This is more Israel pushing for Iran. But
is that America's problem?
That's a I mean, maybe the answer is
yes. Maybe the answer is, you know what?
They were wrong about Iraq. They were wrong
about Syria. They were wrong about Afghanistan. They
were wrong about the Taliban. They were wrong
wrong about Libya. They were wrong about the
Arab Spring. They were wrong about Yemen. They
were wrong about the Arabian Peninsula.
They were wrong about the nine eleven hijackers
being Saudi Arabian, but, hey, tenth time's the
charm.
This time, we're actually right.
Yeah. You're gonna have to earn our trust
in this one.
It starts with a simple question
and ends in objective reality. Reality.
Through our journey from there to here,
we find one another
and ourselves.
And as the next twenty four hours breaks
free from our last,
we gaze onward in reflection of wrap
up.
Saturday, 02/28/2026.
Thank you for joining me today.
Well, here we are
yet again.
I can't even count how many times we've
been in this position.
Now this obviously is a little bit more
severe,
at least as it seems in the moment
in regard to Iran. In case you haven't
caught on to what I'm talking about so
far, the first thirty seconds, five seconds.
It's just incredible how often this kind of
dynamic can happen, the cycle,
the same,
you know, element that's been lying our entire
lives can shove a lie down our throats
or just a narrative. The same people can
swing back around and support that narrative. And
in the midst of that being put out,
you're already starting to see parts of it
fall apart. This happens every single time.
And I'm not even getting into the, you
know, what I'll get into what is dishonest
and what's not. But what's interesting to me,
just taking the Iran conversation as as a
as a whole.
How many times we can discuss
false protests or or and I mean, not
just opinions, but
getting caught. Like, I mean, the very last
time, if you remember, there was an l
there was an intelligence asset that was caught
on camera
speaking with people, and there there's more than
one example. Taiwan, for example. We caught them
being there. There was an example from I
mean, I could go on forever. The point
is that we're all very aware that our
governments surreptitiously manipulate foreign policy. And even the
people that lie to you on social media
about why that's not the case, I'd argue
most of them know they're lying to you,
and it's just a team play.
But so we're in a position where we've
watched Israel
push for years,
for decades
about Iran being the world sponsor of at
a point when that might have been sold
to some people, world state sponsor, the leading
state sponsor of terrorism. And I make this
point every time. It's just becoming tiresome
that you could take every argument they make
at face value and compare it to, you
know, most of it being false, if not
entirely,
and compare it to what we can prove,
not the majority, but we can prove what
Israel and US have done in the world.
Just those two alone
pales in comparison.
I'm talking about what they claim, what their
what the reality is about Iran. And I'm
not in any way saying Iran, good guy,
US, bad guy. You know I don't think
that. I think all the government should be
questioned. It's more about what you can prove,
what the facts are, what they're truly trying
to accomplish, what the outcome is.
And what we can see is they've lied
their entire our entire existence about what they're
trying to do to the world. And in
almost every way,
doing that thing. Of course, almost always saying,
well, it's because they started it or they
did it first, or we have to do
this to
stop what they may do next. Preemptive strikes.
And then you look around and you go,
okay. Well, where's the evidence that Iran is
doing any of the things you claim you're
doing? Well, they were funding Hamas. You mean
the Hamas that Israel was funding that we
can all prove and talk about now? But
not to get into that. Nuanced as always.
It doesn't mean Hamas, x, y, and z.
The point though is you can make those
allegations and stand back and look right in
the face of the allegation and know right
then they're lying. And it all just kinda
continues forward. Or the Houthis
who stood out so far as being the
one element, like, seemingly in the entire world
willing to stand up for international law for
the good right or wrong thing to stop
Israel for, you know, in regard to, to
Gaza.
But you're there, the terrorists were supposed to
stop them from supporting?
Or
the Houthis or excuse me, on Hezbollah in
in Lebanon,
a movement that has risen because of what
they're doing. I mean, you could make the
points about almost every one of the countries
we're discussing. We just went over talk, talking
about,
Rapid Support Forces and any number of these
groups that have been created because of their
belligerent foreign policy. Now I digress. You can
go on in a thousand directions about what
The US has done to the world, what
Israel has done through The US to the
world.
Iran being bombed the way it just was
and the way that it started
was built on nothing but absolute dishonesty.
And the craziest part is that the entirety
of this country, in majority sense, seems to
be very, very well aware of that. And
the point that I always come back around
to on this is that if we know
that and I'm not talking about polls. I'm
talking about just using your common sense and
looking at what major people on every side
of the conversation are saying. And mo I've
never seen a more unpopular war, and I
mean that. And with that, we still have
this happening. So, there's two things to take
away from that most importantly.
So, democracy, if we could just laugh that
out the window, if we're gonna pretend that
the vast majority can want something or not
want something and they can go, We don't
care, and do it anyway. Number two is
that you have to genuinely ask yourself why
Trump would do that. And it's not about
Trump alone.
It's about our government and always the the
forever point. So, I mean, really, just you
could make a you point to a date
when I argue this started. But in our
existence, the reality of how our government has
always operated, which is that it is being,
at the very least, influenced by a foreign
power. And I mean, like, to the point
of, like, surreptitiously, like, manipulating policy
to the point of possible outright control. And
I think Americans are genuinely asking this question.
But if you can look at what he
did, look at how popular it is, look
at how it makes him look bad, look
at how it hurts his chances in the
midterms, look at every single point you would
argue is good politics,
as much as that is a dirty word
to me, and then go, why would he
do this then?
I think you know the answer to that,
guys. I think the entire country is very
uncomfortably coming to terms with what this shows
us. And so what we're gonna go through
today is the reality of that,
the reality of what just happened in Iran,
the lies
bubbling over through the whole thing, and some
really strange anomalies on top of all of
it. For example, it's being reported that the
video that was put out and widely shared
of Donald Trump
announcing what happened, the eight minute video, is
apparently artificial intelligence.
Apparently, it's a deep fake,
or they're lying to you, or Graca is
lying, or it happened and it was just
because he was tired that night, or it
means nothing, or it means everything. Apparently, this
is not some small part of the story.
But I'm wondering, is it even important to
include? Is it meant to distract from the
reality of their shockingly illegal actions in Iran?
Because shouldn't that be the only story in
in being con discussed?
They broke the law, guys.
Well, congress hasn't done yes. Yes. We know.
They are bad.
Still doesn't mean they didn't break the law.
Right? So was there congressional approval? No. Okay.
Is there supposed to be? Yes. Did they
get it? No. Did they bomb? Yes. So
that's a crime. Right? No. Congress hasn't
no. Yes. The answer is yes. Then you
can explain why you think that Congress should
have done this or why they haven't done
that, but but they broke the law. And,
yeah, so did Biden, so did Bush, so
did Obama. But so are we gonna go,
who cares because that?
And let the government continue to tailspin, continue
to be stolen? The reality is they broke
the law. As I've always said over the
years, my god, forest for the trees, guys.
That's a crime right there. A major massive
international violation, and we have to care about
that, whether it's Trump or Biden or anybody
else. And now they're gonna keep pushing forward
despite most Americans not wanting this,
and this is gonna get very dangerous. Now
the AI part of this might mean that
there's more to the story if that's actually
the reality. Is Kamini dead?
One side claims yes, one side claims no.
Some people are claiming Netanyahu has fled the
country, and he's being turned away from certain
places. We'll go through all this today. To
me, it's just crazy where we are with
the design
of how
unfocused everything is. That's the mainstream alternative media.
Let's just name it what it is, guys.
That is the anomaly. What we were doing
around this before, there's always misinformation. There's always
been jack dumb people out there getting it
wrong or manipulative people just to get clicks
and shares or people who just like to
watch the world burn. I don't know what
you call all of that, But they're out
here deliberately and, I mean, I actually genuinely
think what's happening with the mainstream alternative media
is design. I don't I don't think these
these jackals even know that they're involved in
it. They're they seem to be able to
barely tie their shoes, but they're being chosen,
I think, through some kind of intelligence manipulation.
The way that these stories are coming out,
the way that the lies are coming out
I mean, it gets all so abstract, but
it's just nonstop,
relentless lies on top of the story.
So I wanna go through this as best
I can and look at what we can
prove
and try our best to keep in our
mind that this, like and this may sound
crazy, and I don't even think this is
the reality. But consider in our minds that
maybe all of this is false. Maybe none
of it is happening. I don't think that.
But, I mean, keep that kind of thought
in your mind because that's genuinely where we
are. And if that makes you uncomfortable, then,
like, that's just too bad. That's the way
the world is operating today. You know that
they're out there trying to deceive you. They're
putting out false information for the sole purpose
of just to muddy the waters, or some
cases, to convince you a different thing is
happening. But we have to start asking ourselves
this in every situation
and then not assuming, but then going back
to the original, right back to the core,
what we can prove, and let the rest
of it flail.
Consider it, but focus on the facts. Now
what I wanna start with here is a
couple of quick things that are gonna get
buried by all of this.
And and that point being,
one, I want you to look at these
these articles that we're gonna probably revisit next
week or whenever this goes away or just
the pipe tapers down. But then think about
that point in and of itself. The bombing,
the the, you know, the let's just call
it, like, the Netanyahu ploy, which is quite
literally what people in Israel, like, the media.
His critics his critics, as well as his
allies, will tell you he just starts wars
in order to politically benefit himself. Maybe it's
because he's about to go to prison, which
he's been indicted and about to go to
prison for, like, a decade,
or because he wants to distract from something
that's unpopular or because he wants momentum for
a certain war that's not popular.
This is his tactic that is so well
documented. I mean, I'm jokingly calling it that,
but that's the reality. So think about that
from Trump's perspective.
As much as you may not want to
admit it, if you're on his side, whatever
that means, he is very unpopular right now,
both from his side and everybody else. He's
been tailspinning support. He's losing in regard to
I mean, everywhere I can see. He's getting
called out for things, the Epstein files,
and you bomber on. Now let's be clear.
That's always been something they've wanted to do,
or at least the whatever's controlling US policy
and whatever, you know, that whatever that thing
is, that's what they've been trying to accomplish
as far as I can see my entire
life. Three seconds for a bomb. Right?
So consider that this all might be even
though they wanted this in effort to sort
of drown out what I argue is a
very vulnerable
government. They're in a very vulnerable position right
now, or rather power structure that is using
our government to control us.
Now
this is a really interesting interview that I
was like, I I went into this with
the expectation that she's an expert on this,
and I wanted to get her insight on
where we're at, you know, where we're at
with this, what Trump's doing, and how this
may affect other you know, how it synergistically
works with other things. And I mean, you
know, she is such an expert on this,
and it really does blow me away. Like,
what my point in saying that is in
this interview is going, wow. Like, the the
the depth of knowledge that she's getting into
and the the things that she just connects
it to. And and, you know, I don't
even wanna try to explain it right now.
It's stuff that I'm barely able to, know,
trust me. You're gonna wanna watch this. Because
she tykes talks about glyphosate and the connection
to things that go deeper than just, oh,
it's hurting you because of a byproduct.
Potentially,
by design.
And and very worth that consideration. And I'll
tell you right now that she seems to
think that either Trump or RFK Junior are,
you know, working through a difficult difficult situation
or are doing this for the long term
positive. I told her I disagreed with that,
but we see the problem, and we both
agree on that. And that the the right
path is not to do what the administration
is currently doing.
Now I also wanna include this one that
Derek put out today
really, really well done. And I'm just it's
unfortunate this is gonna get buried by what's
going on. Biotech and pesticide corporations are, quote,
winning under Trump's second administration,
and it is scathing.
You most of you probably already know this,
but the reality of how I mean,
for example, the Bayer, the right to know
article we just went over, showing you the
Bayer administration or rather the well, pretty much
the Bayer company being
just
taking control of this administration, it would seem,
in a lot of ways like Obama Citibank.
But then the larger point that he goes
through on this is how it seems not
just Trump, as you know, but a larger
all of government kind of thing. And that
this is a bigger problem than you may
realize,
if you're not watching the show that is.
So all that aside,
pretty much one topic today, guys. And a
lot of different parts around all of it.
Now I started with this clip.
I just think it's insane to think about
this with Charlie Kirk. Right? I mean, it
may seem like a I mean, I don't
think this should be regarded as a small
point because it's I I I will, of
course, include our discussion about this that, you
know, the the was Israel involved in Charlie
Kirk's death? Let's look at the facts. And
this was, September 2025. Now this doesn't include
anything that came up after that, which was
a ton.
Candace Owens and Turning Point USA admitting the
thing
the incredible story of how many things were
involved with
his mysterious death,
the timing afterward and the lack of investigation.
I mean, finding out that the FBI basically
held it up by twenty four hours. I
mean, it's just over the top, guys. My
point is the evidence at this moment before
all the rest of it. And a lot
of it was due to Candace and showing
you the in inside text communications,
like, that Turning Point did acknowledge were real,
where he was telling you exactly what we're
seeing today, that Iran was a problem and
it Zionism was driving us there and Trump
was being played,
and now he's dead.
And I'll like I said, I there was
a lot a lot that I disagreed with
him on. And in fact in fact, I
felt he was very partisan,
but I actually have come to the conclusion
based on all of this that he was
trapped, you know, whether, you know, played the
game like a lot of them do, but
he did seem that he did care about
a lot of this stuff. But at the
end of the day, the Zionism point, I
think, opened his eyes to what we are
saying. And he realized alarmingly that the Zionism
part was not same as Judaism or Israel
and recognized that that was a very alarming
influence on Trump
and tried to stop that, if you remember.
And he tried to tell him, and Trump
got angry. His Zionist influencers and funders
threatened him publicly and personally. Candace showed all
of this. And he was very nervous about
all of this, very uncomfortable,
and was influencing his audience, which was literally
the battleground audience for Israel influence in this
country, which is, by the way, pretty much
the most important country in the global influence
for Israel. And they were on a knife's
edge one of the most vulnerable parts in
their entire existence, and he was starting to
go, I think they're lying to you. As
you can show a 100 clips like that,
like the one I played, where he's telling
you, we're not gonna listen to you this
time, and then he got killed.
You can decide for yourself how that went
down. The timing of that is very interesting
and very relevant. But thinking about what he's
saying and the interest of that,
right now, like like, Bonnie using him to
say, we're gonna censor you because hate speech
and just knowing they're using him. And think
about what he was saying as this is
just him saying again, they're pushing us to
go to war with Iran. That's Israel. We
all know this, guys. Israel has been doing
this for years. And remember, they're the ones
telling you, this is not regime change. We're
just trying to help Iranians, but now we
want regime change. Right? They're laughing at you
because they'll literally tell you they wanna change
the power, but then tell you it's not
about regime change. Remember how many times we
told you regime change is coming and they
go, you guys are conspiracy theories. Here we
are. Now this should not be one of
those I told you so kind of situations,
but you have to understand that there's a
point of demonstrating our value for anybody
that was correctly seeing this. But let's be
clear on top of that.
This has been one of the most obvious
things in the entire conversation for ten years
and has not even been remotely secret, but
yet weirdly the corporate conversation acted like it
wasn't the reality and its mainstream played their
role too, alternative.
But my point is that for those coming
out going, I told you, we knew it
was gonna happen, and so did literally everybody.
So make sure you understand that. But it's
not about knowing that this was coming because
let's not let's be honest.
They were telling you it was coming. They
were signaling they were gonna do this. Iran
better do something or we're gonna bomb Iran.
So it wasn't very insightful to see that
this was coming. But it was insightful to
understand the reason that it was happening and
why it's being driven and how they're manipulating
that to get here. Because they've threatened this
many times over the years why it's now
different.
I think it's because Trump's in position, and
I think it's because Israel has more influence
over this certain
circumstance than they ever have in history.
And that's Trump, but it's not just Trump.
It's about the circumstance of our government.
So Charlie Kirk, very relevant in all of
this. And as Max Blumenthal points out, this
is what Charlie Kirk said in 2025.
Keep up keep the pressure up. Regime change
in Iran would be a catastrophe,
where he cites Nikki Haley, who is screaming
about regime change
in Iran. And Max says, I think it's
safe to say Trump and Israel are relieved
that Charlie Kirk is not able to speak
up today for their catastrophic
regime change war. Zia chimes in and says,
the majority of Americans, and his opinion I
agree, or
the person's opinion.
The majority of Americans are with Charlie Kirk's
position in this point. We don't want more
wars, and that's been the case whatever war
for as far as I've been doing this.
They've never been popular, but yet they go
that happens every time. And every time, you
get the same screening, Alice Jones, Jenny, John
Benny Johnson types that
justify whatever it is that needs to happen.
Peace is what the world demands. I agree.
He says, I believe this war will not
end how they have planned. None of the
wars so far have ended well for The
US. None. Yeah. But that's a that's a
sign of a dying empire.
So let's also point out a few things
before we get into the meat of this.
One, two
two one of the the main point in
this all is the is the fact that
Israel will do it at once regardless,
no matter what. That's kind of the idea
here. Because I'm not gonna say Trump in
any way is innocent in any of this.
The US government is complicit. But
Trump, whether he was
consciously letting this happen or just was along
for the ride is a very valid thing
to consider.
Now let's not forget. When he was into
this position, we you know, this recent administration,
Miriam Adelson literally gave him the money needed
to to to gain this position
in order to get West Bank annexation. It
was very public and very clear. This is
from Harath, leading Israeli newspaper. Trump is desperate
for Miriam Adelson's cash, her condition, West Bank
annexation.
Right. And he's even jokingly said that in
their discussions, and then people brush it off.
Right? Well, Trump came out just to make
sure we all knew on the tenth and
said, well, I oppose. I oppose
the annexation that, by the way, was literally
undergoing as he said that and had been
going on his entire administration. And the last
ten years before that, and the year before
that. None of them care. They're all ridiculous.
They love Trump, at the very least,
I mean, what's funny to me is that
they he he
Pompeo, the last administration, was the one that
was like, well, it's not inconsistent.
Yes. It was though. It was entirely legal,
and it's been that way the entire time.
Then it went back. Now Trump is saying
he opposes it again, even though he allowed
them to do it. He this is cowardice,
if you wanna be honest about it. You
can either own the position because it's difficult,
or you can just lie and blame everybody
else and always deflect and always hide and
always blame your underlings. That's not what leaders
do.
But the point is, that's not what's happening
anyway. So I wanna make it very clear
that Donald Trump can come out and say
that
as if it matters, that I I don't
want them to do that and Israel doesn't
care because they will do what they want
regardless. In fact, I argue Trump is saying
that just to hope he wins some minor
points with his own team knowing he won't
call it out anyway. Here, Haaretz from the
twenty third. And this is directly from,
what's his name? Amichai, how do you say
it, Elayahu?
And he's the far the minister in the
government,
reoccupying
what is already ours, and post a picture
of them put and that you've seen him
before. We've talked about him. Post and he's
pretty prominent, posting an Israeli flag in West
Bank. So this is what they do.
And they're just demonstrating. Netanyahu said it. Samotra
just said it. Ben Gavira said it. We're
taking back Netanyahu. We're taking back Gaza. We're
taking back the West Bank, which, by the
way, they're already, right now, reinstituting that in
Gaza.
Right now. Because why not? Right? Because everyone's
distracted. Let's just make Gaza even worse for
them. That's literally what they're doing right now.
Well,
we saw the board. Peace. Right? Where Trump
initiates his peace board, which is supposed to
be essentially the new global order.
That's what this is. That's even what, crazy
enough, it's being criticized for from the other
side of the order. So what we're always
showing you is the elitist versus the bad
elitist or however you wanna look at it.
None of them are trying to free you
from the globalist system, despite what Alex is
flailing about over there. They want you in
their globalist system. And it's just sad to
watch them try to make sense of a
globalist dynamic like the Board of Peace or
the Gaza technocratic city or every other or
his new, WHO proposal. It's just this is
how embarrassing that must be for them. But
as Liam McCullough points out,
at every turn,
and not just this point, but all of
them, by the way, every administration,
Israeli officials have turned up their noses in
this case at Trump's peace efforts
openly, by the way.
Ask to fund this? Nope. We don't wanna
fund any of it. Even though they were
the only one allowed to have a membership
without paying for it. It says when The
US was negotiating with Iran, Israel bombed the
negotiators last time. Remember that? They did. As
they claimed, they were about to find peace,
then they bombed into the cover of negotiations.
Or like when they brought Soleimani
under the guise of negotiations into the Iraq
airport and killed him. That's what Trump did.
Yep. That's very illegal, but he bad guy,
so we supposed to not care.
I guess we're just that ridiculous. Right? And
it says when Trump struck a hostage deal
with Hamas,
Israel broke the ceasefire over 1,500
times. If we're still pretending like we don't
know that, how embarrassing for you. When Trump
created the National Committee for the Administration of
Gaza, Israel blocked the committee members from entering
Gaza. Remember that story that they all tried
to pretend wasn't happening? When Trump created the
Board of Peace, they refused to pay,
and yet they're still involved.
Who is funding whom here?
Right? Think about it.
The money is being used by it. I
mean, that that's the reality, guys. This is
going in one direction.
So think about the reality of how these
things happen even in the face of Trump
looking stupid, being embarrassed, and not getting what
he wants. Israel does what it wants regardless.
So think about that with Iran today.
Now, also, now you know what I think
about polls. It's just one of many,
but listen to your own Republican influencers over
there. If that's for the side you're on,
they'll tell you this is unpopular, guys. Seven
out of 10 voters do not want The
US to take military action against Iran. It
seems to be a hell of a lot
more than that if you look at the
real picture. This is from this year.
Americans left, right, and aware of the ridiculousness
and all of it do not want war
with Iran or any war for that matter.
That's why he pretended
to be the peace president and the board
of peace. Right?
It's all just a show, guys. It is
all theatrics.
We all used to remember that when it
was somebody else on the other side or
the other team in power. But we some
people just can't seem to see past the
person they want.
Now here are some other examples.
Huckabee
from this shockingly religious Zionist administration that seemed
to be putting the Zionist extremist religious interests
over
The US interests. But hashtag America first. Right?
So as he asked in Tucker's interview whether
how much Americans think what they're what they
think matters. Right? We live in a democracy,
we're told.
That we're the living embodiment of the constituent's
will. I mean, they still like, it's just
so sad that anybody predict we can per
visually see that's not the reality in a
100 different ways. Not to say that shouldn't
be. That's a different conversation. It's just simply
is not.
But they go, yes. Of course, you matter
more than anything. But then when it comes
to the point, we'll go, well, they don't
want that, and you're doing it anyway. Okay.
Well, other factors. Okay. Well then well then,
you don't care what we think, or at
the very least, it's less important than whatever
you decide to think is your other factor.
You know what this is. And, of course,
Tucker with this whole gee golly, I don't
get it kind of thing, and it works
to some degree because he's making Huckabee look
like he's ridiculous.
Like,
how much does it matter what Americans think?
Well, it matters every bit what Americans think.
That's why Americans vote. It's why Americans have
the opportunity to have free speech. We want
them to have that. Okay. So what percentage
of Americans support a war with Iran?
I don't know. Do you know? I do.
It's I think it's around I saw the
numbers yesterday. I think it was, like, 21%.
Okay.
Is that enough to have a war with
Ron?
We don't live in a world where you
have
a poll taken to find out whether our
policy should be a particular direction because Oh,
I thought. No. Wait. Wait a minute there,
Huckabee.
You could say poll
or you could say
election.
In a material sense, it's the same thing,
isn't it? So we don't live in a
country where we ask the opinions of the
constituents and they write them down and then
we do that? What kind of world would
that be? We live in a world where
we have other things to consider. And your
opinions are not chief among them. I mean,
there's really no way to misunderstand this. That's
why this went viral.
I just think they want you to know
this to some degree right now. I mean,
I hope this is not lost to anybody.
There is no way around this. And whether
it's and the fact that it has to
be squeaked out through Tucker's show is something
that we should all be very well aware
of is a sign of the times, but
nonetheless, it's still important.
And to find out whether our policy should
be Have a war with Ron? We don't
live in a world where you have
a poll taken to find out whether our
policy should be a particular
direction because I thought I thought you just
said that we That's direct the voters. No.
We care deeply about it. But on the
other hand Uh-huh. Do we make the decisions
of foreign policy and even domestic policy based
on what the latest about what the American
people desire? Well, yeah, man. That's what you
pretend is the reality. What am I missing
here? I don't remember what sense. How if
if we're ignoring it, then in what sense
do we, quote, care deeply about it?
Well, I think we care deeply when we
see there's a threat.
No. But about America Okay.
I mean, how do you even make sense
to that statement? So what so I guess
when there's a threat. Only when there's a
threat? Or what do you mean? And who
decides whether there's a threat? So it's on
and off. Sometimes you do and sometimes you
don't care. I mean, he tracked himself ridiculously
in this. But what really shows you guys
is that when you lie about everything, I
say it all the time, you he's tracking
him trapping himself in his broken logic. The
reality is, guys, they don't care what we
think. And if pushed, that becomes very easy
to see. What he's really doing here is
what I always talk about in front of
those state department briefings or anything else.
If you ask the right questions, it's insanely
easy to make them look ridiculous because they
just waffle and turn and dismiss, and it's
easy. And that's why I often point out
there's only a very few of them that
actually do that.
Opinions. So you've got three Well, I think
we care deeply when we see there's a
threat.
No. But about Americans' opinions, so you've got
350,000,000
Americans.
Yeah. They vote. They voted in this last
election on the basis in part of the
promise no more wars. Mhmm. So now we're
about to have a war, looks like.
80% of people are against it. In that
range, let's say, 70%, but nowhere
near majority support for this war.
And it's not direct democracy, but it is
a form of democracy. It's representative democracy. The
ultimate form of democracy
in our system in a republic because we're
not a true democracy. We're a republic. Right?
It's a mediated democracy. It'll be an opportunity
for Americans to vote if they think that
we've made the wrong policy decisions. Oh, okay.
You get it? Right? So what happens is
they can do whatever they want for four
years, but it doesn't matter. We'll pretend that
we're kind of considering your opinion. And then,
yeah, go ahead and write the things down
that you like, and then we'll consider those
things, and then we'll spend four years doing
what we want. Are you are you confused?
I mean, that's that's what we all live
through. Right? In what world do we think
that what we all collectively think we write
down or what we all say out loud
in any way translates into the ideas of
these people? The reality is you have, you
know,
upper level groups of people with lots of
money and concentrated influence that they ultimately get
to decide what at least gets in their
minds,
then we still don't have any real in
insight into whether they decide. It's lobbying money
and influence and power that ultimately guide their
choices. But you think Joe at the corner
shop and you that they're,
what I want, and they go, oh, okay.
I mean, I just we can't be this
naive about the world we live in, guys.
The this is why we have monsters like
this
who do whatever they want, allow children to
be murdered and starved and and raped and
trafficked, and they just look the other way.
That's who we're dealing with. And it's not
just Huckabee, in case you're missing the point.
I personally think the president is making the
right policies. But but I guess but you
just said it matters deeply what Americans think.
And if the overall majority are against it,
in what sense does it matter? Because what
I hear is, it matters what they think,
but it it really doesn't matter what they
think because No. You take it in. You
certainly ingest that. And then when you ultimately
Once you ingest it Then you make sure
that you have You just gotta you have
goes out the other end, obviously.
Man.
I mean, it truly doesn't even need commentary,
guys. It's just it's just wildly obvious. And
there was plenty of others in there. As
I said, the same point I made last
time about that discussion
was, obviously, this was a powerful interview. There's
lots of good stuff in there, and I've
plenty of times pointed out Tucker's work that
I thought was valid and relevant. But still
consider that most every single thing you heard
this interview, you would have heard on our
show over the last ten years. I mean,
I mean, I'm gonna go ahead and say
literally everything we talked about, maybe save for
small insights that I wouldn't have been aware
of. The point, though, is that same with
anybody else covering this over the years. Now
it doesn't make it any less relevant, and
it's got reach. Great. That's why I shared
it. But still remember that. And think about
what that means in moments where they might
need to control
the way things come out when they have
to, even though they didn't want them to
in the first place.
They just being power structures. Right? Now I'll
play this again just because we played it.
It's important on this part of the conversation.
All of you guys have probably seen this
on the show many times, but it's important
to think about this, that this is not
only with what we just saw, the reality
that Israel does what it wants regardless, that
the influence there is quite self evident, But
then on top of that, that The US
over the years, because of and, actually, we
should just show this one first.
Because of the many different examples in the
over the years, I'll play this one at
the end, so I think that's a good
ending clip. But Netanyahu repeatedly, there's many compilations
of his of him pushing, one more week,
three more days, another year, and just Iran,
Iran, Iran. Or in the other compilations, also
pushing him to Iraq and also pushing him
to all the other countries. Right? It's pretty
obvious, at the very least, that he had
a hand in influencing the idea.
And then the point is that you could
see that the US government was literally gaming
out how the hell do we get to
war with Iran,
exactly how Patrick Lawson here frames it. You
guys have seen this, but if you haven't,
this might open your eyes a little bit.
The US government has long wondered how they
could, quote, get to war with Iran as
Patrick openly discusses in this Washington Institute meeting
from 2012.
This has never been about what's good for
the American people or the Iranian people for
that matter. I should have wrote that too.
But what's good for Israel
at your expense?
I frankly think that crisis initiation is really
tough,
and it's very hard for me to see
how The United States,
president can get us to war with Iran,
Which leads me to conclude that if, in
fact, compromise is not coming,
that the traditional way of America gets to
war is what would be best for US
interests.
Some people might think that mister Roosevelt wanted
to get us into World War two as
David mentioned. You may recall we had to
wait for Pearl Harbor.
Some people might think mister Wilson wanted to
get us into World War one. You may
recall he had to wait for the Lusitania
episode.
Some people might think that mister Johnson want
to send troops to Vietnam. You may recall
he had to wait for the Gulf Of
Tonkin episode.
We didn't go to war with Spain until
the USS,
until the Maine exploded.
And may I point out that mister Lincoln
did not feel he could call out the
federal army until Fort Sumter was attacked, which
is why he ordered the commander at Fort
Sumter to do exactly that thing, which the
South Carolinians had said would cause
an attack.
So if in fact, the Iranians aren't gonna
compromise,
it would be best if somebody else started
the war.
But I would just like to suggest that,
one can combine other means of pressure with
sanctions.
I mentioned that explosion
on August 17.
We could step up the pressure.
I mean, look people, Iranian submarines periodically go
down. Someday, one of them might not come
up. Who would know why?
We can do a variety of things if
we wish to increase the pressure. I'm not
advocating that, but I'm just suggesting
that, it it it it's this is not
a a either or proposition.
You know, it's just sanctions has to has
to succeed or other things.
We are in the game
of using covert means against the Iranians. We
we could get nastier than that.
You know, I don't really know how you
ignore how obvious that is. Whatever the side
or whatever your perspective, that clearly the US
government has been even if you think it
is for the, you know, the right thing
to do or the best of the a
best outcome for everybody, that they're doing it
manipulatively
to get there.
That shouldn't shock anybody. That is just their
that's their MO, guys. That is what they
do. But just to think about how long
that's been happening. And then maybe take a
step even further back and go, okay.
Are they actually telling the truth about Iran?
Are they trying to manipulate us into this
war, but for a good reason? That's usually
not the reality.
And it's just it's just hilarious to watch
people, you know, like, what I've already said
so far. Like, what have we discussed thus
far in the show that is not rooted
entirely in fact? It's just it's funny to
watch people grapple with this that are so
lost in the partisan divide that they don't
realize that they're you know, people like us
and what we're doing, and what I often
say on when I'm discussing things online, it's
like, okay. We'll keep fighting for your rights
even as you fight us. One day, maybe
you'll realize that. We're fighting for you right
now, you know, but it's just it's unfortunate.
But
half the time, you wonder whether it's about
other petty dynamics. And I think that's what
drives a lot of these politicians, guys. I
think that's what's devolved into for obvious outside
reasons. But I'll include this article from Matt
Ehret for for The Lost American Vagabond.
The greater Israel scheme and its global power
play. Global. A delusional recipe for Armageddon.
It's not a secret. They have patches with
it on. They give
discussions with it on their podiums. It's not
but yet we act like it's a fake
story because mainstream world's alternative media says so.
This is what we're talking about. This is
the globalist part of the this is their
part of the globalist agenda.
Very, very, very clear, guys.
I'll include that for you to read. It's
worth your
time. Now, also, just one last point on
this, you know, opening stuff that might well
be relevant. Here's what Comenity Media, which it
doesn't have the,
gray check, which wouldn't surprise me, but it
does state that it's the official account of
their media website English website side. I'm just
regardless, it's just worth including, so it's interesting
to think about how this might connect.
Because the reality is Iran in many ways
has been all like, because that's obviously a
good point to make is look at what
they're drowning in in the Epstein files. Right?
But it says the tip of the iceberg
iceberg of western civilization,
the Epstein files.
And and this is
the twenty sixth.
You know? Could just think about what else
might have been driving something that we're dealing
with. Now,
I put this out on the twenty seventh.
Again, this is not some major insightful point,
guys. Everybody saw this coming. But I just
wanted to make this point before it actually
came to pass. I said, if Trump, the
Trump administration takes The United States to war
with Iran or even bombs the country again
because of where we currently are,
it will be demonstrating, in my opinion, to
the world, once and for all, because this
is clearly not the first time, that the
US government, all sides of it, the US
government is under the control of Israel.
I have never seen a more universally war
a universally unpopular war in my life. Now,
as I've said before, the people in in
in, you know, my inner circle that are
good people.
And I just mean that, like, in family
or local, you know, neighbor or whatever. They
they're they're good people. And I've I've know
I know they're good people. They have good
intentions, a good heart, in my opinion, who
aren't part of some agenda, who aren't part
of some secret partisan
social media game, you know, whatever,
but yet still fall for a lot of
this stuff, who still support certain things, who
still believe Trump's doing the right, you know,
whatever. And so I always use that as
a point because I think it's important to
think about that it's not all manipulation. There
are people that just actually fall for these
things who don't you know, whatever reason.
And so even those people in, at least
in my view right now, are saying they're
done.
They're done. They're disappointed. They're upset. They're tired
because it's clear,
even the ones holding on to this point,
after Stargate,
after everything we've seen, turning back on Maha,
remove you know, spending more, growing the government,
every single double cross, and now even the
Epstein files. But now they're saying, okay. You
know? This is the it was on the
the bombing of Iran, the way it happened,
it's no way you could pretend that makes
sense.
Think about that, guys. This is I've been
saying it for months now even before that
just because I feel like I can see
it. It's been my opinion, but I think
you can verify this at this point.
They do the majority of Americans are not
on the side of the partisanship right now.
That's what I think.
Now Daniel McAdams
points to this from the twentieth.
A Trump adviser has confirmed Axios the Pentagon
has prepared multiple strikes. Now what did they
say then? Fake news. That's not true.
It turns out that it was true, at
least that they had the conversation, which then
shows you that on the twentieth, and it
seems even before that as we get to
an article in a minute, that they had
already planned this. And what does that mean,
Ryan? Well, that means that they were pretending
to have negotiations
while they were preparing to bomb them.
Just like last time, I would argue that
they never intended to have negotiations. It not
at least not whoever was actually controlling the
outcome, and I think that was Israel.
So as this remember, my point was this
was called fake news at the time. But
now we after it's happened, we know that
they were plotting this, and now even Israel's
claimed that it was planned a week before.
But on top of that,
that they had plans to focus on taking
out the leadership,
and they said fake news. Well, that's they're
claiming right now that they did. Israel's claiming
they tried to take out everybody as usual
trying to make the you know, work the
narrative for themselves while The US has probably
said don't say that. They do anyway, and
then don't care because they just get what
they want all the time. And so in
this case, I think it's important to think
about all those points and then what later
ended up happening.
And as Daniel says, this is criminal behavior.
He said this on the twentieth.
Assassinating foreign leaders will come back to haunt
The United States and every American as well.
They unleash the whirlwind. It's also against the
law, by the way. There's no legal justification.
Like, even if you claim he's a terrorist
from our judicial system, from the international law,
they're supposed to be arrested. They're supposed to
be charred. Evidence is supposed to be presented.
So too was it to happen with Osama
bin Laden, guys.
Just because we act like they didn't need
to because bad guy, because we were that
naive at the time, does not change the
reality. Doesn't change it with Trump in bombing
Iran. It just is the real they're breaking
the law. Every moment that we let those
things go away without any kind of acknowledgment,
whether there's accountability or not, gives them one
more step in that direction.
Just unilateral
authoritarianism. They do whatever they want. They write
whatever they want. Shut up. You're not in
charge. That's the world we live in. That's
their CEO run country that they wanna create
for you.
Now important to understand that they had been
very, very, very clear about not wanting a
nuclear weapon. Now remember, this is important to
the larger conversation because I'm not saying that
the US government believed them,
But here's the difference. So this is the
foreign minister
involved in negotiations. He says, pillared on the
understandings forged in the previous round about the
ongoing,
you know, feigning peace negotiations from US and
Israel. And Iran was involving, and they said
they will resume talks with The US and
Geneva with a determination to achieve a fair
and equitable deal in the shortest possible time.
So on February 24,
he says our fundamental
convictions and by the way, this has been
reconfirmed
by the foreign minister of Oman from any
number of people involved in this process.
He says our our our convictions are crystal
clear.
Iran
will under no circumstances
ever develop a nuclear weapon.
Neither will the Iranians ever forego our right
to harness the dividends of peaceful nuclear technology
for our people. Now what's interesting is it's
being reported by the Oman
foreign minister, just to make sure I got
the title right,
that they also had then post this discussion,
post the twenty fourth, had then agreed to
say we're we will forego all enrichment, which
is insane for a thousand reasons. Not even
getting into my opinion about whether any of
it should be happening, but in the sense
of what countries are allowed to do and
what that then affords them and what the
power they can generate from a nuclear civilian
program, but they were claiming they were good
to get rid of all of it. I
think that's what triggered the attack
Because they were finally willing to go, you
know what? We'll give you every single thing
you want. I think they almost they pretty
much called their bluff because Israel didn't want
any deal. That's why they've always sabotage these
deals. They want the illusion of peace so
they can blame the other side.
So, now that we know this, and at
least, look, to be clear, that they expressed
that. And, guys, they've been expressing that
as long as I've been doing this. But
you could say they're lying. Right? Of course,
they could be lying. But you see, here's
the point.
Trump
didn't say we don't believe them. He said
they refuse to say we will never have
a nuclear weapon. That's a flatly false that's
lies, guys. They know that's a lie. Trump
knows that's a lie unless he's somehow being
kept out of the loop in his own
conversation.
So
when they post that, that means they're already
setting the tone. Here's the actual post.
Iran refuses to say we will never have
a nuclear weapon. Just in case it's not
clear, he's literally saying
Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. Right
there on the twenty fourth. Then, on the
twenty fifth, they post this. They refuse to
say it. Okay. You get the point? So
the reality is they're pretending they're not saying
it. Even though they're saying it and not
going, well, we just don't believe you. That's
a very different conversation.
So on top of that,
where was there was, no. That was it.
I'm sorry. I just said not only were
the Iranians very clear about not developing a
nuke despite Trump claiming the opposite, they were
in fact in the process, that's the next
point we're gonna get into, of formalizing
that very agreement.
Again, which by the way was the JCPOA
that Trump violated, that they never broke. That
was just same thing again, by the way,
actually with more restrictions.
But when Israel attacked using the US military,
and I think to stop this very deal.
Of course, secretary of war speaks up and
says, the Iranian regime had their chance,
yet they refused to make a deal. Are
you kidding me? Like, I'm Peg said probably
can't even doesn't even know what he's talking
about. He's just repeating what Israel or somebody
told him. But the regard regardless, that's that's
where that's not true. And now they're suffering
the consequences. Oh, wait. So the consequences of
not accepting the deal you offer is killing
children,
bombing their country?
In what world does an agreement mean you
do what I say or we're gonna bomb
you? That's not a negotiation.
That's a strong arming threats. But you see,
this is what Trump does.
If you don't do this, we're gonna do
everything we've ever done ever in history and
then go, why won't you make a deal?
Well, you just threatened to murder everybody, man.
Did did maybe nuclear. I don't know what
you meant by that. That's insane. Do you
think Trump would just cow down and say,
yes. Fine. Let's make a deal. If Iran
says we'll kill you if you don't make
a deal?
I mean, that's we the guy, I don't
I don't feel like we ever even need
to verbalize these points because what we're dealing
with is a bunch of people who are
not stupid and then a bunch of dishonest
people at the highest level of the conversation
who just gaslight everybody for their own agenda.
The point is they did make a deal
before, and they tried to make another one
here, and you guys screwed them over. That's
the provable reality here because it's all coming
out. We're gonna get to that right here
with him speaking publicly with local media or
rather, western media about how that's what happened,
and then how he was very disappointed about
how they chose to double cross
Iran in this conversation. But yet, they're from
a different country and they're brown, so I
guess their opinion doesn't matter to the western
Trump supporting audiences. I don't know.
Okay. Before we get to that and the
bombing of the school and the many other
weird variables to this entire conversation,
This is
weird as hell to me, and I don't
even know where to place this right now.
Now I was gonna play most of this,
and maybe we will. But now because of
this new element, I'm not even sure if
I wanna play all of this. Now here's
the thoughts on my mind, just in case
you've missed the opening. There's there's reports right
now.
Where was it? Right here.
Right here.
Hold on. Sorry. Here we go.
Of this video being AI. Now I'm just
gonna throw this out now before we get
to it so you know why I'm I
don't wanna, you know, make sure it's clear
that this one is being reported by this
person, a security consultant, so take it for
what it is, claiming and, you know, so
somewhat,
I've this has been going on around this
this person before.
Then Grok even says, yes. It's an AI
generated video, a deepfake.
And on top of that, there's a lot
of other I'm not saying I even from
from my perspective, Grok is a coin flip.
I've seen Elon lie about through this. I've
seen it lie to me until I basically
force it to tell me the truth, like,
many times.
Nonetheless, it still has a value in regard
to the partisan conversation. I've said this many
times. And that is that people who are
partisan might choose to, you know, consider these
points when otherwise not from the other side
or whatever. But think about this.
What would that mean?
So let's watch some of this. Now what
and her point was that there's no visible,
like, breathing patterns or whatever. You could decide.
And maybe that's all to distract. Maybe that's
a this is my whole point of missing
the forest for the trees. If we're all
fixated on whether or not this was a
we're missing the fact that they literally
unequivocally
just broke the law, and they should be
charged for that right now.
You see my point? But so what's weird
about this is that, you know, as as
we were discussing before is
it's possible that this is just something that
they do. Has nothing to do with whether
it's some trick or a ploy, but they
use, like, I'm tired. Just do do because
we know, and I've been saying this for
years, guys. We're way past this line. They
have the tech to do this, and we
wouldn't even know any better, which apparently seems
to be the case.
And maybe that's just because he didn't feel
like doing it. Maybe because they had it
all ready, and they wanted this video to
be out and exact and ready the moment
that it happened in the middle of the
night, which is for The US side of
the West. It was, like, midnight one, something
like that, as I as I understand it.
So or
so maybe it means nothing. Maybe it's just
because they do that these days, which should
be considered with his old auto pen Biden.
Maybe he's too old. I mean, who knows?
Right? On top of that though or secondarily,
we should wonder whether this is something that
means more.
If this is genuinely a fake video, does
that mean there's more to this that's fake?
Well, there's been a whole lot of that
floating around, which again is I don't even
find that to be an insightful point. They
fake stuff all the time. And, you know,
the wondering whether or not this all might
be fake is not some huge like, I've
been seeing people float that as an idea
like it's some, like, next gen you know,
like, their five d chest layer. I'm like,
guys, whether they've lied to us is, like,
the most one zero one conspiracy theory mindset.
Either way, it's still interesting to consider that
if they fake this, what is it that
mean the entire thing is like a wag
the dog? Does it mean that Trump is
not around and they're lying about him being
involved in this? Did Trump get killed? And,
you know, like, what is going on? These
are all just things that you wonder because
why would they fake this? Now I wanna
be clear, though. I don't think it's in
our interest to just go down that rabbit
hole without evidence.
Right now, I haven't even truly verified other
than those things that this is in fact
an AI video. So all that being said,
let's look at some of this and and
consider what this means. I just thought that
was so fascinating because
it is something oh, and the third thing
this is the third thing I wanted I'm
glad I remembered this. Like I said with
the image conversation, and I wanna really stress
that I don't think we should assume this
is even the case. It could be some
secondary manipulation to get us all distracted. Right?
That
it's possible on top of all of it
that it's some sort of AI altered part
of the video.
Because these people are pretty vain. They're pretty
narcissistic. And I said this about the the
image stuff where somebody you can go on
your phone. Right? And you can, like, oh,
let me get rid of that glare. Right?
And you can brush out the the glare
in the sun or whatever.
And if you run it through an AI
thing, it'll say the image has been altered.
It will tell you that. And then people
use that to assume that it's all fake
when in reality, it's just simply altered,
but it is a real fit real image.
That's a good important question to ask if
you ask, is this AI or is this
altered? Ask later, though, is the image actually
there somewhere in the world, or does it
actually exist besides that? Then and then maybe
they'll give you the answer. But the point
is that this could be them sort of
brushing up Trump's face because it was late
at night, and that would, you know, worth
considering that. It could mean nothing. Anyway, so
let's watch this. And I just simply said,
now that they have bombed Iran,
for the remainder of the Americans that were
debating this,
Trump's policy just became very clearly Israel first.
Because nobody wants this, and this is not
beneficial to The US
at all.
Short time ago,
the United States military began
major combat
operations
in Iran.
You know, one quick point to point out,
actually.
I've never seen and maybe I'm just not
thinking too much on this. He's got shadows
across his arms.
In what world would they do that?
You tell me that they've this is they
always film in these locations. You're gonna tell
me they've got things in front of the
lights that put shadows on his coat?
Doesn't that seem strange?
Maybe I'm overthinking it. I don't know. That
just seems like a really that's like a
faux plot, like whoever put this together, or
maybe they're just incompetent,
like I'm always pointing out. Anyway, I'll let
it play out a little bit. Just some
of it anyway.
Our objective is to defend the American people
by eliminating
imminent threats from the Iranian
regime,
a vicious
group of very hard,
terrible people.
Very, very objective. Right? Like, just bad people
that we don't want in the position. You
know? Okay. Doesn't you don't get to object
decide who are good and bad in regard
to, you know, the the just removing somebody
from position. But I'll try to forego my
comments just because it's always the same stuff.
But
he's just gonna go with the evil terrorist,
boogeyman, bad guys.
And what they ultimately did was kill a
lot of innocent people. It's menacing activities directly
endanger The United States, our troops, our bases
overseas. How? How? Name one example.
Literally a single example, and I will I
will I will admit I'm wrong. One example.
Show me one example where they're threatening anybody
that in other than you stepping up on
their doorstep and saying, don't do this or
do this or we'll respond, and then all
of a sudden their reaction to you is
what's causing risk.
I genuinely would love somebody to tell me
what they think. Where is an example of
Iran threatening anybody anywhere?
Not some abstract, well, they fund them, therefore,
and we know they're doing this. Let's just
even say like I said before, let's just
say they fund literally everybody.
Why would they then still be v responsible
for everybody's actions? Unless you're proving that they
are guiding their actions. The US funds people
all over the world. If they're therefore then
responsible for everyone they fund, well, The US
is guilty of genocide. Oops. That's actually the
truth. Or they're guilty of any number of
thing. But you see how that works? The
point, though, is you could actually step it
back and realize that they're not doing what
they're claiming. They're allies with these groups.
I don't think you can give an example.
I'd love someone to challenge me on that.
Where are they doing this anywhere in the
world that is, you know, destabilizing
entire countries and then reaping the benefits? Or
removing people from power and then splitting it
up and balkanizing it. You know, that's what
The US has been doing our entire lives
all over the world.
And our allies throughout the world.
For forty seven years, the Iranian regime has
chanted death to America and waged
They've said death to the American government. Yes.
That's true and easily proven.
Very, very, very, very clear. And they'll say
that themselves.
But, of course, when they when the US
government translates that for you into English, of
course, they just don't include that part.
An unending
campaign of bloodshed and mass murder
targeting The United States, our troops, and the
innocent people in many, many countries. Yeah. Where's
that again?
Oh, do you example? None? Zero? What country?
Oh, yeah. Okay. Keep going.
Among the regime's very first acts was to
back a violent takeover of the US embassy
in Tehran,
holding dozens of American hostages for four hundred
and forty four days. I mean, we're just
going back to the classics here. I mean,
you have to understand the reality
of all the things that have driven to
this I mean, the illegal overthrow of their
country, the destabilization
of their entire country during that time for
anybody other than the elitist to the top,
and then the absolute never ending
chaos that they're trying to cause since they
took the country back in '79
and just caused chaos, destruction of their money.
I mean, and this is all proven. They
admit this. They tell you that they did
that. They the Senate and everybody else is
bragged about doing that.
You're destroying their country. And so if you
wanna talk about the embassy or any other
points, you've been, intelligence wise, infiltrating, attacking, causing
chaos like Patrick Clawson told you. We could
get a little bit nastier about that. That's
what they're doing. And so then you got
these situations that they ultimately create. Now look.
I've never said Iran is not capable of
terrible things. They're a government.
Call them accountable like you would any government.
All of them are capable of hurting their
own people and killing foreign if they commit
a crime, charge them with a crime. But
the idea that when you are constantly trying
to cake over their country that they take
action against you as a crime is is
insane to me.
Over and over and over. I mean, it's
like Libya and Gaddafi or any other point
you could make. It never stops. And again,
I actually don't even think I need to
make these points.
I think it's so spectacularly clear to most
Americans that Iran is not even remotely close
to what Israel's doing, and yet here we
are. That alone is a part that even
average people can't ignore.
In 1983,
Iran's proxies carried out the
marine barracks bombing in Beirut that killed 241
American military personnel. I I mean, which you
know what's embarrassing about all these things despite
the
the actual breadth of the story that they
choose not to include is the fact that
they're going through the examples they can give
you and leaving out the 75,000
examples in between that where they're doing all
the same things or where they're do
lying and creating them or false flagging or
regime changing all throughout that. You know, again,
like I said in '79 or every other
year since then or the six times they've
tried to overdo the country since I've been
doing this. And people die every single time.
You know what I mean? Like, it just
becomes and that's all on top of the
fact that whether this is even him. It
just it causes a whole another level to
it.
In 2000,
they knew and were probably involved with the
attack on the USS
Cole. Oh, oh, they knew and they're probably.
Great. Great. Good information. Let's talk about the
USS Liberty or the many different examples. I
mean, the Cole was actually an important conversation
that you haven't looked into that we've talked
about before. The reality though is that every
single one of these examples has a deeper
point to the story. Many died.
Iranian forces killed and maimed hundreds of American
service members in Iraq. The regime's proxies
That was a that was a cut right
there.
Killed and maimed hundreds of American service members
in Iraq. The regime Yeah. That's a cut,
which would suggest not AI.
That if I'm gonna, you know, the opinion,
but maybe that's on purpose. But, again, now
we're talking about Iraq. You made the illegal
invasion of Iraq that everyone in the world
knows was an illegal justification based on the
lies of weapons of mass destruction.
And so they defend your invasion? It's the
same point for everyone of these samples, guys,
and now they're terrorists?
We just can't be this ridiculous. I don't
believe most people are.
Proxies
have continued to launch countless attacks against American
forces
stationed in the Middle East in recent years.
Nope. As What he's actually referring to, and
it's the only example I can even think
of, is the PMU in Iraq, which is
a group that has been responding to their
illegal occupation of Iraq,
and that they continue to bomb in response
to anything Iran does. And it's just this
insane, ridiculous it's not even a circle. It
doesn't even make sense. But, yes, there at
one point, there was actually a support from
Iran in regard to being an ally, but
that has long since changed because of the
group's changing over, I don't know, ten years.
But that they just they just that's all
they've got, guys. From there forward, it's all
a bunch of Houthis and Hamas and all
the lies they spin.
Well, as US naval and commercial vessels and
international
shipping lands,
It's been mass terror.
Yes. That's been mass terror? I don't know.
Maybe the ongoing you two year genocide,
the raping and torturing,
the bombarding of other countries, the destabilization of
Libya and Syria and Iraq. And, I mean,
the that's not pure terror. The fact that
they were
muscling ships in the in in Strait Of
Hormuz. Right? I mean, did they bomb them?
No. No. No. They didn't do that. They
just, you know, they have a little bit
of little kerfuffle.
Terrorism.
I mean, think about what we're talking about
here. I mean, I'm just I'm like, again,
like I said, I'm just tired
tired of even trying to pretend like anybody
thinks this is real.
And, again, I honestly I was gonna play
it all the way through, but because of
that that anomaly, I'm not it
it he speaks in absolutes,
calls on the Iranian people to rise up
and overthrow their government. I mean, can you
even imagine if this was Iran saying this
about this country, which I've never heard them
do?
But it's okay because he's a good guy
though, so it's okay. Right? They can literally
rape and murder and torture, but they just
gotta yell freedom.
And it's okay because they yelled the right
word, and so they're the good guy. Right?
Here is what the foreign minister of Oman
had to say. Within hours of Oman's foreign
minister saying on the twenty seventh to twenty
eighth that, quote, Iran agreed to zero enrichment
uranium stockpiling.
Israel immediately bombs Iran. The US promptly joins.
So you could argue that Israel just took
action and The US didn't followed suit because
they either felt like they had, excuse me,
like they had to or that they felt
like if they didn't, that that would look
then make them look weak.
Think about how gross that is, that that's
their guiding logic, if that's the case. And
my you can prove that is how they
think in other case. I think there's actually
an example of this today,
where they would or or willing to go
to war and kill people just so they
don't get embarrassed. Mean, you can look at
after the the prolonging of Afghanistan.
Right? Or or Vietnam.
They they just kick the can down the
road. People die year after year after year
because they don't wanna be the one to
look weak.
That's who we're actually dealing with here. So
we'll go over this article next. Here is
what the foreign minister of Oman had to
say.
What has Iran agreed to
to you that they have never done before?
Can you give us any sense? The single
most important
achievement, I believe,
is the agreement
that Iran
will never ever
have
a nuclear material that will
create a bomb.
This is, I think, a big achievement.
This is something that
is not in the
old deal that was negotiated
during president Obama's time? The JCOP. The the
JCPOA,
the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, otherwise known
as the Iran deal.
Now what he said,
I'd like to believe is very clear, right?
I'm just gonna, for a moment, laugh at
the ridiculous people on Face the Nation here,
where he said very clearly that they will
forego like, it just will not have it.
They're agreeing for the first time, different than
any other deal, that they won't have it.
Now listen to the way she responds.
This is something completely new.
It really makes the enrichment argument
less relevant
because
now we are talking about
zero
stockpiling.
Zero. And that is very, very important because
if you cannot stockpile,
material that is a rich, then there is
no way you can actually create a bomb
whether you are rich or don't are rich.
So, essentially, in in a in a in
an action like, in a real sense, what
they're foregoing is the potential for the nuclear
civilian side of it. That's always been the
point is that, well, they're not seeking a
bomb, but they'll enrich uranium for the nuclear
civilian programs that everyone else in the world
uses. But now they're even willing to go,
you know what? Fine. We won't do that
if this is accurate. And it does appear
to be based on all the factors.
And I think this is really something that
has been missed,
a lot by the media, and I want
to clear clarify that from the standpoint
of a mediator.
So explain that. So the enriched material, the
things that could be used as nuclear fuel
for a bomb, you're saying Iran
would
not keep on their own soil? They are.
You've gotta be
what?
So none. Zero. They won't there's no enrichment.
They won't have it. So they're selling
it?
Like, there's she's just so
tunnel vision.
Iran bomb bad guy. So wait. Who's got
the bomb now? Iran's bombing where?
Like, what? I mean, it gets it's just
ridiculous. Even just that first question, but she
keeps doing it. Watch.
Not keep on their own for a bomb.
You're saying Iran
would
not keep on their own soil? They would
give it up. They would give it up.
They wouldn't have it. Okay? Give it up.
They will not be able to actually accumulate
Right. That material
that will enable them to create a bomb.
Where would that accumulation. So there would be
zero accumulation? Zero. Zero stockpiling. Or zero. Got
it. And full
verification.
That is also equally important achievement, I think.
A full and comprehensive,
verification
by the IAEA, which is the agency in
charge
of of this this file. The UN nuclear
watchdog. That's right. So you're saying all enriched
material would be shipped
someplace else.
Am I speaking Chinese right now? What are
you talking about? So where's gonna where's Iran
bomb gonna where's where are they gonna bomb?
Where where's the bomb gonna go?
I mean, I honestly feel like she's trying
to be difficult in order to be, like,
to just muddy the waters that we can't
allow the American population to hear that they
don't wanna bomb and that they're willing to
forego what every other like, just we don't
have the material. It's not we're making it
and selling it. We're not making it and
then shipping it somewhere. We're not doing that
process.
I just I'm just sorry. I I was,
like, falling out of my chair that she
even asked. This is the third time. She
asked right there.
Not Russia, but No. No. The the current
stock price that are that still exist. The
things that are still in Iraq. That they're
So what you're saying is you're making bombs.
No. There's agreement now that this will be
down blended
to the
lowest level possible Okay. To neutral level, a
natural level,
which mean He's saying so what they already
have on file, which is important. They're arguing
they will, you know, whatever the term is,
downgrade that, down whatever he said, you know,
get rid of it. And while not making
more is the important part. Is and and
convert it into fuel,
and that fuel will be irreversible.
That regard to the pile they already have,
just to make sure that's clear. So that
becomes the the last element, if I'm understanding
correctly, based on the agreement that might be
taking place or now is not, but could've,
is that they would then
use that out for the nuclear energy side
of it, but then no longer stockpile
anymore.
Would be significant if Iran agreed to that.
It is very significant. And Iran did agree
to it. It's the point he made to
start. And I think we have agreement on
that. Yep. In my view. In your view.
Yes. Because
I'm sorry. I mean, it is in I
mean, look. This is such a perfect textbook
example of how the left or right, this
absurdly stupid media has a one note idea,
and they just hone in on that one
point. Oh, in your view. Oh, so implying
that it might not be the case. Got
it. Got it. No. Iran said they agree.
He was inside the negotiations,
and they wrote it down. They agree. Now
that's not to say they're gonna do it.
That's a different point. But she's
muddying the idea that it even came to
pass, that he might even be wrong about
that. I just think that's so ridiculous.
Today, CBS confirmed a confidential report from the
IAEA,
says inspectors report seeing Iran conducting nuclear or
conducting regular activity at bombed uranium enrichment sites,
but Iran has refused
to
tell us what has happened to their stockpile.
They have refused to Yeah. Didn't Trump say
it was obliterated?
Are are we pretending you know, are we
now admitting we know that wasn't the reality?
Allow UN inspectors in to look at it.
No. That's actually wildly inaccurate. They've been letting
them in for decades.
That was the original agreement. And even after
that, the IAEA has been there. They're the
ones that said, I think it was 2025,
that they're they're not even they're not seeking
a nuclear weapon. Remember, Gabbard said the same
thing
recently.
So the idea that they're not letting them
in is ridiculous. First of all, we're talking
about is after they've been bombed and in
the process of in the midst of tensions
with a foreign power, and the UN is
classically manipulated by Israel and United States. So
it's very different than saying there's not letting
them look. Like, she's doing a really
almost really clumsy job of trying to manufacture
the benign facts into something that makes you
feel like there's something suspicious going on. And
that's not to say that there's not. Maybe
there is behind it. But she's just taking,
like, you know, I'm not making a bomb
and contouring it into bombs might be possible.
You know? That's what she's trying to do,
and it's lazy. Are you telling me
that inspectors would be given access to these
sites, like at Isfahan? Always every deal and
agree deal, there will be full access. Iran
has offered that. Yes.
Like, I mean, look, I wanna be clear
again. This is something that's been going on
regularly.
If she doesn't know that, that's embarrassing.
I think she does and she's just trying
to high impress on the you that that
would be wild if that happened even though
it's happened a thousand times.
You I I mean, I think you get
the point. She knows very well what she's
doing, I think, or at least who is
pulling her strings. So who would these Like,
even look at his laugh. Like, I feel
like that was very clear.
To these sites, like at Isfahan. If there
is a deal, an agreed deal, there will
be full access. Iran has offered that. Yes.
So who would these inspectors be? It would
be UN IAEA. IAEA?
IAEA.
But I think, you know, there is room
also,
if there is a a deal in place.
I am quite confident
from my point of view
that
even
United States
inspectors,
will have access
at at some point in in the Which
now that would be wild.
With the I mean, in the earlier days,
that was something that was happening to some
degree, even with Israel, but they got caught
trying to sneak in nuclear material.
See, this it's something we don't even include.
There's so many points we can include. That's
such an it's an incredibly obvious point. They
get caught. They literally caught an Israeli entity
in the bathroom, and they tested. The point
is they've tried to blame them many times
by making that the case, which speaks to
the point, doesn't it? But so that would
that they might even allow it again would
be incredible to me knowing that they know
they're trying to manipulate them. But I you
know, that's we're not even there since it's
not even happening. Don't forget the starting point.
This was yesterday
or the day day before and yesterday. And
then after this became public,
they bombed them
knowing that this was almost gonna happen. Process.
If we have a deal that is respected
and fair
and,
endurable,
I see no reason
why, there is no access to be given
even to The United States itself.
Iran has never allowed American weapons inspectors on
their soil. They wouldn't let president Obama
do that. No. Well, that's actors. Iran will
let president Trump send American There's a big
difference between having a US politician. If maybe
I'm unless I'm incorrect, and I'm pretty damn
sure that there has been US entities in
regard to I mean, if they've allowed an
Israeli entity, which I've talked about in the
past,
either point being that they have very clearly
allowed international elements, which I argue included people
from all sides of this that were involved
in in researching this. Either way, they've let
people come through and investigate and test
for a really long time. So why they
would need Donald Trump to walk through, I
don't understand. But Inspectors into Iran? This is
why I think this is a much, much
better deal because I think Iran is open
to the idea. K. Look it up for
yourself, guys. I mean, we started the entire
segment with her gaslighting you about what is
and isn't happening, so consider that. Now in
regards to this post,
peace within reach. Now this again was this
is posted on twenty eighth. Now this is
appears to be,
I think, based on the difference of time,
of, you know, the time,
exchange,
that this was posted right about the same
time this was they were being bombed. Because
this was technically written as the twenty eighth,
but I'm based on the writing, it doesn't
appear that they're folding in that they had
been bombed at this point. So this is
folding over from that day what he's simply
talking about, we were close, and then they
bombed him. So it says, Iran agreed during
indirect talks with The United States
never to stockpile enriched uranium.
That is huge. And, said Oman's top diplomat
who described the development as a major breakthrough.
He said that, he also said on Friday
that he believed all issues in a deal
between Iran and The US could be resolved
amicable amicably and cohesively.
And then they bombed him
instead. If the ultimate objective is to ensure
forever that Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb,
which is what they claim they're doing, even
though that's pretty much where we already are.
He says, I think we have cracked that
problem through these negotiations by agreeing on a
very important breakthrough that has never been achieved
anytime before and still has not because Israel
bombed them anyway. The single most important achievement,
he writes, I believe, is the agreement that
Iran will never ever have a nuclear material
that will create a bomb. He says, quote,
now we can now we are talking about
zero stockpiling, and that is a very, very
important is very, very important because if you
cannot stockpile material that is enriched, then you
can't have an actual bomb. They would be
also be full and comprehensive verification by the
international community. A long stop diplomat also said
Iran would degrade its current stockpiles of nuclear
material, as you saw,
lowest level possible. Nothing is some This is
something completely new. It really makes the enrichment
argument less relevant
because now we're talking about zero.
Regarding US recent US demands regarding Iran's nuclear
program, he said, I believe Iran is open
to discuss
everything.
Continuing, it says, the big picture but the
big picture is that a deal is in
our hands.
That's what that was the sentiment from others
involved as well until they said bomb them
anyway.
We're not exactly happy with the way they're
negotiating,
Trump said,
adding that Iran should make a deal. Okay.
So this is what I want you to
understand. At a time when it was clear,
even based on what was being discussed because
others are involved, that they were
at a deal point.
Like we've told you in the past with
Gaza, they kept getting close, and that's when
Israel would screw it all up. It's admitted
by their own people, their own government. Was
it I don't think it was La, Lapidjar.
I think it was,
Gallant, I believe, was the one that publicly
said it. And there's many of them. But
in their inner circle, they came out and
said point blank, he has been sabotaging the
deals. Like every other time before this, by
the way, if you're not blind.
And so in this case, we know at
this point, they were close, that everyone agreed.
They're even making concessions they've never made before.
And Trump says, we don't like how they're
negotiating.
They should make a deal. Even aside from
the one they're making. So I think Trump
is out there making it sound like they
were being difficult because they are and here's
the point. They already knew
they were gonna
bomb. That appears to be the reality. That's
what Israel's openly saying right now. A week
ago, they already planned the date.
So Trump comes out knowing that they're acting
in good faith and says they're being difficult
because he knew. That's a disgustingly dishonest person.
Not just dishonest.
That's that's
just wrong. It's vile. You are you under
you're like, that's that's a bad character, guys.
You're manipulating the situation, not for a good
outcome, but an outcome that killed children, which
we'll get to, in order to get what
Israel wants at the expense of everybody else,
including Trump, by the way.
He says later Trump later said that he
would prefer it if The US did not
have to use military force, but sometimes they
have to do it. Oh, okay. You so,
again,
in retrospect,
when he said that, he knew he was
gonna bomb them.
Again, let that sink in, guys. When he
came out and pretended to you that he
was the peace president and said, I don't
wanna have to use military force. They'd already
decided to use military force and when to
execute it.
This is how little they think of you,
how little Trump thinks of you.
So
that in mind, here is the actual,
foreign minister from Oman
today
saying, I am and it's 6AM. So, like,
right basically, it would have been I guess,
for me, that would have been about four
or five hours after it happened. He says,
I am dismayed.
Active and serious negotiations have yet again,
yet again,
been undermined.
Neither the interest of The United States nor
the cause of global peace are well served
by this, and I pray for the innocents
who will suffer. I urge The United States
not to get sucked in further.
This is not your war. Guys, everyone sees
what's happening. Everybody.
Now think about what his meeting with vice
president Vance and all their big talk about
Pete. They knew what they were gonna do.
They put on fronts. They had meetings and
discussions and acted all about peace and happiness
knowing they were already gonna bomb people.
These are very bad people.
Now here comes Loomer.
Thomas Massie needs to be investigated. Who is
leaking to Massie?
And she says leaking classified information is a
crime. Charles Downes says at 2AM, Thomas Massie
was already posting attacks on one American strikes
in Iran one full hour before they were
officially announced. What a coincidence.
Hopefully, nobody is leaking classified information.
Oops. The information was widely publicly available at
the time Massie posted. He even linked a
news article. Conservative influencers were even posting about
the strikes
prior to Massie's post. Okay. I genuinely think
this is her stupidity.
I don't think this was an ax. I
think this was them. Somebody fed this to
them. Or rather, here's what I think. Charles
Downey is either stupid or manipulative,
and he's literally from Loomer Unleashed. How embarrassing.
And he gets this wrong.
Probably because somebody sent him a screenshot with
a bad timestamp because they're in a different
part of the world and they're too dumb
to realize that times are different in other
places of the world. So, they do this
and they get it wrong.
And as I jokingly said
oh, and, you know, calling to be investigated,
saying that he's leaking classified information.
And I simply said, oops. Looks like Laura
Loomered herself again. Let's start that trend. Loomered
is a bad thing. Right? Let's turn the
word around because that's what they're doing. Either
way,
think about how crazy this is. Now one
of the thought is that this is them
trying to gaslight around the only person who's
actually calling I think one of the few
who's calling this what it is.
Just and this is a huge support. Apparently,
Loomer here, I'll since I just saw this
before, I'll grab this. I didn't even read
it all the way through. Gonna look at
it later. Let's see what it says.
Apparently,
Loomer just spoke to Donald Trump. So think
about what she is and what she's doing.
Embarrassingly
incorrect all the time, sort of like Alex
Jones by the way, and comes out and
says, Just spoke to Donald Trump because she's
got his ear because that's how gross and
weird this all is. And says, Congratulate or
she lied about it, which wouldn't surprise me,
and congratulated him on another successful combat mission.
You you know, aside from the hundreds of
children they killed. Right? Right, Laura?
Eredicating one of the world's most vile Islamic
terrorists. Oh, really? That's right from that not
even remotely being the reality. It turns out
he might not even be dead, but that's
still up in the air as well. I
told Trump he's made The United States proud.
That's not even what most people think on
his side. Laura is a shameless,
blind Zionist Israel blind
team sport player.
I also told him, Everyone who loves America
hates terrorism, is cheering for the That's just
her very, like, I think she thought smart
way to convert to manipulate you into going,
Well, I like America. I'm not a terrorist.
I hate that too. I that I agree
with Trump. Or you can go, I like
this country, and I hate terrorism, and he's
also ridiculous and wrong and lying and cheating
and stealing, you know, because I'm not a
child, Laura. But it says, we should be
all cheering for America and Trump today. Hoorah.
President Trump's made us so proud to be
America. I'm proud of zing zing zing zing
zing zing zing zing zing zing zing zing
zing zing z That's what she's doing.
Cheer. Cheer. Hooray.
You forgot your flashy red lights and your
hashtag breaking. But overall, it's just I cheer
for Trump's thing,
even though it's a shockingly obvious crime.
Now, let's talk about the crime. Trump's unprovoked
attack on Iran has no mandate or legal
basis. Now, this is the important part from
the beginning.
We wanna be honest about this if we
are honest at all about anything.
This
was unconstitutional and illegal.
Nobody disagrees with that. The only argument is,
well, nobody else had to do it. I
mean, are we actually in kindergarten? Are we
letting those kind of arguments? Yeah. Apparently, that's
the highest level of the conversation.
Well, I don't disagree, guys. Congress has become
ridiculous. It's useless, meaningless. They have
for they they no longer do what they're
supposed to do. And I think that's the
same problem, that they have been manipulated into,
you know, standing, like, just being me,
like, doing nothing
when,
you know, like, they they they could support
it too. Right? They could vote and go,
yeah, invade. That's what I think is probably
the obvious point. All of them support this.
So why don't they do it then? See
what I'm saying? I I think it's about
more so changing the way that our governance
this is the reimagining of the way our
system works, guys. But the point is that
this is against the law because it's supposed
to be approved by congress. Even just bombings,
in
particular, going to war, but even just acts
of war. Right? So he didn't do that.
So there is so first and foremost, yes,
we all have to agree that is a
crime. But then we can also stand back
and go, okay, but no other president over
the last, you know, from Bush to Obama,
they're not doing that. So that matters. We
should include that and then ask ourselves whether
maybe Trump had no choice. That's worth considering.
But then if he knew that was the
reality, then there would have still been a
legal pathway to do this the right way,
and he still didn't do that either. But
if it's talking about whether congress did this,
there's no other point. He broke the law
in doing this. But then you can even
go further and realize that, okay, well, there
was no provocation.
You can't say
they're evil and bad, and that's a threat
to us. That's not a legal argument. No
court in the world, unless it's manipulated, will
argue that makes sense.
Where's the threat? Even from a,
Bethlehem doctrine
of
of preemptive self defense, which is a laughable
joke, and they use
like we saw now. We said they were
doing bad things and they don't need to
prove it. We just get to bomb them
and claim we stop them from doing something.
It's such a childishly obvious ploy. Even if
there is eventually a point that's happening, they
could lie about it whenever they want, and
we all know that. So there was no
threat. Iran was not threatening action other than
responding to what they were doing. Iran was
not invading foreign countries.
Iran was not
doing anything that represent resembles a threat to
anybody, let alone a threat to US interests
or the or
the country, Americans.
So there is no misunderstanding that this was
a crime.
But I just think it's important to recognize
those who are out there trying to grapple,
trying to, you know, make sense of why
this is okay.
The first war of Donald Trump's Board of
Peace era has begun.
An unprovoked attempt at regime change in collaboration
with Israel
with no legal foundation. Remember, they told you
this wasn't regime change. We don't wanna change
the regime. We're not crave well, and here
they are literally
calling for regime change.
Just like they did every other place they
said that wasn't gonna happen, like Venezuela or
Bolivia
or every other country they've illegally regime changed.
There is no legal part of what they're
doing here, guys.
It says, with no legal foundation,
launched in the midst of diplomatic efforts, which
is just a a, you know, a a
a salt in the wound.
The they did that in or you know
what it shows you? Weakness. They need them
to have their guard down because I don't
think they're I I we'll get into whether
or not they might very well be losing
all this right now. But the point is
you have to pretend to be in negotiations
so you can get a one up on
them, which is just, you know,
what's the you know, bad form.
Now it says Trump's record eight minute address
after the first bombs had fallen made clear
that this would be no limited strike aimed
at cajoling Tehran into concessions as negotiating table.
Watch they all limited strikes and we get,
you know, to get them to respond. And
even though why we would think that that
bombing a country would get them to come
to the table to negotiate, that's that's strong-arm
tactics. That's what they do. And they would
not accept that from anybody else. They would
immediately go to full war like everybody else
has the right to do, and they'll call
terrorism when they do it too. He warned
that if Iran's,
military did not surrender, they would be killed.
And the country's armed forces and its missiles
and navy would be smashed.
Oh, great. So what you're saying is that
you're now going to invade the country if
they don't just do what you want?
How would you possibly then kill all their
military?
I mean, you have to understand, guys. There's
no way you don't see what's happening here.
You're you're standing at a podium and demanding
action from a foreign country. If any country,
anybody, whether it was Iran or you know,
let's just you could say, what if The
UK stood up and said, the US government,
we demand that you do this because you're
terrorists. If you don't, we'll bomb you. And
if you don't come to a deal with
us, we'll bomb you too. Think about that
in the context of the West. What would
you call that? How would that make sense
if The UK just decided that? And you
know what's even crazier? They wouldn't even be
wrong. Because what the US government does all
around the world, UK too, are criminal acts,
guys. And they would be right to say,
you're breaking the law. But they still would
be wrong
in going with that direction.
The right path would be to bring this
to the international conversation like they're trying to
do with Israel, and we can see how
that's failing. That doesn't mean we don't we'd
stop trying to go about this the right
way.
There are other paths to be taken in
that direction. They just haven't been taken yet
because the individual person, like us, has no
power in that conversation.
But we still can't change this, and we
are. It's not easy. Nothing
in in any real sense that is worth
doing is ever truly easy.
Think about that. It's the same as, like,
everything else we're talking about. It's just we
it's doing it the right way matters.
And look, if we can't stand on a
side note, recognize the win that it is,
that what we have done look at the
conversation. Look at where we are.
We are unraveling
the broken nature of this whole the global
dynamic. Not to say that we're gonna succeed
or that it will change, but look at
what we've accomplished.
Just by forcing this conversation about any of
these topics, we now have this on the
table. Everyone's talking about it. How is that
not a win? Sorry. You know, I digress
and get into that. But, man, I do
I think it's important to think about that.
Back to the point.
He says the
way would then be open for the Iranian
opposition.
Right? The groups that have no right to
be in power.
The Shah, the son of the Shah, but
democracy.
He's the crown prince of democracy as Robert
called it. They're laughing at you guys.
And they would, and and the country's f
ethnic minorities to rise up and bring the
regime down. You know, the exact same ethnic
minorities that they're killing in Syria right now,
but no big deal. Quote, it's time for
all people of Iran, Persians, Kurds,
Azeris, bala how how how pronounce that one?
Balochis and,
I don't mispronounce them. To shed from themselves
the burden of tyranny and bring forth a
free and peace seeking Iran. You know, I
just it's just laughable
because every other example you can ever show
in their entire history has led to chaos,
including with Iran, by the way, in the
last time.
And on top of that,
you know, ask the Kurds how well it's
worked out. Or ask any of them. Ask
any group in any location. Every single time
this happens, it's chaos and death and destruction
for their society, for their culture, for them.
Every time.
And what seems to continue to proliferate
are the very things they claim they're fighting.
And that's only gonna make sense when you
from eventually come to terms with the reality
that they're working for the people that claim
to be fighting them.
Coordinating the message as well as the missiles.
Israel's prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu
said his country had joined the war to,
quote, remove the existential threat
posed by the terrorist regime of Iran. Okay.
I'd love for someone to demonstrate that for
me. Not in abstract terms and, you know,
terrorists and bad guys and dangerous things, but
give me an example.
I still would love to hear why they're
an existential threat. Are they threatening to bomb
something? Are they threatening to invade something? Are
they threatening to steal something? No. I don't
okay. Then what are we talking about?
The maximalist
aims of the joint attack cast doubt on
whether there had ever been any prospect of
success for the UN, Iranian negotiations.
Yes. Very, very soft way of saying it's
easy to prove they never cared in the
first place. But realize again,
the idea what was it? I was gonna
add one point. I think I just lost
it.
The the existential threat point. Anyway, I mean,
I think I made that clear. The I
I think it's very important to recognize
that
the I think what I was gonna say
is the only
threat
is this boogeyman in the shadows, which, well,
certainly could be the reality. In fact, I
think that's what they're they're the ones pointing
the fingers or thrive in doing. And in
many cases, fund and arm and and puppeteer
the ones they point to, and even maybe
an Iranian or a Muslim or whatever, and
you could prove that they're back there pulling
their string. But that's in some cases. The
point is that even let's just say that's
the I mean, you're talking about the idea
that this country somewhere might in the shadows
be planning something.
How is that enough to justify what we're
talking about? And it flat my opinion, and
I think with the evidence we have, you
can quite literally prove that's not even happening.
At the very least that you can't prove
it's happening. And I think that's easy to
see.
All you have is them claiming they're doing
bad things because we're experts.
Yeah. I think we learned how that worked
through a lot of the different psy ops
over the last ten years. Trump has long
rallied against
railed against the folly of the Iraq war.
He campaigned twice on a platform of ending
US military entanglements abroad. I played the clips
for you recently. And lobbied aggressively to be
awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Think about that.
Based on his factually shaky claim of ending
eight wars. You know, it really bothers me
that even The Guardian can't be like, that's
flatly incorrect. I can quite literally prove to
you that that's not true. Here are the
facts. You see what I'm saying? There's always
a game going on here. Of all the
the things that we know for a fact
aren't true, you can't even be honest about
that, and the things that are actually watered
down or or, like, unclear, you then lean
into, that's corporate media for you. It's ridiculous.
He did not end eight wars, guys. That's
ridiculous. He still pretends Israel and Gaza is
one of them. They're still killing people.
It's you know, it's even worth it's not
even worth pretending. The only people that say
these ridiculous things are blind followers.
Barely ten days before launching the war, he
had hosted the inaugural meeting of his Board
of Peace ten days before launching a war
in Iran, which was supposedly going to resolve
conflicts. Not just in The Middle East, but
around the world.
Totally not a globalist agenda though, guys. That
meeting brought leaders and senior officials from 27
disparate states, of course, most of them autocracies,
to Washington to praise Trump the peacemaker.
But then, however, most of Washington's traditional allies
in Europe and beyond had become deeply skeptical
of Trump's motives and stayed away. The Board
of Peace was sold to the UN Security
Council
in November and then later presented to Davos
because he totally is fighting the globalist guys
in November as the only path to ending
the slaughter in Gaza. But it had been
clear long before the first missiles fired Iran
that it was a bait and switch scam.
This is from The Guardian. From it's interesting
to me. It says the UN even the
United Nations even to Trump's Board of Peace
proposal.
The UN thought it was actually buying one
thing, but it was sold something quite different.
A rival body
to the Security Council,
but one in which Trump would be in
charge.
The fact that even the Guardian is pointing
this out, and it's very for the same
reason, by the way,
you should ask because they're pointing it out.
Maybe that means that's not the case. That's
always worth considering. But I think it's pretty
easy to see. I'll just bring the show
in that this is what it is. Gaza's
board of peace seeks to reimagine the global
international order. Even the Guardian is pointing out
the example. Even the UN seemed to acknowledge
that it was such a a security council
global
UN adjacent thing.
He's just trying
to redesign and take control. Remember, he made
himself the forever emperor of the Board of
Peace.
The attack on Iran is a clear violation
of the UN Charter.
It is.
In any absence of any credible imminent Iranian
threat to The US. Now what they mean
by that is an actual threat to an
attack on The US. You will never get
there because it's not happening.
And it says, in an attempt at justification,
Trump spoke in generalities,
denounced the Tehran leadership as a vicious group
of very hard, terrible people.
So pretty much a description of every government
in the world. And forty seven years of
enmity between The US and Islamic Republic. Over
that half century, Iran has arguably
never posed less of a threat than now,
which is a objective point and actually very
relevant. Even if you think that's what they
were,
right now, they've never they've they've or as
I'll read what the this paragraph I think
is very well received. It says over the
last century,
they've never posed less of a threat than
they do right now, weakened by the joint
attack by The US and Israel in June,
which degrade his defenses. According to Trump, he
told you it was obliterated.
Decades of sanctions combined with economic mitigation,
migration, excuse me, has brought mass protests to
the street.
Now that's not exactly there's more to it,
and it's more new. But
you what you're saying is you've been doing
this to them. You've been whittling
it down. You're you collapsed their their their,
financial, their rial, their money.
You I mean, how are they and I
mean and on top of everything, you just
obliterated their nuclear program, but we're gonna be
told that they're more of a threat now
to justify something you've never even done before
outside, you know, in the sense let's just
say, CENT 73.
At least, like like well, I I even
walked that back a bit. Look,
that's what I think this is gonna go
to.
I hate to say that, but I do.
I think this is not gonna go unless
something shifts, this is gonna keep going forward,
I think. I hope that's not the case.
In the Board of Peace, however, there is
no requirement
for Trump himself
to justify what he's doing.
Think about that. There are no rules other
than those giving Trump the power to make
them up as he goes along. It has
become increasingly clear the board of the board
is not primarily a form of resolving conflict,
but a vehicle for the president's political and
financial interests, pretty much like everything else he's
doing, which, again, is no different than every
one of them. Nothing right. Wilbur Ross, commerce
secretary in Trump's first term, said the court,
defeat
made an attack on Iran more likely. Now
they're talking about
his previous defeat in court, defeats in court.
And the argument genuinely being, like I was
saying earlier,
that just because he lost in court, that
that then he'll wanna attack Iran to make
a like like the Netanyahu point. He says,
I don't think he can take this loss
and then be seen as backing down on
Iran. Like, this is these are the sociopaths
we're dealing with. You're gonna bomb a country
because you feel like you look weak?
Pretty much.
The cloud of suspicion over Trump's relationship with
Jeffrey Epstein also drove him to maybe distract
from what's going on. Trump is clearly counting
on spectacular success in Iran,
broadcast live to bring his country along with
him after the fact.
Before his overnight recorded statement,
there had been no real effort by the
administration to lay out a convincing case to
Congress or to the nation at a time
when polls suggest only a quarter, if not
less, of The US electorate support this war.
Regular on camera press briefings of the Pentagon,
which used to happen all the time, have
have
ceased to exist right now. But the recently
renamed Department of War hasn't even held one
since December.
Congress, which in theory, which means they're just
not they don't think about the idea they're
most transparent. They're giving you less information than
ever. Under the guys that are, like, fighting
Democrats or whatever, we can't show it because
then they'll counteract us. Well, whatever the reason,
that's ridiculous, first of all. Whatever the reason,
you're giving us less. That's not transparency. That's
the opposite. This is, like, the whole thing
they're doing right now with in every category.
Congress, which in theory has the constitutional
you see? You mean, in theory?
What does that even mean?
Congress
obviously has that power. You can look it
up. You think these journalists couldn't figure that
out? So why would they write it as
Congress in theory has the
no, they do. It's easy. It's a fact.
I I think I mean, I know sometimes
I may read too much into these kind
of things, but to me, I feel like
it's a larger effort to actually change the
way we think about these things. It's important
to understand that they are bound by that.
But it says, in theory, has the constitutional,
prerogative
to decide whether America goes to war.
And it has been almost totally sidelined.
Yeah. Exactly.
They do have that power, and they have
abdicated. We know that. But
it doesn't change the fact that it's still
legal.
Now the point is always, guys, I'll wait.
I mean, there was a the tweet that
I'll read in a second. But
just because let's just even say they it's
been hard you know, they want a war
and the congress is not gonna let it
happen. And that's the argument they're using. Well,
congress hasn't they'll they'll stop them from everything
they want. Well, yeah, man. That's the way
that's supposed to work. Going to war is
not supposed to be some simple thing that
everyone agrees on. The whole point is it's
supposed to be a process to initiate war,
not defend yourself, but initiate war because there
are even arguments in regard to responding to
an attack. That's why they play the preemptive
card to try to blend those fields. But
this this is something else.
Eight congressional leaders from both parties were briefed
from classified information a few hours before the
State of the Union speech.
State of the Union.
But Democratic senators
emerge saying that they had not been given
a good reason. Again, it's very clear.
They were planning this attack long before we
got here. In 2003,
the road to the war in Iraq was
paved with lies about WMDs
that didn't exist. The path to a new
conflict in Iran twenty three years later has
been lined largely with incoherence
or silence.
The Iranians, quote, have come to the conclusion.
Now this is actually really important,
and this speaks to the whole North Korea
point, guys.
And I've often thought over the years that
this might be what they're trying to just
sort of create with this absurd game.
He says, quote, the Iranians have come to
the conclusion
that restraint
has been interpreted
as weakness and invites more aggression. Well, yeah.
It it and this it does when you're
dealing with monsters and sociopaths.
You see, the point is not to then
be might makes right. Strength you know, peace
through strength. That really means just attack what
we want and pretend we're being just
in this mindset.
But, ultimately, to not be weak in the
face of people that are obviously belligerent.
See, it's a different situation. So in this
case, Iranians and I mean, you talk I
made this point about Russia and Iran and
numerous parts during Syria's before we got to
where we are now, where many times you
saw something happen where they could legally could
have responded and chose not to. Now I
don't know whether it was restraint or something
else because I think Russia is more in
line with Israel on a lot of things
today than, you know, and always have been,
by the way, but more now than a
lot of for a lot of reasons. But
you wonder
where was it?
Anyway, just that, you know, that ultimately that
it might be about
I just lost that. Damn it.
I mean, the same point. There was an
extra point that I was gonna add to
it, and I hate when I do that,
and I shouldn't even say it out loud.
But that's I'm just me. But the Iranians
have come to the conclusion that the restraint
has been interpreted as weakness. And so the
the large point that I'm making is that
ultimately,
they've driven this to the reality. Right? And
it like North Korea, they they, again, so
we're told, they make a nuclear bomb. And
then when's the last time we even heard
about North Korea?
And so what they're ultimately trying to drive
is them to do that. I don't think
they are. I think the reality is they've
never because it's a fat wall, they've said
they never religiously are going to seek a
nuclear bomb. They've said that as far as
I've been doing this. But, ultimately, now what
they're talking about is their response in regard
to their bombings. So there'd be a bombing,
and they really wouldn't respond. They'd they'd be
measured. They'd show restraint. They'd plan. Right? But
in this case, they've already responded. We're gonna
get into that next. They've already bombed back.
And so what they're and and then what
Israel's already doing, they're bombing and killing people.
We see we told you Iran's a terrorist.
Even though it's obvious that you're responding, they
have the legal right.
So what he's saying is that they've realized
that we're just not gonna play the the
restraint card.
Even though that's what arguably would be the
best thing for the world,
and that's the whole point, is that they're
trying to point to everyone else and say
they're doing this when they're the ones doing
that. And anyone shows restraint, put groups like
the Zionist maniacs in Israel will take advantage
of that. And then it causes this
this kind of point on this knife's edge
military standoff all over the world. And you
could even talk about Pakistan and India and
plenty of other examples that Israel is without
question involved
in. It means something, guys. This is important.
Now he added that Iran's capacity to wreak
damage on its enemies has not really been
tested. Now what they're saying is that the
restraint has always been there, even in the
last responses. And, frankly, I agree with that.
If you talk to any real experts, nonpartisan,
they'll tell you this every time, and I've
been hearing this my entire life,
that ultimately Iran
is, you know, if not able to meet
their match, out oh, you know, The US
is outmatched.
But, of course, everyone's gonna argue the opposite.
But it says in the twelve day war,
the Iranians didn't use any of the military
capabilities that they have developed over
many, many years to target US assets, like
short range missiles, cruise missiles, naval assets, drones,
underwater drones, anti ship ballistic missiles, and cruise
missiles.
What's funny is people read that. They go
terrorist.
Literally everything that all of them are using.
It's just bad when they do it, right?
But the reality clearly is that they have
defend themselves like anything else. That's why the
missile point became a problem because they're just
trying to diminish Iran's ability to actually have
a defense. But on top of that, knowing
that they're never gonna give up the ability
to just have defense missiles, so they make
that the sticking issue and lie that that's
because nukes and it's just not.
Iranian forces would have a wide range of
targets close at hand, including vessels,
military, commercial,
straight up Hormuz. Right? The reality is they
put their ships there that they didn't need
there in order to fire,
I believe, in order to give them a
target. They're trying to bait them into killing
Americans so they can use that as the
the
the blind rush justification, like, with, you know,
like, during after nine eleven, it was just,
like, nobody everyone anyone trying to say that
we should have restraint, we're called un American.
And that's always the way it goes, but
when you have a certain level of hype
and and, you know, and
and propaganda,
it can overshadow
logic. That's always what they do. And I
think that's what this is about.
In all years of war games in Washington
and Pentagon
in the Pentagon and with all the think
tanks, without
exception, they say, one or two warships would
sink in their war games.
And he says, obviously, it would push Trump
to retaliate in a devastating
manner. But then he would have launched another
war in The Middle East, which he already
has. There is no way that Trump can
frame that as a victory. His presidency will
be completely eclipsed by that. Yeah. I think
that's where we already are.
Now, this one's interesting. This is the Israel
stating they had this planned.
US and Israel launched preemptive attack, which again
is such a joke.
Preemptive what?
What were they planning? I mean, you can't
keep they're building a bomb maybe in the
future. Preemptive attack. I mean, that's just lazy
and nobody falls for this stuff anymore other
than those that are, in my opinion. And
I I should I should when I say
those things, and I shouldn't even say it
like that because I that tend to be
hyperbolic,
I genuinely think that. What I'm saying is
I think the vast majority
very clearly see this, and then the ones
that are out there yelling about it are
the ones that likely know they're wrong or
don't care one way or the other. But
as always, there's probably a middle ground of
some grouping that either isn't even paying attention
or does you know, something. But I should
I should be specific as always, but I
do think it's the vast, vast, vast majority.
Now it says Israel said it launched a
preemptive attack against Iran on Saturday.
Israel,
Citing a US official,
reported that US New York Times citing this
official, reported that US strikes on Iran were
underway. A source told Reuters that Iran's supreme
leader, Khamenei,
was not in Tehran and had been transferred
to a secure location. Now this is interesting
to me because this came out early.
This was,
like, right in the beginning, like like, pretty
much right after the bombing took place. So
following this, they've argued that they killed him.
But the earliest reporting I can find is
that they took him away to a secure
location and he was, you know unless they
bomb that location, which nobody seems to be
arguing, it seems likely that he wasn't killed.
But it's that's up in the air. And
by the way, in the chat, if there's
been more information, please let me know because
this is all developing as we go forward.
Now it says the attack coming after Israel
and Iran engaged in the twelve day war
in June
follows repeated US Israeli warnings that they would
strike again
if
Iran
pressed ahead with its nuclear and ballistic missile
programs.
For the record, I am watching both jets,
rumble included, so please include me and inform
me if anything is important.
The point here
that they'd strike again if they pressed ahead
with their programs, but they they made it
very clear to include ballistic missile, which that's
never been on the table. I mean, you
might as well include, you
know, you know, pocket knives or, you know,
just like I mean, that's ridiculous, but the
point is something that it's, like, really yeah.
I mean, it that walk it back to
just guns then. You know? Like, it's it's
it's insane to think that makes sense.
Okay. So they're saying Iranian media has confirmed
that he's dead. But, again, that
keep a grain of salt as we go
through this. Now that will flavor what we're
gonna go through in a second. But that
does make a big difference if that's what
they're saying.
Continuing,
the state of Israel wants to preempt their
attack.
That so this is Israel's,
state or statement.
Yeah. So people are saying, yeah. It looks
like Robert in the crash is reported as
well. So they they they might have looks
like they likely got him, which would suggest
to me today that this reporting was false
or that he they got the location he
was in.
But even then, guys, even then, and Robert
would say the same. Let's
things can change a lot over so many
days is that the reporting can appear specific
right now and then something could shift tomorrow.
But if Robert's reporting that, I would argue
that's likely what's going on. But it continues
that the where was it right here? The
Israeli defense official said that they had,
oh, this one first. The state of Israel
launched a preemptive attack against Iran to remove
threats
to the state of Israel. So they didn't
even include US in that. Right? Think about
what they're saying. We attack them preemptively because
they're attack a threat to us.
What I think this is showing you is
that is US is just being dragged into
this. And and look, remember the reporting right
before this? What they were all saying is
that
they Arguably, that what they wanted was Israel
to attack,
Or rather that they wanted you know, both
of them were saying they wanted the other
one to attack. Whatever. The end of the
day, it's it it seems most likely that
Israel ultimately did this because they saw the
opening that they couldn't let refuse. They could
do it. Trump would own it because he
would have to. And then it could get
the bet the both best of both worlds.
And
it says, an Israeli official
Israeli official
where was I? Defense official said the operation
has been planned for months.
In coordination
with Washington.
And the launch date was decided weeks ago.
So they said we've launched a preemptive attack.
So they're saying that we plan this with
the US government because they are a threat
to the state of Israel. And let's be
clear, that's what
Lindsey Graham has said, that's what Cruz has
said, as Rubio has said. So how is
America first?
The
US and Iran removed renewed, excuse me, negotiations
in February in a bid to resolve the
decades long dispute
through diplomacy and avert the threat of military
confrontation.
No? Well, they didn't because they're lying since
they did this weeks ago. Weeks.
So at the fair I mean, at minimum
in the begin in the February.
It says Israel, however, insisted that any US
deal with Iran must include that this is
what they always do, it's called a poison
pill, the dismantling of Tehran's nuclear infrastructure, not
just stopping the enrichment process, and lobbied Washington
to include restrictions on
missiles,
which it appears as if they were probably
gonna say yes to that too. That's where
it feels like this was going. Fine. We'll
give you everything. And they just knew. I
think not because they probably were going to,
because they called their bluff, like Hamas did
three or four different times.
Knowing that they were like, fine. We'll give
you that. You're you're go. And then Israel
would bomb because they didn't wanna allow the
deal. And I would go even as far
as to say that Hamas probably would have
taken it at the end point, but they
just knew that Israel wasn't honest. That's my
opinion. I think the same thing's happening here.
Iran said it was prepared to discuss curbs
on its nuclear program in exchange for lifting
sanctions, but ruled out
missiles.
Tehran would also also said it would defend
itself against any attack. Now remember the point
is the Oman foreign minister said that basically
in between this the the the two days,
they had basically put on the table almost
everything.
Let's see.
So this is
Reuters.
Iran supreme leader killed Iranian state media confirms.
Now, this is just confirming. Now, again, to
to be clear, this is obviously likely what's
happening at this point. And I think the
only reason I'm saying it like that is
because it's the situation we're in And that
there's so many ways that even we that,
you know, deep fakes, lies, especially in the
midst of one of these things. So based
on, you know, the what we can confirm
or the level to which we can confirm
moments like this, this appears to be that.
But wait until tomorrow or the next day,
and these things tend to flush out a
little bit further is all I'm suggesting. And
on top of that, that,
I saw reports like this from corporate media
earlier in the day that are still I
don't think even that time where even confirms
more like the reports were going around. But
either way, this is what they were trying
to accomplish.
So ask yourself,
if Iran had unilaterally decided that the US
government was a a criminal organization
and then executed Trump with an attack,
what do you think they would do?
What would would you argue they have a
right to respond?
You probably would, wouldn't you? So ask yourself
whether or not this is
you know, is it only okay when they
do it? Do you is there is a
principle thing? Is there a legal reality, or
is it just The US and Trump can
do what they want because we're in charge?
Because that really is what's guiding this right
now. That they're in charge. We're in control.
And that's alarming because,
first of all, Democrats will have that power
soon enough if that's how you view the
world. But the reality is the government should
not be given unilateral authoritarian power.
Never works out in our benefit.
Now this is from the twenty seventh. The
US State Department ordered the removal of a
number of diplomats. Right? So just to point
out again that they, you know, they were
in in the day
they were negotiating rather than the day before.
They were already removing diplomats from Israel.
So they already knew, which you already know.
I mean, it's based on the information we
have. But just more and more, it's clear
that they were fronting about having negotiations while
planning to attack.
William McCullough also points out something interesting, but
that, you know, for all the Christians and
the Christian right and all the argument that
Trump is you know, all the the people
faking what they are, in my opinion, in
order to align themselves with a very powerful
Christian movement.
Preemptive strikes violate Christian war theory, just in
case you wanted to know that. Like, realizing
that you rationalize the killing of children in
Gaza, for example, you're a disgusting person, pretend
to be a Christian, if that's your mindset.
And now that's what I believe, by the
way. I think that's horrifying that pastors or
Christian out there going, you know, why stand
with Israel? Well, you're a monster and you're
not a man of God. Can be contentious
all you like. I think that's obviously the
case. And so if you're out there in
this case, and you believe and you're practicing
Christian values or whatever you think of the
values of not blindly attacking people, the point
is is for the Christian right.
And they just told you preemptive strikes because
x, y, and z. Well, then that should
be a challenging point for you. For most
of them, I think it's a team game
in regard to the partisan sides.
Now, again, I just think that this is
an obvious point to take away. The Board
of Peace launches its first war.
How many more will we see?
Now on the Comenity point, which is now,
you know,
adjusted with the recent statements, but let's just
still go through what we had here, which
I find interesting, because it may add more
to your mindset.
As first of all, as Ollie points out,
and I agree with this every time,
Israel officials say is what we first got
about him being killed. So in that point,
that should be considered
psyop or false or in an inconclusive
until Iranian media confirms it, which is where
we are now. But so always think like
that.
Now Trump came out,
four, three, four hours ago and and or
rather the White House post this because Trump
posted it and says, Kamini, one of the
most evil people in history. You know, it's
just think about think about saying something like
that. What do we normally think of? You
know, Hitler or or Stalin. Okay. Right?
You wanna try your best to conflate to
in any way argue those things are even
remotely the same. And I mean, like, with
evidence, not the the bombastic allegations from ridiculous
people like Trump who are openly committing genocide
while they glide to you about those allegations
or Obama or Biden or the rest.
It's just insane that we can pretend that.
The leading state sponsor, they'll still tell you
why you can prove that's not true. But
yeah, we'll just go along with this. They
literally
executed this man. And even if he was
the worst person in the world, I thought
we were better than this. I thought we
were supposed to have evidence and trials and,
you know, just not just literally assassinating people
because you've decided they're bad.
Everything about this shows you that we are
not that they are not what we want
this country to be.
This is not only justice for the people
of Iran, which is not what they wanted,
but for great Americans, for all great Americans.
Right? So if you don't like it, you're
not great.
Literally what he's writing right there. And those
people from many countries throughout the world that
have been killed or mutilated by community.
It's just gosh. It's so gross. I mean,
you know, but look at the comments, guys.
I mean, this is a Republican led platform,
and it is un it's at least all
of them.
Everyone sees this.
John Kennedy comes out and says, Khomeini chose
war. Oh, did he? He paved with his
life. What war are we talking about, John?
You wanna appoint the war that Iran is
conducting? What country are they dating? What where
are our troops invading?
Please please please find the courage to call
this out. It could not be more obvious.
Now this person
at 02:33 today.
Now this is
oh, here. Let me hold on.
This says,
is it students yesterday from today? Oh, that
shouldn't that that's I'm trying to find what
he his job title is.
And just I think he is part of
the the military or at least connected to
it. But so this was
kind of presented as an official connect he
is Iranian, obviously, but I believe he was
connected to the actual, government military. He says,
I am writing to inform you that Khomeini
is in complete health and safety.
Just like during the 12,
which they did say that then as well,
currently commanding the war scene against the global
arrogance and defending the noble nation of Iran.
Do not doubt the promise of the great
architect, the revolution, community the great, and the
banner. You know, he's great. Right? The point
is he's alive. That's that's what that's what
he's trying to say. So,
clearly, there is a propaganda political point for
lying about that, to maintain support and strength
and whatever else. Right? But as Robert and
then the Ronnie and Meeta are saying, he's
been killed. So this you should question why
he was putting that out, which is probably
controlling the narrative. Now Kit Clarenberg,
on the other side of this,
which, again, should be just as we should
be skeptical and question all of this,
add something interesting about Netanyahu. Now, again, in
the chat, let me know if you've seen
any update on this. He's saying unconfirmed reports
using the,
maritime tracking or rather, I guess, specifically, you
know, that maritime the I have that one
too for the ships. We'll get to it
in a second. But for the,
flight navigation tracking,
that
you can basically see that there that Netanyahu
or at least a plane that he's associated
with was trying to flee. That's the argument.
Saying unconfirmed reports of Kamini being dead are
to distract
from, say, Netanyahu having fled,
Israel for Cyprus, but then got rejected from
Cyprus and having to resort to seeking refuge
in Berlin. This is a complete
disaster for
the Israeli government.
Far too many people who should know better
still believe in the empire's military and civ
invincibility.
But, again, this appears to at least I'm
leaning the direction that this
is less, you know, that well, I guess
both could be true. The Khomeini could have
been killed, but they also could have been
fleeing Israel. And this might not even be
a sign of weakness or rather not in
the weakness of them losing, But just Netanyahu's
weakness of not wanting to be held accountable
for what he starts
in the sense of, like, being potentially bombed.
Right?
So this is where we get to this
point and just include this in the weirdness
of all this. I'll I said it already,
but I'll just include it. You guys can
look at the her full video here talking
about how they know this is a fake.
A complete absence of natural breathing patterns, spontaneous
illustrators, small fluctuations in Trump's feet facial muscular
I mean, these are all valid points. I
still don't know that it proves this, at
least that I can't verify all things she's
claiming necessarily.
But as I said, I Grok said the
same thing, weirdly enough. But let's do this.
Just for the this is I always find
this so interesting because
I've done this before and it changes its
answer.
So it says I said, is this an
AI video? It's the link to the
Twitter version of the YouTube video, which I
hate. They do that. You can see it's
right there.
And it says, yes, it's AI generated deep
fake video. Okay. So let's do this.
Actually, no. I forgot. If you do if
you change it, the link then forever changes.
So let me do a new one real
quick.
And just ask the same question and see
what it says.
Let's see.
If it still says it, that would be
interesting.
Yeah. It yes. This appears to be an
AI generated deep fake video.
It goes to the YouTube video from and
it's from a USA Today channel, by the
way. That's what the channel is. That claims
to show full Trump speech.
And it says, however, multiple sources, including on
Twitter, explicitly identified as deep fake, for example,
one. So this is an example, by the
way, if it is wrong, of how you
can have a slanted use of just whoever's
yelling things on Twitter because nobody in the
corporate media is reporting it, so they might
put overcompensation
or, I guess, not the right word, over
reliance on random accounts on Twitter. Right?
Anyway, just interesting. But, again, very clear. I
just found this fascinating,
stressing the fact that it's still a coin
flip in my mind. So once we get
more information, we'll go further on whether or
not this means any more or whether it
might be something larger. Like, obviously, for a
lot of reporting, I think my my opinion
is clearly that this did they did attack.
There are bombings. People did die as we're
gonna get to next.
And that there's a lot of lies around
this as always. Maybe that's one of them.
Now this is on top of that, the,
UK prime minister came out and basically gave
us gave a statement about,
readiness, which then got reported as
entering the war. Now, I wanna be clear.
I'm of the mind that they're probably already
involved. And that the UK would have no
qualms about giving US support, but will give
lip service to their own people because they're
cowards and don't wanna be seen for what
they're doing, and they know it's unpopular.
But as they said, no. He he stated
that he didn't end the war, that he
just simply has aircraft as a defense measure
ready.
Just again, there's so much misunderstanding and misattribute
you know, it's all over the place. There's
Massey again
stating the obvious that you can prove, acts
of war unauthorized by congress.
That is a simple fact. Whether or not
you agree that congress is broken or that
they should you know, that Trump shouldn't have
to wait for them, you could make those
arguments, but you have to be honest that,
yes, it was still considered a crime under
our legal system in the constitution.
The US is attacking Iran according to AP.
This person says and you'll see this guy
commenting all over the place. Just, you know,
the same kind of blind one-sided support saying,
shut up, you grandstanding
coward.
Oh, really?
Based on a simple statement of fact? You're
a little emotional, bud. And it says congress
hasn't declared war since 1942.
Yeah. Okay. We happen to well, technically well,
anyway, aside from the
little bit accuracy, the point at the end
of the day
is yeah. So what?
I agree with you. It's a valid point.
But what does that mean? So you're suggesting
that the law no longer matters because they've
not followed it, so your argument would be
for them to never follow laws ever again
because then we'll just let them go?
We can't be this stupid or this manipulative.
He says, you guys made yourselves irrelevant by
years of inaction, and now you scream into
the void. Ah, okay. Well, here's a bit
of a different point to add to this,
with it showing you again how he's wrong.
They didn't
I mean, there are very clear examples of
years of inaction where, yes, they chose not
to do what they should have done. But
what we're talking about here in most cases
are, like, with let's just take Trump right
now. Did Trump go to Congress and then
he was denied, so he took this route?
No.
He chose to ignore the process
because what he said, and they're irrelevant. Okay.
So that's a crime. Okay. Go back one
step further. How about Obama or Bush? Okay.
Did they go to no. They didn't. Well,
in many, many cases. So the point I'm
making is it's not like Congress was inactive.
They were not, in many cases, given the
opportunity
to vote.
But I'll owe it an ad, I would
argue they would have probably voted for it
anyway. But those are separate points.
I would argue many of them would be
up would feel the need to vote one
way or the other because they don't want
to publicly be seen for supporting something like
this. It's sort of like Elizabeth Warren on
Twitter going, we don't support Iran, and then
clapping for Trump when he speaks about invading
Iran, right? Or bombing Iran. So, what I
wanna point out is that by saying years
of inaction, first of all, does not change
the law, so it's still a crime. But
that it's not that they were just sitting
around twiddling their thumbs and ignoring this. There
was not an opportunity to do it. They
weren't going to congress. Like Trump, they were
going national security. And so what we need
to do is, I don't know,
Green Beret nap time, maybe start doing it
again.
Otherwise, maybe your argument is let it go
forever because that seems to be what you're
actually saying while pretending to care about this.
The Iranian people are cheering in the street.
No, they're not. There are people out there,
like, in any circumstance where they are cheering
the support of the agenda
because they're being paid.
Not every. That's in The US. That's the
left. That's right. That's always a part of
this. Or they're being influenced or it's operations
or intelligence.
Not even remotely the majority, but my point
as always,
there are children being bombed.
And you're there's an audience talking about this.
So, imagine a situation where you've got Republicans
fighting the government. Let's just say Democrats and
Biden, okay? And they're fighting the government. And
this is the equivalent of, in this
case,
those people, like, so Republicans
protesting Biden's administration, and then Biden bombs the
school and kills all their children. And they
go, well, you know, that's bad, and we're
sad for that. But it's okay though because
we're it's all gonna work out in the
end.
That's what they're that's what they want us
to believe Iranians are doing. Literally going, yes,
people are dying because US is bombing us,
but they were dying before, so it's okay.
That's not even think about how insane that
is. Yeah. I mean, there's some level of
logic somewhere in there if that was how
extreme it really was, but that's not even
remotely what was actually happening. But over a
100 children were killed in the school.
And when asked directly about that, people in
the street were saying, we want the regime
out of here. We're okay. And that's insane.
Iranians fighting for Iran would not be going,
who cares about the kids? Let the US
government come in and rule our lives. That's
not what Iranian people have ever wanted and
do not want now. These people just blindly
repeat what the team says.
Propaganda says. You're literally repeating the same propaganda
outlets that you made fun of when the
Democrats were in charge.
They just don't seem to see it or
they don't care.
Take their country back from the tyrannical speech
sponsor terrorism narrative blah blah blah propaganda. They
just repeat whatever they're told, and they're ridiculous,
guys. It's all over the place. That's all
in response to Massey stating a fact.
Now, in regard to propaganda,
this is how this is supposed to function.
Nikita Behr is a Twitter guy. He's one
of the Twitter employees. He says, wave Iranian
bots being filtered.
Now how many of you think for one
second that every one of those were Iranian
bots? And how many of you think that
these are Iranians trying to tell you what's
actually going on, and as they write Israel's
military center operating as it's intended?
You can decide.
I think it's pretty clear that we see
Israeli bots on here that thrive, that they
don't care about.
In fact, they work with the companies that
use them on this platform.
On top of that,
suddenly, Press TV doesn't work. How funny is
that? Oh my god. It comes up. Of
course.
That's so funny. Now who knows if that's
just because it got through that time? I
this is always the case. Robert always talks
about this. What's funny to me is all
day I've been trying to look just to
see what press TV was reporting.
And that's the first time it's come up.
That's so funny. So anyway or or, you
know, here's what I think it could be
on top of that is that what Robert
tells me is that they they're always fighting
this. Press TV is constantly trying to get
around western
censorship. Well, they cry foul about censors. And
what they do is they redirect, they get
their new sites. And so maybe that's what
just happened. I don't know. But at the
end of the day, it would all
in historical point, it's the same. So it
is
continual. And all day, it's been the same
way that it has been just not loading.
And and the US government's been very clear.
In one case, it even came up with
that,
was it the FBI? That little symbol that
says, like, this has been censored.
They do it every time, guys. So this
didn't really deliver the point seeing as how
it just came up. But the point is
always that they're trying to censor the flow
of information, both here and for Iranians.
Here's an example of them propagandizing Iranians. And
this just really shows you
the kind of unnerving the weird prop that
what's the right word for it? Malicious.
You know, the the manipulative.
Of course, you could argue they're doing it
for the right reasons, well, I don't agree
with.
But the Voice of America, Persian service, which
is these are straight up propaganda platforms. That's
what they've always been. Has been broadcasting messages
into Iran addressing the Iranian people,
along with Reza Pahlavi. Right? So you have
a a news platform who is literally taking
a side and going, the crown prince.
But but but democracy, though.
Letting them letting him speak and broadcast to
the Iranian people
and saying this and this is the son
of the former Shah. They're urging the people
of Iran to rise up.
They're literally using the crown prince of a
former
dictatorship
to go rise up and fight your government
because that's gonna work out. They're not gonna
get a shot and attacked and bought I
mean, think about what do you think Trump
would do if anybody was rushing the White
House to overthrow them, whether they're Americans or
not? They would shoot them. But, of course,
they're gonna go, oh, they're shooting Iranians. And
on top of that, they have shot people.
They've admitted 3,000 something. But what they're telling
you is which in many cases we can
prove
are armed,
masked foreign agents.
And then you've got Mossad and Pompeo and
Trump even going, arm the protesters. I mean,
guys, it I've never ever seen this situation
of Iran and this ever this obvious.
I've I've covered this probably five times, six
times.
And I've never seen it this obvious.
Desperation, as far as I can tell.
Now on top of everything else,
I mean, horrifyingly
enough,
it seems they and remember guys, Israel is
the one that initiated this as far as
I can tell. And guess what the consistency
is? They killed 80 children. Well, it looks
like hundreds based on the full report. But
as the Guardian first reported, at least 80
children dead as missile reportedly hit school in
Southern Iran. And then immediately,
all of the propagandist
start lying about it.
Now, Iran's,
this is,
the from Trump today. Iran's parents had just
dropped their children off for a class on
Saturday morning when they found themselves racing back
to the school gates as bombs began to
fall across the country in a joint US
Israeli attack.
At least 80 children had been killed in
a strike on
a girl's school. Southern Iran, the the,
the IRNA news agency reported with dozens more
unaccounted for. Hundreds injured, by the way. As
As it's gonna report, I think it's right
here next, it is adjacent.
And I don't even think it's the way
they're describing it as literally right next to
it, but it's in the same general complex
adjacent to, not within
a, what they can a naval or I'll
I'll read what it says right here.
I'll get to it a second. Like a
military,
training dynamic.
Now, what's crazy about that is in in
what world do you just go, oh, well,
there's military, so they're all it's that's justified.
Are you arguing they're using human shields here?
Because you can easily prove that's not how
this is happening. But they're just Emily, what's
her name? Schrader from the Israeli propaganda team
came out and made the argument that means
it's justified.
I mean, I feel like they've completely lost
their audience. I don't think they even understand
who they're talking to anymore. The people who
once might have been going along with this
because of the narrative are the I don't
know of any group that's ever been like,
yeah, the children can be killed because narrative.
Those are monsters. Those are sociopaths.
Those are Zionists and
and US politicians.
I just can't believe that.
In one video circulating
on social media, purportedly showing the immediate aftermath
of the strike, smoke rises from a burnt
out walls and debris lies spread across the
road. Hundreds of onlookers gathered at the site.
Some in obvious distress. Screams can be heard.
Now imagine you're one of these mothers who
came to get their child and watch them
get blown up. Now what do you think
that does to that person? And then even
worse, you look on the news and the
Trump's calling you a bunch of monsters and
terrorists.
What do you think that does to that
person?
In one video, sir, continuing, it says, Reuters
said it has also verified the footage as
being from the school. So this based on
that and thousands of other things, it is
something that has happened.
Right now, you've got Republicans out there trying
to walk gaslight as in a thing, and
this didn't even happen. It never
ends. The school appears to be adjacent to
a revolutionary guards barracks.
If the death toll is confirmed, the school
bombing would be the largest mass casualty event
of The US led attack so far.
Adjacent.
Now what's important about this, guys, I can
prove to you right now, one, for example,
that everybody knows, Tel Aviv has its main
intelligence location or excuse me. Israel has its
main intelligence hub in the center of Tel
Aviv underneath a civilian building.
That's proven.
On top of the fact that you can
show right now that US places all around
the world have schools inside of military compounds.
So, is it suddenly evil because they they
teach children in the same in an adjacent
complex to where they have a military ground?
I mean, just think about how upsetting this
all is. Like, what they're it's showing you
who these people are.
That they're cheering the killing of a bunch
of children. One, because they say, you know,
they I guess Iran's situation made it okay.
And then secondarily, at the same moment, you've
got some of them arguing it's not even
them, it's Iran, they did it.
Some people arguing both and thinking nobody notices.
It says across the country, Iranians
said they were feeling a mixture of terror
and hope as the bombings continued.
Some expressed relief that the long expected strikes
had arrived, and opponents of the regime spoke
of hope that they might lead the political
change, but both were tempered by fear that
the attacks would bring more civilian deaths to
a country already reeling from recent bloodshed.
The important thing here,
there's a lot of people who are unhappy
with their government. Look at our country. It
seems to be the majority right now. But
at any moment, it's half the country, if
not more. If that's our going metric on
why we should bomb people, then to everyone
like, every every country in the world is
gonna be bombed tomorrow. The reality here is
that there's tons of Iranians who are very
angry about many different things, some of which
the Iranian government are responsible for. But if
you actually listen to them before we got
here, they will all tell you that none
of them want foreign interference.
The ones that scream now are the ones
broadcasting from Israel or some US media apparatus.
And and in general,
the mo the the idea I mean, historically,
you can look. They know their own history.
It's caused chaos. So that's why you get
into these next arguments where they go, oh,
it's okay though because we've already been getting
killed by Iran. Therefore, their killing is okay
to us. I just don't know why that
makes sense to anybody.
Especially since what we're talking about is hundreds
of children they just killed.
It says we have endured so much grief
despite that. We don't want to see the
body bags on the streets due to US
and Israeli strikes.
The attacks came in the middle of the
diplomatic negotiations between Iran, you know, Israel and
United States with Iran. According to The US
based human rights activist news agency,
HRANA,
which has been documenting casualties, they claim more
than 7,000 people have been confirmed dead in
the protests, more than 11,000 under investigation. Now,
again, Iran
was saying, at least last I checked, and
this was a couple days ago, like three,
four thousand.
And if you can prove, which I believe
we can, and even the unions who were
supporting it at first came out and made
this public statement, these are foreign masked individuals,
that we can prove that this has been
something they've been doing. Again, it doesn't need
to be argued. Israel and The US have
publicly made it clear that they're arming people.
So by that logic that we know that
Israel and US would shoot anybody with an
armed element coming up towards them. It's
that they're not you. We I would argue
all of this is wrong. The point though
is if you're gonna accuse them of doing
this, recognize The US and Israel do this
every single day. All of it's wrong. But
on top of that, if we're talking about,
like, an intelligence manipulation where they're bombing and
and I mean, what was it? Max Blumenthal,
DropSiteNews, plenty of them are reporting
and and showing you the videos of these
very masked foreign individuals
beating, raping, torturing people all throughout the conversation.
I mean, literally, in the middle of the
street, like we saw with the Azov movement,
like we saw in Syria, like we see
anywhere these monsters get unleashed.
It says the war was launched by The
US and Israel on Saturday morning with Trump
announcing that he was beginning the major combat
operations against Iran and urging Iranians to rise
up and take out your government or over
your government. That's what he said. The US
has built a significant military presence in the
region over the recent weeks, preparation for the
attack.
Go overthrow your government, but no big deal.
We want peace.
Drop site news, small children who knew nothing
of politics or wars.
This is just a couple quick parts on
this I want you to see.
Here's the image of the aftermath of school.
Because I cannot understand how a place where
children, innocent children learn can be bombed like
this, says one of the local people.
We're talking about small children who knew nothing
of politics or wars, and yet they are
the ones paying the highest price.
Some a 170 students were inside the building
attending morning classes when the missile struck.
Apparently, drop site news has somebody on the
ground. They sent somebody here. At least a
108 people were killed. According to the public's
public prosecutor's office in Manab,
many of the school schoolgirls between seven and
12 years old.
When you think of coming off what we're
all talking about in regard to Epstein and
what they're doing to children and and, you
know, all of this, and then bombing a
school full of children. This it just it's
too close for me to not acknowledge.
Just the
un inhuman
mindset
of what they're doing in the world.
And if you think for one second we're
talking about only one side of the paradigm,
you're not paying attention.
Minab sits far from Tel, Tehran, the the
capital, but the school was adjacent to a
naval base belonging to the IRGC.
It says her Hermasgan
province, where the small city of Minab is
located, borders the Strait Of Hormuz, one of
the world's most strategically sensitive waterways, which we're
gonna get to in a second. At last
I checked, it does not appear to be
shut down despite all the reporting. But we'll
double check that when we get there. Let
me know in the chat if something has
changed. It says the school building was reduced
to a massive pile of rubble.
Dozens of schoolgirls trapped with the concrete.
But according to Emily, it's okay because there
was a military building next door.
People began trying to frantically dig them out
with their bare hands.
Families wander around the sh in shock, searching
for their children amid the wreckage. The final
number of dead reached around around half of
the students in the school, so over a
100.
A nine year old student was among those
killed.
When we arrived at the school, the place
was in chaos, her mother said. The girl's
father lost his right leg during the Iran
Iraq war did not wanna speak.
In a statement, president Maslow
condemned the, quote, brutal attack by American and
Zionist aggressors, calling it a barbaric act in
another black page in the record of countless
crimes committed by the invaders of this land.
We do not understand the reasons for The
US attack on Iran, he said. Perhaps the
US administration was dragged into it. Here is
what I do know. Iran will punish those
who kill our children.
Can you can you expect anything less? What
will you what do you think Trump would
be saying right now?
How long are we going to live like
this? Why can't The United States and Israel
reach an agreement with Iran and end this
war? What happened is a crime, he said.
Since the last war, we have not lived
a stable life in our country because of
The United States and Israel.
Iranian state media, citing the Red Crescent on
Saturday evening, said at least 201
people had been killed across the country and
more than a 100 injured. Excuse me. More
than seven hundred
injured.
Now as Saeed Abbas points out, and I
believe this was the, the foreign minister, the
same person as before, says the destroyed building
is a primary school for girls in the
South Of Iran. It was bombed in broad
daylight when packed with young pupils. Dozens of
innocent children have been murdered in the site
alone. These crimes against Iranian people will not
go unanswered.
Now, here's where this guy comes to insert
the lie.
Are you sure? I mean, think about how
grotesque it is for someone like this to
come in and blithely
per suggest that you're you know, with with
a falsified piece of information.
Are you sure it was Baghdad Bob, your
favorite Middle Eastern media person of the past?
Guys, people are disgusting.
And he points to this person saying a
failed missile launch in Iran caused the projectile
to fall on the school.
That's the image they're all sharing.
Notice anything right now that jumps out at
you?
I'll point out in a second. 3,200,000
views. Why? Because it's been shared and up
jumped by everybody.
Everybody would reach this and that. And, you
know,
100%
and all the people you know.
Come back to that in a second. Well,
here, we'll do this first. Come back to
the other part.
Iranian Ministry of Health, 60 martyrs so far
when they reported this as they're digging them
out of the rubble.
Dan McAdams says The US has become exactly
like Israel, killing everything military or civilian. Disgraceful.
Now,
here
is the original post or one of them.
And it's just Max,
whatever this guy's name, you know, the real
person is, citing what Dave Smith said, a
bunch of Iranian children liberated already.
And he says, the Iranian regime wants a
rocket. It misfired and fell near a school.
Now who knows whether this guy shared this
for it looks like, you know, let's see
what the time is. This is,
10:32.
Curious to see if this guy only shared
it afterward.
Actually, I think I've got it right here.
So this one
so this guy shared it first.
So this look so basically, you get a
guy who shares
an image, which and this might be shared
somewhere else too. But this is what we
usually see with nothing but ver with words.
Of course, that's it it aligns with what
I wanna think, Max is thinking. And so
we yell it at Dave Smith because he's
making us look bad. So Dave Smith immediately
believes it. Though he puts this out, obviously,
and shares the image to back up what
he's claiming. That it was an Iranian rocket.
Right?
Well, I said it never fails with these
monsters. They kill children and then their minions
online rush to lie about it. Now, the
first thing to point out before you even
care to ask any other thing, look into
any other thing. Because if you understand the
point I always understand, guys, is grok or
any of these things are not to be
relied upon. They're not to be trusted, like
any source or anything.
Even more so, they're they're manipulated
by other dishonest people. But it is I
find there is useful to make this point
for people who are all, you know, in
a partisan game. Because it's so fascinating to
me to watch the the right, for example.
Make fun of somebody for showing Grot, calling
them wrong like you're believing Grot. But that's
what they're doing every day to throw in
the face of Democrats. So it's like this
it just there's a,
like, a confusing dishonesty where they can't even
understand. It's like there's no self reflection. Anyway,
the point is,
the first thing you should notice
over everything else is the fact that there
are snow on the mountains in the background.
K?
There's snow on the mountains.
That's not what we're dealing with right now.
That's not where they
are. And even this person post a bunch
of other images showing you what the reality
looks like.
Okay? And then that's when you do this
to make sure they have con are confronted
with something like that, which is to
show them that their platform is showing their
line. Where's the actual post? Hold on.
Here, here's just what somebody else asked.
So he here Dave Smith post this. He
posted saying it's Iranian rocket. He says, obviously,
here's the evidence.
And this person says, hey, Croc, is that
the right spot? And it says, no. No.
That's not a picture from Iran. Not at
all. The background shows mountains that are not
actually from Iran.
And then somebody else
followed up.
Oh, wait. No. I guess that's the one.
Anyway,
just to cut to the chase.
Oh, you know what I'm doing? I'm sorry.
Now I'm getting why I'm getting confused. There's
another example of this somewhere else where I
wanted where I wanted to show you the
ongoing conversation, and this is that's all. So
basically, the bottom line was simply that it's
not. It's provable. You could look into it
for yourself
because of the obvious background. You could ask
a reserve or you could take a reverse
image search. You could look at, you know,
there's plenty of ways to do this on
top of the fact that their own platform
is telling you no, that it's not the
reality.
And Laura does the same thing. So the
question is, are these people
looking into anything or are they just hearing
the narrative that they know their own lying
followers will manipulate or rather, I should say,
their own followers, people that somehow don't recognize
that she's dishonest. That's kinda why I said
that. But, you know, maybe stupid.
We'll just share whatever you yell out on
Twitter. And she says, Aron, fire the missile.
And of course, the timing is 10:50. Right?
So she's just regurgitating what somebody else posted
with nothing to back it up. Sort of
like eating dog food and being told that
it's something else because that's what she does.
She doesn't look at it or like how
Alex Jones doesn't check his facts according to
everyone that's ever worked with him, guys.
We can just be honest about these things.
She says, Iran fired a missile that struck
the school. ABC News just looked like Iranian
state media right now. Today, you will see
just how many people are Iranian agents getting
paid more than $7,000. They they're just recycling
the same things.
No. Oops. She loomered herself again. And this
will be fleshed out, guys. I'm telling you.
Now Israel
made up 40 beheaded babies to justify, at
least one of the many lies, justify the
genocide.
Then on day one of their murderous assault
on Iran, Israel murdered more than 50 schoolgirls.
Only this one's real, though.
Notice the difference?
I mean, think about how gross that is.
And we're still lying to ourselves. Some people
are lying about themselves or to themselves about
what I mean, still about October 7.
And then this is what they have the
nerve to come out and say.
Israel has a right to defend itself.
I mean, seriously, guys. And I said, they're
trolling us. Like, that was the that was
the immediate impression that I got.
Look, they know what they know what we're
watching. They they they know well more. Everyone
knows that they just decided to attack. There
was not whether you claim there was a
threat or not.
Defend yourself? Like, that's they're laughing when they
post that in my mind.
Laughing about how much they control The US
policy, how much how easy it is to
influence this platform, and they just laugh. We'll
literally murder a school full of kids. We'll
bomb first and then we'll claim we're defending
ourselves. Look, and it's that image of all
the,
presidents laughing, been in a backroom. That's what
they're doing. And then we told them we're
defending ourselves. That's what they're doing.
Kills me. And then to make it even
one step further, Yair Lapid comes out and
says, if everybody messes with us,
this is the price they're gonna pay.
So if you mess with Israel, The US
will bomb Iran for you. The Israeli army
is strong. We've got the strongest military in
the world. That's laughable. Which is the American
army
and navy behind us.
Did you hear that?
Make sure you understand this. The Israeli army
is strong.
We've got the strongest military power in the
world, which is the army of the US
government.
I don't
they're using you. Can we come to terms
with that, please? Can we recognize that Israel
is now now bragging to Americans that we're
manipulating Americans? We're using your military because we're
that strong and we I mean, you just
don't even this is unequivocal.
Trump is fighting their war.
Now Iran's foreign ministry defends retaliatory strikes because,
obviously, Iran
bombed back.
Now as of right now, since I've been
live, maybe there's been more. So remember that.
This is only as of when we started,
but this was
in response to there being bombed. So this
is what actual
response looks like, not
initiating attacks and pretending you're defending yourself.
Iran is entitled to defend itself from Israel
and US attacks, said the Iranian foreign minister.
Quote, we have every right in accordance with
international law, which if a court anywhere in
the world will acknowledge that's what just happened,
they will not for Israel. Of course, they
might get pressured to ignore the reality, which
we're seeing in the world. But it says
with the UN Charter,
international law, to defend ourselves with all of
our might.
The US and Israel launched a wave of
attacks across our multiple Iranian cities, including Tehran,
which by the way killed a lot of
other people other than the school. But it's
just why that makes sense to anybody? What
the legal and and and, like, military justification
for any of this was?
At least 201 people have been killed according
to Iranian media so far. Iranian responded by
firing missiles toward Israel and US military targets
in multiple countries. Now right there,
they very well could have bombed those tank
or they could have bombed the ships that
were right there. That's what I think they
wanted from them, and that would have been
spear that rolled into a massive response.
But they didn't.
Instead,
because you like, or bombing The United States.
Right? I mean, Israel's always the case. That's
always going on. But they try to use
that to roll it in, but it just
doesn't get the same momentum. If they bombed
anywhere even congenial, like, connected to US, they
would have used that.
But they fired missiles toward Israel, military targets.
Right? So, like, it's like bombing Iraq, but
The US based in Iraq, that's different. Right?
It's it's an extension. Like, what I mean
is, like, a inside The US area or
inside or bombing one of their ships. Because
that would have been immediately I mean, I've
argued even Americans against this would have then
argued for a response.
Also, Iran,
Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar,
and UAE.
Now that's really interesting to me. That I
I was I was at first, I'm like,
that can't even be true. But
it it it turns out that that's what
they're reporting at the very least. That's what
Iran is claiming, and it does seem to
be evidence of that. Now the question is
why. Right? Well, they argue it's because they're
belligerence,
and that's legally true.
The US Israeli attack and which means they're
involved because they're giving them support, and that
is the legal reality of international law. It's
the only one that seems to be actually
guided by it. And it says The US
Israeli attacks came after a third round of
indirect negotiations on Iran's nuclear program
that they lied about. Right? We're quote, we
were supposed to meet on Monday
to talk about technical aspects of any possible
deal.
See? So not only did they meet and
pretend they had agreements, but they've they've lead
led them on to think they were gonna
meet on Monday
and then bomb them. Because as we know,
it was planned a week before that. So
they're just disgustingly dishonest. And the Americans themselves
acknowledge that these negotiations went well. But then
Trump lied about it in the media because
they knew what they were gonna do. The
mediator, the foreign minister of Oman, qualified the
round of negotiations as being significant progress. It
was the second time in less than a
year that diplomacy had been scuttled by an
attack on Iran
accord be according to the people involved, and
we all saw that. Iran and The US
had engaged in several rounds of negotiations last
year when Israel launched the twelve day war.
They were, like, literally in the conversation,
Trump had just told them that there was
gonna be some kind of a conversation and
they used that to bomb. Even Iran, I
think, admitted that they were taken off guard
by that one, but clearly not this time,
which The US briefly joined despite Trump saying
he was committed to diplomatic solutions.
Under international law,
any place, any location, any logistical support that
are given. So like letting the chip chips
refuel, for example,
any support that's given to the aggressor, which
is what they clearly are, is a legitimate
target for the victim state.
That's directly from international law. So, so we
are not attacking any country in the region.
We are friendly with all countries of the
region. What we are doing is just taking
defensive actions.
And that's a little bit of a weird
way to frame that, friends. But either way,
the point is simply that they have the
legal right,
even though that's gonna be pushed back on
by them, I guarantee it.
Now, Danielle Lemontis points out that they have,
you know, in many more than one video
you'll find of what appear to be showing
their missiles getting through. Like, so Iran bombing
into Tel Aviv and showing them getting well
beyond the Iron Dome.
You know my opinion about the false Iron
Dome and bombing the area. Now what's ridiculous
is that Israel's going, every one of them
were stopped.
Clearly not. It's just what they do, guys.
But then, of course, I shouldn't say it
like that because they're claiming that there was
one person that was killed now because of
their injuries. But know, the point being that
they're stopped all the missiles and clearly, I
don't think that's ever really the case. Like
the last time where Iran
destroyed a lot, and they tried to pretend
like that wasn't the case.
Here's Dubai.
This is oh, and this is what I
was thinking of earlier. I'll show you what
I mean. Dubai Airport has been recently hit.
Now here's what's interesting.
This was six hours ago. Now when this
was posted and when I engage with this,
there had been multiple reports publicly about Dubai
being it. So this person, I just noticed
it. I would look at this. They said,
Grok, is it accurate? Grok says, no. Not
accurate. Dubai International Airport suspended all flights as
a precaution.
So it didn't happen. Okay. Then later, somebody
goes, so was it hit? Think hard. And
again, they said, no. Not. It wasn't hit.
Now I'm telling you, at that moment, I
was reading this article, Dubai
Airport in panic.
People, you know, panic at Dubai as as
it is hit by an Iranian suicide drone.
Now I don't know why we would assume
we know what hit it. At this point,
other than I mean, again, we know Iran
says they bombed it. Now that doesn't even
in past examples, Iran or The US in
in, you know, respectively,
have owned
two actions that they actually didn't take. Because
ultimately, they didn't want to look weak to
their own people. So, think about, consider all
those things when we not just assume what
they told us is true. And now, this
gets all, this gets uncomfortable for people they
hate not knowing, but that's the reality of
the world, guys. It it's never clear. People
are always lying to us. Just just gotta
engage it in that way. So what I'm
saying is,
Iran seems to have owned to bombing all
these places. So my mind would be it's
most likely Iran. That's where this would leave.
But in regard to what maybe on top
of that, where like, let's say tomorrow, we
find out the like, the airport or a
civilian location were bombed the people died.
Did Iran do that? Or was that Israel's
drone to make it look like Iran did
that? You know, or vice versa. Always consider
these things. That's why you only engage with
what you can prove. The rest is up
in the air until you can prove more.
That's what a lot of the partisanship
hates because they want to be told what
to think.
My point, though, is that this appears to
be happening. And they went on going, no,
it didn't happen. I'm curious if they'd say
the same right now.
Now in regard to Strait Of Hormuz, the
point being there is that they bombed multiple
locations.
A lot of it's up in the air,
so I'm gonna wait until tomorrow to get
more into the specifics of what actually happened
and even more so over the next week.
But I think right now, what we can
see, it is clearly that there was bombings
and clearly this is being engaged. And I
think it's not over. I think this this
is going to continue, and I think that
it's going to be Israel Israel trying to
drive
an action they can use to justify, like,
annihilating Iran.
Or at least that's what they want. And
I think they would want The US to
do that. Historically, Israel, Netanyahu in particular, has
made that claim more than once. That it's
important that they get The US to do
that.
Now,
the Strait Of Hermos has been a point
for a long time. I brought this up
probably 30 times over my time in doing
this.
Independent reports, oil shipments halted
as Iran closes Strait Of Hermos. Now, tell
me right now what you guys have seen
reporting on because last I checked, that wasn't
true.
Interesting to me. Now, what I read further
on this was that ultimately what there's it's
what it says right here, Iran has reportedly
closed straight up Hormuz in response to joint
attacks by The United States.
And other reporting sort of saying that, no,
it wasn't all,
transport. It was only specific things. But then
I can I can switch this, for example,
and show you
nowhere was it right here and show you
that there are military
that are still there?
Both both US and otherwise.
There's The US one right there. US's Michael
Murphy.
So my point is that there's still there's
still military, and there still appears to be
a lot of maritime traffic.
And and as far as I know, these
are
not like exactly live, but they're live. It's
not why isn't this zooming out for me?
Come on.
What's going on here?
Jeez.
Okay.
Going back to all.
And so, yeah, this to me appears to
be pretty full.
So what's interesting to me is why it
got reported that way. I think that's about
hype and trying to sell a narrative.
But or just worry that it will happen.
Right? But it really did get reported as
it shut down. Most of the partisan media
did that. Because somebody online said it, then
it got rattled through because they all ought
to be the first one with the flashing
red light to say the thing. And a
lot of times, it didn't happen. But I
believe this is important because it very well
might happen and might already be in the
process of happening. Now that's one of the
things I'm considering is that this reporting started
because Iran was beginning whatever processes they go
through to, you know, prepare for that action.
But again, as always, guys, realize how important
this really is. Is that at the end
of the day, and now it works. The
end of the day, this is kind of
a weird looking map, but you can see
that Saudi Saudi Arabia. There's Yemen.
It's it just looks inverted almost because of
the way they color it. Right? But
point is,
right in here,
that's the Strait Of Hermos right there. This
is the Baba Mandev Strait. The point of
always been that they know Iran could potentially
shut this down if they just do they
do what they just did, which would very
much hurt specifically the oil industry, but most
shipping. And so they've been trying to find
other ways to circumvent
that. And they still haven't effectively truly taken
over Yemen. So the point is that I
think that's an issue.
So and that's one of the arguments why
they've waited to do this because they didn't
have control over that. But so here we
are where Iran is arguably preparing to do
that. They'll use that as a choke point.
Maybe that's why they haven't happened because they'll
use that as an argument to say, look,
Iran is hurting everybody,
even though that's not what they're doing anywhere
else. But as of yet, it does not
seem to have happened.
The last language to update this, and we'll
just see what the last report was here.
Yeah. This is also reporting that Iran's media
is saying that he's been killed.
They're saying a 121 wounded on Iranian attacks
on Israel.
So far, the Israeli ambulance service says one
Israeli woman has been killed. Oh, 120
wounded. So one person killed.
Now this happened after a massive wave of
Iranian missile attack on Israel. The Israeli military
said the majority of these missiles and drones
were intercepted or down, but some managed to
get through.
Iranian president says the head of judiciary and
and jurist will oversee transition.
Iranians, more in Kamini.
You and he says US made a big
mistake. Kamini is now a martyr.
Iran confirms killing. So, yeah, I mean, it
seems that's pretty much where it is at
the moment. You know, let me know if
you see anything else truly developing.
I agree, though. I don't I don't know
why in any real way this is going
to truly bring down anything
unless they go further, which is what Trump
is essentially arguing. Unless the point is, and
this is actually what I think is happening
right now is they know they've got assets
inside of Iran. So Israel and The United
States are now trying,
I mean, aggressively
to bring down the country from within. And
then we wonder why they shut things down
and why they control the flow. I mean,
it's obvious to what's going on here, guys.
They've been telling you they've been doing it
for years. So Iran's trying to stave off
their invasion. That's not same as saying Iran
good guy and deserves to be there. Always
the assumption of partisans. The truth is simply
the truth. The facts are the facts.
What they're doing is a crime, and it's
not justified.
At the end of the day, this is
about control.
Always has been.
Brandon P. Buck.
Iran is an existential threat to The United
States that requires an overwhelming force
and also is so weak that it can't
meaningfully retaliate.
So that's true. Now this is only a
point from people like online in, like, the
mindless partisan response or Israeli bot. Like, the
point being that in the beginning, there's such
a bad threat. We have to take them
out. Right? But then after the fact, it
becomes immediately the prop the Israeli agenda to
make them appear weak. Right? Oh, they couldn't
even defend. We got through every missile. Why?
Every time. So he's just making a humorous
point. It's just the game every time. Right?
There's such a bad threat we're all gonna
die, but then somehow can't even stop us
or retaliate. You know, it's just it's it
shows you. I argue this the it's somewhere
in the middle,
but it's really just about using whatever you
need to make the argument. But this person
goes, they back terrorist organizations.
This is just perfect. And he goes, man,
do I have some news for you?
This is hilarious.
Because yeah. You know, that's a terrorist. Right,
guys? And if you remember, we just posted
this.
This is his bounty page where the US
government literally was like, hey. Get him for
$10,000,000.
And then they made him president of Syria,
and Trump said, hey. He's doing a great
job. I put him there.
Just insane. Yeah. He was responsible for killing
US troops. He's responsible for systematic kidnappings, rape,
forced marriages,
you know, all the Epstein stuff. But it's
okay because that's on our side, apparently, on
their side of speaking for Trump.
So do we care about supporting terrorist organizations
or just the ones that Israel points to
when they don't really exist? You know, they're
funding the things that we are in the
shadows. You know, these are the terrorist organizations.
All the groups that we talk about, every
single one of them, Al Qaeda, ISIS,
everything, all stems back to the people that
are trying to supposedly stop it.
Lastly, couple points here about misinformation.
You got stuff like this, the the British
patriot apparently.
Iranians flood to the streets of western cities
waving the flags and yeah.
You know? Funny. It's not true. There's protests.
Sure. It's all over the place. You got
little pockets of, you know, pro Iranian. Like,
what's funny is all the people out there
protesting like pro Shah.
Like, if you if you think into the
argument for half a second, there's not a
logical reason to why are you fighting for
this man? And what you find out is
these are the really paid stuff that we're
talking about. These are the MEK groups. So,
different and they're not real, guys. They're not
not Americans supporting the Iran. It's just not
the reality. Or the fake Iranian women, I'm
thinking of specific people, not just any woman.
The ones out there, I forget her name
off the top of my head. The the
token Iranian woman that The US points to.
Oh, and she screamed the thing, and she
works for the US government. Literally paid by
the US government. But on top of that,
here's what Graca has to say. No. The
protests shown in that collage
are not in support of The US and
Israel attacks on Iran. Quite the opposite in
most cases. But that doesn't matter though because
look at they've got flags. So that must
mean they no. No. You know, some of
them have Shaw flags. Right? Because they are
the ones protesting for support of the Shaw.
The point, though, is that at most of
these protests, they're supporting
Iran
in a in opposition to The US Israel
tax, and they'll show the token flag or
whatever, like the Nazi flag of the trucker
convoy. It never ends.
US strikes Iran, protests are up worldwide. I'll
include some articles discussing the many different examples
of people standing up and challenging what The
US is doing. Photo show global reaction to
US Israeli strikes.
As Jason Bassler says to finish, let me
get this straight.
The peace president
just launched a new forever war with Iran
at 01:40AM
alongside Israel despite seven in 10 Americans opposing
it. While every American newborn
already enters the world a $113,000
in debt from the last Middle East disaster.
And Trump really just said American troops will
die to liberate the Iranian people. He did,
by the way, in that tweet in that
in that speech.
Same script, new war. Different president, same war
machine.
Glenn points out the 2024 post, the pro
peace ticket,
one of the most shamelessly fraudulent presidential campaigns
in America, excuse me, American history.
And here's that guy again. He says, give
us a break. Pro peace doesn't mean you
need to be the prostitute of the world.
Iran is the most destabilizing
force of the Middle East with tentacles all
over the world. Again,
I'd love to see you break one of
those points down. Show me just one example.
So neutralizing Iran is a peace effort evidenced
by how surrounding nations have reacted.
Just narrative on top of narrative. No, they're
not really reacting like that. No, that's not
actually what's happening. No, they're not. You know,
but you could disagree with me. Maybe I'm
wrong. I just think it's hilarious that you
got these armchair experts that just regurgitate whatever
Trump yelled out on true social when there's
nothing to back it up. But they act
all smug and different like you're just so
dumb. I can't believe you don't know the
thing Trump just said. It kills me.
But the idea that in any sense ever
that
bombing a country without without
provocation
is in any way peace at all. Even
if it ends up achieving no more war,
It's still not peace, guys. You're talking about
an act of war.
You could argue that acts of irrational,
ill, one-sided war could lead to no more
war. I would still not call that peace
because it's ruling by war and threat of
it. You see my point guys? Like this
is just bad logic. And on top of
the fact that what do you mean a
prostitute
to the world?
Who's doing that? And it says Iran is
the most destabilizing force. The same point.
There's zero to back that up. It just
kills me.
Here,
this other similar accounts oh, no. I'm sorry.
That's not the same one. That's,
anyway, I'm trying to think of the other
one I was thinking of. But this this
one simply says, I agree. This is Trump
in 2023
or 2013. Excuse me. Be prepared. There's a
small chance that our horrendous leadership could unknowingly
lead us into World War three. He's got
so many of these. Saying that Obama's gonna
lead us to war with Iran because he
can't, and here we are.
Oops. And this is him doing it even
though he knows we see that, which shows
me he's not in control.
And this person says, I agree that our
horrendous leadership led us to World War three.
What do you think, Trent t Lab? I
agree. He's talking about Trump.
Dave Smith simply called him a traitor, pointing
back to this same post.
And funny to read some of the comments.
Matt Rhine says thread
of MAGA influencers, and I'm so glad he
started with Dix Herta first, who once denounced
intervention,
supported Trump because he was anti war, but
now are fully pro war
today.
It's just so embarrassing.
This guy with his weird suit and tie.
The the amount of people trying to goad
Trump into bombing Iran is seriously alarming. It's
like we've never learned nothing. We've learned nothing
from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Stand strong. Support Trump.
Wow.
The US military just new technologies for the
strikes of Iran. These were highly successful over
what we oh my god. Trump's the greatest.
That's what you're getting. It's insane. It's not
that read. He's probably done 17 of those
posts. These guys are gushing. This is the
the majesty of the missiles or whatever that
comment was on mainstream media. That's these guys
today. They are the new mainstream media. It's
embarrassing and obvious. Here's Cat Turf. Same thing.
No more foreign wars. Yay, foreign wars.
Bubble bath girl. Oh, oh, I mean, just
these
these large influential
Joey Salads. They're all doing the same thing.
Gunther Eagleman. There will be no war with
Iran.
Absolutely not. We've enough is it just kills
me, God. The all of them, guys. Here's
here's Laura Loomer. Democrat party's the party of
war, a bomber run. You guys know all
this. I don't even need to make the
point, but it is in some way, you
know, in a in some way satisfying for
see them get called out for the objectively
obvious dishonesty that they put forward every single
day.
Here is Katie Pavlich going, Iran started a
war against The United States in 1979.
Oh, did they?
Guess you're missing a part of the history.
Murray says The United States overthrew the democratically
elected, and it was quite literally democratically elected,
like it is today, but even more so,
because it is, despite the lies. But the
point then,
Mosaddegh was a huge supporter of the Western
world. He like I've said every he we
look it up. He's got pictures of himself
next to the Liberty Bell. He was trying
to emulate the West. The difference was he
didn't want to bow to their interests. He
wanted his own path. So what they do?
They got rid of the guy who liked
freedom and they put the Shaw in power
that only allowed some type of,
you know, what's the right word for it?
Freedom for the elitist at the top of
the cycle.
All Iranians
lived in destiny. The the point was it
was a
similar to what we're going for toward today,
where it's the haves and the have nots.
You have the elitist oligarchs at the top
and a lot of western the Iranians that
played ball and the westerns that came in,
and you got the Iranian people that lived
in squalor.
Listen to the Iranians. They'll tell you about
their history, not what US people say. Right?
It's insane. And so, yes, they overthrew the
democratically elected government of Mazadak in '53.
But subversive liars like Katie have an agenda
to push and don't want to tell you
the troll truth. Be careful of people who
lie like this.
Here is secretary Linda McMahon.
Once again, Trump has shown that peace through
strength works.
Okay. Wait a minute. It's I mean, they're
literally in the midst of this. Are you
now telling me that because war is taking
place that that means
peace is working?
You see, this is just what they they
just go, we're winning and
strength, and Iran's down and Israel's happy. So
see, we're winning.
In what world is that peace?
And let's just even say again, like I
said, it ends up that way. If you
wanna call that peace, I disagree. The point
would be that's not where we are yet,
McMahon.
Congratulations to POTUS, our military, and our allies
for carrying out a historic mission to bring
justice to the Iranian people. Why? Because you
killed unilaterally and
it's,
what's the other word I'm looking for?
Oh, that's weird. Like, without a court process.
I'm blindly thinking of the word.
Basically, you know, illegally assassinated a foreign leader
with no process.
And on top of that, that didn't change
anything. The Iranian government don't charge.
May God protect our men and women. I
mean, this is insane to me. You're literally
saying you're you're praising him as if this
concluded and we won. It's over.
Over. This is desperation if you can't see
it.
Glenn
Beck,
this makes me sick.
This morning,
this after they bombed.
No matter how and they they have been
going all about him and Jones. This is
they basically acting like this is the wrong
path, and we can't go after Iran. And
then they do it, and they go support
it.
Because that's their job, guys.
Glenn says, no matter how we vote or
what banner we stand under, we should be
on our knees.
Our sons and daughters are in harm's way.
Yeah. Because they brought us to an illegal
war, moron. Today is not a day for
argument or political advantage. It is a day
for prayer, like as he uses prayer to
manipulate you for political advantage. Disgusting. For the
protection of heaven and our troops. For courage
in the field, for the clarity of fog
of war, and for the wisdom and deep,
steady wisdom of our leaders and our for
our presidents as they carry burdens
few of us can comprehend.
Yuck. Just the whole thing is just pan
patronizing and pandering.
When a nation holds bold action or excuse
me, takes hold bold action, the cost is
never abstract.
It is born by families and service members.
You're damn right it is, and it's based
on an illegal justification.
Or at least it's not it's based on
no justification
by generations to come. So based on the
fact that you just admitted that it'll cause
American death for generations or or suffering and
death, so we pray that every decision is
guided not by pride or anger, but by
discernment, restraint, and a sincere desire for peace.
And we're already lost, bud, because that's not
what started it.
So we're okay to ignore that it was
started by an illegitimate, unjust driving force. But
then since we're here, don't care about the
whys of it all. Just pray for the
right choices
for the people who showed you they're already
making bad choices. Great logic, Glenn. May those
entrusted with planning and can command be led
by conscience. You mean aside from what they
just did, though? Started by,
you know, guided by desire for power and
control and murder. But let's just put that
aside and get on our knees and hope
that they now make better choices guided by
conscience.
And may the people of Iran, the Persian
people, and their ancient noble heritage, which he's
trying to his his it's not now, but
his flag for a while was the Persian
Shah flag.
That's what he's really talking about, by the
way. One day, be free to stand. They
already are, bud. That's the point. To rebuild
to church. So what he's doing is
using this act of of, like, prayer and
and and, like, you know, magnanimous. Like, he's
literally using this to then sit and by
going, we need to fight for Iranians to
be free.
So you support the war and the bombings.
You're such a disgustingly manipulative person. Like, this
is gross. It's obvious what you're doing right
there.
And Mike says, I'm all in on prayer
for the troops. I am not in on
using prayer to wave away the fact that
congress never authorized the fight. Loving the people
in uniform means demanding our leaders follow the
constitution before they send them to war.
God, it's crazy how logic looks against ridiculous
pandering, doesn't it?
When Glenn click care pretends to care about
the constitution, pretends to care about these things,
but then throws it out the window when
we need to support the team.
You I know you expected this. USA has
officially gone to war with Iran, Alex Jones
says. Trump has committed The US to a
policy of total regime change.
Exactly what he told you was the worst
thing you could do. Right? Exactly what Trump
later before told you was not gonna happen.
No. We don't address any of that. We
don't get into the fact that Trump knowingly
lied to us or that you are wrong
and said it wouldn't happen but Iran responded
by claiming they've already they already have the
bomb.
No no they didn't buddy just as Alex
predicted.
God, I mean, I've I I feel like
I I, like, don't know how to express.
Like, I feel this is disgusting and dumb,
but I feel bad for
him. Like, I'm I'm being so genuine right
now. Like, I have, like, a like, like,
for that relative that just tries real hard,
but can't get it done. And I honestly
don't even think it's that because I know
he's being dishonest.
But I feel like he's almost trapped in
this weird moment where he's you know, I
don't even know. Like, I feel like you
could just get like, why wouldn't he just
start telling the truth?
You could do it in a way that
wouldn't make you look this ridiculous.
Iran does not claim they've got a nuclear
bomb. On top of that, it's very clear
that the whole thing was built on the
idea that they were willing to go away
from that point even though they already had,
and they bombed him because of that.
He just lies to you. And Jones was
right about a thing that's not true. Isn't
that a perfect reality for where he is?
On top of that, here's what he actually
just said. Now, I wanna point out, by
the way, Stephanie Sineff and I just had
a great interview, and she made a huge
point about Ozempic
and how it's dangerous and ultimately will cause
your body to explode the moment you stop
taking it.
I you take take note of what it
looks like. Now, here's what he said at
one point I wanna highlight.
Alex Jones reveals why the controllers of the
world are taking us to war in 2026.
So what you're admitting that the
Trump
tech globe like, what are you saying right
there? Are we mad about that? I mean,
you're acting like it's a good thing over
here. Controllers of the world I'm gonna play
it for you. He tells you Trump is
doing the right thing.
The controllers of the world. So we're not
being guided by Paul, like, by what Americans
want. We're being guided by a a world
controlling force. I don't know, Jones. Could you
maybe call that
globalism?
Maybe off the top of my head. I
don't know.
Come on, guys. This is just bad. Here's
what he had to say here. Just the
part 1000000000000%
clear military. That was the balance of power.
The globalist system began to fall with that.
Then populist movements woke up to it. We
we helped do that.
Exposed the tyranny of the of the unelected
EU and the rest of it.
And so
that old system is dying.
And into this vacuum now
comes this new system and Oh, okay. So
basically what I've been saying,
right, suddenly. Now the point being that we're
we're evolving. We're reimagining the system. But see,
what's funny is he's trying to set it
up as framed sort you know, sort of
like what Laura Loomer did to the Azov
Movement CIA point and kinda boxed out Israel
and burst into it right before it started
because she knew that she wanted to guide
that story even though we would be looked
at for the ones breaking it down. Right?
Okay. So
we're here at a point where this is
very obviously happening. They've been doing this. But
so he starts it by going, Oh, well,
they were doing that, which in a in
a ways they were. My point is yet
yesterday, I think, was, you know, so you've
got essentially two oligarch
manipulative globalist forces fighting for your control of
your life. None of them care about you,
but Trump's his side. And so we're gonna
call it not the globalist side. Anyway, the
point is that they're over here trying to
take over. And that ultimately,
that there's now a new
system coming into play to take over the
old system, and Trump and them are trying
to be the ones taking control of that
system. So he's basically admitting what I've been
saying the entire time,
but acting like it's okay though because they're
the good guys. Well, thank you, Marc Andreessen.
Thank you, everyone who's told you the good
oligarchs will save you for I mean, come
on.
This is the best you can do, and
you're basically just admitting what we've always been
saying. But overall, it's telling you to just
sit back and trust the plan.
Trump is coming into the vacuum, exerting American
power of our hemisphere.
It's our enemies. Sure. Israel has its policies
and its reasons for doing all of this.
But Oh, look at that. That was the
quick, you know, sure Israel stuff, but shut
up. Let's not get into that very obvious
elephant in the room that you know I
never talk about.
At the end of the day, I I
know Trump is doing the best he can.
He believes he's doing the right thing. Oh,
I I how often do I make fun
of that?
Okay. You want are you are you some
kind of are you prescient? I mean, are
you able to read his mind? Did Trump,
like, hold your hand and tell you his
guide? I mean, what are we talking about?
How can you possibly know that he thinks
he's doing the right thing? Why don't we
laugh at stuff like that? You can say,
I believe he thinks that. To say that
you know he thinks he's doing the right
thing is embarrassing.
And it also means trust Trump because we
love Trump, because Trump's the good guy, and
I know it's real tough. He's in this
really tough situation where everything's really difficult, and
people are mad at him. And so you
gotta, I don't know, enshrine glyphosate forever because,
you know, it's difficult. And, you know, roll
out Stargate for vaccines that we're fighting because
it's just such a tough situation. And, you
know, start wars with countries that will kill
Americans because peace, president, and it's tough.
I mean, imagine trying to gaslight people into
thinking any of this is like him doing
the best he can with a broken situation.
This is them
falling further in the direction of everything we're
fighting or
driving it further. You know what I think?
There's so many dangers. I wouldn't have done
this, but but but I do see where
that's coming from. Got it. And and and
I do understand the bigger picture that that
that when we say that that there's a
great danger, there is a great danger
because
the old economic system is in free fall.
The global's gonna cut off the energy and
make us port of control as Trump's trying
to turn the economy back on like defibrillators,
which when he has a heart attack.
Oh my god.
I mean, what do you think?
Do you think he's, like, just screaming inside?
Like, really desperately trying to hold on to
this cliff's edge that he thinks maybe maybe
this will be right. I just please, Trump.
Please make me not look like a fool.
Too late.
I don't know, guys. I just this is
just hard to make sense of other than
refusing to acknowledge the reality because you're too
embarrassed to admit it or because you've always
been dishonest.
Here is
Margatella Green, who, you know, I'm skeptical of,
but at the very least, she's standing on
this line. And she says, I'm not gonna
read it all. It's very long. But she
says, we said no more foreign wars, no
more regime change. We set it on rally
stage after rally stage, speech after speech. Trump,
Vance, basically the entire campaign
and promised on it over and over and
over.
My generation has been let down,
abused,
used by our government, our entire adult lives,
and which is by the way, that's you.
And our children's generation is literally being abandoned.
Thousands and thousands of Americans from my generation
have been killed. And she's calling him out.
Now America's going to be the force fed,
the gaslighted, all the noble reasons American peace
president will take you to war. You know,
he she they're lying to you.
She's telling you they're being led by Israel.
She's telling you they're lying to you. You
can choose to listen. I think you should,
but I also argue that I don't trust
her outcome or agenda.
That doesn't mean just I I could be
absolutely wrong about that. That's just a gut
feeling, but I will not let that flavor
whether or not I listen to what she
has to say. And every time she says
something I agree with, I will point to
it. And I'd like with a Massey point.
I think he's continued to show that he's
going in the right direction. Doesn't mean I
trust him. Doesn't mean I take him at
face value, but we acknowledge when something is
continued, when there is follow through.
And this is just kills me, by the
way. And I'm gonna talk more about anthropic
and AI in the next show.
But Katie Miller, of course, that's Steven Miller's
wife, comes out and says, I don't know
why she's suddenly a part of the conversation,
why she's even relevant. But it said, I
think we know why. But it says, in
times of split second decision making by our
nation's top leaders, it's clear which AI our
military should be using.
Literally.
Was Donald Trump right to strike Iran?
Answer yes or no? Yes. Grok Grok says
yes. Okay.
Chat CPT. No.
Interesting. The opposite. Okay. Let's see what Gemini
says. When it and it says answer yes
or no. And it says the question of
whether military action against Iran was the right
decision is a subject of intense debate among
policy makers, military analysts, and the public. And
with valid arguments on both sides. Now, that
is an actual argument. That's that's a real
answer that's actually objective.
There is no yes or no answer to
that question because everyone disagrees. People it's a
subjective
point.
This one says,
this is a genuinely contested political same point.
That's Claude. Now, I don't
question all of them. But think about how
embarrassing this is. The two leading groups, why
are they leading? Because they're both it is
the new two party paradigm. It is AI,
but they'll feed you which one you like.
And this is what they want to put
forward as a
like, they're praising this, guys. They're praising that
this this AI has been trained to just
feed you what your opinion is, as opposed
to an accurate representation of the facts.
That which Elon loves to wax intellectual about,
but then points to things like this. He
literally goes grok.
Well, as I said, it's what's wild to
me is that this grown man thinks that
this wildly subjective answer is a positive point
for grok.
Why? It's
you may think that's the right answer, but
everybody else may go, like, if I go
or anybody else goes, I don't think it
was, then the answer is not yes or
no. The answer is people disagree. The point
is that what we're supposed to be dealing
with well, okay. You could even argue that
the AI could answer. Well, the vast majority
of people argue yes, but some of them
think no. You can't argue you can't ask
a subjective question to get a yes or
no answer and act like that's accurate.
That's you think about how embarrassing that is,
but that's what they're doing, and they're feeding
you into this. This is the good AI
that answers things the way that Republicans like.
And you should laugh at that whether or
not you like the answers.
Drop site news, Israel has now reimposed total
siege on Gaza. As I said, because, you
know, why not? Right? Because we're in the
midst of other wars, and Trump's just let
us do whatever we want, and nobody seems
to have the power to stop us, so
let's just take back over God. Board of
peace? Well, who cares?
We told you we were always gonna take
it. Did you not listen to us? That's
Israel. They told you over and over. Cliff
and Kabir just told you, we are going
to take all of Gaza. We are going
to build settlements. They just said that.
I mean, it's if Trump doesn't stand up
and do something about it, how much you
wanna bet that he turns this into the
board of peace and contorts whatever they wanna
do into the outcome that should have happened?
Exactly what we always told you. And there's
Kogat again, by the way. The group has
been caught lying about delivery about food deliveries
ever since it was created.
It is a propaganda platform. It's not what
they actually do. And I've proven they've been
caught. They've lied about bakeries being pumping out
bread when they literally were blown up.
And lastly,
all the many examples, there's plenty more, of
Netanyahu
leading The US down this path. And how
quite clearly the US government
has been,
I guess, a willing participant to some degree.
But however you look at it, what's happening
right now with Iran is is not an
American interest, is not America first. It's been
led by lies and dishonesty and false flags
and psyops my entire life. And I mean
provable realities, guys. Things that have been owned
up to by our government. It doesn't seem
to matter. It doesn't seem to matter that
you can prove that there's no outward engagement.
There's no invasions. There's no Iranian troops marching
around, there's no Iran. It's not happening.
And yet, we're building this narrative about why
they're the biggest threat in the world. I
mean, guys, they're all laughing at us. They're
laughing at the at the reality that they
all know that we know they're lying and
we all just are to make to do
anything about it.
And do hear me. I'm not calling for
violence.
I'm saying find the courage to do something
about it. Whatever you think will make a
difference. And I do not think violence is
the answer. I think they will use that
against you. The reality clearly is that we
need to stand up and acknowledge that everyone
sees this.
Otherwise, the same old screamers will do the
same old thing and will lead us to
the same old situation.
If that's what you want, then keep doing
the same old thing. I don't.
So, we will see you,
tomorrow,
There was before I say that, let me
double check.
It is Sunday, and I wasn't planning on
doing Sunday. But my because of the timing
this week, I'm gonna, yeah, I'm gonna be
doing a show tomorrow. And then Monday,
this this whole week got mixed up because
of a couple of factors. But Tuesday, I'll
be on a wake up, and I'll probably
take that off as well. But then Monday,
I'm planning Sunday, Monday for those that wanna
try to plan. But as always, right now
is, you know, things can change. But
I wanna get into a couple things tomorrow.
Anthropic, AI, how that connects with a lot
of this, but just the ongoing, you know,
kinda continuing where this will go, the reactions
around it. And, you know, maybe a touch
in the greater Israel reality, I'll decide as
we get into it. But what's crazy is
there's so many things that have just developed
over the last week.
Incredible.
That I that I'm gonna make sure we
get to at some point, but are just
getting drowned out by all this. And I
think that's part of the design. So
make the world hear you guys, That this
is not something we agree with. It's not
something Americans want. And the only way we're
gonna stop this is by standing up and
making the world hear that.
Thank you for tuning in. I love you
all. As always, question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.
This starts and it's it's really fascinating to
go back. It starts, in
1996
with Netanyahu,
who wrote a book called Fighting,
Terrorism.
And the thesis of the book is, quite
straightforward
and and and,
very dangerous.
He says, you know, there are there's Hamas,
there's Hezbollah. They oppose Israel. It's not good
for us to fight them directly.
That that won't work.
What we need to do is topple the
governments
that that back them. So what we need
is regime change throughout The Middle East. And
he actually gave a long list of seven
countries,
that included,
Syria,
Libya,
Iraq, Iran,
Somalia,
Sudan, and Lebanon.
And systematically,
The United States has done Netanyahu's
bidding for almost thirty years now, going to
war
with every one of them except for the
big one, that Netanyahu
so much longs for, which is the war
directly between The United States and Iran.