation, this is not a news platform,
says a lot about you. Are you a
willing participant? Is there, you know, is there
somebody else in the room with you right
now? Like, I think that's where we're talking.
Either way,
keep sharing it. Who cares?
I think there's an interest there. Here's another
example, and this point comes back to something
that is this is more so the next
point we're gonna get into is where I
keep bumping up against this topic. It's interesting
to me.
Better word for it, I'm sure, but it's
interesting to me how you will talk about
something
and be very explicit about it. Make a
very, very clear point.
But then because and I and I get
it how it's easy to go, like, oh,
maybe that guy's got an ulterior motive or
because a lot of times, most cases on
this horrible platform, they do. But nonetheless, it's
very clear. And people jump in and respond
as if you they're responding to what they
assume you were trying to do,
which by the way is just ridiculous.
But this is what we see constantly and
that's the left and the right of the
paradigm because that's pretty much breeding assumeers, a
la Twitter files and everything else. But Elon
Musk is so crazy. Elon bought anyway as
we keep seeing the excellent. Yes. Exactly. There's
always the one ends one second apart. But
America First Legal simply says, breaking Biden Harris
DOJ sues to keep illegals on voter rules.
Now you could argue that's exactly what they
are doing, what they think they're doing, but
it's what's I think it's funny about this.
Well, actually, we'll start we'll start with that
one.
I guess it's the same difference, but
the this says,
yesterday, the Biden Harris DOJ sued the state
of Alabama for fighting to remove potential noncitizen
and illegal aliens from their voter roll ahead
of the 2024 election. Now, like always, that
may be exactly what's happening and maybe what
the DOJ is saying is a lie.
Why would I not consider that? That's exactly
why DOJ or any government, left or right.
Of course, we don't follow it. But you
see, people that follow the show know that.
People that only see the one things they
want, they, you know, they tend to frame
it as pro left or pro right because
that's the only way the world makes sense.
But here's what's interesting.
What they're claiming in this exact post that
they don't wanna link to, and I think
that's why,
there's a very different explanation.
Now all my only point, as I said,
I said, I'm not saying that I take
at face value what the DOJ is arguing.
But nor do I take at face value
what any of you are saying. So that
being said, shouldn't you include what they're actually
arguing?
Or would that be too accurately informing your
in for your followers? So let's look at
what it actually says. So here, remember, they're
saying that this is them try they're suing
Alabama for trying to stop illegal voters. That's
what they're claiming. Now this is the part
that matters. It says August August 13th, and
this is the same document here.
It says the secretary of state announced the
launch of a, quote, process to remove noncitizens
from Alabama. So to be clear, that seems
at least that's how they're framing it from
Alabama, and maybe that is actually what's happening.
Maybe the the lie is right here what
the DOJ says, but don't you think it
matters to show that this is my point
about lying for your truth. It matters to
be able to point out that this is
what they're arguing. This was, it says, 84
days before the November 5th election,
selection,
the justice department's review found that both native
born
and naturalized US citizens, so not illegal,
have received letters stating that their voter record
has been made inactive and that they have
been placed on the path for removal from
their statewide voter registration. So if that's even
remotely true, that means that through this process,
they either accidentally
gave this to people that were voters or
maybe in their interest to stop the illegal
voters, went a little too far and started
putting it giving it to other democrats.
You know exactly as I do that that's
something that all of them are capable of.
All of the paradigm are just as childish
and ridiculous.
So all I'm saying is an objective observer
that's not taking sides on your game, your
childish 2 party game.
I'm simply pointing out that shouldn't we include
that that's not what they're saying? That they
are arguing that you also boxed out actual
voters? And if that's the case, that that's
crazy and important?
Of course, they don't think that. But
it says, the letter directs recipients who are
in fact US citizens and eligible to vote
to complete and submit the attached state of
Alabama voter registration form, which, by the way,
if you're a voter and a US citizen,
that you should not have to go through
that process.
I mean, just objective. As I go know
who this audience is, wouldn't you agree that
that seems to be relevant to the conversation?
And I'm I'm willing to argue that this
this will come out, and I'm willing to
bet, if I'm reading this correctly, that the
evidence will show that there are actual voters
that are there. Well, here's another angle to
put on it too. It's very possible, and
this is an interesting overlap, that the US
government, let's just say the Kamal Biden administration,
decided to wave their magic wand and say,
you're just citizens now because we want that.
Which, by the way, I wouldn't agree with
because that seems pretty arbitrary.
But wouldn't that then technically make them legal?
Yeah. It would. But I would still push
back too. I would say that's you can't
just do that and claim the because that
invalidates the whole process. But then it becomes
an interesting point of what becomes legal. Like,
from my perspective, left or right, the government
stating things does not make it law if
it's unconstitutional whether they vote on it or
not. So you get the point, like, for
the end of the day,
this is to simply go back to what
they're saying and make it about how they
are
suing to keep illegals on the rolls is
not very accurate at all. And then when
you only point it like this and make
it seem like they're removing you get my
point.
So the idea that my the response is
yada yada yada blah blah blah. Anyone who
spent any time on the subject of ballot
fraud knows the number one unconstitutional legal ballots
are injected into the system way the number
one way that they're injected into the system
is via bloated voter rolls. And Biden administration
knows this which is why they're fighting it.
Okay. May maybe you're probably right. I I
simply added for conversation, I agree. And I
would argue that under the illusion your vote
translates, I would agree but I don't think
it does so you get that distinction. But
I said, so now that we can move
past incorrect assumptions and realize that I'm not
coming from a defending the left perspective despite
me already saying that, can you acknowledge that
this is important to include all the info
so readers can come to their own conclusions?
And surprise, surprise, she didn't respond.
Because of course not if it hurts Trump
or whatever. You see the or the if
it hurts Kamala.
I just think I just said, I I
guess not. Some of us care more about
the truth than partisan supporting narratives.
I'd like to believe anybody, objective, would agree
with this. And, of course, instead, most people
try to frame it as me defending them,
keeping illegals on the ballot even though I
made entire shows about how we should not
allow that and how they're using this to
trick you into digital IDs. And, yes, people
who are citizens should be able to vote,
and those that aren't legally shouldn't based on
the basic law. Yep. Those are just static
realities. And also, we should include what they
say too even if they're lying because that's
objective.
It's infuriating and exhausting that we even have
to go through that, but I do think
it's important.
At the same point, I just responded to
Elon saying the same thing. I said, what's
crazy is how you all lie, every part
of the 2 party illusion. And the most
common lie by omission. I think that's exactly
what that is.
And then end the segment around voting, I
thought this was interesting. Ian Smith says, so
are we voting on machines hooked up to
the Internet? Are we still voting on machines
hooked up to the Internet? Which of course,
if the one, the Veer vote actually translated
and and that's actually what was going on,
like, the point would be, yeah. Of course
that matters. Because think about how crazy it
is. That we could have entire
videos or documentaries of how easy it is
to hack these machines or how Curtis, going
back to decades or more, can say, I
was paid to manipulate these machines, and we
all know that. Or in that case, the
Diebold machines or what he was telling you
were manipulated, and they all heard the testimony
and then literally used those same machines in
that very state. Because that makes sense. Right?
But to me, that seems cartoonishly stupid.
And both sides allow it.
So how does that make sense? Well, this
is the point I'm making. Because Andrea Lynn
chimes in and says, so are we still
thinking voting in quotes is actually legit?
And there's the exact point. I think what
this comes down to, guys,
is how they keep you divided
amongst the the the illusion.
Right? At the end of the day, if
they keep as we've said many times over
the years, if they keep you asking the
wrong questions, they don't care what answers you
find. Right? And if we're arguing with each
other over something irrelevant
right? So if if hypothetically, they vote doesn't
translate, and they want you to think it
does, and instead of every day finding more
evidence to point to the fact that they
don't allow your vote to translate, they keep
you arguing about the the voting machine problem
that is so ridiculous and obvious, it's been
there for 20 years, so we don't recognize
the bigger point. But we sure hate those
democrats that don't realize. We sure hate the
republicans that wanted to that's how that works,
guys. I mean, I'm convinced of that, and
that happens in every single conversation we're having.
Hence, versus they probably still leave cookies for
Santa Claus.
Important.
Now,
the last segment on this, which I think
is it just seemed to just
lost people. People lost their minds around this
point. And I think this is actually pretty
interesting. Now let me be very clear about
this, guys. At the end of the day,
all I'm trying to do is the same
thing I was just doing right there. I'm,
like, trying to highlight what I see as
a contradiction.
Now people can argue that I favor one
side or the other, but anybody who's ever
listened to this show or knows my opinion
knows that's not true. I I think the
again, for the millionth time, I think they
are both equally ridiculous and both equally dishonest.
So when I see a contradiction, I think
it's important to point it out. So I
said, can you imagine the republican reaction to
this if it were Obama, Kamala, or Biden
wearing this? And you've all seen this. Maybe
you forgot about the back of it though.
And I said, but of course, since it's
Elon,
insert hypocritical excuse here, which is just perfect
for the way this turned out. Hashtag do
party illusion. Now this was vision for the
blind saying the back of Elon Musk's bath
mat suit. Now, again, remember, this is,
some suit for I think from the Diablo
game and it was for Halloween. So for
first point,
before everyone assumes what they do in the
chat, there's no reason I mean, in no
way am I saying it's wrong or illegal
or he's not allowed to do that. I
don't know where that would even come from.
Because I very clearly stated what I thought.
But what I thought was interesting is you
all well know, anybody objective will go, yes,
absolutely, whether it's left or right. If this
was Obara wearing that and was a publicly
stated Halloween costume and he loved Diablo, the
game,
you know damn well they would still freak
out about it and say, oh my god.
He's got a a devil Baphomet on the
front. It's like a goat head, and he's
got an upside down cross in the back.
And, yes, I know that history around Saint
Peter. That's not the point I'm making.
Right? Despite the fact that historically going forward,
it's clearly been identified or overlapped whether it's
accurate or not with the idea of some
kind of a devil worship concept or this,
you know, whatever.
Regardless of that, it doesn't matter because that's
not my point. I'm not saying that he's
devil the devil or I'm not saying he's
not Christian. It's just funny, all of the
reflexive
responses which literally fit into insert hypocritical excuse
here.
The point is simply that if it was
Obama or Biden or whatever else, they would
lose their minds about it.
And maybe both of us, but all sides
should have concerned about that weirdness of wearing
that, but it's not the point. It's about
the fact that if you could apply that
logic one way, obviously, it should go to
both. And the other point would be that
he's not a politician. Well, yeah. He really
is if we understand what that means today,
especially now that he's a part of Trump's
cabinet. So, yeah. Very much so. And he's
very clearly a political figure. You know that
by a fa for a 1,000 different things.
So this person also pointed out that the
suit, mind you, is the one he's wearing
in his profile pic. To this very moment,
by the way. Which I think is interesting.
I forgot to grab that, we'll just look
real quick.
So it's the the image of him wearing
that suit is in his profile, which I
find interesting.
Now Mark,
pl pl,
Palacio Palaciano,
not familiar with his work, but he says
I made excuses for these images in 2022
and 2023.
And here's the full images, so you got
the upside down cross in the back, You've
got the Baphomet thing in the front. And,
yeah, Halloween costume. Again, not I'm not saying
it's like, oh my god. He's a devil
or whatever. That's not even the point.
Just don't forget
or on top of that, here he is,
Elon
palling around with Klaus Schwab,
but, you know, just other technocrats and global
leaders
at the
Atlantic Council discussion.
The you know, by the Global Citizen Awards
or whatever.
What I think is funny about that is
that, obviously,
it's interesting how many examples we have that
this person is so obviously part of the
same machine that
mostly people on the right claim they're fighting.
And I think that stands out.
Now here is another example
of contradictions, remember. This is what we're talking
about. So the idea that people will be
unwilling to to acknowledge that that would be
something that they would be concerned about. If
it was anybody on the left, they would
say, oh my god. Satanic pedophile. Whatever they
would talk about. So Elon Musk
points this out on September 26th. He says,
once you understand the Kardashiev scale, Kardashian, however
you pronounce that, it becomes utterly obvious that,
essentially, all energy generation will be solar.
Okay. Whatever you think about that. And, again,
I'm not saying wrong, good, bad, up, down.
I'm just pointing out that stating that we
would be going in the direction of solar
energy seems to be pretty diametrically opposite of
what most Republicans are saying right now.
Again, not my about my opinion about it
at all. It says also just to do
the math on solar on the Earth, you
and and you soon figure out that a
relatively small corner of Texas and New Mexico
can easily do it. Okay. This person says,
but I don't want this.
My nearest came in.
I talked up many times. Not that there
is not some use for this, but the
insustainability,
the reality of how this doesn't make any
sense with the way the the with the
production level. I mean, a 1,000 things we
talked about in the past. The actual byproducts
of doing this or the windmills, whatever else.
But it's funny to me that, as you
well know, and this is the only point
I'm making, that if this was Biden that
came out and said solar energy will be
the future, you damn well know what most
responses from Republicans would be. But now that
Elon says it, oh my god. Well, maybe
so. And if he does does it, well,
we'll support Elon's solar energy.
I just think that has to be pointed
out as absurd as it actually is and
childish. Here's another one. It's part of the
same conversation.
So in response to that same point, point,
Naomi says regardless of whether or not whether
or not CO 2 drives global warming, and
she says it does not, which I agree
with, solar may well be the best truly
sustainable source of energy in the future.
Here's what Elon says. C 02 does increase
temperatures. This is empirically true. Meaning, you can
run small scale experiments. I'm, well, okay. Hold
on now. Is he leaning into the climate
change dynamic? Now whether or not he says
that the what they want is what I
want, the idea that you're rationalizing the c
o two is part of the red the
global warming dynamic, that's what he just said.
Doesn't that concern Republicans who have highlighted that
exact point as one of the central problems
for the US the agenda 2030 and US
well, it damn well should.
If you're gonna be consistent with your logic,
I think that's important. But I think we
all know what's going to what's going to
come of that. Lastly, I found this to
be pretty interesting. This is from September 25th,
and it says, this will be one for
the history books.
We, Robot,
1010,
Los Angeles, which I, you know, takes the
framing from I, Robot, the movie, but guess
what it's really about?
Tesla confirms we, robot, robot taxi event,
which, you know, maybe you don't care about.
May I mean, to me, I've the the
whole driving I mean, this all of it
connects with the same conversation of the technocratic
rise of smart cities, a 15 minute city.
This is a central part of that.
Of course, because Elon did it, we'll pretend
like that's not part of it just because,
and that's my point.
That has to be called out. If you're
a conservative out there and you recognize that,
don't stand by and let it happen. Call
them out and say your logic is inconsistent.
And then I'll include this thread which goes
over a ton of different points. Morpheus, Codex
pointed out. I'm not familiar with the work.
All of these are pretty valid points. Just
you know? And they're all mostly mainstream articles
in, like, this point of the exact checkpoints
of all the the global World Economic Forum
kind of global,
you know, great reset discussion, how he checks
every box. He's tweeted about everything they wanna
accomplish, whether it's carbon tax or the COVID
19, the vaccination, all of it, or or
the Tesla or the micro mRNA factories. I
mean, it's ridiculous how many overlaps there are.
But he goes on to do point out
a hell of a lot of things that
if any other person, I know you would
see them criticize.
And then Sal just always come in with
the pressing point
as he puts out this meme that says,
there is no red, there is no blue,
there is the state, and there is you.
With a picture of Kamala and Trump, let
red and white, you know, it's just
exactly.
There's only the government manipulating your life. Everything
else is narrative to convince you that that's
some that something else is happening. Now, lastly,
to bring this the other thread off the
same post about him wearing that armor,
weirdly this person jumps in and says, so,
do you love? You're opposed to the free
spirit individualism that our constitution guarantees?
That's my point. I was like, and if
you really wanna have an entertaining moment, read
through this the the comments. It's just I
can get I responded to most of them.
I just am blown away by how almost
one person I even responded going like, you
know, I whether you're bots or not, maybe
you should reflect on whether this platform is
turning you into one because you all have
said the exact same response that doesn't seem
to even relate to what I'm saying. But
anyway,
so I simply and so she's asking if
I'm somehow opposed to free spirit, which I
don't know why you would ask that. Because
she's assuming I'm going bad,
Elon bad, and armor bad, and he's not
a Christian. Nope. Not even remotely. Simply pointing
out that it would be hypocritical to you
get it. But I said, nope.
Any more absurd self serving assumptions for us?
So you're really saying is
then she brings it to the point that
it carries over to the next conversation. So
this was where it was really coming from,
you see. And then it should make you
think about the people defending Elon Musk. She
says, are you anti Jewish and pro Islamic
radicalism for so for a reason?
Woah. Where'd that come from? And she says,
if so, can you state your rationale?
So you brought you screech out an assumption
and expect me to tap tap like, it's
so funny to me. And I said, oh,
so you weren't done with the absurd self
serving assumptions. I stand with Jews, Muslims, and
Christians alike calling out your Zionist genocide. You
can screech all you want about racism because
we all now see that Zionism is racism
and that Zionism is not Judaism. And I
include the clips coming from a
dying a a holocaust survivor
discussing how he is siding with the Palestinians
or Jewish members of congress telling you they
see the genocide or Jews in general siding
with the people pat protesting at the colleges
or the Jewish doctrine, which I'll play for
in a minute, discussing how he's seeing kids
get shredded and murdered and shot in the
head twice.
Of course, he responds by saying, so there's
nothing called Islamic genocide?
What?
Like, I where is how it's embarrassing that
this is the best they can do. Whoever
is doing this, who said anything like that?
And she said, does it exist exist in
your ideological framework? Of course, you already know
that Zionist genocide does not exist unless you
contort and distort statistics and definitions.
You know, despite the the Jewish academics openly
saying that that does exist or the many
human rights groups or you know, it's it's
pathetic.
I said, do you only assume? What an
intellectual infant. Go gaslight for genocide where people
are not laughing at your blatant lies and
flimsy sidesteps, so nowhere. I'll leave you with
3 Jews who disagree with you. And I
said, are you calling this holocaust survivor a
liar? And big surprise, of course, she didn't
respond to that because there's no way for
her to really come out of that as
somebody else responding.
Right? You're not she's not gonna step in
and go, yes, he's lying because that's a
huge point of contention for people whose Zionists
wanna pretend that they're fighting for Jewish people.
But this is where we are. So bringing
this into the conversation about
Lebanon and foreign policy.
Let's start with a couple of other points
around funding that's actually happening simultaneously. Here's
genocide supporter secretary
Blinken. Today, this is on 26th, I am
directing the drawdown of 5.55,500,000,000
in remaining authority and support for Ukraine's defense.
The United States and more than 50 nations
stand united with Ukraine, and this support will
ensure continued robust support. Okay. So you're openly
supporting a Neo Nazi government
that is being funded by the other right
wing government in Israel that's absolutely doing the
same things. Because that does make sense when
you understand what Zionism really is. But this
because it's openly funded by Israel, the Azov
Movement, which is a very obvious Neo Nazi
element.
And they're supporting them too because this has
been a long time agenda. The point though
is that they're spending 1,000,000,000 of your tax
dollars to fund the most obvious representation of
what we pretend we're fighting in the world,
which by the way, if you've been paying
attention for any period of time, it's been
that way for a very long time. Moderate
rebels and whatever else. It just never stops
and we all see it. But because of
the screaming partisanship that keeps you trapped in
the status quo, it never stops going the
same direction.
On top of that, here's Matt you met
Matt Miller. Now here's what I think is
hilarious about this. Let's refresh just to make
sure we have the most up to date
numbers.
Matt Miller has
at least we're told, because I'm I'm convinced
that even the the engagement on a lot
of these Zionist posts are complete bot lie
manipulations. Like, I guarantee it. With the comments
underneath it and it's just pathetic how obvious
it is that the world sees what they're
doing and yet they still get you know,
it's I think it's hilarious. But my point
is this, he's got 626,000
followers,
15,000 views,
only 60 likes.
Here's what he says. In a meeting with
Kenyan president, you know, the group they're currently
using to occupy Haiti and, you know, Kenyans
are seemingly being used right now as their
kind of military arm in this location.
In a meeting with the president that they
are, you know, the puppet president I would
argue, emphasized our shared democratic values. Really?
Shared democratic values that you don't care about
anywhere else in the world that doesn't exist
anywhere?
And the importance of the US Kenya partnership,
which is what it's really about, in addressing
regional and global challenges like the occupation of
Haiti. He thanked Kenya for the leadership of
the multinational security support. My point simply and
he's talking about Haiti.
It's that
does anybody believe these morons? Does anybody give
them any credence? Like, you have lost the
plot. Everybody sees right through what you are,
what you've been lying about, and even your
own followers.
Just you just don't even matter.
Because you're a clown. You're a tap dancing
clown out there screaming, Israel's doing nothing wrong,
while we all see the bombing buildings behind
you.
It's it's sad. But I just want us
to recognize that people see through it. You're
not alone out there.
And then, of course, Israel just got another
$9,000,000,000
of your tax dollars
in aid that they don't need,
while they're half the half the time selling
some of this to other countries to get
money for themselves, which they've already reported in
Israeli media.
8 another $9,000,000,000?
I mean, realize, they got $4,000,000,000
a year before this, going back to Obama,
con and continued during Trump and everybody else.
And then they what is it now? What
another? 40 +1000000000
on top of that? It's probably I'm probably
missing 2 APAC, just before I'll remember.
Why? So they can keep committing genocide while
they pretend they're calling for de escalation.
Yeah. Because that doesn't make sense if you
have a brain.
Then,
the Lemkin Institute, making sure you didn't forget.
And remember, this is the Lemkin Institute For
Genocide Prevention.
Don't forget, right in the beginning of their
genocide, they even pointed to Lemkin at the
per in the past using that person to
pretend that they were doing something right. And
that's right when the Lemkin Institute came out
and said, nope. You're a genocide.
They stopped doing that because now they got
caught. It's just like everything else. But the
Lemkin Institute wants you to know excuse me.
As of September 27th,
the Lemkin Institute reminds the world
that the Israeli prime minister, Netanyahu,
is a genocider
or genocide error.
That's pretty powerful from the Lemkin Institute For
Genocide Prevention.
Israel is a genocidal state supported by a
genocidal society.
Wow. Right hit the right on the nose.
This means that the genocidal killing of a
Palestinian and how Lebanese
people will continue to spread.
It will not stop on its own. Anybody
on this is telling you this right now?
If this doesn't stop, it's gonna spread everywhere.
Which is, by the way, as always, the
projection of what they wanted you to think
the other guy was doing, because that's what
they're gonna do. That's what they're doing.
And what do they keep saying? If they
don't stop Russia, they're gonna go around the
world. There's no evidence to suggest that. Not
even remotely.
Or Hamas somehow is gonna take over the
world even though Israel funds them and they're
trapped inside this area. But, you know, it's
listen to Israel because if we don't do
what they want, let them keep killing children.
This group that they have created and funded
is gonna somehow take over the world as
they're literally doing that, as they are already
occupying Syria and Lebanon and Palestine.
And the US government is occupying any number
of other countries for Israel, and they're openly
telling you their greater Israel project includes Jordan
and Saudi Arabia. And it's it's obvious. It's
right on the surface.
It says the world has a responsibility to
protect life. Of course, including Arab life. You
shouldn't even have to include write that. Walking
out of Netanyahu's speech at the UN is
not enough. There must be action.
Because, basically, 90% of the room left when
he got to speak, which I'm sure was
embarrassing for him. Good.
It says the US the the Biden is
particularly to blame for this horrific state of
affairs. Rather POTUS being the position, whoever's in
power, It must act immediately and effectively to
stop Israel.
Greg Stoecker made a point that's pretty
it's it's powerful because this this this is
a veteran. Right? He knows what he's talking
about. And he says, to the young Americans
who may soon die in another useless imperial
war, which by the way, if you speak
to veterans, that's predominantly the opinion today, which
says something.
A message sent to he says, a message
sent to me from a Vietnam veteran.
He says Vietnam was the graveyard of my
youth.
I survived physically, but the moral injury defined
the rest of my life.
Please, if you're listening, don't let this happen
to your family or your children or anybody
you know.
Vietnam was a fraudulent
war without meaning, without honor. We were suckers
who sacrificed for nothing.
I used to think I was a war
criminal.
But I've come to realize that the real
criminals were the people who promoted the war
and profited from it. And the people who
acquiesced
with whatever the politicians told them. Because realize
the people that even if you ended up
in that war,
most of these people went there with honorable
intentions,
believing they were fighting to save the world
from terror, whatever it is.
And it says, this is still true with
the current wars. The idea that
that he right? And what he's saying is
the has come to realize that it's the
people that are blindly following politicians that are
the problem. He says, all I can do
is bear witness to the reality of war
for newer generations.
And then Greg ends with the overwhelming majority
of cons conscientious objector applications get approved.
The point is, it we're walking through it
right now. We're sleepwalking through something that will
be talked about for 100 of years. And
all of you that are part of it.
That's the it's the same thing we talk
about every time. Right? What would you have
done? Well, you're doing it right now.
Now, Asal Rad points out, the Gaza overlap,
which obviously shows this I mean, this is
why it's happening. Now I guarantee it would
have happened in some way or another because
this is what they wanna accomplish, and the
US government is feckless.
But realizing what has been allowed in Gaza
has changed the world dynamic in this in
many different ways. Now she points out, look
at this graph to see how Gaza has
changed everything.
Israel is emboldened to carry out indiscriminate slaughter
in Lebanon with almost a year of livestream
genocide,
backed fully by the US government with zero
consequences.
Look at this graph. Deadliest day in Lebanon
in decades.
The pace of Israeli strikes appear to surpass
that scene during the 2006 war,
in which more than a 1000 people were
killed in Lebanon over a month.
Look at this breakdown. Look at the graph.
For those in the podcast, I mean, this
is 80% I mean, it it's 8 times
bigger.
Daily deaths during
the 2006 war,
one day,
558 people killed in a single day in
Lebanon.
Almost entirely civilians.
By some accounts, all. But, as we always
know, we should never take either side at
face value in any moment like this. Anybody
objective anyway.
But we know. As all of the social
media, the videos were taken, the human rights
group any I mean, the vast majority of
the conversation, just like Gaza,
they killed almost 600 people.
Rania Kolek,
who is 11 who's Lebanese herself, who I've
reached out to, but I'm sure she's got,
you know, a lot going on, obviously. I'm
sure just fit professionally and and mentally, it's
probably pretty difficult. But she says the world
allowed Israel to mass slaughter in Gaza for
almost a year. Israel learned it can get
away with literally any atrocity against the territory
that it occupies.
Now it's testing out the Gaza method on
Lebanon,
an internationally
recognized sovereign country.
By standing by passively,
the world is telling Israel that in Lebanon,
they can do as they've done in Gaza.
This won't stay isolated to the Middle East.
Israel's methods will spread if Israel isn't stopped.
And, again,
to to pretend that's just the same as
the other arguments, it's not. Israel has stated
this. They have made it clear. Israel even
just came with another graph at the UN
showing their intentions to occupy more countries.
The international community
seems to be
I mean, there are people within it that
seem to speak a lot.
I get to see any action outside of
Yemen.
Now here's Mordecai Klompas pointing out the reality
that this did not start on October 7th,
just like everything else.
This is a video going back before Hezbollah
was in existence,
which is the main point to make. When
Israel carried out
the Sabra and Shatila massacre in Lebanon
in 1982,
which for the podcast, the video is playing
below, showing just
smats slaughtered people killed out in the open.
Children crying in the streets. IDF members picking
up bodies. It says there was no Hezbollah
in 1982.
Israel is not its goal.
Hezbollah, Israel,
is its well, excuse me. Sorry. It was
when Israel carry out this massacre in Lebanon
in 1982, there was no Hezbollah.
Israel is not its goal. Hezbollah, Israel, its
real. Its goal is to occupy Lebanon, Syria,
Jordan, parts of Iraq. That's the greater Israel
project and much more.
The point is that if you're gonna pretend
that this was all because bad guy Hezbollah,
then you're not paying attention.
Because they've made these arguments before.
Long before Hezbollah even existed. And this is
part of occupation that the world tries to
ignore.
Now Norman Finkelstein, by the way, was also
out there.
As the squirrel points out, he was in
1982,
standing out with this sign that says,
this son of survivors of the Warsaw ghetto
uprising,
Auschwitz
will not be silent.
Israeli Nazis stop the holocaust on Lebanon.
Somebody who I mean, very few have been
as intellectually consistent as somebody like Norman Fikostain,
of course, always gets misrepresented as pretending the
holocaust didn't exist, which is all his argument
is completely the opposite. But he says, when
Israel invaded Lebanon and raped, massacred, destroyed the
country, given rise to Hezbollah resistance movement against
this genocidal,
depravities.
Right? So the point is that what they
did
is why Hezbollah was created.
So they massacred civilians, Hezbollah was created to
stop what they're doing, and then they go
on pretending Hezbollah is the reason they're doing
that. And guess what? The western world governments
didn't
care because they never have.
Now Adam points out something interesting. Even using
Chat GPT, which I recommend you run screaming
from personally, but he says, Israel was always
the aggressor. And even Chat GPT
says this.
He asked short answers only, when did Israel
first attack Lebanon?
Israel first attacked Lebanon in 1978. Oh, you
mean there was even more than 19 yes.
There was. During operation Latani,
long before Hezbollah. He says, when was Hezbollah
founded? 9 it says Hezbollah was founded? 1958.
When did Israel first attack Palestine? It says
Israel first attacked Palestine in 1948
during the Arab Israeli war following the establishment
of the state of Israel. He says, when
was Hamas founded? Hamas was founded 19 87.
Now, yeah, I'm sure that they'll add narrative
if they need to. Oh, well, there was
this and there was that going on. The
point is right now, the clumsy narrative is
that this started with them on October 7th.
Which is just sad that anybody pretends that's
the case. The squirrel also points out not
to forget the point that I've been making
for a very long time.
Lebanon is occupied by Israel, parts of it
anyway. He says, it has been entirely memory
hold by the western map media class, but
Israel is occupying parts of Lebanon illegally
right now. So Hezbollah and Lebanon have both
the moral
and the legal right to attack Israel to
regain its territory alongside helping stop the Gaza
genocide. That is called the legal right to
arm resistance for Geneva Convention under international law.
Now, of course, as always, if they attack
things that are not considered military targets, then
that would be a crime. But as far
as I can tell in Robert's research and
people that we can that we hold in
high regard of their opinions, and that comes
from all different sides of the paradigm, including
people that see it as a lie or
foreign resources or people on the ground, all
of which we've the point is the evidence
is undeniable
that the vast majority, if not entirely, their
their firing has been on military targets.
The only difference would be that you could
argue the settlements would be a different discussion.
Now, of course, we'll we'll get into right
now what's happening in regard to what seems
to be bombing in Tel Aviv. But, I
mean, again, tip draw the line.
It's obvious that that would be under international
law, if done in a vacuum,
a crime. And even then, you could still
argue that right now it would constitute a
crime. But you have to argue that the
understanding of the fact that Israel's been bombing
right into Beirut this entire time.
So what do you think Israel would do?
Like, I think that's still good and, like,
the right thing to do for us to
objectively say both are crimes.
Right? But the way we engage with that
going forward is what the difference would be.
But you have to be objective about it.
But realize that the fact that they're being
bombed and civilians are dying, why would they
not respond? Isn't that exactly what Israel's been
saying for a year? It is. But their
logic only applies one way. Right?
The point though is that they are occupying
parts of Lebanon. And so that gives them
the legal right to to respond, and they've
been bombing these settlements
along the occupied areas that are illegal territory.
And Israel's given them a future capacity. So,
again, just the point is they're this is
their human shield dynamic of everything that they
are. They're br people from other parts of
the world come in and we'll give you
these settlements where they're gonna bomb you because
they're on their land
and they have a legal right to. And
then we'll give you legal capacity and give
you guns and we pretend like it's your
fault. It's just pathetic how clear all this
is.
It says, in fact, every country on Earth
has to supply Hezbollah with advanced weaponry, rockets,
tanks, jets, missiles, as to enable them to
more effectively attack and invade Israel territory so
they can regain their own illegally occupied lands.
Now you could argue that not everybody has
a right to do. The point is that
anybody doing so would be legally just in
doing so.
That's international law.
He says that's the standard for Azov Nazis
in Ukraine established by the west, who recently
invaded and occupied Kirks and in in Russia
and have been bombing civilian targets in Russia,
which we've talked about, and Donbas.
So now they're they actually occupy the bottom
line though is the reason this all started
was because of the
Azov
US Israeli entity that's been bombing in Donbas
and killing people for a very long time.
Either way, he says what's good for the
Azov Nazi goose is good for the Hezbollah
resistance gander. The bottom line is that if
you're gonna pretend that they're supposed to be
armed to defend against Russia, well, there's no
difference here, intellectually.
The point is that it's not about
law, intellectually accurate.
They're committing genocide in full view. They just
want you to shut up and let them
keep going.
Now, Roz Rothstein,
who is the daughter of holocaust survivors,
so on, says, well put to this graph
that's completely wrong and says, the definition of
double standards. And it says, 60,000 displace Israelis
for 11 months. You know, who, by the
way, are mostly living in really nice hotels
where they're comfortably staying and also were on
illegal territory.
International community is silent. Why? Because they're illegal
settlers. So the community knows that they're criminals.
Period.
Then, 70 per 70,000 displaced Lebanese for 4
days. International community condemns Israel demands ceasefire.
Yeah. Because they're literally occupying the territory. They're
bombing civilian areas, and their ever and their
very entity is illegal in the first place.
But here's what I said. The definition of
ignorance.
Only one of these countries is illegally occupied
is illegally occupying the land on which the
displaced were living illegally,
giving the country being occupied the legal right
under international law to armed resistance regardless of
who fired first. Can you guess which?
2, of course, no response from her because
the facts don't matter to these Zionists.
But
here's Biden
telling you that all out war is possible
and making sure he knows that he's a
Zionist too while trying to act like he
wants a 2 state solution. You know, the
very same solution that we now have proven
that going back as far back as you
wanna look, well, before 76 but obviously after,
Israel has been trying to sabotage that, including
funding the very group that they use to
justify their genocide on Gaza today in order
to make sure that they were divided.
And doing so all the way right up
until October 7th, which has been even covered
by Israeli media.
And then going Tuesday's solution that they have
continued to say post October 7th is never
ever, ever, ever gonna happen. So Biden's going,
we're fighting for the thing that they keep
telling me is never happening. In the meantime,
here's more weapons. Keep bombing them.
So he's either the stupidest person alive or
he he's complicit in the genocide, probably both.
Here's what he says.
A war is possible, but I think there's
also
the opportunity
are still in play
to have a settlement that could fundamentally change
the whole region. Right. And I I look.
One of the things that
I found is there's
the Arab world very much wants to have
a settlement
Mhmm. Because they know what it does for
them. Mhmm. They're willing to make arrangements with
Israel and
alliances with Israel if Israel changes some policies.
And
I, those are I've known BBNET now for
a long, long time.
And I'm a I'm a very strong support
of Israel. I make no bones about it.
I said years ago, I was a Zionist.
All a Zionist means is that there needs
to be in Israel. Mhmm. Nope.
So, again, either really, really, really stupid or
lying to you because that's ridiculous and not
the truth as anybody with education will tell
you. And I'll actually end today with a
clip from Gabor Mate who is as you
and then will openly tell you that's a
lie. But or Avi Shalom who I'll play
before. But think about what he just said
right there. Now this, I argue, is their
shifting narrative about trying to pressure or I
mean, they know they're screwed.
I really believe that. They are trapped. They've
cornered themselves. They painted themselves in this genocide
corner. Now part of it is because I
think they're compromised or influenced. But at the
end of the day, even if you believe
in all of this, you're losing this whole
thing. People see what you are. So what
he just said was that the Arab communities
want the 2 state solution,
but Israel doesn't.
Now you're not supposed to say that out
loud. Listen to him again.
The opportunity
are still in play
to have a settlement that could fundamentally change
the whole region. Mhmm. And I I look.
One of the things that
I found is there's
the Arab world very much wants to have
a settlement
Mhmm. Because they know what it does for
them. Mhmm. They're willing to make arrangements with
Israel and alliances with Israel if Israel changes
some policies.
And,
Right. So Israel has to change what it's
doing. Right? Obviously, because they're illegally occupying. Right?
It's bottom line. So every time you hear
the Israeli government say that they don't want
a deal, they only wanna kill us because
we're Jews. Well, Biden just literally said that
wasn't true.
Now that doesn't mean it's true because Biden
said it, but realize how crazy that is
that even their closest ally, one of the
only people on the planet or governments that
is act actively supporting them just basically said
they're the problem.
Why? Because they are
the government.
I, there's a I've known BBNET now for
a long, long time,
and I'm a I'm a very strong support
of Israel. I make no bones about it.
I said years ago I was a Zionist.
All a Zionist means is that there needs
to be in Israel. Mhmm.
And,
the fact is, though, that Bibi has a
picture I signed for him
when he was a young member of the
of the embassy here Mhmm. In the United
States. And he has 8 by 10 picture.
He asked me to sign. I have a
BB. I love it, but don't agree with
the damn thing you say or do, Joe.
Yeah. And I do, and he's right. I
don't agree with his position.
How in the world do you make sense
of that? What a stupid thing to say.
Like, quite frankly, I think he's probably just
making this up, and I think he just
kinda stumbled himself. Like, I think this was
something he's just trying to make him use
to make a point and and make himself
look like he's sort of on our side.
But I think he screwed himself right there.
Because think about what he just said.
You you said a picture going back to
a law years ago when he was younger.
And you're telling me that all that time
ago you didn't agree with anything he was
doing but I love you?
And and clearly, his point right now is
about how today he does it. So you've
never agreed with this genocidal monster, but somehow
have always allowed him to be in power,
always supported his genocides and his war crimes.
Yeah. That's either compromised,
blackmailed,
or completely a part of it. Which I
think all 3 apply in many cases, but
here that's just crazy to me. This is
the guy who's currently and again, it would
be anybody there right now based on who's
currently in, you know, Trump or anybody,
is continuing to arm the genocide against everybody
else in the world seeing what's happening.
Of the of the embassy here Mhmm. In
the United Mhmm.
And,
the fact is, though, that Beebe has a
picture I signed for him
when he was a young member of the
of the embassy here Mhmm. In the United
States. And he has 8 by 10 picture.
He asked me to sign. I have a
BB. I love you, but don't agree with
the damn thing you say or do, Joe.
Yeah. And I do. And he's right. I
don't agree with his position.
There needs to be a 2 state solution.
Ultimately, it needs to happen. There's a way
to do it, and they have And I
agree. And so does the vast majority of
the Palestinian people and the Palestinian resistance groups.
It's true. It's easy to prove. The only
person or entity that is holding that from
happening is Israel.
That's it. It's been that way for a
very long time. Now it's just very clear.
They're openly telling you that. They're, like, we
can't make a deal with the terrorists.
Well, then what the what's the difference? You
funded them since 2 thou since as far
back as you wanna look, really, since they're
like, I a point I've always made about
that is don't was there was a it
seems and, again, this could even be wrong,
but the evidence seems to suggest that there
was a hamas before their overlap with Israel
funding.
But the point is that what they are
and how they were used was created by
Israel through that process. And up until October
7th, they were being funded by Israel. And
the stated reality from even Haaretz
has made it clear that he said we
need to fund them to keep them divided.
Very clear.
A possibility.
I don't wanna exaggerate it,
but a possibility if we can deal with
a ceasefire in Lebanon
Yeah. That it can move into So now
we're playing now we've moved. Look. Gaza keep
killing them. We're done caring about that. Let's
pretend to fight for a ceasefire in Lebanon
for the next 12 year 12 months.
Really? So what we saw how that went
where they were clearly not caring about it.
They failed to get a ceasefire. No. You
didn't. You allowed Netanyahu to systematically
stop that process as Horetz wrote. Exact title.
And now we're gonna pretend that we're fighting
for a ceasefire in Lebanon?
Right? So we hopefully, 12 months from now,
we we'll see that not happen.
I mean, I just can't believe anybody, let
alone these 5 mindless followers at the table.
Anybody can't see how dumb that is.
We're dealing with the West Bank,
but we also have Gaza to deal with.
Yes. And so Oh, yeah. Mhmm. Mhmm. Gaza.
Yeah. But it's possible, and I'm using every
bit of energy I have with my team.
And you know from the defense department, you
know it well, to get this done.
It's so funny. Oh, yeah. Mhmm. The defense
department.
And we're so in the know. It feels
ridiculous. There's a desire to
see change, I mean, in the region.
Yeah. From everybody but you and and and
the Israeli government. Like, it's just so infuriating
that anybody anywhere gives these people any credence
anymore.
Kills me. But here's what he put out.
Right? So he says this about we want
Tuesday's Lou. Here's what he puts out though.
September 28th, statement from president Joe Biden on
the death of Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of
Hezbollah. He says, Hassan Nasrallah and the terrorist
organization he led Hezbollah, aren't you already lying,
were responsible for killing 100 of Americans over
a 4 decade reign of terror. Oh, is
that what it was? A reign of terror?
So how about we overlap that with everything
Israel's done to Americans, how many Americans Israel's
killed in the same time frame? Oh, don't
do that because then it'll be so clear
that Israel is far more terrorist than what
you claim this entity is.
But they're our allies, so who cares? Right?
All of the sacrifice, all of the all
of these, sabotage, all of the assassinations, all
of the killings, all of the setups,
911. I mean, who cares, though? Right? Let's
just pretend like a group that rose up
in defense of an Israeli genocidal act is
somehow the terrorist because
fill in the blank. Paid, blackmailed,
a Zionist. Who knows?
It's infuriating.
And he says this death, his death from
an Israeli airstrike is a measure of justice.
You know, we'll forget about the fact that
he leveled buildings to murder civilians
to maybe kill him. Because based on the
way they talked about this, they were praising
the the attack before they ever said he
was killed. To me, it shows that they
weren't sure, and the ones that woah, we
got him. Yeah. So I I think they're
just murdering civilians. And I think at the
end of the day, they might've thought he
was there, and they're willing to flatten buildings
to do this. In a sovereign country, this
is not Gaza.
That's so incredibly over the line, more so
than anything they've done before. Even that was
already they created a new line.
At this point, how is this different than
any other act of terror in the world?
Whatever the justification. You don't think other groups
have justifications for attacking the US or whatever
else? Or, you know, under the guise of
the narrative that that was what happened? It's
crazy that anybody pretends like killing bombing all
these buildings to go after this one entity
in a sovereign country is in any way
a justifiable act. Especially somebody who was, 1,
not acting in a military capacity, or 2,
is not a terrorist,
despite all of the narratives they spin. I
mean, if you look at just Netanyahu
or just Obama or Bush or Biden,
or Trump for that matter, any president,
their own track records have killed so many
more people.
They just call it freedom and democracy, and
we all pretend that makes sense.
The United States fully supports Israel's right to
defend itself, he says. Against Hezbollah Hamas, the
Houthis, oh, the Houthis now, or any Iranian
supported terrorist group. Okay. So anybody that Iran
is an ally with is somehow now a
terrorist because you don't like what they're doing.
Now realize also that the the Republicans are
trying to frame the Biden administration and the
Kamala dynamic as
Israel won't exist if we're or accept here.
They are going do whatever you want. They
have the right to do whatever they want.
Defending yourselves is murdering an entire population again.
Ultimately,
Biden's aim is to deescalate.
The only reason the way that would make
sense is if they mean what Biden would,
Netanyahu said, which is we'll deescalate through escalation.
Not a joke. We will escalate in the
interest of the escalation. It's like
it's just inst it's
I can't think of a word
that encapsulates the stupidity of that. It's not
that that does justice to it. Like, it's
just so blatantly backward.
And everybody seems to know this and yet
it still drifts forward.
Harold Kim Iverson said, rightly so. So here's
Biden gushing over their ally. She says in
1947, Israel tried to kill president Harry Truman
by sending letter bombs to the White House.
Just one of a 1000 different things you
could look up, easy to prove, that shows
that Israel is actually its own best. Now,
like, what the west way best way to
put it is, who needs enemies when you
got friends like Israel?
Sarah Abdallah,
this is the, French maritime, the commander of
the French maritime forces
on the corporate media saying the Israeli army
was born out of terrorism.
Israel did not exist. These individuals sought to
liberate a land that did not belong to
them, and thus their foundation was rooted in
terrorism.
You see how common this understanding is in
the world? The only people blinded by this
are the ones that are captured by Israeli
influence
that are not in the interest of the
country. They're doing too like, whether it's the
UK, the United States, the world understands this.
It's not about Jews. It's about Israeli Zionist
manipulation.
Or and, really, as we just Zionist, we
talked about as the Christian Zionist being more
in the world today than Jewish Zionist. But
the point is obvious.
Now what's interesting about that, though,
don't forget what
Wilkerson said, and this is now seemingly being
backed up at least by the corporate media.
This is from, the 25th. It says, the
US is not providing intelligence support, which frankly,
I just don't believe. But it's saying not
providing intelligence support to Israel for Lebanon operations,
Pentagon
says. But what's even the fact that it's
put out even if it's not real, even
if they say the fact that it's stated
shows you a schism like we see in
Israel,
where the military is sort of breaking off
from the executive branch and going, we don't
we're not on the line right now. That's
pretty wild. That is an early sign of
a collapsing empire when the enforcement arm or
the military or the police start to break
off. That's crazy.
Now Vivid points out, you know, Zionist Israeli
propagandist,
the Pentagon says that they won't support intelligence
for their genocide in Lebanon.
The backstabbing of Joe Biden and Kamala, its
best allies. I'm disgusted. It's just so funny
how the framing is, like, you're literally murdering
civilians in real time and you're like, how
dare they not just blindly support what we're
doing? I'm surprised too, quite frankly, but to
frame it like that is pretty funny to
me.
And then Tom Cotton, same thing. Just to
kinda show you exactly what Tom Cotton is.
He says, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris continue
to delay critical military equipment. Well, not only
is it actually illegal internationally, but also American
law to continue giving them arms. Why? Because
of this conversation.
It's not even just this article. We've been
proving this from the moment this started. They
know as a matter of fact now that
they have been blocking aid. But by the
way, we already did. There's the evidence there's
more evidence for that than damn near anything
we're talking about in this conversation. But as
we'll come to in a second,
he's apparently even been,
written up
for lying to congress about u Israel blocking
aid. But guess what hasn't stopped?
The arms going to Israel, even though that
is actually currently against US law. But you
know what? They don't care about the law.
Just like it was illegal to send arms
to the Azov Movement and they did it
anyway.
They don't care, guys. They're a criminal organization.
But the point here,
how dare they not do the thing that's
illegal when we all know it to support
the genocide is what Tom Cotton is saying.
And it says further delays will endanger Israeli
lives. Yeah. But what about what about the
other civilians that are there? What about the
hostages they're bombing in Gaza? He doesn't care
about any of those lives.
Interesting what direction he seems to care about.
What about American lives, Tom?
He says, in increase the likelihood that the
conflict will escalate further. You may decide from
Israel openly escalating the conflict at every turn?
And harm American national security? Oh, okay. Who
cares about Americans? We want the national security
dynamic, which is just an excuse to justify
war and murder.
Well, what's he what I like about this
or I think it's right here. No, no.
This person responds by saying, hey, when's the
last time you posted about Arkansas? You know,
the place where you're supposed to represent?
Does America or Arkansas benefit from escalating this
war?
No.
Tom doesn't care about America or Arkansas. He
cares about his Israeli
whatever you wanna call it. I I mean,
you look at his conversations on his platforms.
He doesn't seem to talk about anything right
now other than Israel. As an American politician
for Arkansas.
If you're in Arkansas,
maybe you should think about that.
Lastly, Caitlin Johnstone
says these two words contradict each other.
This is CNN. Blinken issues forceful plea for
democ for diplomacy after Israel's strike on Beirut.
Yeah. But you just gave them weapons.
Right? So please,
seek diplomacy in a country that you're illegally
bombing and occupying?
That's it's just painfully stupid. They'd think you're
gonna fall for this. The Biden administration, she
writes, could end this with an instant. In
an instant. Simply by demanding it. They are
issuing a performative plea instead of making forceful
demands because they fully support
Israel's atrocities
and wanna see more of them. That's your
opinion, but I would agree.
Now Kavorka Mezian,
very intelligent person, especially around Middle East foreign
policy. Here's Here's what he had to say
about this. Now we're coming into, like, the
the current dynamic of what's going on. In
the last 48 hours in the assassination of
Nasralla. Now it's this will have major consequences.
And probably for the western countries supporting Israel
as well, sadly enough. And I hope I
hope I'm wrong about that. He says in
the past 48 hours, Lebanon has experienced a
significant geopolitical event that may have far reaching
implications for the entire region. This moment is
likely to be recorded as a decisive chapter
in the region's history. And he goes on
to explain why. Now what I love about
this response is it's not slanted towards one
side or the other. He makes great points
about how this may very well be a
very damaging thing for Hezbollah. Despite I I
would probably argue my opinion would be that
he would side with Lebanon before Israel, but
he I'll let him speak to his opinions
on his platform. But just based on his
work, and I obviously, I think that's the
objective moral stance, quite frankly. But either way,
the point is that he makes very objective
points, which is why I so greatly respect
his work. He says, firstly, the decision to
assassinate Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah,
was made while Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu
was in the United States, which we'll go
into,
which is just such an insult meant to
be, I argue,
specifically during the United Nations General Assembly. Now
I argue the US was aware of it.
You can even see in the picture a
US military personnel right with him while he's
making the call.
Just complicity, obviously. But my point is about
insulting to everybody who pretends that there's some
kind of international law binding their choices or
that they've got like, to the UN itself.
But it says the location
and it was specifically at the general assembly
when this happened. The location and timing are
symbolic for two reasons. It suggests that the
decision was made with American consent. And it
implies that the principles of international justice are
represented by the UN, as represented by the
UN,
ostensibly,
are subordinated
to Israeli interests.
This signals that we are living in an
era where power overrides justice. Now, frankly, I
think we've been there for a really long
time, but it is very clear.
Secondly, he says Nasralla's assassination would represent a
significant blow to Hezbollah.
Even the group's most loyal supporters cannot ignore
this reality. Now one thought jumped into my
head.
Weirdly enough, right at the beginning,
right after this happened, there was a lot
of reports from news outlets and individual on
the ground who seemed to suggest they could
confirm that he wasn't dead.
So as usual, during a war, you know
how that stuff happens. It's propaganda for the
interest of the agenda for their side. So
that happens. But that's why you question everybody
all the time, especially during a war.
Well, a thought occurred to me that we've
seen this happen before, where you play the
hubris of the side like this, where like
with Venezuela, it happened to the United States
government many times, where they just they let
them think they were in control and they
made them look really stupid by just shutting
down what they were doing. In this case,
it occurred to me that maybe he didn't
get killed. And maybe that they let the
go. Let's let's let's lean into that and
let that be the case. Now the evidence
points to the fact that he was killed.
Now everyone seems to be saying that. Now
and that does seem I would agree with
that objectively with the reality of the evidence.
But just an entertaining thought.
If that did happen, that might be important
for how this played out. But it says
Nasrallah was a charismatic leader, a skilled military
commander, and a master strategist.
Replacing him would not be easy, and he
was a unique figure within Hezbollah. His leadership
style and capabilities would be difficult, if not
impossible to replicate.
Moreover, and by the way just so it's
clear, just like it was Soleimani,
which by the way I think I can
grab that if it pops
up. No.
Oh well. I'll I'll grab it later. The
I I did mo I report I did
an interview with James Corbett. I did a
lot of early work on that, pretty much
before most people in the independent media around
that discussion. The point was
that he was assassinated by Trump in an
international airport under the guise of diplomacy.
He was on a diplomatic mission. I mean,
there that's 4
5 different war crimes in one. Nobody cared
because bad guy. But the point was, he
wasn't. No matter how you frame this, he
was in fact a a an entity that
was very, very, very much. He was a
supported, loved entity for by most of the
world.
And he was almost
one of the sole responsible entities to actually
fighting ISIS, even though the US was supporting
them and pretending that they were fighting them.
And, of course, during the dynamic of the
invasion of Iraq and different discussions within
that, they were defending
the sovereignty of a country against American invasion.
And that's the only thing they used to
frame he killed Americans. Well, yes, the dynamic
was you were the illegal invader and they
were defending the sovereign country.
How do you frame that as they're the
terrorists is beyond me, but the point is
that they killed him and they still pretend
he was a bad guy.
Objectively, that's not even the truth if you
look at just about all the evidence we
have. But as always, my point would be,
he's part of a government and you can
clearly show that there are always actions taken
by these people that I would call, I
would argue are a problem.
I just have a fundamental point if I
don't support governments. Period. But either way, he
was not the way they framed it. The
same point applies here.
It's just easy to make the whole bad
guy so we don't have to address the
fact that you're just a criminal like everybody
else.
He, if you look at the the discussions
around the world, the other countries, both that
are arguably on the US side as well
in some cases, he is not framed the
way that they pretend he is. That's an
Israeli narrative.
But it goes on to say moreover, this
event occurred amid an ongoing existential struggle with
Israel. Drawing historical parallels, it is akin to
the hypothetical assassination of Joseph Stalin during World
War 2
or
Ayub before the conquering of Jerusalem.
Such a loss in the midst of a
crucial conflict could be devastating for Hezbollah's popular
base. Thirdly, Hezbollah's recent involvement in the conflict
with Israel followed the events of October 7th
when Israel decided to ethnically cleanse Palestinians.
When this policy failed, the Israeli government under
Netanyahu shifted toward more aggressive actions, genocide.
Given Hezbollah's religious and moral doctrine,
which does exist and easy to prove, intervention
became inevitable.
The group views its role as a protector
of the Palestinians, and its leadership sees participation
as both a religious and a moral obligation.
However,
a key question arises.
Did Hamas coordinate its October 7th actions with
its ally?
Available intelligence suggests that neither Hezbollah, Syria, nor
Iran had any prior knowledge of this, which,
by the way, seems to completely challenge the
idea that it was some Iran centric operation.
Now that could be a lie. It could
be a cover up. But again, if all
you do is blindly follow the narrative from
the deep state, maybe you should reflect on
why that is. But it says this raises
serious concerns
as one would expect coordination in such a
significant conflict.
Opening a new front against Israel without informing
key regional allies could be seen as a
strategic misstep.
There was also speculation that Israel may have
had prior knowledge of the October 7 attack.
Given Israel's sophisticated intelligence capabilities,
it is difficult to believe that the attack
caught the country by surprise.
Some argue that Netanyahu may have allowed the
attack to unfold to justify the brutal crimes
against the Palestinians.
Looking ahead, if Hezbollah loses this conflict, it
could have dire consequences for the region with
Damascus and Tehran possibly becoming the next targets.
Now right there, it's interesting because
logistically now look. I I'm not a war
expert by any account.
But I do my research, and I have
a lot of people that I've talked to.
You know, people that are just in doing
this for a decade plus that I reach
out to that I know understand the dynamics
more than most people. And my point is
that based on objective, not partisan, but objective
perspectives of the dynamic,
I don't see how it's possible that Israel
could win this without the blatant and just,
I mean, entire
support from the United States. I mean, on
the ground physical action.
But even then,
if that happens, it's a domino effect where
you get possibly Russia, China kind of event.
Well, specifically Russia, Syria,
baby China for a larger point. And eve
and then, same point. That you listen to
these experts and they're going, look, there's no
way, even with US allies, that they could
actually win right there. I know that brushes
up against the American hubris, we love to
tell ourselves, we're the number one everything. But,
objectively, that seems to be the case. Now
that doesn't mean, like, the use of nuclear
weapons, I understand, which is probably where that
would go, both Israel and the and and
the United States because they're belligerent.
But overall,
his point is that
if it ultimately could mean the loss of
the conflict, I just don't see how that
would line up unless,
as I just explained. But it says it
could have dire consequences, of course. And, obviously,
Iran and Syria are on the chop. They're
they're in the crosshairs right now. He says
there are historical parallels here as well. Since
211, Western and Israeli intelligence agencies, particularly the
CIA and Assad, sought to remove Assad
from Syria
and remove him from power because of his
support for Hezbollah.
Assad was viewed as a an obstacle to
their regional objectives,
And they armed radical insurgents, otherwise known as
terrorists, to topple his government.
That's who they are. It wasn't because of
freedom or saving the Syrian people. They, I
mean, more than most countries, these people broadly
support Assad. Of course, there's always factions that
don't.
And you should always wonder and question whether
these are artificially ceded, but either way, in
any country you could find resistance like in
Iran. But most of even those people don't
want the US coming into their aid. They
just wanna deal with their own dynamic, but
they do resist or have criticisms of the
government like anybody does. I mean, look at
the country in the United States.
Half the country disagrees with the current administration.
Does that mean we're illegitimate? Well, somebody might
make that argument. But the point is that
it's funny how we apply that logic only
outward.
But he goes on to say, the rise
of ISIS
in this context
is seen as a product of American and
Israeli efforts to destabilize their adversaries.
It's exactly what it is. He says, when
this plan failed,
who cares of the c you know, arming
and funding rabid terrorists around the world that
ended hurting other people too. Who cares? Because
we don't care about other people. He says
Israel then intervened directly to achieve its goals.
He says, therefore, the region is either headed
to a grand compromise
or a big regional war with global ramifications.
Only time will tell.
I really hope that there are some adults
in the room
anywhere in the US government where we actually
realize that even if it may look you
make you look sheepish, that you stop this.
But, of course, the absurd part is that
he has to put this disclaimer because I
believe he lives in Germany. He says, nothing
in the above text indicates or should be
seen to be encouraging support for any group
designated as a terrorist organization by the German
government. The fact that you have to put
that,
you know, free speech, we pretend and then,
you you know, if he doesn't put that,
they're gonna arrest him for a terrorist. Like,
this is happening in this country too.
Right? This is why a lot of people
in our field don't
state it as clearly as we do.
I just think the truth is more important
than what that might become.
And sure, maybe that'll there be maybe there
will be consequences, but I'm accepting the consequences
for doing the right thing.
Here's what Jonathan Cook added in his own
perspective.
In killing Nasrallah, Israel chose to open the
gates of hell.
He says we'll all pay the price. He
says Hezbollah has confirmed that its longtime leader,
has Hassan Nasrallah, was among the 100
of Lebanese killed in Israel's massive bombardment of
a suburb in Beirut last night. Now this
was obviously posted on the 28th.
He says Israel's decision
to assassinate Nasrallah
using some of the enormous bunker busting bombs
the United States has been arming it with
is beyond foolhardy.
It is outright deranged.
Israel has removed and knows it has removed
a moderating a moderating influence on Hezbollah.
Meaning that now they're gonna respond in kind
when they wouldn't have before this is the
argument. Israel's actions will achieve nothing apart from
teaching his successor and leaders of other groups
and countries labeled as terrorists by western governments
several lessons. Now what's important to read right
there, that they're not terrorists. That these are
largely resistant groups and the resistance groups fighting
for their own self determination and actually, as
most honest people in the world will show,
following a far more far more moral path
than anything Israel's doing, or the US government.
Not to say entirely, but objectively the case.
And his point is that these groups, now
that Nasralla's gone, whoever's gonna be taking that
role,
is gonna be seeing things a bit differently.
And you could even argue that that was
the plan,
to drive them to become exactly what they
wanted to point at to justify what they're
doing. But that may blow up in their
face.
But he says that the these groups around
the world or any others that see this,
this is the lesson that Israel just taught
them. One, that Israel and the West standing
squarely behind it do not play by any
known rules of engagement, and that their opponents
must do likewise.
That's terrifying because that is exactly what they're
doing and what they what they have always
shown.
The current restraint from Hezbollah
that has been so baffling western pundits will
become a thing of the past. And again,
it his point is that even western media
has pointed out.
I mean, you you get yeah. We'll come
to it in a minute. The idea that
even BBC verified was, like, 73%
of all of the bombs between these 2
since October 7th has been from Israel.
They funny how you just ignored that fact
when you wanna make it out to you
being the victim.
And let not even getting into the fact
that they're illegal occupied, which makes that a
moot point anyway.
But he goes on the next point that
Israel is not interested in compromise, only escalation.
And that that and that that is a
fight to death,
not just against Israel, but against the west
that sponsors Israel.
Which again, you might argue would drive them
to take extreme action against the west, which
would be Israel's fault. There is no such
thing as a deescalation
into deescalation.
Now, I mean, you could argue that through
annihilation, you could end up having the the
war stop, but that's not the same thing.
Now it says that Israel's ideological extremism,
its Jewish supremacy, and its endless craving for,
what is that? Levenshrom?
A territory that a state or nation believes
is needed for its natural development.
Oh, I guess that comes from a a
German thing,
especially associated with Nazi Germany,
must be met with even greater Shia inspired
extremism.
Like, that's the mindset they're building. Because remember,
as I've said for I I haven't gotten
this a lot set in this recent discussions.
But over the years,
you could argue, undeniably,
that what Israel has driven the Middle East
discussion into and what the US is a
part of is a Shia, Shia, a Shiite
divide.
Right? So the idea being that you have
the the
Saudi Arabian
extremist element that is the foundation
for
everything we're dealing with in extremism in the
Middle East for the most part, as that
they openly fund them, people just don't connect
that. It's like not even connecting dots. It's
like slapping you in the face. Just pretend
it's not there. But that they this is
an ideological
war that US is fighting on behalf of
Israel. Because you'll notice that they go after
every single entity like this, and you see
the ones that they're funding being the opposite
side. And they're constantly driving these agendas.
But his point is that the people on
the Shia side of it will just decide
that they have to act more extreme because
they're gonna do it to them either way.
And then they go, see? That's what they've
always been. Even though you can prove that
the
current embodiment of terrorism was created by Zionism
in the in the region decades ago.
Now deck goes on to say decades of
western terrorism in the Middle East unleashed a
Sunni oh, excuse me. I said, Shia Shiite
Sunni divide is the what I meant to
say before. And the comp that's why overlap
with Saudi Arabia. Sorry if it was confusing
there. Decades of western terrorism in the Middle
East unleashed a Sunni nihilism
embodied first in Al Qaeda and then ISIS.
Right? So this is the idea we're talking
about. This is their we can prove that
these groups are funded and and helped and
supported
by Israel and the United States.
And so that's why they're going after the
other side of that coin.
Now it says now the west via Israel
is fomenting for a Shia resistance, its own
I
is fomenting for the Shia resistance, its own
ISIS movement.
The moderates in what the west dubs terrorist
organizations have once again lost the argument. Why?
Because the US imperial project known as the
west has once again demonstrated it will not
compromise. It demands full spectrum global dominance, nothing
less. Now remember, this is the point about
saying the demonstrating the fact that Israel and
United States, despite claiming they're fighting
extreme Muslim terrorism,
are funding the worst radical elements of that
very discussion.
So the morons out there like Laura Luma
who are screaming about this are ignoring that
fact.
You can't pretend that the rising problem is
this when you can see that Israel and
the US have been funding that very thing.
Hamas are a 1,000 other examples. Moderate rebels.
And then the pro the reason they don't
that is because the more moderate elements of
the thing that they wanna pretend is only
extreme
aren't willing to just bow to the interest
of Israel.
So what do they do? They seek out
the ones that have no moral standing, and
they go, here's a $1,000,000. Go bomb them.
That's easy to prove.
So what we're seeing is the example of
that.
The obvious reality is that they've demonstrated that
they will always lean in with the radical,
act like they're fighting it, and then blame
you for that. So why wouldn't you just
ride like, why wouldn't I mean, at the
very least, you'll understand why the logic would
become rise to or I guess, fall to
their level.
Israel may make very short tactical gains in
in killing us, Rallah, but we will all
soon feel the whirlwind, he argues.
When that whirlwind comes, the job of our
politicians and media will be to ensure that
we make no connection between this moment of
savagery
and insanity from us and the blowback.
Just don't connect the the dots.
The role of Western establishments will be to
cry victim, as always, and insist they hate
us for our freedoms, for our civilization civilizational
superiority because they are simply barbarians.
Same old. Same old.
But what comes next, he writes, as with
what came before will be entirely predictable.
Violence doesn't beget calm.
As I've always said, violence begets violence.
That's why I argue we should not be
acting in it regardless of the circumstance. I'm
not talking about the idea of self defense.
I'm talking about the idea
of realizing that we need to choose a
different path.
He says, Israel knows that.
Violence begets violence. That's the point. You don't
escalate to deescalate. It doesn't make sense. Our
leaders know that, he says. But they open
the gates of hell anyway. And then even
also from the UK,
add the disclaimer. I'm not supporting these terrorists.
I mean, the world is in a dangerous
direction because of the Israeli Israeli United States,
Western Europe, all of these people acting
as the most radical elements of the world
and pointing at everybody else.
Now hear me on this. That's not the
other side is the good guys.
It's just stating an obvious reality of who
is the actual the one actually driving the
problem. I think governments will always end up
in this position. That's why we as the
populations need to be vigilant
and make sure we don't let that happen.
It's too late for this, but we can
change it.
I I really believe that. Now lastly, on
this point, next section, Robert points out, make
no mistake, this is a US war on
Lebanon. As much as it as much as
it is an Israeli war, Lebanese civilians are
being massacred with US weapons based on joint
Israeli US intelligence
with with green lights from the United States.
These civilian massacres are committed with American taxpayer
dollars. Now that's interesting because the point of
the Pentagon claiming that they're not helping
now to be clear, this has been going
on long before October 7th, and this statement
was made well after they would already been
going back and forth. So he could simply
be talking about up until this point. But
I'm willing to bet you as well that
that's not going to change.
Now let's get into the flattening of these
buildings and the assassination itself.
Now this is just outrageous.
Again, it's the same point we make about
all the rest of these. No matter what,
even if everything they've said was true, which
it's not,
this act was a crime.
Like, the remember remember right in the beginning
when they start you know, we killed a
couple of civilians to go after Hamas, and
we're going, that's a crime. Like, you that's
collective punishment. And even the international community was
like, yep. There's no way around that. You
did not, you know it just it it
just continued to escalate.
We all saw that pinnacle moment where he
was on Wolf Blitzer's show and the guy
said, yeah. We killed and he said, you
killed 400 civilians to kill that guy. And
even Wolf Blitzer couldn't swallow that. Why? Because
it doesn't make sense with the what we
pretend was always the reality.
And now, they've just broken the even the
illusion of rules of engagement or any kind
of whatever you wanna call it. The acceptable
level of action within a war. And now,
they're doing it in Lebanon.
Israel just brought down 6 entire buildings in
Beirut. A densely populated civilian location, killing everyone
inside.
Child, woman, and man.
The death toll is said to be in
the 100.
This is the end of any notion of
rules of engagement.
It's pretty it's a it's an extreme step.
And as we just outlined,
likely for a very clear purpose.
Now Glenn Greenwald points out what this propagandist
was saying.
He says, this is the kind of, quote,
reporting
that caused this person to win some award
by the White House press corps at their
annual White House gala.
Uncritically repeating whatever Israel and the US officials
tell him to say. That's mainstream journalism for
you and mainstream alternative for the most part.
That's because sonography services for the powerful is
what corporate media values most.
Right? I don't think it's usually a good
sign to get an award from the executive
branch. 1 year's job is to hold them
accountable. Right? But here's what he said. IDF
spokesman, rear admiral Daniel Hogari. You know, there
is a list. Liar.
He it was said it was a, quote,
precise strike on the HESPEL headquarters.
A precise strike that leveled 6 buildings full
of civilians.
I mean, these people are cartoons.
And I don't even they don't even try
to cobble something together anymore. They just lie.
And a lie as usual. Precise strike, headquarters,
human shields, every single time. That's what it
says.
In order to that use them as human
shields.
And he he quotes in or same just
same point. Completely parroting what they told him
to say. Great journalism, Barack.
Now, Sal points out the same thing from
Gaza.
That Barak wants you to Barak Raviv, it's
like, go, precise strike. They took down 6
buildings. Well, we already know what Israel pretends
is precise.
This is a picture of Gaza.
And as Asal of the Igris points out,
well, this is not precision bombing. This is
ethnic cleansing.
Pretty simple.
You don't precision strike
every single building in the entirety of Gaza
and pretend that's precise at all. Of course,
once it's done, they go, well, all of
them had rocket launchers. Sure thing. Sure. Interesting
how we've never seen that. Like the comedian
said, it's like you're fighting the x men.
The the titles just vanish once they're gone.
Ridiculous.
Now here's what Asal Rad pointed out about
the Pentagon discussion.
I mean, it's actually pretty incredible to me.
So here we are, where everyone in the
world this is posted on 27th. Right? So
everybody already knows if this happened, it's being
discussed. There's videos out there. Even Israel's already
made points about this as we just showed
you. He's like, precise strike. We just did
that. Okay? Public.
Here is what the Pentagon said.
Has called on both sides to not escalate
the situation. Is this an escalation?
Yeah. Again, we that remains to be seen.
We're still assessing. Six apartment buildings in the
southern or the suburbs of Bay Road have
been leveled. That's not you you have to
assess whether that's an escalation?
You're telling me that. I do not know
that to be true. So, again, we are
still assessing the situation.
We are going to continue to have our
calls with our you know, the Israelis to
get more details.
I appreciate the question.
I hope you would also appreciate that this
just happened a few hours ago. So, yes,
we are still doing an assessment. Oh, good.
Good. Good investigation. Right? Okay. So let's get
this logic straight. Okay? So
in any other context,
right, as you well know, as we've been
talking about every single time this happens on
any other context,
the US government will take whatever Israel says
at at face value.
Right? We've seen Matt Miller say this a
1000 times. Well, Israel said and Israel is
investigating. Okay. Good enough for you, Matt.
Well, okay. So then now, Israel openly commits
a war crime,
proudly acknowledges it online and says, we just
did a precise strike on these buildings.
And now, you want to suddenly investigate.
We no. Not an Israeli investigation.
We need to investigate. And it's probably gonna
take a year.
I added that last part, but think about
how stupid that is. So she's literally telling
you that as this is happening, we are
going to investigate. Despite the fact that it's
reclaimed. And not even just investigate, but we're
gonna tell you that we don't even know.
We're not sure yet.
I mean, it's striking.
I just it's just I don't even know
how people can ever I mean, even these
fake journalists in there are, like, really?
Really? Like, this sick buildings. It's clear. They
said it. That's why she knows it and
you'd and they know it too.
This is desperate deflection of absolute complicity and
genocide. Imagine how uncomfortable it must be for
that person assuming she's not a sociopath. I
hope it's uncomfortable. I hope you stay up
all night worrying about going to prison.
Hopefully you do. If you're absolutely still in
that position and lying about them murdering civilians
on a daily basis.
We are still and they even like the
smug response about, well, it just happened, and
we'll have to investigate. Next time something happens,
when Israel does something and they and everybody
knows, and then we're like, well, Israel's gonna
investigate.
We'll raise the issue.
Right? What Israel said, and we're gonna let
them
recognize the difference.
Now Owen Jones,
also on the 27th, so magically, he's able
to push this together as a journalist, but
she couldn't figure it out. You're looking at
the tear a terrible crime, he says. And
another pivotal moment in the fall of the
west. He says, do you realize excuse me.
Do you really think we're going to get
away with this?
Here's the actual clip just so you can
see this. Now it's being filmed from, I
think, a TV screen.
Yeah. Here's the actual clip.
Real precise. Right? Real precise.
And there is no way in the world
anyone in the brain could say that's not
an escalation. It's a bigger Stripe than anyone
else we've done so far in a location
that you just initiated more with that you've
been occupying
for a long time. Well, we don't know
yet. We'll have to do the mathematics on
this to make sure it's actually a it's
a councilor. Who can they be?
Maybe that's a window. Is that a window?
Yeah. Maybe it is a window.
Yeah. Okay. Never mind. I thought it was
a TV at first. No. It looks like
it's a like a balcony with a opening.
Man, that's crazy. Imagine sitting on your balcony
and seeing that.
Wow.
Yep.
Here is Daniel McAdams
pointing out that the what was used,
it was the US that bombed Beirut and
killed all of these civilians.
We paid for it. We built the bombs.
We handed over the bombs, and we provided
the targets. We are,
we when are Americans going to wake up
and say enough to this monstrosity?
Now, again, he's saying that in the cases,
it's it's the government did this. You did
not. But the point is that Americans, they're
using your tax dollars in fighting in your
name
in supporting this genocide
every time. So you're gonna tell me that
it took ton one ton MK 8 4
bombs to
kill 1 person?
Or was that just to make sure you
maximize the suffering, just like in Gaza?
Ryan razbah Raspiani points out that Israel used
GBU 39, bunker, He's claiming bunker buster bombs
in Beirut. The point is simply to point
out that they're using massive bombs to completely
destroy entire
city blocks,
just like in Gaza, all of which comes
directly from the US government.
The attack ignored the presence of civilians in
the area with dozens of trapped under the
rubble. The United States quickly moved to deny
any connection to the attack and refuted Israeli
reports claiming that they were informed of the
attack in advance.
Now here,
News points out an important point about Nasralla,
the person they claimed to have killed in
that attack. He says, flashback, Nasralla says US's
disregard for international law is why only military
strength can protect vulnerable populations.
Yeah. Isn't that exactly what what,
gosh. Blanket was name. What the I was
just referencing is exactly his point he was
making. Right?
They drove him to this point. They are
the ones continuing to cross every red line
that's drawn, to break every rule of engagement,
to whether it's look. We the only thing
we can do is to fight back with
the same.
And that's what you know what's funny about
it, as always, that's what Israel's projecting is
what they're doing, even though you can prove
that every single time they're the ones pushing
the boundaries.
But it says, if the it it is
the Americans and this is what he said.
This is what Nasrallah said in January 2024.
It is the Americans who are preventing the
end of the war in Gaza. It is
the Americans who are using the veto in
the security council. And Hezbollah had repeatedly said
that if Israel simply stops what they're doing
in Gaza, this would stop.
Instead, they flattened 6 buildings with US support
because they don't care about stopping. They want
it to keep going.
So that's the point is that he's standing
up and telling the world, look, this is
the Israeli government, the United States,
disregard law everywhere they go. Gee, I wonder
why they wanted him gone.
And it says the entire world saw who
continues to challenge the will of the international
community. He's right.
Everyone.
Israel, he says, has made sure to trample
every single international law in the past 2
months.
Why do you think they wanted to kill
him?
Now, salaam Ahmad points out what Benjamin Netanyahu
said. The state of Israel killed the master
murderer Hassan Nasrallah yesterday. The master murderer?
Like, I swear to god these people are
from kindergarten. Like, the like, you can't think
of like, it's the same thing they keep
saying in the UN. The terms they use,
like, it's just, you know, terror dungeons and
things like that. It's like they it's like
they try to make it childish and cartoonish
instead of just saying the terrorist or the
murderer, the master murderer. What does that even
mean? It's such a stupid thing to say.
And he goes on to say, we settled
accounts with those responsible for the murder of
countless Israelis and and many citizens of other
countries, including 100 of Americans. Like, just
most of that is just nonsense?
There's just these people here and there and
countries everywhere are very, very Trump esque
broadening of the narrative, mission creep, if you
will. Nasrallah was no longer a terrorist. He
was the terrorist.
He was the axis of the axis, the
central engine of Iran's axis of evil.
Yeah. That's all that's all they have. They're
just reverting back into the same old narrative,
and that's exactly why Trump and the rest
are beginning to shift you into that mindset.
He says he and his people were the
architects of the plan to destroy Israel.
There's nothing to back that up at all.
Not even remotely. Other than their narrative and
what they say about everybody in regard to
how they think about Jews or whatever they
try to frame it as. Everything they say
and do, exactly the opposite.
Now to be clear,
yes, they do identify Israel as the problem
in the area and argue it has no
right to exist because you know what? That's
international
law.
But, especially post October 7th, they repeatedly stated
exactly what they wanted to see in the
outcome, which is 2 state solution, Israel stopped
bombing, and all they wanna do is make
that ought to be exactly what they're constantly
doing.
It was not only activated by Iran, he
says, but many times also activated
also activated Iran.
Therefore, at the beginning of this week, I
came to the conclusion that the powerful blows
of the IDF landed on Hezbollah in the
past few days. These blows will not be
enough.
His elimination is a necessary condition for achieving
the goals we have set. Even though it
will have no such effect, in my opinion.
It's only gonna cause this to continue. It's
gonna cause them to act more, and then
they can go to blame on there. Look
at them. They're the they're the attacker even
though they're simply responding to your increasing aggressions.
And he says, here's what he was trying
to achieve by this escalation.
Returning the residents of the north safely to
their homes. Because that makes sense. Right? Let's
blow this into ex you know, 1,000 times
larger to bring them home.
And by the way, still the illegal settlers
we're talking about, which shouldn't be allowed to
be there in the first place. He goes,
and changing the balance of power in the
region over the years.
Because as as as long as Nasralla lives,
he would quickly restore the capabilities we took
away from them, which I don't see any
occasion they took any capabilities away at all.
But I don't see how the idea of
taking one person out of the structure is
gonna stop them from being able to resist.
Now, to Kevork's point, he was a very
intelligent leader in this context, and maybe that
will hinder what they can do.
Well, that's yet to be seen. But it
says, that's why I gave the directive and
us were always no longer with us. I
simply still argue based on the idea that
Hagari simply said, we the precise strike took
out these buildings.
If they thought they killed them with the
strike, they would've been saying that right then.
That's my opinion. I think this is them
just cobbling together what happens like they always
do, very reactive. But it says his elimination
promotes the return of our residents to their
homes. No. It still does not. Exact opposite.
It also promotes the return of our abductees
in the south. How exactly does it do
that?
So bombing in Lebanon and murdering civilians while
still bombing by the way, still bombing in
Gaza, which is where they are. How does
that keep them safe or bring them home?
It doesn't. In fact, it makes it far
most likely, which is what your own population
is telling you. But as always, this is
aimed at the west blindly following along. And
it says the Morrison war sees that Hezbollah
will no longer come to his rescue, the
greater the chances of recovering our abductees.
Or you could take the deal which would
have him home on 9th 10th October, like
everybody already knows, and you're lying. In the
coming days, they will face significant challenges, and
we will face them together.
Together, I guess he means him and some
of his cabinet and the rest of the
United States government. Everybody else seems to be
against what he's doing for the most part,
but who cares?
Kim Iverson points out about Nasrallah,
no matter what you think of Hezbollah,
it's important we remember the reason that they
were targeting Israel was to pressure them to
stop their genocide of Palestinians.
Now Sarala died a true martyr defending the
defenseless.
He was on the right side of history,
which I'm sure bothers a lot of people,
but guess what? It's the fact.
Doesn't mean everything he ever did was good.
But I think if you actually take the
time to look anywhere but the narratives of
the west, you'll find that the rest of
the world is a different perspective. And that
should mean something to you.
Now, Nokora Erekat says if all that is
being reported is accurate and I think she
kinda means the same point about the assassination
and so on.
We just witnessed Israel authorize an assassination attempt
from the UN.
The very body whose raison,
how do you say that again? The the
terror, like, the the justification for war, is
to avoid war. Alright. Is that what it
is again? It's the,
the moment, important, reason, purpose for someone someone's
existence. Yeah. I thought it was used in
the context of, like, the impetus for war,
but so the definition as written here is
the most important reason or purpose for someone
or someone's existence.
The the and she's claiming the UN is
that is to avoid war, which you might
dispute. I mean, there's I again, it's the
body verse, the different individuals within it. But
I don't think the UN as a body
is necessarily on the side of peace. But
it says maintain peace and security. What a
disgrace and mockery
and the thread unraveling what's left of Israel.
And I agree with that. But our point
is simple, that this has unraveled any illusion
therein, or if you think that's the case.
This has shifted things forever.
I said that in the beginning of this.
This has only added to that. It really
has. What they have done is change the
entire dynamic. Now here's what the cradle reported
about the bombing.
Either there's dispute about the exact location, but
regardless, while in the United States and clearly
with US personnel behind him. The question is
whether he was actually at the United Nations
when this happened. Now here's what the Crain
report.
Netanyahu gave the orders to wipe out an
entire neighborhood
in Beirut
from the UN headquarters in New York, which
is wild.
It's an insult. It's meant to be an
insult. I can do what I want. Nobody
can control what the Israeli government does, which
a lot of people love to hear.
But, I mean, think about what that shows
you. That's in that mean that's embarrassing for
the US government. That's embarrassing for literally everybody.
Because it makes it shows very clearly that
there's no regard for the very things you
pretend you're fighting for. Or Biden acting like
we're gonna reign him in. And I don't
agree with him, but I
clearly, you're just a passive observer to Netanyahu's
genocide. Or I shouldn't even say it like
that because the reality is you're just in
line with it. But I mean, in the
sense of whatever he does, you seem to
be just following along his coattails in the
context of Biden or whatever else we're talking
about.
And what of course, they
block out all what's going on there, which
is interesting.
But Arad Batrand
says the level of impunity is just unfathomable.
The man is currently violating dozens of UN
resolutions, which is easily provable, and is facing
an arrest war by the ICJ. I mean,
technically, he should have been arrested once we
when he stepped in the UN.
He says, yet he goes to the UN
headquarters and orders from there another egregious war
crime.
The world is broken, he wrote. Now Rami
ar Araya points out the the room pictured
is not at the headquarters from his hotel.
And it's saying the carpet is wrong, but
looks to match the lawless regency.
So, again, this seems a little bit up
in the air, but regardless, I think the
point is simple. That in while in the
United States, where he should be arrested already,
he ordered the murder of an entire city
or complex or, you know, block of of
Beirut,
killing 100 of civilians
at a place where he's arguing that they're
the victim and they need to stay stand
with Israel to fight against terrorism. He goes
out and orders terrorism.
Now, Asal Rad point point pointing to the
The Onion article that said, Netanyahu feeling like
a trip to the US to start World
War 3 went pretty well.
And guess what? Here is the Times of
Israel reporting to you that the prime minister's
trip to the New York,
in quotes,
was part of a diversion
so that Nasrallah would think he was safe.
If I mean, if you this is exactly
what I'm talking about. Whether that's even the
truth, that is the Times of Israel reporting
that the u the Israeli government made a
conscious choice to use
the entire UN process simply to trick Nasrallah.
You know how insulting that is to everybody
there? They already know that. Most everyone at
the body thinks these people are ridiculous monsters.
The point is that the US and Israel
seem to control most of what happens to
that body.
Think about how insulting that is.
And even if it's let's just even say
for this other part of it that it's
real.
Netanyahu and his government knowingly set this up
to go to speak about peace and defense
just to trick everybody.
Including the US, including Europe, including people at
the UN, so that he could tear carry
out a large terrorist attack on Lebanon.
That's simple that's from times at Israel.
That's wild.
It's terrorism. It's what it is.
Now speaking of terrorism support,
as I pointed out before, the fake international
human rights lawyer.
Here's what he said. With this with that
same image right there of
at the UN
calling from the United States and then murdering
of civilians.
You'd think a human rights lawyer might have
some gripe with that. Right? But he says,
regardless whether Nasralla is dead, what a glorious
f you to that from the tiny Jewish
state to the rest of the world?
Wait a minute. I aren't you don't you
have allies? Like, so screw everybody? We're gonna
do what we want? Yeah. That's exactly the
message, guys. They don't care what you think.
They don't follow the law. They don't care
about human rights. F you to the world.
We're gonna murder who we want, guys. And
the rest of these governments go, uh-huh.
Feckless.
That's why it's on us to make something
happen. The peoples of the world.
Stand up now before the rest of Lebanon
is gone. He goes on to say, the
fake human rights lawyer, they all wanted us
to stop, to appease these jihadist bastards, he
says.
All of the the every every person in
that so the 99.9%
of the people you killed in those buildings?
Well, no. According to even you, you're talking
about just Astrolabe, but you killed almost all
all the rest of our civilians.
He's a human rights lawyer. Don't forget.
I mean, that's grotesque.
He says, but Netanyahu went to the UN,
apparently on a ploy to trick everybody,
slammed that cesspool,
then got off podium and calmly carried out
an act of terrorism.
He says, this is what it means to
have a sovereign Jewish state.
God, it's just so incredible. These people have
deranged minds.
Here's what I said. I said, meet Arsen
Trovsky, the pretend international human rights lawyer who
is a rabid Zionist openly praising the most
obvious violations of human rights international law in
history if committed anywhere in the world by
Israel.
You're a fraud and a traitor to your
own people.
And I mean that in the sense of
Israelis.
They are trying to get them to stop
for their people to come home, and all
they wanna do is expand the war and
act like they're in support of their own
people. Nope. You're a traitor to just about
everything, including people's lives, humanity in general.
Human rights lawyer?
I mean, come on, guys. Like, that's worthy
of ridicule. This person is a monster.
Openly going, yeah. Screw the rest of you
so we can carry out terrorism.
He also said this.
We fire at their terrorists,
or one of them in
a sea of other civilians apparently. He goes,
they fire at our kids.
Therein lies the difference. You know, sort of
like Blinken saying, we follow international law, Hamas
doesn't. Therein lies the difference. Well, that aged
really well, didn't it? Well, here, Arsen Atrovsky,
here's a Jewish doctor telling you
how you aim at their kids.
When were you in Gaza?
End of April for the first couple weeks,
and then there's sniper bullets. I have children
that were shot twice. Wait. You're saying that
children in Gaza are being shot by snipers.
Definitively.
I have 2 children that I have photographs
of that were shot so perfectly in their
chest I couldn't put my stethoscope over their
heart more accurately
and directly on the side of the head
in the same child. No toddler gets shot
twice by mistake by the world's best sniper,
and they're dead center shots.
In fact, more than 20 doctors recently in
Gaza
also told Sunday morning about gunshot wounds to
children.
One American doctor told us he even reviewed
CT scans to confirm what he saw because
he, quote, didn't believe that this many children
could be admitted to a single hospital
with gunshot wounds to the head.
Some shootings
have been captured on video.
So of all the disaster zones you've seen,
how does Gaza compare?
All of the dis disasters I've seen combined
combined. 40 mission trips, 30 years,
ground 0,
earthquakes.
All of that combined
doesn't equal
the level of carnage
that I saw against civilians
in just my 1st week in Gaza.
And when you say civilians,
is it mostly children?
Almost exclusively children.
I've never seen that before.
Never seen that. I've seen more
incinerated children than I've ever seen in my
entire life combined. I've seen more shredded children
in just the 1st week. Shredded? Shredded.
What do you mean? Missing body parts, being
crushed by buildings, the greatest majority, or bomb
explosions, the next greatest majority. We've taken shrapnel
as big as my thumb
out of 8 year olds.
The UN reports that to date, more than
80% of Gaza's population has been displaced and
the majority of its buildings destroyed.
A reality which has taken its own toll
on the well-being of children.
What about the emotional wounds? How can you
measure that?
I can't measure my own.
How do you be a, an orphan in
watching your family, you know, melted in front
of you and shredded in front of you?
How do you fix that? Ever fix that?
Kills me. Now here here here is the
thread that I put out, which I've got,
like, 5 or 6 more that I need
to add to it. I just haven't gotten
to it yet. Which by the way, they
all every time I play that video in
particular, every time. And I've seen a lot
of people share it without that warning. Every
time I share it, even in reply to
somebody, I get that warning put on it.
Every time.
This platform is very surreptitious and it's very
angled differently. It it is social engineering in
real time, guys. But here are all these
doctors, every single one of them. Most of
them from other parts of the world, not
from Gaza, not Palestinian, are there telling you
every exactly the same thing.
Sniper targeted shots to the forehead from Israeli
snipers watching them do it, watching them murder,
watching them destroy, watching them take organs, all
of them. Every one of them. Now doc
this this doctor telling you that they al
Sheifa Hospital, they lied about. There was no
Hamas presence. We all knew that. They're all
lying.
Every single one of them. The the one
I just showed you is a Jewish doctor.
And all they want you to do as
just arson and Trotsky, well, they shoot our
kids. We don't. Yeah. You're a liar.
And in fact, I can from from what
I can see, they're not shooting kids either.
You are.
Now that I I'm sure it wouldn't surprise
me if the other side were shooting kids
too, but I haven't seen it. And I've
seen a mountain of evidence showing the other
side.
It's disgusting that this keeps happening.
Now Julia Steinberger points something out that I
think is really important to consider that I
said in the beginning.
She says, I really need someone to explain
to me how bombing 6 tower blocks
in Beirut
is different from bombing the Twin Towers.
Now there's always a lot of emotional reactions,
a lot of political discussion. Just aside from
all the BS, then objective perspective,
how is that any different?
Well, I mean, look. You could argue that
people thought let's just even take from other
perspective that bombing the Twin Towers. Let's say
there was somebody in there that thought they
were going after. Would that make it okay?
Let's say let's just say there was a
terrorist in the Twin Towers. Would that make
it legally resp okay?
How was that any different? They killed 1
person, they claim, in 6 buildings.
Now there's more than just 2 towers, mind
you, that fell, and I love to keep
that out of the story, but let's just
pretend it was. Let's just say it was
the bottom line is they
are claiming
bombing 6 buildings full of innocent civilians is
okay as long as they killed the one
guy.
So even though we know for a fact
that Israel was clearly involved with 911,
would that make it okay for you if
it was Al Qaeda?
If they thought there were let's just even
say there was an actual terrorist. Let's say
today, Israel decides that there's a Hamas terrorist,
an Hezbollah terrorist inside of a building in
New York and they killed it. They bombed
that building. Why is that not the same
thing?
Oh, because they wouldn't do that to their
ally. Oh, so it's just a a flimsy
line about not wanting to hurt your ally?
Everything else is okay though? What if it
was in Saudi Arabia? What if it was
in Syria? Okay. So they're allowed to murder
an entire city block to kill one person?
That's the line we're now drawing? Or you
mean there is no line? Come on. Anybody
with a brain and compassion
and just
comp empathy for human life
can acknowledge that this is terrorism in its
purest, most obvious form we've ever seen being
framed as the right thing to do which
is what I said on day 1 from
this conversation. That was the most unnerving part.
Not that it was just obvious genocide but
that your supposedly good people in the world
were coming out and going, no. This is
not just it's not wrong. It's the right
thing to do.
Don't worry about the children being shredded on
TV or the starvation or the disease. Just
ignore it all. It's the right thing to
do and go back to sleep. That was
the hardest part for me to
to to to ingest.
So what she's pointing out is one of
the most valid points in this conversation.
If you're concerned about 911, then and you
don't care about this, you're a hypocrite.
And it says, muting because I can't keep
up with all the and with blocking both
the anti Semitic, Jews did both, and the
Zionist, all Lebanese are terrorists, in replies. How
interesting is that? So somebody trapped the b
in between all the BS like a lot
of us are. Because obviously, to say that
the Jews did it, I think is ridiculous.
Clearly, it's Zionism if you wanna make that
point. That's my opinion. You can decide for
yourself.
But there's also a lot of other dynamics
involved, and it wasn't even just Zionists, but
the point
is that the other side of it is
just as ridiculous. Coming in from the Zionist
side saying, Lebanese are all terrorists. Because there's
a lot of that in this world of
conversation right now.
Now what's funny is first, Cee Cee comes
in and goes, you're attracting anti semitic people
because you said something antisemitic, Julia.
Don't you realize that simply saying that this
is like 911 is somehow against Jews?
Are you kidding me? I mean, even if
you wanna ignoring the the semite conversation about
using anti semitism is a is a ridiculous
claim because the Palestinians are semites.
But think about this for a second. So
now apparently,
any disagreement
with the estate of Israel in any way
is anti semitic?
We're not even talking about a Jewish oh,
we're talking about an action from a like,
you're not you're not even saying the word
Israel.
You're going, I need to understand how bombing
6 towers, an act by the Israeli military,
is different than 911.
And she goes, that's antisemitic?
I mean, it's getting so abstract and, like,
3 steps removed. Why? Because that means you
think that them doing this is wrong. I
mean, I I don't even know how to
piece that together, actually. So you think that
bombing this is as bad as 911,
and that because Israel did that bad thing,
you must hate Jews.
I mean, this is so stupid. These people
are ridiculous and are worthy of ridicule. Now
I to make my own opinion, I think
Cece just genuinely thinks that. There are a
lot of really stupid people out there that
blindly go along with narratives that are logically
inconsistent because they were told to. But she
goes on to say, the Twin Towers were
not the headquarters of a major terrorist organization
because the US is not a terrorist hijack
country while terrorists rule and hide among civilians
like in Lebanon. Okay. I still don't get
how you think that's her attacking Jews, but
you're also wrong about that. But he goes,
you're comparing a terrorist attack that deliberately targets
civilians with a military attack aimed at the
headquarters of a terrorist organization.
Okay? Still don't see why you think it's
anti Semitic. That has been bombing Israeli civilians
for a year. That's not difficult to understand.
Now you're wrong about all of that, first
of all. Secondly,
I don't see how that connects in any
way with anybody Jewish. But who cares? Because
you attack Israel's actions,
you're an antisemite. That's what it means today.
You understand? That's the new definition. If you
agr if you gripe about a genocide, if
Israel's doing it, you hate Jews. Right? If
you don't like a law of their passing
that clearly demonstrates
apartheid, you must hate Jews. Right? If you
highlight that the Israeli government stood up and
just said, these people shouldn't exist, you just
must hate Jews. Right? It all makes sense.
I mean, that should sound stupid to you
because this is stupid. And there's a lot
of people out there making this case.
Now, Julia, also in the same response, somebody
responds by saying, no one is saying all
Lebanese are terrorists. That's intellectually dishonest.
And I said, no. You mean aside from
the Israeli military? And the Israeli media?
No. Not you're just intellectually stupid. I just
I'm just shouldn't be that mean. But what's
funny to me is that these people are
out there defending things, and they don't even
know what's going on. Or it could just
be bots in the IDF bot room, which
does exist, like all of them do. But
as you've seen,
here here here's the Israeli media, which by
the way is all screaming about this from
I've seen 4 different channels saying the same
thing. Kill them all. Wipe them all out.
There shouldn't be anybody. And don't forget,
there are already documents going around about how
they're gonna make settlements in southern Lebanon.
So that has to matter to you if
you're an abducted person. If they're talking about
making settlements, then you already know they're not
gonna give it back. This is about occupation
and nothing more. But he says there is
no difference between Hezbollah and Lebanon. That is
an Israeli representative speaking on Israeli media.
Then
oh, wait. There was a
damn it. Then I grabbed the wrong one.
Son of a gun. Well, either way, there
are 2 examples of media and then military,
which you've already seen. I mean, I've I've
gone on this extensively. But the the the
this is the educate the Israeli,
minister of education. But there's also another example
on the media, but I it doesn't matter.
The point is the same. They're telling you
that they feel that way despite Netanyahu coming
out and saying, don't worry. We're only fighting
Hezbollah just like he lied to the Palestinians
and then went on to kill all Palestinians.
On top of that,
this is about Gaza, but it's the same
point.
This is rabbi David,
Midvasir saying, I speak Hebrew. I'm very horrified
to say that the translation below is accurate,
just for those that wanna dismiss it without
due diligence. Here's what Khaleesi is highlighting.
Israeli Knesset member, so part of their government,
Amit Halevi, from Netanyahu's Likud party, says newborn
Palestinian babies
are terrorists.
I've been telling you, it's not a secret.
This is now what? The 9th example I've
seen of the Israeli current government
explicitly stating this?
Many times, right on the Knesset floor going,
they're all terrorists. Kill them all. They're guilty
right from there. They're not trying to mince
words. They want you to know, in their
mind, which by the way, again, goes back
to that same debate with Lumeran Galloway where
she tried to argue that, that the children
are terrorists and he laughed at her because
that's worthy of ridicule.
They want you to think because they're blind
propaganda that these people are terrorists when they're
born.
He says,
I remember
Halevi
priding himself with al Sheifa raid. And so
he caught in the department, I don't remember
exactly the orthopedic department,
Supposedly, a 150 terrorists and killed them. And
of course, he's as we now know, those
were almost entirely Palestinian civilians which that remember,
the time this video was already shown. The
time,
it came out very clearly. They were just
howling every Palestinian that was killed or taken
as terrorists.
That was very early in the conversation. Weirdly,
we just forget about it. And he goes
on to say, at the same moment, the
maternity ward,
300 terrorists were born.
Oops.
See how that works? And he goes, why?
300 children, not terrorists. And he goes, no.
Terrorists. No. Children, he responds. And the guy
says, no, Elora. Those are children.
And so so we should kill children now
as well?
This is where we've gotten? Right. That's his
argument. They're terrorists when they're born. I mean,
I don't even know why we have to
demince words about this. That's what most of
them think.
You're not gonna hear that from Palestinians.
Show me that I mean, I mean, I
guarantee you'll always find an infringe example in
every conversation from somebody.
You will not hear that from it from
the large from the use Palestinian government because
that's not the argument.
Hey. I get even with the hatred that
they likely have, rightly so, for the Israeli
government, and that would drift into the people
as well because a lot of them feel
the same,
you won't find that.
Now Sal Diagris points out, if it wouldn't
be okay for America to bomb, I don't
know, let's say Mexico City to kill a
cartel leader, why is it okay for Israel
to bomb Beirut to kill a Hezbollah leader?
Yeah. Don't try to find the hole. The
logic is sound. And the problem is that
everybody knows that.
We just make an exception for the state
of Israel.
That's it. And that should bother you. He
says and the the response but, Sal, they're
not sending rockets in the US.
He goes, they would if they were under
occupation.
There you go. Perfect circle. The point is
clearly that, one, if they're occupied, they have
the right to do so. But the idea
is that the US was occupying Mexico, maybe
they would be firing on the United States,
and then the point would be the same.
Either way, it's not about the, well, they
did this first. It's the same logical point
however it started. You don't get to go,
well, they bombed over here, therefore law doesn't
apply. That's kind of what they're always doing.
You bombed a an entire city, killed all
these civilians for one person, there's no way
you make that not a crime. Every other
context in the world, we all wouldn't even
bat an eye to call it a crime.
But now, oh, we can't because you're afraid
to be called racist or because you blindly
allow Israel to do things nobody else is
allowed to do. That's not about Jews or
Israelis. It's about the Israeli government.
Now Sal also points out, also, I'll just
leave this here,
who is the aggressor again?
Daniel McAdams shared this on a livestream, but
the point is this has been discussed. And
I actually have the BBC clip as well.
Israel Hezbollah conflict.
And this is post October 7th.
Over 7,400
cross border attacks since October.
Note that the red is Israel, the blue
is Hezbollah.
In most cases, that's like 6 or 7
times the amount of rock rockets and and
missiles.
So it's pretty clear
who the aggressor is here.
At the very least, you would argue that's
in in, not equivalent response, which is a
whole part of what descript in regard to
war crimes and genocide.
But again, here's the BBC who's openly talking
about this on corporate media, making sure you
understand that over 83%
of all the attacks between them since October
7th have been made by Israel. I think
I said 80 some or it's 83.
Now,
in let's see where at. We're about 3
hours.
I will play a couple of these. We'll
see. I'll let it go for now. I
was get I might just wrap the the
lot pretty much everything else after this last
point is gonna be stuff that I could
pull off. But I think what's important here
is it's just this let the next couple
sections are about the the aggressive dishonesty,
which is always there.
And a lot of it's it propaganda stuff.
Aaron Mate had a great, interview on
how he even managed to have get any
word in on the Piers Morgan show, which
essentially allows people to scream over you of,
you know, all. It's just such an embarrassing
display.
But this one first is,
Hassan, Mediasson.
Now what I find so frustrating about this
is, yes, there are points worthy to make
here to point out how, again, Piers Morgan
is playing this clumsy role of acting like
he's the middle ground when he's absurdly still
pro Israel, blinded by things he thinks he
knows, which he's completely and embarrassingly wrong about.
But on top of that, Mehdi Hasan, who
again was
I mean, there's a lot of examples before
this point where he was ridiculous. During COVID
19, he was a blind follower.
My point is this is another dynamic of
the false dichotomy
or false binary, whatever you wanna call it.
That they're presenting this as Hassan is on
the side of the the truth and
and Pierce Morgan is the bad guy. Well,
no. Because he comes in and he does
make some good points, but he also cements
about a lot of falsehoods
that I think that's the way this is
supposed to go. That's why you should be
looking for not these
corporate media adjacent figures and looking for people
who actually have an honest engagement in independent
media. Now listen to all of it. I'm
not saying ignore any of it. Consider all
of it, but make sure you absorb people
who are not
compromised
for elitists or part of the corporate media
in my mind. But either way, let's watch
this clip.
All Israel's fault, does it? Well, no. They
because you're mixing different things up. Is Hamas
But you're always very keen to put it
all on Israel. No. Because if we're talking
about I try and be a little bit
more like hang on. Because hang on. When
you commit a terror attack Yeah. You you
you you both sides occupation and and illegal
No. Aim right there. Like, the idea of
calling it a terror attack
is just it that's part of the propaganda
narrative. Like, if you're gonna call that a
terror attack, why wouldn't what Israel did in
Lebanon be called a terror attack? All because
you frame it as one side good, one
side bad.
It's not what Hezbollah is. Hamas is funded
by Israel. So how the hell do you
make sense of that? Because the point is
he doesn't care about those in that information.
He that that that's been presented to him
and under his tweet since the beginning of
this. They he he doesn't care. If you're
not gonna address the fact that Hamas has
been funded by Israel up until October 7th,
then you're you're either a moron or a
dishonest person. So that is an early point
in there, but it it I do argue
that Hassan makes good points in a lot
of I don't. Yeah. You are. You said
don't. I try and be fair. You can't
be fair to an occupier. By the way,
when we talk about Russia and Ukraine, this
is what frustrates me. Right. I know my
friend Owen Jones sat here and said the
same thing to you. We talk about Russia,
Ukraine, you don't do both side. You blame
Russia as the invader and occupier. You don't
do that with Israel. That is the double
standard on your part. No. No. No. No.
No. No. I'm morally consistent because I say
Russia hold on. Let me finish this sentence.
Russia illegally invaded and occupied Israel and illegally
annexed to Crimea. No. See, here's the problem.
See, there's where you've where you fall in.
Do you think, oh, Mehdi's on the side
of the truth. No. He's not. Now he
either doesn't know that, which is crazy to
me, or he's this is all a big
show. I don't know. You can decide for
yourself. They did not illegally occupy Crimea and
a moron could put that together. The information
is unbelievably clear. It was a referendum and
it's obvious. I mean, there again, like these
elections of Venezuela, there were international observers. It
was obvious.
The people of Crimea are mostly Russian speaking
and they were and you you could there's
a 1,000 different reasons and ways to show
that they were more in line with Russia
and wanted that. But, of course, it's easy
to make Russia a bad guy because narratives.
And so you just lie. It's like pretending
Assad's gassing children. The amount of information proving
that's not true is unreal.
Just like the amount of information showing what
Zionism really is and Israel's an occupation, but
we just pretend it's not there.
So that bothers me when he goes that
route because you had a good point. The
idea that he is inconsistent with Russia. You
can't just pretend that it's the point is
that Russia was drawn into this using another
proxy element that was meant to do that.
And they've been very tactful about tactical about
it. Very measured because they knew they were
being drawn into it and they did not
take the bait. Because remember,
day 1, the corporate media was reporting tanks
driving into Kyiv.
That didn't happen.
Not in the context they were framing it
as some invasion of Kyiv. The point was
that that was Russia did not try to
take over all of Ukraine on day 1,
which is what they thought would happen.
That's why they were framing it that way.
Either way, what he's doing is highlighting this
as,
you know, Russia bad guy, but you're not
consistent with the narrative. And I just wanna
make sure that's clear.
Standard on your part. No. I can't be
consistent, Piers. No. No. I'm morally consistent because
I know. Russia hold on. Let me finish
your sentence. Russia illegally invaded and occupied Israel
and illegally annexed to Crimea. He did Israel,
but he meant Ukraine. And Israel is doing
the same thing in the West Bank Gaza,
the Golan Heights. As you know, they are
completely different. Yeah. Israel's
worse. It's been going on much longer. People
living under much worse conditions But you can
have killed more kids. Right. But there is
no similarity in these two situations.
I mean, think about how crazy it is
to even say that. Like and, again, Hassan's
going, yes. You're right. Because Israel is that
much crazier in every possible dimension, in every
possible way.
It's amazing that Pierce just continues to buck
that. Like, at least, if he wants to
give the impression that he's somehow in the
middle of an objective, then he would go,
yeah. Then you're making a good point. And
let me explain. But, no, he just pushes
back because these people are not genuine. Israel's
is worse. It's not. How many kids have
been killed in Ukraine versus Gaza? Well, in
one in one year,
Ever.
Ever. Ever. Ever. Take whatever point you want.
More kids have been killed in Gaza and
Ukraine. Okay. Every human rights group agrees with
that. What's happened in Oh, let's just shift
the conversation. See, there's a dishonest person. You
damn well know that point was shockingly valid.
Okay. We won year? No. Ever. Ever. Okay.
How about this? No. The point would be
that if you have any care for how
many children or civilians are being killed, which
is usually one of the main metrics for
deciding but something is worse than the other
in the context of war, then you would
go, yeah. Well, you're right. They have undeniably
killed more children. There's no dynamic that makes
that make sense, but let's pretend that Russia's
bad or worse because that's what we're supposed
to do. Ukraine. And we can come to
Ukraine. What happened in Ukraine is a Russian
dictator
invaded India. Russian dictator.
It's just childish. Like, this my point is
that you could come into this acting like
Russia is the aggressor. What they did was
wrong. But if they have to make it
so hyperbolic and ridiculous, they just these are
you know, if if they're a terrorist because
they're the bad guy. How about you just
argue what they're doing is a crime? Nope.
They gotta take it all the way because
that's the only way this dying empire can
make it make sense. And that applies to
the UK's dynamic as well. We agree on
Ukraine. Yeah. But we don't agree in Israel
because you're not consistent. I think Israel is
much more complicated. That's complicated as my friend,
Tan, as he coached, pointed out the other
way. It's just a good way of avoiding,
avoiding attributing moral responsibility.
It's complicated. No. It's not complicated, actually. Israel
is the occupier under international law. Israel is
the one killing the vast majority of civilians.
Right now, it's not a liberal democracy from
It's not anyway. But, yeah, he's right, especially
right now. And even according to their own
people, according to the judicial reforms that are
chain. I mean,
judges from Canada made that point years ago.
If this happens, there will be no no
judicial independence. Yeah. That happened a long time
ago. It's just it's just embarrassing that they
either don't know or don't care. Right? But
the idea that it's complicated in these dynamics,
it's an illusion.
It's occupied Lebanon, it's occupied Syria, it's occupied
Palestine. End of conversation. The reality is, yes,
crimes can still be committed around that and
they have. But that is where the conversation
starts and ends.
They're the occupier, they're the criminal.
Yes. That's as simple as it gets, and
the dynamic is obvious because they're bombing an
area that they are occupying.
They that's why they're so desperate to hide
this part of the conversation. With Russia It's
run by neo fascists. Right? Well, I don't
disagree with you. There's some right wing headbangers
on that cabinet. Also think Netanyahu has to
go.
Or most of the come the entire population.
Also think the whole of Hamas have to
go. Right? In under no scenarios, liberal democracy
right now, Palestinians. Right. And Hamas, which is
funded by Israel. Right? You get the point.
It's this is a meaningless exercise in futility.
The problem is though that it's
it is reaching some people. And I think
they're having these conversations because they have to
try to take the advantage where they can.
That'd be my opinion. But here's how he
responds, which is hilarious. As I told you,
there is no comparison between the two wars.
You think you got the better of that
exchange? I think you're embarrassing yourself. He says,
so your attempt to conflate them to suit
your your,
virulently anti Israel agenda is very disingenuous.
Like, that's just a desperate effort to frame
this the way you want. That's not how
that exchange went, Pierce. And I think he
knows that.
And here is Barak Ravid, the one who's
just blindly parroting what Israel says. He says,
hi, yes, spokesman real rear admiral Daniel Hagari
says Israeli jets patrolling the airspace
near Beirut Airport
and will not allow
flights
to land. Now they claim
hostile flights with weapons,
which how would they know what play yeah.
That means planes. That means we're not gonna
let people land right now or take off.
Quote, it's a civilian airport for civilian purposes.
It needs to stay the way okay. That's
pretty alarming. As Ali says, Israeli just went
to a reason just wants a reason to
bomb the airport. Everything for them is an
excuse. Lebanon has lost its sovereignty after this.
That's his opinion. What I think is pretty
scary, and here's an article about that,
we will update soon as we know. It's
says Hagari announced that they've begun restricting access
to the airport. That's that's the reality of
it. Of course, weapons and bad guy stuff.
But get this. So you're telling people, get
out of the way, but you can't leave.
That sure lines up. Right?
To me, this is an extension of the
Gaza genocide. It's exactly what it is. And
why exactly does Israel get the right to
restrict a foreign country sovereign
the ability for people to fly out of
there or any that's everything about this is
a crime. Israel acts like it can just
pull whatever lever it wants because it's in
control, because that's what the world is allowed
it to think. That is what the mindless
followers of the US government and UK have
allowed it to think
Or become real because that's what's happening.
We can just
order evacuation orders to Lebanese government buildings that
have no connection to Hamas or Hezbollah because
we can do what we want. Or we
can send messages to your cell phones somehow
in other countries because we we've infiltrated your
tech and nobody talks about that.
This increasingly is getting more concerning.
I mean, I'm not even talking about the
sad reality of the people suffering. I mean,
the way that this is undeniably getting out
of control,
even in the sense of what the US
government pretends it's managing.
Now here's the US embassy. So here's what's
crazy to me. The Israeli government says, no.
No. No. Nobody's leaving. And then the US
government meekly follows along and says, you know,
okay. No one's evacuating.
So you're now saying US citizens are not
able to leave. Well, here's what it says.
US embassy is not evacuating US citizens at
this time. Israel is literally carpet bombing entire
blocks and you're going, no. No. You're good
to stay.
But you'll but somebody will have a small
you you'll evacuate people from foreign countries just
for the propaganda purposes. But when citizens are
actually in danger because of your ally, you
won't even tell them to leave. But here's
where it gets more crazy. It says there
is a commercially available flight at that US
citizens who expressed interest will can departing Lebanon
will have to book and pay for it.
Oh, so you're making them pay to flee
the bombing of your ally. But guess what?
Combined with what we just told you, they
can't leave.
If they're restricting the airport,
and they're going, well, we won't let you
fly out of the military, but you can
sure as hell buy a ticket that Israel
won't let you flee on.
So now US citizens are trapped in Lebanon,
it seems just like they are in Gaza,
and neither government cares. Not the US government,
not the Israeli government, because clearly they don't
care about any of you. Now as Israel
accidentally starts killing American citizens in Lebanon, which
probably has already happened, how much you wanna
bet your government doesn't care?
That should be very disconcerting for you all.
Patrick Henninson writes, one of the big takeaways
that will result from today's massacre in Beirut
by the Israeli military is that there is
now more broad support in the region
and globally for Hezbollah than there has been
for the genocide of Zionist regime. He's right.
So they keep they want they love to
stress what they want the people to think
in the world. The narrative. They love to
push that out is what everyone thinks. Nobody
does.
Clearly, more people have now recognized what they
are because of this. It's caused more instability
for their own country, for the Jews of
the world, because of the way they frame
them as what they are even though they're
not. Because of what they're doing. Because they're
not the north, illegal settlers are not gonna
go back any time sooner. They've caused this
to spin out of control even more
because that's all they know.
That's what terrorism looks like. He says it's
beyond the pale now. Not since World War
2 has the world seen a regime where
they've pensioned for mass murder like that of
the Israeli regime.
Vanessa Bealy points out a press TV report
demonstrating that, where they say we are going
to fight back stronger than ever before. Now,
of course, you'd argue that would be probably
the response even if they weren't, you know,
both sides always propagandize.
But at least what they're putting forward from
new leadership is that we're not we're gonna
go harder, which obviously is what you'd expect.
Maybe you could argue based on some of
these points that maybe it won't be as
strategically
directed. Maybe we'll have worse leadership.
Maybe that's worse. Maybe that's gonna be even
more belligerent and clumsy and and, you know,
exactly the point some of these people are
making.
This is guaranteed to get worse because of
what they did. Everybody could've foreseen that. It's
probably what they want.
They're saying that that while Israel may have
killed Hassan Nasarallah, they have instead created 100
of 1000 more. And the resistance will not
stop because of a single leader.
Now, the savior points out that as of
right now, we're really the starting of the
show, that a rocket was fired from Lebanon
and hit a Zionist building in Jerusalem.
Hitting in Jerusalem is is an important point.
And then newspaper and articles collection says direct
hit on at a power outage in deep
in Israel.
They power's going out. So all all it's
showing you guys is that right as of
right now and probably a lot more since
I've started, there's bombing going back and forth,
and it's not just like we've seen in
Gaza. They are effectively hitting inside areas that
they claim are protected by Iron Dome and
oh, where's that? It's not working, which I
think proves a point that I've been saying
for a really long time. That it mostly
show that Iron Dome that you paid for.
Either way,
this is going to be used to argue
their terrorists even though what they're doing again,
this is the point I made before. Bombing
in areas that have civilians.
I'm not I mean, again, and this is
based on an image we're getting, you know,
in real time reporting. So for all we
know, they're it's a military location. But I
would argue it's most likely we're seeing, especially
because of the killing of the leader and
the fact that Israel's been doing this everywhere
for its entire existence, that they're finally going
we're gonna react in kind. And I would
say they're both crimes. But you have to
acknowledge
the reason this is happening.
Right? And if Israel just killed
100 of people in 6 buildings, arguably to
kill one of their leaders, how was that
any different?
There's gotta be some
legal equivalence here, guys. Otherwise, nothing matters.
Now, in regard to the lies,
because there has been I mean, like every
other time,
the biggest one I wanna highlight here is
Netanyahu, which we already showed you, claiming
that every single home has a rocket. You
know, despite the fact of them saying that
we're only going after Hezbollah, but we're gonna
bomb every single person because you all have
rockets.
And then I said showed you their own
mill their own government, the Ministry of Education
and plenty of others, and the media saying
they're all terrorists because that's what they're teaching
their own people. That's what they actually think.
So here's what he said.
They fire these rockets and missiles,
not from military sites,
not from that. They do that too.
But they fire those rockets
and missiles
after they place them in schools,
in hospitals,
in apartment buildings. Where have we heard this
before?
And in the private homes of the citizens
of Lebanon.
Alright. Okay. Now how'd that work out with
Gaza? How many times have we seen that
proven?
Well, 0, in fact.
You may think otherwise because you bought one
of their graphics and cartoons, but realize that
every single one of them have been shown
to be false, mostly about the corporate media,
which is wild to me, but it's true.
They endanger their own people.
They put a missile in every kitchen,
a rocket in every garage. Wow.
I said to the I mean, just I
mean, you could call you could say he's
being hyperbolic, but that this he we're literally
murdering people based on these statements. You realize
he just left this room and ordered them
to murder 6 buildings full of people.
That every single one of them, in every
car, in every kitchen. I mean, that's not
even logistically possible, but who cares? Because let
him say what he wants in front of
the United Nations. Why is he arrested standing
there?
People of Lebanon this week,
get out of the death trap that Hezbollah
has put you in. Right. So by that
game, just like in Gaza, if they don't
leave, well, they must be Hezbollah. That's what
they're already saying online.
Despite the fact that they has no legal
right to tell them to leave their homes.
And just like we've said in the beginning,
legally speaking, international law, they're required to prove
that these are the case before mass murdering
an entire block of people.
Okay. But here's the important part. As we
know, because this is not Gaza. Now that
they've armed this area,
are we gonna find out? Well, I guess
it'd be different because crazily enough, they're able
to get away with killing 100 of people
to kill one person. They're gonna say that's
what justifies it. But there's other bombings they've
already done. I guarantee you somebody's there checking
and going, there where's the tunnel? Where's the
rockets you claimed? Where's the evidence?
And that will come out.
So on that point,
let's not forget. Well, first to his point
about every rocket and every kitchen. Well, that's
exactly what Israel's built in this
illegitimate
location. He says Tel Aviv has military infrastructure
everywhere in the city.
I mean, the what he's pointing to, by
the way, is a squirrel, is a Horace
article that openly discusses this. And it in
and of itself says, does the presence of
IDF's headquarters in Tel Aviv endanger the city's
population?
Yes. Which the article includes. The point is
that everywhere in the city, in different locations,
they have their military equipment embedded in civilian
neighborhoods. How is that any different?
Now the that what the people online try
to argue, well, it's not in an apartment
building. It's it's its own building. Well, okay.
Fair enough. And that I haven't seen evidence
that these are in apartment buildings in Lebanon
either, neither have you. But the point is
that if you're embedding these within a civilian
location, it's the same difference.
But the point in that's by the way,
that's what Israeli media points out. But it
says bunkers underneath housing, the entire Israeli military
intelligence command and control structure. Because there are.
They're also they they have remember the Al
Shifa building?
The underground tunnels? Barak,
former prime minister,
admitted
that they built that. And I I showed
you the article. That was built while there
was a hospital.
They built this underneath and on at when
they first broke so they originally were the
ones that created a human shield dynamic in
Al Shifa. And there's yet to see evidence
that that they ever used Al Shefa as
a command center for Hamas. They said so
and they wouldn't even be able to prove
that there was even a command center. They
shot he shot a bunch of old and
out of use tunnels.
The bottom line though is that they keep
lying about that and keep getting caught, and
it proves that they are the ones that
have actively done this. Pretty much like every
other allegation you've seen. Human shields, organ theft,
yep, that's pretty much pointing back at themselves.
They are, it says, they're legitimate targets per
Israel's own standard. Right? So if you're gonna
apply their logic, doesn't that make everyone in
Israel well, it would. Now I don't agree
with that. I think that's wrong.
But by Israel's logic,
Lebanon has right to defend itself for the
next year straight, and they can bond everywhere
in Tel Aviv. But I don't agree with
that. He says whatever Netanyahu is, wherever, Ben
Gavir against the entire Israeli political and military
leadership is automatically turned into a legitimate military
target to bomb and wipe up the face
of the Earth. Every person in that vicinity
is a human shield, their own standard. Like,
think about it, guys. If they're bombing 6
buildings full of innocent people because of the
person being present, that means anywhere they are
in the world, ever, at any point, makes
that entire location a justifiable target, by Israel's
logic.
But, of course, to them, it doesn't matter
because only terrorist bad guy can be a
loud target, not us. Even though you're the
most obvious living embodiment of terrorism in the
world today. This is if you don't reply
in kind, they'll just keep escalating over and
over and over again. It's a great point.
Now,
here's what you're seeing
online. Iran Vadah 110 is a de destroyed
home used by Hezbollah.
When I posted the IDF animation, which is
embarrassing, you even thought that would fly, of
Hezbollah storing rockets, which was an animation they
created when they've done,
every time they've done that, it's been proven
to be false.
He says all the antisemites laughed and said,
Soros, trust me. Well, here's a picture.
Like, this is so funny. Like, this guy
just jumps from one assumption to the next.
Right? Well, they said and I posted and
you laughed, so here's a picture they sent
me. Okay.
Okay. And what's funny about this, first of
all,
how we pretend we even know where this
comes from, for though we know this is
anywhere in the world. But let's just take
it face value pretending it's in Israel.
Or, I mean, excuse me, in Lebanon.
What they're trying to show you is a
is a rocket
inside of some structure. Right? Pretty sure that
looks like something other than a building, but
we'll we'll go for there. But here's what
it Iyad points out. You wonder how they
put the ballistic rocket inside the apartment because
that's actually an apartment building. Maybe they placed
it first and then built the apartment around
it.
The point is that people never think through
their narratives. This guy got told something by
somebody and then blindly repeated it without doing
his due diligence because that's what Zionist do.
And he says, I don't think the Zionist
PR firms that come up with these crazy
lies are stupid.
They are targeting the stupid Zionist ideologues who
are going to swear it's true.
Perfect.
Exactly. His point is a bit look at
the size of this thing. And you're telling
me because of the location he pointed to,
which is an apartment building, that that's going
to be inside of an apartment building somehow?
Certainly possible. But as
Kim makes a very excellent point about, same
thing, Assad commentary going, RDF spokesman revealed Hamas
tried to launch a cruise missile
from the house a house in Lebanon.
And even shows you. There it is. Look
at that. Wow. Look at that lamination. Well,
there's the actual real shot.
Here's the point, which is logic.
She goes, and how exactly would they launch
it from inside the house? Does this house
have a reinforced floors or exhaust channels or
a clear exit path? Mighty militaries can't even
launch cruise missiles from inside of buildings. Now
they think you're so stupid you'll believe Hezbollah
can fire them from just anyone's house.
And of course, you'd be like, well, they
don't care about the house. Well, that's not
the point. It wouldn't be able to functionally
launch from inside of a building without it's
just ridiculous, guys. These people think you're that
stupid.
And now they're expanding that out to manipulating
the stupid Zionists that will spread whatever they
hand to them.
That's embarrassing.
But don't worry. They gave you a drawing
instead.
IDF says this is how close the weapons
are to us based on this drawing we
put together with images that you can't verify.
I just I don't even know why. Look,
maybe it's maybe let's just even say for
objectivity. Maybe it's real. Wouldn't surprise me, seeing
as how they're all legally occupying Lebanon and
they're trying to fight for it back. But
what's embarrassing is that a group that has
been caught lying more than I've ever seen
in any situation in anything I've ever covered.
Now even now more than Ukraine, which was
wild. Ukraine was just clumsy, Which is just
I think is just an extension of the
Israeli agenda, quite frankly, as they fund the
Azov movement.
But they have just been caught roundly. Every
single major event. Mostly by the corporate media,
which still baffles me.
So my point is, if we know that,
which anybody objective does.
At the very least you have to go,
okay. Well, they've lied a lot and we
know they've lied a lot, so maybe that's
a lie too. That's just what an objective
person would do. So the fact that they
think they can come out and float drawings
and cartoons
and go, that's the truth because we said
is,
I mean, I guess the what else they're
gonna do? But it just shows their shocking
hubris.
Now here's another example of a lie. And
this woman online broke it down very clearly.
Israel's using digitally altered videos to create propaganda
videos to legitimize targeting civilians. And she mentioned
in the end the point that we already
proved is happening. Prove many have proven many
have proven this in their own videos which,
again, I spoke to people that can look
at this and you don't take that at
face value. Do your own due diligence
and show on the last show we had,
those little popping off flashes at the bottom.
That's not rockets or munitions. That's flares they've
dropped with the bombings. And you could argue
same thing with the rest of what we've
seen, dropping little cluster munitions and different things
to make it look like there's ammunition in
these houses they're bombing.
That's what that's the level of Zionist manipulation.
Here's another example.
Last 2 days, has anybody told you that
there's video proof of Lebanese people hiding cruise
missiles within their homes? Boy, do I have
a story for you. I found the video.
We're gonna take a couple of seconds, and
we are going to watch it, and then
I'm gonna break it down for you.
If this is their damning evidence, they have
a problem. Let's break it down. So first,
you see the home. Right? And then it
pans out. And then they show you the
strike on the complex. Right? Now it's a
little blurred. I don't know why. It's after
they show you the strike that they show
you a zoomed in portion of the video
where you can see what appears to be
a cruise missile being launched at another building.
Here's the problem.
That building wasn't there before.
These are 3 separate videos that are all
spliced together, and they all appear to be
from different locations because the strike that shows
it exploding to begin with features a field
full of bushes. You can even see other
buildings clearly represented in the background. So why
don't you see the building that the cruise
missile reportedly struck in the second video? And
why are there very odd transitions?
This is where frame by frame comes into
play. You remember I pointed out the blur?
They blurred the whole complex.
Why would they do that?
Easy. It's not even the same shape. From
this angle, you should be able to see
several characteristics
from the first home that you can't see.
Even with the blur, you should be able
to see the dark brown rooftop on top
of the building, but it's not there.
They manufactured this one too, only this one
they did digitally. Instead of launching flares at
a building to make it appear as if
a cruise missile had gone off in there
somehow without exploding
and without launching. Right. They just digitally threw
3 videos together. And in the 3rd video,
you can't see where the missile is coming
from. It's all obscured by smoke and even
more blur. Now a lot of people wanna
say that we're being hypercritical,
but these are the same people who told
us that a calendar was a guardian list.
So maybe maybe we might have reason to
be a little bit mistrusting.
Right. Or a 1,000 other examples of them
being caught lying over and over and over
and over and over, which I'll I'll actually
include a thread on that same point. The
idea being, they've already been caught in this
exact way,
splicing together videos, claiming their here's a tunnel
that's going under oh, we caught you. There's
different tiles on the floor. There's different ceiling.
There's wires that aren't there now, like, just
lazy or that they're just that bad at
this. And they splice video. They've been lying
the entire time,
which means you that mean they know that
they're manufacturing all this. Now, Rania Collect makes
a good point. These are just lazy arguments
you get online. And the point you need
to ask yourself is why they would go
to this extent.
One, it means that they know that they're
not fighting the people that they're claiming they
are, but they need you to think these
people are repressive, that they're anti you know,
whatever. Nuzzle an extremist because that's what sells
the west.
This person says, Lebanon was living in peace
and tranquility in
1976, and then came Hezbollah.
Except that was a decade later, but who
cares about the facts? Her point is, I
was just at the beach in Lebanon. This
is Rania.
Less than 2 weeks ago, where everyone was
bathing in bathing suits as skimpy as Miami,
you freak.
They're just lying, guys. They're just making this
up because the west, especially people in the
paradigm,
fall for it.
And she says, also, who cares?
Arabs are only worthy of life if their
women are in bikinis?
Are bikinis the only way to humanize us,
you pervert?
He says, you should be embarrassed. Seek help
and leave us alone. Because this is the
point about the reality that there are plenty
of people in the conversation, whether Iran or
elsewhere, who do believe in the different culture
and the different like, with the hijab conversation.
Robert makes this clear every time. Yes. There
are lots of people in the country that
argue that that shouldn't be something they require.
Different culture, different conversation. But there's also a
lot of people in the country who are
even religious who wear it as a symbol
of resistance to what the US is trying
to do. And then there's people that believe
in that conversation. Let's not forget how hypocritical
it is to pretend like that's a weird
problem when you still have that happening in
extreme religious in in in women in Israel.
In in in, what was it? Orthodox Jew
communities.
It's just it's what's
different though because we go it's the same
conversation. It's the same thing from a different
religious perspective. I guess because they're not brown,
it's somehow not a problem. It's just lazy
arguments. But either way, the bottom line is
they lied about this.
Not only is the date wrong in the
conversation of Hezbollah, but the point is that
that's not the reality. As she's and plenty
of other examples you can see for yourself.
Now, here's another point. And you're seeing this
a lot. Alright? Okay. So, they bomb this
area. They take out Nasrallah.
And what do they need to do? They
need to convince the world that everybody's on
their side.
Even Lebanon's cheering because we told you they
wanted to be freed. The same game they
played in Iraq. The same lie they spun
in Syria. The same thing they do everywhere.
And here is this random Zionist going,
Lebanese civilians are celebrating,
the the death of Nasrallah. Well deserved party
all night. And it's just this. Just them
dancing and singing.
Point.
He says the Zionists are copying posts from
each other and spreading disinformation.
The video is from the anti government protest
in 2020.
I I mean, you can even see this
on the original post, guys. Which do they
know what they're doing?
This is a very dishonest tactic. They're lying
you know, that doesn't mean that this complete
follower knew that. Either way, it doesn't matter.
They're not doing their due diligence. They go,
yes, narrative. I like. Share. Same with the
2 party paradigm in this country.
But why would they have to lie about
that? Because it's not true. Because they have
mass popular support in Lebanon.
But, of course, he tags community notes. And
then guess what? They don't do anything. Because
community notes is not in the interest of
the truth. It's in the interest of controlling
narratives like Twitter has always done. Right now,
clearly for the Zionist agenda. You you you
can tag community notes for the next 14
years straight despite the obvious and easily proven
evidence, they won't follow-up because they don't care.
Because the
system seems to be influenced by like, even
someone like like part of Syrian Girl.
She she engaged with this process. And she'll
constantly point out that it makes no difference.
They the Zionist bots will overrun it and
get what they want every time. Because that's
what
Elon allows. Or Yakinor with the conversation of
the a partnership with the ADL and the
use of CHEQ, Israeli platform, to stop the
bots, but really just overrun it with Israeli
bots. Or using Authentix to verify and take
your biometric data. It's pretty clear what they're
doing.
And here's an example of that. So Sal
Diagris points out, 30% of Beirut are Christians.
Make sure you listen to that, Republicans, as
they bomb Beirut and kill at least what
it what it would be? 1 out of
every 3 or 4 per people in Beirut
are gonna be a Christian that they kill.
So right now, knowing they killed 100 of
people in Beirut, I guarantee you, some of
those are Christians.
But you won't hear a peep of that
from the Christians of the world, or from
the most of them, or from the republican
Christians that blindly support Israel.
But it says, listen to those screams purchased
by your tax dollars. Now you want I
don't know the video, but you don't want
it. But the point is you can just
hear people screaming. Just whether out of, you
know, horror or sadness because Nasrallah was killed
or whatever it is,
people are screaming. And this is recent. This
is in Beirut. Now this person says, hi.
Descended of Lebanese Christians here, which I don't
know why that he's got a bearing you
know what's going on there. But it says,
there there is footage of Lebanese Christians rejoicing
and dancing in the streets. No. You're pointing
to what we just showed you. And Sal
says, do they look like they're dancing in
the street? He's they're not. These people are
screaming and crying. He says, for the love
of god, turn off the Lockheed Martin funded
faux news.
Oops.
Oh, tell me I didn't just lose that.
Okay. Good. And it says,
I shared a video of a group of
them singing and dancing last night. Lebanese Christians
are terrorized by Hezbollah. This is a good
thing. I simply said, yeah. It was from
a protest in 2020. All you have are
lies.
And surprise, surprise, she didn't respond.
What what did I just delete right there?
Hold on. Whoops.
How did that just happen? I wanted to
see
oh, what is that? How was that happening?
See, isn't this interesting? Like, look at this,
guys. I was just looking at these posts.
Now suddenly they're not allowed to be seen?
Isn't that strange? Maybe they blocked me. Let's
see.
Oh, that's why. See? See how that works?
You point out that they're lying, she gets
caught lying, she can see that she's lying,
she can be proven to the fact that
she's lying.
Right?
And then she blocks me because I made
her I exposed that she lied. Or rather
that she got tricked into lying, however you
wanna look at it. But is that what
honest people do? Oh, look at that. Isn't
that perfect? This is a video from 2020.
She got caught, guys. Look at that.
That is perfect. That's the same person.
That's why she blocked me because she got
proven that she was lying? Like, is that
what an honest person does? No. That's what
a Zionist manipulator does. I'm gonna include this
link too so you can have the proof
that that's a lie. That even not not
that because Twitter says so, because it is
the truth, then Twitter just backs it up.
Because I it is. You can easily see.
It's it's that's what's so crazy about most
of the the lies.
It's right on the surface easy to prove.
They either don't care to look because they
don't care about the truth as long as
it hurts Israel, like a same two party
dynamic,
or they're
lying. They know they are.
Now on top of that, Casey Wright includes
a Cradle article simply talking about how this
happened in Syria,
saying that in the Mi 6 basically produced
fake videos of Syrians celebrating
in the same dynamic by handing out sweets
and whatever. You know, it's the same thing
you see every time. Now here's another example.
This one's actually
crazy
because of how like, I think anybody not
blinded by the partisanship right now, anybody who's
standing back and kinda see
this video is shocking because of how clear
it is
that they're leaning in the direction that everything
Israel says is true no matter what.
So Dana Bash has to issue a clarification,
which
is surprisingly enough that they completely misrepresented what
somebody said because a Jewish person said that's
what they meant.
Watch.
On a story we brought you yesterday concerning
congresswoman Rashida Tlaib's com Who I don't support,
who I think is crazy as everybody else.
Attacking a decision by Michigan attorney general Dana
Nessel to bring charges against pro Palestinian protesters
at the University of Michigan. Okay. So in
case you can we we can hear that,
she criticized Tlaib
that this represent this political entity
try framed
Palestinian protest as terrorism.
That's it.
Talib accused Nestle of, quote, biases.
Okay. So you're biased. Right? You are just
broadly stroking Palestinian support as terrorism. Yeah. Because
that's dumb. That's ob that's obtuse. That's ignorant.
That's actually racist.
So she said, that's bias.
Okay? You follow? Here's Talib's full quote to
the Detroit Metro Times. It seems that the
attorney general decided if the issue was Palestine,
she was going to treat it differently. That
alone speaks volumes about possible biases within the
agency she runs.
Seems pretty simple to me. Now let's be
objective. Maybe she's got some secret meaning there,
but you don't know that. The words are
very clear. And whether or not she had
some secret, the facts are obvious.
You said you said that that you you
are being biased. And she's simply going, that
might mean that there's more bias within the
agency.
Right? That seems cut and dry. Like, it's
funny to me because I'm going through this
on the the online back and forth I
was just showing you. People that do this.
Now Talib did not reference Nestle's Jewish identity.
Her office has not responded to our request
for clarity. Her allies insist that's not what
she meant. But Meaning that she's been accused
of making it about her Jewish identity, which
she did not. Nestle
still says she believes it is anti semitic
and repeated on CNN yesterday that, quote, clearly,
she's referencing my religion. Oh, clearly. Clearly, she's
referencing your religion by in no way even
mentioning your religion because that's clear. Right?
See how dumb that is? Like, they're cementing
this in re
It's clear that you mean anything about Jews
if a Jew
suggests that in the interest of covering for
Israel and Zionism.
That's really clear.
I mean, think and guys, and even stating
it exactly like that, that's not that's not
racist at all. Because what I'm talking about,
whether a Jew or not, is somebody pretending
that what you said was racist to hide
the actions of a government.
That's just stupid. And, in fact, racist in
its own right because what you're doing is
using Judaism to hide crimes.
So every Jew in the world should be
outraged by that and say that that Jewish
leader or ruler
is using her religion
to cover for genocide.
That's what she's doing.
Tlaib did not say anything of the kind
and in fact made a logical point, even
though I think they're all ridiculous,
about how she was biased against Palestinians
or anybody protesting for Palestinians, which, by the
way, includes a lot of Jews.
It's just this is such a comical dynamic.
It's just crazy how it really is this
bad in the hierarchy of this country where
people in the media like this moron talking
are just completely
blinded,
Either by propaganda, by political interest, or they're
really that stupid.
And that's pretty scary when you think about
it.
Now, Mohammed Shahada made a really great thread
here. Really, I should do an entire show
piece by piece reiterating. But we've got over
every one of these. I mean, literally everyone
over the last year.
But this is a great thread.
Every single one of these are a lie
that's been proven. Not an assumption, not we
think first thing, but a proven lie. For
example, where
France 24 broke down how this woman
pretended to be a nurse from Al Shefa,
but it turned out to be a fake
video put out by Israel.
They proved that.
Or any number of examples, like this one
was a,
supposedly a rocket lot. Nope. It was an
old seller they proved, and it was demonstrated
by even Israeli media.
It's incredible how many times they've lied.
Over and over and over and over. It
goes on for a while.
Isn't that crazy?
But
we still pretend like we have to treat
them like they might be telling the truth.
I mean, we should be using logic and
going, well, based on so far, they're probably
lying. But still consider. Always consider it could
be, but recognize that you have a logical
standing for realizing that they're probably lying.
Now I might I'm gonna think I'm gonna
go over this later since we're almost at
4 anyway.
But this is just embarrassing. Right? We're
this I mean, again, this this this woman
is just disgusting to me. She's this this
smug, indifferent like, this smug dismissal of the
fact that I mean, because what Aaron is
talking about are verifiable facts.
Discussing the fact that I mean, whether it's
the killing of protesters, whether it's the rape
allegations, which the whole world knows are based
on absolute fabrications,
but she just smugly shouts him down and
interrupts him every 5 seconds because Piers Morgan
will allow it.
And shockingly enough, Aaron holds his composure and
maintains if it's incredible.
But there's a couple of these clips,
and Pierce is just it's just so embarrassing
the way like, this is not how you
run any kind of engagement, any interview to
allow 1 there really 2 of them to
just smugly shout him down every time he
tries to make a point. And I'm not
talking in any way that's, like, making another
point. They're just going, oh, you're a lot
oh, you're a racist.
Just, like, right over the top of him
every time. It's really hard to watch.
But he just goes on about those points.
What I wanted to make sure you saw
before I wrap,
this woman
is the one that already got caught lying.
And I said, in case you've see if
you've seen the this ignorant woman, there's a
tag, smugly dismissing easily verifiable facts about Israel's
genocide in this general history of war crimes
in recent debates with Eir Mate, don't forget
she's been caught many times, shamelessly lying like
the example below.
If a ceasefire
means
the return of the hostages
and the dismantlement
of a genocidal regime that has stated
that they're going to attack us again, then
everybody would be in favor of a ceasefire.
But if a ceasefire means that we're just
gonna keep them quiet for a bit until
they attack again, then it's Israel's obligation
to defend its citizens and destroy that threat.
Don't you think? It's quite the Israeli accent
you got there. But what's funny is that
what she's talking about is what we tried
to tell you from the beginning. Right right
now, their narrative is all about, we want
the ceasefire, no Ash won't let us, and
all of our people support us. Nope. It's
clear they don't. And it's clear they know
you've been trying to break stop it from
happening. But back in the beginning, the first
couple months, this is what they were saying.
Well, ceasefire are are hostages are secondary. We
gotta go after Hamas first. Until that became
really uncomfortable because nobody agreed with that. Now
they pretend like it never happened. Here she
is saying it, just so that's clear, but
it's what she says next, which is incredible.
Why is it necessary, it would is reported,
to start shooting, having snipers outside a church?
I don't. I saw the reports this morning.
The church there are no churches in Gaza,
so I'm not quite sure where the report
is is is talking about. There's a Catholic
church in there, isn't there, that is Yeah.
Unfortunately, there are no Christians because they would
drive Oh, okay. So just first step, no
churches. Oh, but there are. Oh, okay. But
there are no Christians.
If you were in that I'd be like,
time out. Did you just were you making
that up, or are you admitting you were
wrong? You know, that's really embarrassing. And she
goes further. Drove driven driven out by some
all the reports this morning.
The church there are no churches in Gaza,
so I'm not quite sure where the report
is is is talking about. There's a Catholic
church in there, isn't there? There's more than
one. That is Yeah. Unfortunately, there are no
Christians because they were dry drove and driven
out by But there are respectfully, there are
Christians because I spoke to an MP yesterday
who has family members in the church who
are Christians.
Well, I don't know what happened. I don't
know who was attacked. Oh, yeah. Let's go
back to the other point. Ah, the attack.
We will talk about that.
How embarrassing. Like, just so it's clear, that's
not a mistake. This woman is deliberately lying
for Zion's agenda. And the game is what
they used to get away with. It's just
going, that's not true. There's no Christian. There's
no that's just a lie. And people used
to just let it go. But no. There
are churches that you've bombed. And yes, there
are Christians. And in fact, there were a
lot. And even in the context, there were
Jews that lived in Gaza before Israel made
them leave. And that's on the record.
But you see, they just lie.
Lie and lie
and lie
lie. Let me let me preface these remarks
with I never never ever believe
Israeli figures.
I've been in the government too long to
know that the Israelis are patent liars.
Yep.
Maybe we should start paying attention when people
tell us stuff like that.
Now she this also goes back and forth
to other stuff. I might I might touch
on later. But I wanna make sure you
saw this too, which is pretty wild. So
this is the Israeli citizen spokesperson,
and and this this is she's a representative
for the Israeli government. K? She's she's representing
them in this discussion
and is saying that the Gaza famine is
a hoax.
Like, isn't it funny how the YouTube and
all you're not allowed to deny major world
events? Oh, but unless the major genocide or
or the major starvation campaign that every legal
standing in the world is highlighting as
a famine.
Right? This is the IPC. It's like the
the lead standing
entity in the world on this conversation, and
it's telling you famine is imminent as 1,100,000
people, half of Gaza, has extreme catastrophic food
insecurity.
So she but she's going fake news. This
is on June 18th, but I'm pointing out,
well, no. That's not true.
Ruth, who is in this video, responds and
says, there is absolutely no famine in Gaza.
What there is is Hamas stealing humanitarian aid.
So she's just going back to old narrative
from day 1, which everybody's proven false.
Cutting off the hands and feet. Oh, you
mean that fake story Elon Levy just spread
again that was been proven false in the
1st 2 months? Yeah. That's how lazy and
desperate this is.
Publicly. Okay. Well, I said, oh, well, except
for the pesky little fact that literally everyone
in the conversation
has called out Israel for what it's doing,
and Israel has been caught lying by its
own media about every aspect of this genocide,
even killing of its own people, you know,
except that,
hashtag Zionism as terrorism. And I include the
article from ProPublica,
which, by the way, in case you missed
it, it says Israel deliberately blocked humanitarian aid
to Gaza. 2 government bodies concluded. That's the
US government, mind you. Anthony Blinken rejected them.
And that's what I was showing you before.
Here he is even engaging with this exact
point on c m b CBS
acknowledging that point, acknowledging they blocked it, acknowledging
that he made a wrong call, but he
only had to judge it based on real
time information. Oh, okay. So you so you
lied.
And then here, apparently, Netanyahu told Blinken that
Israel denied humanitarian relief to Gaza relief
because minister wanted to inflict collective punishment. You
know where that comes from?
The Atlantic.
The Atlantic article discussing this exact point is
highlighting the fact, not only did they lie
about it, but they told the internal circles
told Blinken, we want to hurt the civilian
population.
Blinken later certified that Israel had not arbitrarily
denied.
He lied. And the Atlantic, and seemingly everybody
else, is calling it out. Oh, but don't
worry.
They they wrote him up. What are we
in? Junior high? He wrote up I I
that's a prison worthy sent out. Who cares?
Because it's not about accountability.
It's about the illusion.
So the point, again,
this liar who blocked me after I exposed
that doesn't like to be called a liar.
I mean, the point is simply, this is
a representative of the government
who blocked me.
So I said, where was it? Right here.
Of course you block and this is the
old account we use when we were censored
on Twitter. I said, of course, you block
and run from the facts like the child
murderer you are. So you're denying and blocking
of aid? The die denying blocking of aid
and deliberate starvation of Palestinians and you're hostages
alike?
Or are you just afraid the Israeli people
will see that you know that and don't
care? And I also added,
tagging Twitter, I said, then this member of
the government blocked me for pointing out the
obvious facts about them blocking aid. Isn't that
against the rules, Twitter?
But something tells me you'll make another exception.
Because it is, by the way. They technically,
they're
as a government representative, you're not allowed to
block.
And that's that's what this I mean, I
guess you could argue it's a personal account.
The whole game is ridiculous. But either way,
the point is that they're lying. They know
they're lying. And when confronted with the provable
evidence, they just go block,
run.
And yet she'll stand there and act like
you're wrong for pretending people are dying while
children are starving as she speaks.
It's disgusting.
They are disgusting.
Tiberias says, never forget that Biden Harris spent
1 fourth of a $1,000,000,000
to build a temporary pier from your tax
dollars under the guise of supplying humanitarian aid,
committed war crimes and a massacre by hiding
soldiers in that fake aid, and then left
the people in Gaza dying of thirst and
hunger.
This is your lesser of evil.
So there's your point for the other side
of the game. Okay? It's the same way
either way you look at it.
Because in his perspective,
he there are people that are choosing Kamala
over Trump because they argue that she's the
lesser evil, and it's the same stupid point.
They're both evil. They're both pretty damn on
par in my opinion. The the point is
that this the lesser of evils is the
ploy
Because they're both the same damn thing.
And then, of course, Vivid says, I do
not stand for an immediate ceasefire.
I stand for the complete and utter destruction
of Hamas and Hezbollah. Oh, the mission creep.
Turn the planet. Israel needs to finish the
job, says this proud Israeli Zionist propagandist.
That was on September 26th. So just in
case you were unclear about this,
everybody in Israel seems to want their families
back, but the Zionist propagandists want you to
think that they all wanna stick it out
for revenge or whatever they're making it out
to be. So the destruction of now Hamas
and Hezbollah. See how that see how that
expands?
Now my point was in Gaza, it would've
just become the Palestinian Islam and Jihad. It
would've become whatever was next to keep it
going. Now you're just like, Hezbollah too. So
now you have to destroy Hezbollah and Hamas
everywhere until this end it's never gonna stop
unless we stop it. And these blind propagandists
don't care about anybody, not even Israeli population
because they don't want that. They want their
families back.
That doesn't mean they support Gaza or Lebanon,
but it means that they know Israel doesn't
care about their families.
That's a crazy thing to recognize.
Now just to end really quickly, don't forget
that everybody,
the vast majority of people at the UN,
walked out when Netanyahu got to speak, which
I don't know why he's not arrested, which
is mind blowing to me.
But as Hassan Mafi points out, when the
west sees a terrorist,
standing what is it? What was it? Fifty
something standing ovations?
When the rest of the world sees a
terrorist,
Empty chairs.
Think about that.
Now, I could've done this for I mean,
it was it it almost I think it
was something like
other than a few entities, and clearly that's
the UK, the US, and, like, 6 or
7 others.
Everybody else at the UN is on the
side of Palestine. It's not my opinion.
State was obviously state of Palestine, but I'm
telling you, I could've gone over and over.
Belgian prime minister, Gaza genocide,
minister of, what was it again?
Venezuela and
Palestinian territory. That's just Venezuela saying same thing.
We're gonna write the unwavering solidarity of the
Palestinian people. Here is Jordan.
Jordan's an important dynamic in this because of
the occupation, because of the discussion of Jerusalem.
The point is that Jordan's minister of foreign
affairs
listen to this. As they're screaming, they're not
gonna end this. What it says is all
of us, members of the Muslim Arab Committee,
we are willing
right now to guarantee the security of Israel
in the context of Israel ending the occupation
and allowing for the emergence of an independent
Palestinian state. So now not only do you
have all of them, Hamas, Hezbollah saying, if
you stop what you're doing in Gaza, this
will end. And then you've got Jordan saying,
look. We'll guarantee Israel will not be annihilated.
What even if you whatever you think will
happen or, persecuted, I would argue.
As long as you give Palestine a state,
and guess what? They go, no. We're gonna
keep murdering children, which is what's happening. Even
Jordan is giving them an out and they
won't take it.
And then just this is the US government,
what's her name, Greenfield,
saying that Palestine won't be allowed a state
because they don't meet the requirements, which is
not up for her to decide.
And they're still pushing back. Max Blumenthal pointing
out, here they are patting themselves in the
back about how they're saving the world when
Gaza's in ruins and Lebanon's under assault and
Russia's updated its nuclear doctrine because of these
psychopathic clowns.
That's what's happening.
But Tom Cotton don't worry. Tom Cotton is
proud to stand with Israel. There's no moral
equivalence.
What it's meaning. There is a legal equivalence,
you blind bought off liar. Who cares, though?
Because moral equivalence. We're gonna pretend like they've
got the moral right to murder children because
we're on your side. No. You're a terrorist.
You are siding with the evil of the
world and acting like it's okay because here's
$237,000.
That's all your soul's worth?
That's weak.
Lot we got Lord Bebo highlighting Israeli soldiers
are being detained on vacation.
This world is shifting.
He went to Marrakesh, Morocco.
Right? Here's someone We're gonna murder some children,
rape a couple people, then we're gonna go
off and have fun in Morocco. But guess
what? They don't aren't okay with that. And
they arrested
him. He's accused of war crimes and is
completing a 3 month of duty.
Now, the point is that this is happening
around the world.
People are arresting Israeli soldiers because they're committing
war crimes. So it shows you that things
are shifting. And now you got people that
aren't gonna be afraid to travel anywhere else.
Good.
Now I'm not saying that for every Israeli.
That's the unfortunate consequence of what your government
is doing and blaming you for it. But
most Israelis do, in fact, support what's going
on. Now you'll also find that today, and
this is on 25th,
rabbis, Jews, and allies
sat in the APAC office of Los Angeles,
and they were demanding APAC stop claiming to
stand for Jewish safety. Well, look at that.
While supporting the genocide of entire people. What
was that again about only racist and, you
know, the reality is, there are a vastly
growing number of Jews in the world
that are calling you out.
But of course, there must all be trash.
Right, Ben Shapiro? They're all racist if they
don't support Zionism? How does that work out?
Hopefully, you're paying attention because the world is
changing. Zionism, as Dan Cohen points out, who
I have an interview with, I think, the
day after tomorrow,
is the opposite of Judaism. He's right. Jews
who follow their religion would rather die than
become Zionists, and you will see that all
around the world, including in Israel, where the
Orthodox Jewish community that stands up against Zionism
gets beat up by the IDF
all the time.
Now, this in general is just
the, you have
more colleges because they're being forced to by
these in these
You could see, you saw, you already see
how this goes down where some of the
presidents that try to stand up against them,
stand for free speech even though I disagree
with 90% of what they push
were removed or fired be or
left because Israel was calling them racist for
not attacking all the Palestinian protesters.
Now they've coerced through the DC manipulation to
make Zionism, the word itself, a racist term.
As he writes, Zionism is an ideology supported
by Jews and non Jews. Biden, I am
a Zionist, it's opposed by both too.
Right? Glenn can be objective, and he's saying
banning it would be like banning Marxist as
an insult.
It's stupid. It's it's completely the opposite of
what it is a attack on free speech.
And don't worry, Trump's gonna take care of
antisemitism in his first turn. Right. Because he's
gonna block you and censor you and use
digital IDs to stop you from speaking. Just
like the other side.
But Zachary wants you to understand the most
common myth about Zionism was that its purpose
was to save Jews from persecution, suffering, and
this destitution. Right? During the 1st few decades
of Zionism, Zionist immigration to Palestine, Zionist leaders
in Palestine, in fact, rejected
61% of immigrant applicants. Think about that. The
number one reason for rejection? The applicants were
too destitute and poor.
Look at that. Zionist leaders in Palestine, like
Arthur Ruppin and and Mehem, Shinkin,
wanted wealthy, strong, single Jews to migrate to
Palestine in order in other words, they wanted
Jews who didn't actually need a safe haven.
The lies they're built on are so shockingly
obvious if you just look.
Zachary Foster has a PhD in Palestinian history
from Princeton.
It's
sad how many bliers there are out there.
And I'll include my discussion of Zionism versus
Nazism, Israel's connection to extremist ideology, and ADL
faking Nazi marches. It goes with the history
of Zionism. And I'll leave you with this.
Oh, under 4. We made it.
Ron, you post this. Now this is Gabor
Mate, Aaron's father,
who is a Jew himself and has and
is very, you know the history
he spoke he speaks a lot about this.
Aaron's interviewing about Zionism and the goal. And
I wanna I want you to understand that
this is rooted in the reality.
As Avi Shlom and other academics will tell
you if you just listen. Stop listening to
politicians
and listen to academics, listen to listen to
anybody, listen to politicians too, but stop blindly
listening to politicians about things that suit their
interests.
Listen to some other perspectives out there, and
you'll find very rapidly
that the majority
sees this.
And it's just been hidden.
It's been suppressed.
It's been choked. It's been called racist and
people flee.
Right? But the point in there to make
sure you heard is to listen to all
perspectives.
Consider all perspectives, but objectively and
view them and do your due diligence.
And this is what you'll ultimately find.
Thank you for tuning in.
It is crazy, guys. It really is. I
mean, as much as I do this everyday,
I'd say every you go through this, and
you're just going, I just it's wild how
much
that it just keeps going.
But every day we make a difference.
You must remember that. You must believe that
because it's true. I get new people every
day, we reach new people. We it it
is changing the conversation, which is changing the
world.
Quite literally.
Now, always, they will try to the power
structures will try to take that power back,
but we can stay vigilant and we can
continue to move
the needle.
It's happening right in front of you. And,
damn, we need that faster than ever as
we're seeing that the agenda switch into Lebanon,
more civilians are being killed. But I see
that as always, we have this opportunity because
the peoples recognize it.
Do something. Stand up. Speak to people. And
I'm not advocating for violence, but the reality
is the more pressure we apply, the faster
this will end. So thank you for tuning
in. Thank you for believing that we have
the ability to make a difference, because you
do. And as always, question everything. Come to
your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.
On the first president first prime minister of
Israel said in 19 thirties
that politically speaking, we are the aggressors,
and the Arabs are just defending their homeland.
That's what Ben Gurion said. Now publicly, they
spoke a different language,
but Ben Gurion said this very clearly
to his fellow Zionists, his political rival,
Jabotinsky, who founded the
party that later became today's Likud party. Which
is Netanyahu's party. Which is Netanyahu's party.
He said that
the Jewish colonial project, he called it that.
The Jewish colonial project
cannot be achieved without force, because no country,
no people give up the land without fighting
for it.
So
what I want people to know in a
nutshell is
there's antecedents. There's a history behind this, and
the history is that
of 1
people
coming into a land
and having the resources, having the
imperial support
to achieve their goals
at the expense of displacing
and oppressing
and occupying
and suppressing
and very frequently
mass killing
than other people.