Israel's nuclear capability in terms of weapons. I
can't comment on on on on that specific,
question. You'd I'd have to refer you to
the Israelis on that. Does Israel have nuclear
weapons?
I'm not prepared to comment on that,
on
You're not prepared to comment on it? It's
a very basic question.
We are with an ally
conducting a war against Iran. This war continues
to escalate.
Tell us something
as congress or as the oversight body,
what is Israel's nuclear capability in terms of
weapons? I can't comment on on on on
that specific, question. You'd I'd have to refer
you to the Israelis on that.
Does that mean you don't know?
I can't comment on that, sir. I'm
You're the main person in charge
of knowing this and understanding it.
Will you not give us an answer? I
I don't understand why this issue is so
taboo
when it's a basic question,
and we're in a war alongside Israel against
Iran.
We're dealing with the potential for nuclear fallout,
and you won't answer this basic question.
Well, again, it would be outside of my
purview,
as the arms control and nonproliferation undersecretary,
to discuss
that specific question.
Sir, that is a dereliction
of duty.
It starts with a simple question
and ends in objective reality 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 the
day.
Welcome to the daily wrap up.
Wednesday, 03/25/2026.
Thank for thank you for joining me today.
Or 2026.
I'll make sure I said that correctly. Thank
you for joining me today.
Pretty much an entire follow-up from yesterday's show.
There was a few of the things that
I was deciding we're go to whether or
not to get into
topics that I'm sure you're seeing go I'm
gonna get to them all tomorrow, not even
go over them to start today. I'll be
doing a show tomorrow so we can catch
up on some of the stuff that I
pushed off.
More so a lot of the things that
I tend to cover in the beginning that
I think are important just to make sure
you don't miss in passing.
But today, I I decided just to kind
of follow-up on this one point of the
story that I think is really important,
like I said yesterday, and and even more
because of how it developed.
Now if you've been watching the last two,
three shows,
you've seen the way this has developed. Now
most people don't stay that tuned in to
the day to day. Now that that's just
the reality. I've I've learned that over the
years as much as I find that confounding.
I mean, I mean, I mean, I shouldn't
say that. I mean, we all I can
remember back when I was at a point
when I wasn't doing this. The bottom line
is most people don't stay tapped into the
day to day. So they get the headlines.
They get the kind of framing, which that's
how they often manipulate people because the corporate
media is very much a part of that
game, whether they know it or not. The
editorial board, the way that they kind of
control the flow.
Like, Asal Rad doing a great job every
day showing you how the New York Times
is just using language, manipulating the way you
view one story versus the other. Even though
it's the same action, depends on who carries
it out, they frame it differently. It's very
simple.
But so my point though is that is
if you follow these over the few days,
it doesn't make any sense. And I think
that's what a lot of people are starting
to really come to, you know, acknowledge,
even if they support Trump, that you're seeing
with his rhetoric.
Where what either he's trying to be confusing,
which, you know, you could make me argue
that that's a tactic. That's a political tactic
even though it's very frustrating and insulting to
the people who are supposed to be you
know, he's lying to everybody. But you could
argue that's a tactic and and even argue
it's because of political manipulation and that's just
the way the world is. I would even
understand that argument.
The point, though, is that you have to
acknowledge that we're being misled
even if it's a tactic. And what we're
seeing is a continual misrepresentation,
and it says one thing the next day,
it changes. And then it changes a third
way the next day. And then maybe it
goes back to the beginning, and it just
keeps doing this. Every topic you pick. In
regard to this discussion, I think it's a
really important thing to notice this conversation flow
going from, you know I could go back
many steps from the way it started, the
illegal actions, right, the claims within, the original
cease fire offer from Trump through Italy that
Iran denied. They said flatly no. Then it
turned then Trump, angered by that, I argue,
turned out and said, only absolute surrender. And
then, like, a day later, started talking about
peace talks again, and it's just it's
absolute surrender. And then, like, a day later,
he started talking about peace talks again, and
it's just it's you know? And you could
argue he changed his mind every day. But
then we get into the conversation of this
and in in there, a very important conversation
starting being had by most people, it seems,
acknowledging that Israel seems to be dictating the
war. And, hopefully, when you look into that,
you start to realize it's a lot more
than just this war. But either way, it's
becoming a very important conversation, nothing other than
Israel's government having control over policy, like a
lot of governments try to do everywhere in
the world. So So it shouldn't even be
that hard to wrap your mind around.
Then we get into the point of this
alleged defector, which is something that this is
a word that has been used, but weirdly
enough, it's sort of it it well, to
make it simple for people to understand, Trump
argue
put forward he was discussing
potential,
Peace talks weren't really used,
but an end to the war.
And speaking with somebody who was not Kamini's
son
and not the current leadership, but somebody who
was high up in there, highly respected, and
then you know, about the transition to new
power. And so that's, to be clear, not
the Iranian current leadership. That's what he said
over the last couple of days. And remember
and then then, of course, the point was
and we're gonna read through all this. I'm
just trying to give you, you know, start
point. Is that then we got the point
where he said, you know, well, I'm gonna
obliterate all of your power structures and infrastructure
if you don't do this within so many
days. And then, ultimately, that time came, and
that's where you got this interesting new person
speaking to us conversation.
You if you watched, you got the sense
that I doubt this very, very seriously for
many reasons, which we'll go through all this
again in case this isn't lining up for
you. And and and what we've continued to
see since then is Trump then, and this
is just last twenty four hours, deal with
the Iranian government.
So that has to mean something. And it's
is it possible he's doing both of those
things simultaneously? Of course it is. But when
you get into the details
and, again, not the headlines,
but the details. The intern the day the
day that you know, the in between. Not
every twenty four hours, but moment moment kind
of conversations, you start to see that there's
more to the story. And I think it's
important to recognize that if he's now dealing
with the Iranian leadership that he just told
you were worthless and have no power, and
Jesse Waters said they're all hiding in separate
places with their phones all scared and hiding
in the woods and whatever they're telling you,
but now they're dealing with them. Or they're
entirely obliterated, and they're so weak, and they
can't even stand up, and no one knows
what's happening, but we're gonna give them a
deal.
But they're terrorists, and they shouldn't be there
at all because they're killing everyone in the
world, but we're gonna make a ceasefire agreement
to let them stay in power even though
they're about to die.
I mean, a child can see that this
doesn't line up. Now to assume what it
means is irresponsible is not the right path,
even though I think it's kind of easy
to see where the most likely path goes,
we should wait to prove it. But,
like I'm saying is there's a moment right
there where you can't deny that there's dishonesty
happening.
So what is it driving it? Is it
Israel manipulating Trump? Is it Trump becoming aware
he's being manipulated and changing direction?
Is this all of them in line with
a larger play? Is it about something larger
than just Iran? We We should always be
asking these questions. And we're gonna address all
of this throughout the show today. Now it's
likely going to be
somewhat shorter. I'm not gonna promise that because
who knows where the conversation takes us. But
I imagine this will be shorter than usual.
That's a a guess.
But there's only one real point we're gonna
get into, one real general, you know,
aim for today's show. I actually wanted to
start with,
an article we that this point seems to
have kind of gotten buried,
And now it's becoming a lot more relevant
as we're gonna, quote, end with the discussions
of potential troops, ground troops, and and what
that means with all of this conversation is
included.
But let's not forget this conversation
that Mike Breisner,
activist,
independent media,
and and works with with, vet he's a
veteran himself, and he works with veterans.
Excuse me.
And he was the one that reported through
his sources and people he spoke with and
his own coalition, who speaks with a lot
of veterans,
that they were being deployed boots on the
ground. They were being told this. And in
fact or rather, excuse me. I'll take one
step back. They were told it was a
training mission, and that was the kind of
the story as the headline reads, reports of
US service been deployed under a guise of
training, which as I said then, and you
there there I don't think there are any
you know, the military probably lies to people
all the time, including their own people, or
feels they don't have an obligation to tell
them. That's not the point, though. It's about
why, you know, they're supposed to be honoring
the servicemen, and they're tricking them and going
to war.
Then once it was, you know, become aware
that they were not on a training mission,
it's there's the reporting was that it was
boots on the ground. Now that wasn't definitively
about Iran,
but like I said, the rest the the
last so many reports, if you're deploying,
you know,
personnel in The Middle East while you're clearly
engaging in this war against Iran, then that's
boots on the ground, guys. That's what that
is. They've deployed. They're in warfare. There is
killing going on. There's bombings. And we know
that there are people that were already engaged,
whether Kurds or people we talked about from
the very beginning that have been going on
a long time before we got to this
point.
But if they were already deploying people, then
we should factor that into the conversation. And
I think that's important to see, not just
because that that means war, but because of
when they were doing that and then what
they're claiming is happening since.
Seems to, again, belie the point. It it
undermines what they claim they're trying to accomplish,
whether it's the lies of diplomacy when all
they want is destruction, which is pretty much
what always happens, and that's not my opinion.
It's outcome. It's observe observation and outcome. You
can see what they're doing.
Or
you know, there's a lot of factors you
can include. But I think at the end
of the day, it does open the door
to
there's bigger a bigger story than just what
they're presenting to us. And then, of course,
Graham Trump is resetting the world, which is
another important point that we're a part that
I was gonna start with today, but we'll
get into more tomorrow. Palantir stuff and new,
evol
developments in that direction of technocracy and and,
you know, the invasiveness of this technological,
you know, apparatus, I guess. It's not just
Palantir, but, yeah, we'll get to that more
tomorrow. But the idea of how that connects
with the larger global conversation and have Graham
literally telling you he's resetting the world while
talking about Iran and you know, there's more
to this. But keeping in mind this deployment
and the conversation around it and the manipulation
of our own troops, 03/08/2026.
So, also, the show we just had the
day before on the twenty third,
Iran Iranian revolution yet again exposes Israeli plot.
Now this came from reporting that was from
within Israelis Israel,
inner circle as well as the United States
government. And the reality was that Netanyahu was
speaking to his own people and saying, Trump's
gonna stop this thing. Let's make we we
have to keep pushing this. And many other
points that show you that it's not and,
of course, those could be lies. Always consider
that. The reality, though, is every other one
before this had proven to have been manipulated
by them like this already was, like our
coverage, and everyone else's has already shown.
The point is that on top of that,
it was be the the the part that
became even more clear was that Netanyahu was
driving this and at least arguing or the
reporting was arguing that he was doing it
against what Trump was trying to accomplish.
Now that doesn't, in my mind, give Trump
a pass on anything
because he's clearly been
an active player in this. But I do
think, like I said yesterday, there's parts of
both of this. I think it's clear, as
I was showing you Dan Cohen saying yesterday,
like, it's kind of absurd to claim that
Trump was not outwardly publicly telling you he
was gonna do this. So saying he was
forced into this doesn't that that seems like
a a pass for people who wanna pretend
Trump's not responsible.
But you can also clearly point out that
Israel has always been and is still, in
many ways, manipulating the US government. And maybe
with their knowledge, maybe blackmail, something like that,
or lies, or, you know, many different things.
And I think both are happening,
as I think I've gone through very clearly.
And I think it's important not to, you
know, draw a line in the sand to
pretend it's one or the other when none
of us really know for sure.
Question these things. But that the the ultimate
revolution that they claim started this, the protests,
were exposed as another plot that they were
building. That's the main part of the article
we discussed in on the twenty third, was
that they were coaxing building this. And it's
it's admitted to. What and I'm not even
talking about arming the Kurds or admitting from
both sides of The US and Israel governments
they were arming the people they claimed they
were trying to help fight pro you know,
protest their government.
That's that's just an illegal insurgency. But on
top of that, that it was clear they
were trying to create this for a really
long time
as according to Israeli, personnel and media and
ultimately failed. And now it was reported that
we looking back, well, clearly, the Iranian people
are not just
flowing through the streets calling for The US
to keep bombing. They don't support this. And
they admitted that from Israeli media, and so
the reality is they lied to you just
like every other time.
Now yesterday, we talked about and the first
part of this, that that that like I
said, yesterday, we talked about Palantir AI now
is the core US military system. We're gonna
get more of that tomorrow. The second part
of it was doubts about Trump's alleged Iran
negotiator deepen. So this has been an evolving
conversation. So this brings us to today where
and I'll start with an article that kinda
gives you a brief
kind of overview of the last so many
days.
But this already on the twenty fourth, we
were already feeling that this and then my
kind of joke image here was it's clearly
it's somebody not who I don't feel it's
an Iranian or genuinely speaking for the Iranian
people who was in negotiation with Trump. And
I was getting the sense that maybe Trump
doesn't know that. Just a thought. And the
idea being that, you know, he gave him
a present, which I didn't mention at the
beginning,
which how does that line up with you
now engaging with the Iranian government, which is
happening? And then Iran and his government turning
that down. We'll get into all of this.
But then, ultimately,
there's possibilities here that Israel is I was
speaking with, Robert this morning about this, that
Israel is
fronting and playing as some kind of an
Iranian to trick Trump. Right? Or that it
is an Iranian, but it doesn't represent the
Iranian people. Or what if it's the what's
the Shah? I mean, wouldn't that actually make
sense? Because Trump and the rest of them
have been telling you that he's the leader.
So when he starts speaking to the Shah,
because no one in Iran will talk to
him and they just pretend like that's the
agreement, is that not I mean, you see
how perfectly that lines up, but I that's
just one of the many thoughts.
And then they pretend like they have some
kind of agency because he's the leader. Right?
They would play they did it with Guaido.
It's the same kind of tactic. The difference
here is they have even less support than
they did in Venezuela.
So from that point,
let's start with an article from Robert that
came out today. And I think he did
an excellent job on this. This image just
cracks me up. This was it's just it's
basically just Trump underwater is the I is
the idea and Iranian ships kind of surrounding
him and then an anchor Israeli anchor holding
him down as kind of, like, a perfect
analogy for a rather, you know, symbolism for
where we are. The title is strategic failure.
Trump's contradictory Iran strategy unravels. And he did
a great job breaking this down. And there's
new parts from today that are in this,
but, really, the it's still sound based on
the logic. The only difference is what I
mentioned on the new plans being proposed.
So the interesting part here is that not
just the immediacy, like, the last so many
days, but the entire strategy.
As experts, whatever you wanna may think that
means, whether state department fake information experts or
experts in the actual information or just people
who are students of all of this,
have been telling you for a long time
that this is inconsistent. Or, you know, for
example, here's a small point. The CIA in
intelligence told Trump that this was not gonna
work, that doing this would not actually decapitate
the leader, and so did pretty much everybody
else except Israel. And who did he listen
to? Israel, assuming he made that decision and
was out maybe it was outside of his
choice. But there was a lot of those
kind of examples where it seems that he's
been putting forward a narrative that contradicts the
actual reality, the facts on the ground,
or what seems to be the most logical
or what's in the interest of Americans. And
so they've been putting forward a lot of
these narratives that are now coming to pass
and contradicting itself and showing
you that either he is lost
to just desperately lying or he's not aware
of what's really going on. I'm not sure
what's more alarming. US president Donald Trump appears
to be continually backtracking and or contradicting himself
on his various announcements regarding Iran. While his
rhetoric attempts to project dominance, the administration's actions
reflect a state of crisis and suggest that
it's being forced to back down, which is
pretty much what Iran is pushing.
Like, I that's what I said yesterday too.
It's it's almost like it doesn't seem like
a wise tactic for them because he clearly
seems to be trying to find a way
around that. To not to get away from
this is my opinion. And so for Iran
to come out and poke him in the
eye and call him a loser, which was
when they put that video out, and to
basically make a big point about how you're
backing down, you're losing.
As much as I agree, it seems like
that would drive somebody like Trump to just
irrationally do the opposite. That's just how low
opinion I have of people in government.
But I think this is kind of, you
know, the obvious reality of what the facts
show right now. And, again, we went over
yesterday the reality of the interceptors and the
drones and how despite them in again, those
kind of points where they just will yell,
they're completely defeated. They have no means to
do what they have been doing all day,
by the way, or, you know, today, where
they were bombing and yesterday
in ways that demonstrate that they're
increasing their volume.
And so they're just they're proving that these
people are lying about them. Now if The
US has to lie about their abilities, that
other means that they or if they've said
that it is a lie, that other means
that they didn't know that was the case,
which suggests they don't really know what's going
on, or that they lied about it suggesting
they had to because they're not in a
good position. That seems to be most logical,
but there's a lot of those. And so
we have seen the reality now, and the
evidence is showing that they are in this
for the long game and that they can
essentially indefinitely
continue to cause these problems for specifically The
US and Israel. And the Strait Of Hormuz
is the factor we keep talking about. They're
it's not closed down, as we'll get into.
It is restricted heavily, mostly through threats. And
I think through The US and Israel convincing
everybody else that they're in danger by trying,
even though Iran's saying it's only The US
and Israel.
By effects, and I would argue by The
US and media framing it that way, has
dramatically
decreased the tankers that are going through, mostly
just Iranian tankers. But even today, they, I
guess, they just let somebody through, and they're
basically saying, look. We're not restricting anybody but
these people. So it's kind of a mirage,
and I think that's important to
hear. But all of that to say is
that they could take further action, and that
doing that is a game. It's a tactic
they're playing in putting Israel and The US
in a very bad position.
After issuing a forty eight hour ultimatum to
the Islamic Republic Of Iran, demanding that it
reopen the strait,
and that this is over the last three
days,
or face strikes on their energy infrastructure, which,
again, let's be clear, was a crime or
would be.
There's no legal justification to strike their infrastructure
just because you're hindering his ability to, you
know, claim he's successful and, you know, oil
sales and oil prices that are hurting his
personal agenda.
So they said, if you don't do this
what we want, we will commit those war
crimes, which is there's no question. K? Targeting
infrastructure for civilians is a crime.
So you could argue he didn't mean wasn't
intending to do it, but it's still a
threat of a war crime. And it says
to and despite the strait only ever being
restricted to The US is US, Israel, and
their cobelligerents,
which just a legal term from an international
law standpoint means people who are alongside them
committing the war.
Trump appeared to be backing down on Monday.
Suddenly now, again, this is the forty eight
hour period where he was saying, look. You
know, we're you better you better step down.
And he's done that many times and then
not follow through. So now it was, like,
hours before that forty eight hour window was
gonna come down. Iran was just publicly laughing
at them from the very beginning of when
he said that. Clear they weren't gonna stop
or were gonna capitulate.
And it says,
suddenly, after this point, the president began claiming
that he was conducting negotiations
and that a deal was within reach in
five days,
which is a very clear point people are
making today about the timing of the markets
and just arbitrarily aiming at the end of
the market point. I mean, I'll just show
you right now.
Chris Martinson points this out. If nobody gets
goes to jail for this, we've entered the
every man for himself stage of the empire
decline.
Traders placed $580,000,000
in oil bets ahead of Trump's social media
posts on Iran talks. Now there's more. If
you read into this, the reality seems to
be, and this is what many financial people
are saying, is that you can very clearly
see that there's people who have inside knowledge
about things he's about to do and then
make actions based on things that he's about
to do, and then many people are simply
responding to what he's saying on social media
as well. But there is inside levels to
this. And so what we're basically finding out
is this whole weird five day window seems
to be specifically about manipulating the oil prices,
which some people think that's it. I think
there's more to it. But if that was
it, that means that the whole thing, the
defector, was a made up story. Just just
to get a little bit of relief and
artificially so, which is only gonna make it
spring back more, in my opinion. But everything
they're doing is artificial in the way they're
trying to lower these prices, which is why
it springs back every time they do it.
As of right now, as I checked, it
went down a little bit, then it went
back over 100. Could be different right now.
And, again, I'm I'm like Brent crude. There's
many there's different versions, but just for the
point, it's it's higher than it should be.
And it says,
where was I? That he,
even stated that Tehran had agreed to concessions
that would reopen
the Persian Gulf. Again,
they're not agreeing to that. That's just clear.
They've made that, and I'll get into their
stay statement as of the last time I
checked, which is, like, we what you said
means nothing. We have our statements. We're not
gonna back down until you give up until
you basically stop conducting your illegal wars and
stop bombing people for no reason. You know,
you could disagree with the framing. Whatever you
think, they've drawn their line, and they're not
even they don't they're like, we don't wanna
talk. Here's what we demand. If you don't
wanna do that, then we're gonna keep doing
this, and we're gonna only restrict you in
this trade.
That's where we're at.
So having them claiming they have concessions to
reopen it, that's these are
I mean, unless it comes to pass and
you find out there was somebody randomly behind
the someone we didn't know about speaking who
has the ability to make all this happen,
This seems like an outright lie. Whether they're
speaking with somebody or not, the claim, for
example, they agreed to have no nuclear weapons.
Well, you or or a way to frame
this is him just kind of
intentionally misframing what actually went down. For example,
they've always said they don't have a nuclear
weapon. They've always said they're not seeking it.
The evidence has always backed that up. Now,
of course, you could argue that they have
a secret one or they're being lied to.
The evidence doesn't show that, not from the
US government, not from the IEA. Only Israel
is the one lying about that and then
US as well. So the
point
where was that?
Shoot. I just lost
it. I just completely lost my point. I
was gonna there was an up this, post
that I was gonna show.
Well, the the the nuclear point, god, I'm
gonna forget that entirely. That's so frustrating.
Well, the the the world where I was
leaving off, he stated that Tehran had agreed
that two concessions that would reopen the Persian
Gulf. It wasn't obviously closed or restricted. God,
there's a point I was making there. Sometimes,
I wish I could just rewind because as
you guys know well, if we walk the
show regularly, my mind jumps from point to
point and, ultimately, sometimes, like, I drop it
when I'm trying to go back to the
other one.
Well, I'm sure I've gone over the nuclear
point many times there. But, oh, ultimately, the
idea was that the lie about the nuclear
technology, I think, was pretty clear. All the
evidence shows that. But the idea oh, that's
what it was. Thank god. The the point
about, you know, he they promised they're gonna
get rid of the nuclear technology.
So if you're going to say that,
are you saying that they're still doing what
they've always done and framing that as, oh,
they finally agreed because I'm a master dealmaker?
I think that may be the real possibility
here. Or it's simply that they didn't say
anything, and he's just saying, what the current
reality is that we actually know is what
I got to happen and acting like the
deal was done because we are there even
though that was always where we already were.
That seems like a very desperate play if
that's the reality. Now it says Iran's foreign
ministry spokesperson,
Esmail Baghe,
quickly rejected The US leader's claims, asserting that
no negotiations
had taken place
and that Iran's position regarding the Strait Of
Hormuz and conditions to end the imposed war
has not changed.
Now that was them speaking up about a
a pro's deal. And then later, the media
asked and he insinuated that it was somebody
else. Iranian officials then began offering that their
analysis
that the White House's change in tone was
a deception
aimed at making a retreat from Tehran's threats
to attack Iran's electrical infrastructure while preparing for
a possible ground offensive involving boots on the
ground. Now here's an interesting point, by the
way. My I I theorized about this being
a possibility before I saw anybody else talk,
which is pretty much always what that show
is like because I'm not out there reading
everybody else's comments before I go on my
show. I'm looking at source material, just giving
you what I think. Often, that can I
lose I miss things because I'm not reading
everybody else's commentary? But either way, I think
it keeps it fresh and and objective and
not trying to make it what anybody else
is saying.
But the the point here,
preparing for possible ground offensive, on boots on
the ground,
this aligns with facts on the ground that
western corporate media have failed to highlight.
Not only were 2,500 marines sent on their
on their way to the Persian Gulf, but
estimates suggest that up to 5,000 could arrive
in the region by Friday. A frequently discussed
target of any ground operation has been Iran's
Kharg Island. Damn it. For some reason, my
mind is just jumping all over the place
today.
Foreign officials have begun offering an analysis. The
White House has changed in tone. Was a
deception aimed at making retreat from Trump's threats?
What was that?
Or preparing for a possible ground invasion.
Well, either way, one of the things important
to point out is that what we're talking
about is that
they're in a position of weakness and that
Donald Trump ultimately
decided to back away from
the
crimes that were threatened
in order to try to get their concession.
But, you know, either way, what we're seeing
is that them creating a situation where they're
calling their bluff. And I think that's really
important because Trump has continued to be caught
with doing that. But so in this case,
the 5,000 is the combination of 3,000 or
2,503,000
troops that they are now kind of combining.
Now that, again, is not like a definitive
boots on the ground Iran, but we're talking
about an action that is the same point
in regard to the Middle East war that
we're talking about.
Attacks on Iran's civilian energy sector is a
dangerous gamble, Robert points out. And I think
this is really important because this speaks to
the kind of dishonesty we're dealing with here,
that they've been telling us this entire time
this is gonna be a one off three
days for you know, well, four to six
weeks is this time frame they're pointing to,
but they kept telling you it's gonna be
over so fast.
Now this point is about the threats of
power structures, but it's the same point with
everything else or rather power infrastructure
is that they will threaten a lot of
things. They will bluster a lot of things,
and a lot of this comes from nonsense.
Now, in this case, had they gone through
with this, which is the point of the
bluff, is that it is objectively something that
would have been just a quagmire
and would have responded with something that would
have utterly destroyed
far more in response from what Iran would
do to us in compared to what
they would have or could have done to
Iran. Power plants are difficult, he writes Robert,
to destroy and would require multiple waves of
concentrated attacks to take offline,
which would be the point. Right? Iran has
over 400 power plants in total,
including some 150 major ones. Its largest site,
the,
Damavand
Combined Cycle Power Plant, supplies only 3.7
to 4% of the country's total electricity needs.
Even if The US and Israel managed to
destroy it, which would demand significant firepower,
given that Tehran's infrastructure is hardened for war,
again, the point of them planning for this,
the Iranian retaliation would ultimately follow.
Now by comparison, Israel only has five major
power stations, more than just five, but five
major power stations.
Its largest, the Orat Reben plant in Hadera,
provides roughly 20% of Israel's total power needs.
Taking it out would cause a far greater
catastrophe.
The Gulf States also have a much smaller
number of power plants. Iran, for example, or
Bahrain, for example,
relies on only a few, and these countries
consume around five times more electricity than, per
capita than Iran. So if you missed the
point, the idea is simply that that should
they have done this, it would have been
it would have taken a lot of effort,
a lot of very expensive munitions to maybe
take it offline. And remember, they planned for
this and insulated these things, and then they
would have responded.
I mean, maybe. I would still argue we're
get that my point is before from yesterday
is even if they did it first and
Iran responds with civilian infrastructure, it's a crime
either way. And all that would do is
basically make what they did justifiable.
Because then later looking back, well, they both
did the crime. You know? It's I would
argue that their their right response would be
to not do that.
But, you know, that's they're we're being driven
into a direction where it's like, well, there's
no thing you can do. When they do
it, then you have to, or you're gonna
lose. And I don't I don't agree with
that. But
because, you know, you lose more than just
you know, you lose everything if you end
up becoming what they are to maybe win
that war. But
the problem is that there the
the strategy is that if they responded, they
would be able to strike easier and take
out more potential electricity,
effectively hurting far more people
than what they did to them and have
shown clearly with the last twelve day war
point and everything since that they have the
ability to get through their defenses.
And so this seemed like just bad calculus,
but I think at the end of the
day, they weren't really gonna do it, or
Israel was going to drive it knowing that
this would be something that would largely hurt
more than The US, it would look like.
The other word in other words, he writes,
Iran is a far less vulnerable than The
US allies to attacks on energy infrastructure, in
addition to threatening retaliation against power plants on
the other side. The Islamic Republic also warned
that it could, if it wanted to, target
water des desalination facilities.
Again, Iran relies on desalination facilities for only
a tiny fraction of its water needs, low
single digits, in fact, while Gulf states like
Qatar and Kuwait depend on it for 90%
of more of their needs. So their vulnerability
is obvious. And so they have that ability,
should they want to, to press that. But
the question is, will they?
And I I doubt they will if it's
not done first or if at all, really.
And that's not my opinion. It's demonstrated by
their restraint over all of this time.
One of the point that I was gonna
add
is and we're gonna I'll get to it
at the end, actually, but there there's an
interesting I you know, think just about the
energy stuff.
It's obvious to point out that there there
we've lot of us have been covering the
transition. And I mean, not even just like
what I'm talking about today with this obvious
addition to it, but going back before, the
great reset, you know, infrastructure issues,
lockdowns.
Right? And that lockdown's in regard to COVID.
Right? But now a lot of people are
suddenly talking about, and rightly so to certain
degrees,
energy lockdowns.
So if you if you if you're interested
in this topic, I recommend you look to
somebody like Jason Basler or if people in
the IMA, my personal opinion.
Nonetheless
or I should not nonetheless, but in addition
to that, the point is that this is
an this is a real thing, and they're
very clearly,
in my mind, trying to transition society into
some new form of governance, new form of
structure.
So I think that necessitates the collapse of
the current system to justify the new one.
So one of the thoughts, and this should,
I hope, just for the moment, just disconnect
this from the current conversation, is that ultimately,
we're talking about the effort to try to
drive us into accepting what is something that
many of us don't actually want. And that's
just a larger point to just any of
these things, whether it's less control, less freedom.
You know? And so in this case,
a system of, like, the new technocratic
fifteen minute city dynamic, digital everything, like, that's
what they're building.
So the question is, is this in any
way related to that point? And because right
now, what we're seeing is the we talk
we Steve and I talked about the the
International Energy Agency, which is separate, not the
same as the in in Atomic Energy Agency,
and they put out a document discussing why
we need to restrict and pull back on
energy because of the Iran war. So let's
not miss the point that that's not even
debatable. That is an illegal war started by
The US and Israel that is having
byproducts that restrict what you can do in
your lives. And what is the US government
left and right and the media left and
right telling you? Take it on the chin
for hitting going after Iran, just like with
Ukraine. Then all the Republicans made fun of
then are now going, take it on the
chin for Ukraine, you know, or on or
Israel.
So it it the the ultimate point is
that I think we can see how these
things might connect, and that this very well
could be part of a larger strategy to
destroy
oil infrastructure and energy infrastructure. And even more
so, you should question whether that all of
these people might be involved with some larger
global play. Now it's a hard thing for
people to wrap their minds around. I get
it. I would even argue with what we're
looking at that seems less likely than than
the inner dynamic for many reasons. But that's
just my opinion based on limited information
because I think both are clearly happening. The
question is,
one, is that a is this driving you
there? Is that by design? And then would
Iran be a part of that manipulation?
Now, again, we'll talk I'm just gonna point
that out at the end with a really
great article discussing that. And I think it's
worth your time to consider that, even if
it's not something you think is the reality,
because that's how you should think about this.
It's not always one or one or, you
know, all or nothing or one or the
other. Sometimes it's a mixed bag. And so
right now, you get that kind of blind
where people are saying, no. It's all part
of the global thing, and you're falling into
the trap of the inside of the maybe.
Maybe. But considering both of those views or
all of the views
is the right way to go. It's the
right way to look at this.
So
in other words, Iran is far less vulnerable
to these type of attacks. So had they
have done this, it would have been a
very, very bad move for them. And still,
I think Israel might drive this into reality.
Again, Iran relies on, well, as I said
earlier, far less in weather especially with the
water. They need 90% of the needs from
those things that they could bomb. Iran only
gets, you know, low single digits from what
they you know, they've they've
built themselves in a direction that insulates them
from these kind of attacks.
Now here's the, the post, by the way,
of just or the video of of,
Aragati, the foreign minister of Iran, openly saying,
no. The hormos is open. It's open for
everybody.
It's closed for Zionists. And he and what
he says in there is, you know, the
the enemies, the people attacking us in this
war.
And and maybe he's lying about that. But
as as I've shown you before, I don't
think I have it up today, there's tons
of traffic going through there. Now, what I
did like, more so today than in previous
days, there's very, very little, if not any,
traffic in regard to tankers.
And I think that's indicative of the fact
that they're
I think it's from the propaganda side of
the West media is convincing people everywhere
that there's a threat
when there's no indication of that whatsoever
other than what they're claiming they're actually saying.
Yeah. And I think that's important to think
about. Because when's the last time Iran
sunk or attacked? You know, outside of the
the limpet mind back and forth and the
manipulation that very much was a manipulation from
Trump and Bolton last time.
As gas prices steadily rose, he then announced,
back to the story, Trump then announced that
he that the war was, in effect, over
somehow.
Right. Even though we're in the middle of
a potential negotiation to do that very thing
you said, because this might end the war.
And then somehow before that's even complete,
it affects over anyway.
And, again, I don't know why that's not
weak, like, desperate. Like, that shows something that's
that's like saying they surrendered when they bombed,
and
the other, Middle East elements didn't respond, Iran.
They bombed them, and they didn't respond. And
they said, okay. Well, if you if you
keep if you stop helping them, we'll stop
bombing you. And then they continue to bomb
The US and Israel. And Trump framed that
as surrender.
I mean, that I don't know what you
call that other than desperate, weakness, misrepresentation.
If you're strong, you don't need to do
that.
And it says a a
the the war being over is obviously a
blatant falsehood apparently designed to temporarily lower gas
prices. Later, he called on everyone from NATO
allies to rivals like China
to help ensure the free flow of tankers
through the Persian Gulf, which, remember, nobody wanted
to help. Not their allies, not Australia, not
Japan, even The UK, last I checked, said
we're looking for other viable alternatives because, as
Robert Reddy points out,
that's a dangerous situation. And if they join
this, then they're now co belligerence, as Iran
at least sees it as. And they, at
the tightest choke point, can simply just lob
missiles at them should they want to. Now
question is, will they? But, see, they're not
willing to put themselves in that position for
something that I think, whether they say it
out loud or not, is very clearly a
war of aggression.
First, he said NATO would help,
then claimed The US did not even need
its allies before labeling NATO cowards for refusing
to offer their naval vessels for a mission
to break the restrictions imposed on the Strait
Of Hormuz.
Subsequently, the idea emerged
of using US ground forces
to seize Iranian territory,
specifically, Kharg Island, which I'm thinking is a
clear part of the possibility of whatever gift
we're talking about that he was given, or
maybe he wants you to think he was
given that so they can just seize it.
But Robert addresses that in this discussion about
how dangerous that would be because of how
easily they would be a target there. Senator
Lindsey Graham, who, reportedly holds sway over the
president's decision making, has lobbied hard for this
option,
a more heavily favored
a move heavily favored, of course, by the
Israeli lobby. When recently challenged on the viability
of deploying ground troops to Kharg Island during
a Fox News interview, Senator Graham asserted it
could be done and referred to the,
referred the host to the Battle of Iwo
Jima in World War two,
which was roundly criticized
because it was, as he writes, notoriously
bloody. Like, one of the worst in in
memory and around 26,000
US service members. And not necessarily the numbers,
but it was apparently just a brutal battle,
sparking backlash against the Republican senator. Because, you
know, we we're being told no wars, no
boozing around, limited strikes, you know, and now
we're at the point where we're like, just
the it's keep carrying it to, like, the
war one of the worst battles in World
War two.
That's not even mission creep. That's just that's
just I don't even know what you call
that. Even assuming the US military succeeding in
capturing Kharg Island or any other island Iranian
island, it would not change the reality in
the Persian Gulf. At best,
Trump could claim a symbolic victory while his
soldiers faced constant drone and missile fire. And
it really would be symbolic because, I mean,
you could argue that they might be able
to gain something from it, oil and otherwise,
but if you're being bombed and they're able
to,
I mean, I guess at best, you could
you could turn that into sort of you
being the victim in the situation, but that'd
be a hard sell for where we are.
Moreover, seizing an island, he writes, would not
magically remove The US Israeli restrictions placed on
these straight up removals. Right? They would continue
to do what they were already doing. So
it wouldn't ultimately accomplish anything other than maybe
gaining control over the oil resources right there.
Iran can still target ships, which is not
nothing. Right? But, again, bombing would stop that.
Iran can still target ships with missiles and
drones from the mainland.
Simply sinking a few vessels, should they want
to,
with with mines or otherwise, could physically block
the passage.
But remember, these are things that have long
been threatened and stated, like, from The US
claiming they'll always do this, should we do
anything? And there's been so many examples where
they've had the opportunity, in this case, a
legal opportunity, to respond in the ways they've
always claimed that they desperately want to, and
they did not.
Another potential factor is the future involvement of
Egypt, which shows signs of being pressured to
participate.
If Cairo does,
does eventually involve itself, Iran or,
the Ansaral movement, which the
state department have labeled the Houthi rebels as
Robert points out to. As as always, they
give them a name that's supposed to make
them seem like, you know, the rebel terrorists
as opposed to the Ansar Allah movement, which
is largely supported by the people of Yemen.
But it says if it eventually does involve
itself, Iran or the Ansar Allah movement could
block the Suez Canal.
So remember the point here for the other
side of this. If you go around the
landmass and up the Baba Mandev Strait, that's
the Suez Canal with Egypt and going over
to the other, you know, the other, body
of water. And so
that's why they've always wanted to control both
the
the bottom end of the Strait. They've been
basically
committing genocide to just maybe control those areas
and why they overthrew and placed a puppet
in Egypt, which is Sisi, which is a
very public and very easy to understand story.
And so now
they have control over that through Egypt, but
the point is because they do not have
control over the Houthis, the Ansar al movement,
and the Bab el Mandev straight, that they
could eventually decide to try to block the
Suez Canal,
another key global trade checkpoint. The Egyptian economy
is already suffering as a result of the
war, and its crisis could deepen if it's
force forced by its Gulf Arab and Israeli
US allies to make itself a factor on
their side.
Now think about this. Egypt is suffering from
the war. You know, a lot of them
are. Now why isn't everybody in the world
right now, and I think they actually are,
turning around and going, why do we keep
doing this? Why are we allowing these belligerence
to constantly hurt us? And it's not even
just these governments, I don't think, care about
their people.
They are hurting from this. Their interests are
being hurt. And then also the peoples of
these areas. Now it says no option available
to The US president will get him out
of this strategic check he's put himself in.
Meanwhile, Iran's oil production has skyrocketed. I find
this crazy, by the way.
Reaching a forty six year high right now.
At the same time, prices for goods inside
of Iran
have decreased.
That should really bother the American Republicans who
are arguing that this is somehow that, you
know, hashtag winning.
With Iran's the with the war on Iran,
their per their prices have gone down because
the country has halted exports as a precautionary
measure, and
they've removed sanctions on their oil,
which is as I think it was more
money than the argument, I think, Glenn Greenwald
pointed out, which again, the $1,700,000,000
they're talking about and they were given back
to Iran, that was money that was stolen
from Iran. It's very easy to look up.
So the the claim that they just gave
the money for dirt, that's a lie. But
you could still argue you don't think they
should have given it to them, but but
it's their money they stole.
So the point though is the the oil
money that they've gained just from the removing
of the sanctions, which is theirs anyway, by
the way, I guess, is somewhere around 14,000,000,000.
So take a second to think about how
insane that is to argue of all this
time. The the 1.7,
and that changed everything, and you're giving them
14,000,000,000. Why? Because they shot themselves in the
foot with this situation.
Everyone knew this would happen. Everyone knew that
they had this potential. Everyone knew that they
had their missiles stay aimed at all of
these elements that were used were working with
the US government. And then they act like
they didn't know. Trump goes, woo. They weren't
supposed to do that. Well, yeah, they knew
you knew they were.
So that's what make that's one of the
parts that makes me question whether there's something
else going on here.
These are developments that are not weakening,
but instead strengthening
the Iranian government.
Every escalatory threat from The US has been
met with Iran counter threats. And so far,
Tehran has not bluffed,
meaning that they followed through with what they
said they would do, unlike the other parts
of this discussion. The results have fully, been
truly astonishing. Now right there, by the way,
things statements like that should never be taken
for anything other than simply
addressing the fact.
Not Iran's the greatest or pro Iran or
we have this guy. I don't support any
governments, and I think all of them are
potentially
will eventually lead to this exact kind of
point if left to their own devices. I'm
only saying that because it's very important, especially
for new people to show. Because regardless of
what the numbers show, we're growing every day
and reaching new people. And so it's important
to hear that. This is about addressing the
facts, even if that fact is something I
don't want to see or don't agree with
or it's still the fact. As I see
it, I could be wrong. Right? But that's
the reality. They have not bluffed. They have
followed through with everything they said, and what
the US government and Israel continue to do
is blatantly get caught lying. That's just the
reality.
Now it says the results have been truly
astonishing. The US not only rushed to lift
sanctions on Moscow,
because we're just not talking about that. It's
sort of like the Guaido thing where we
just stop we just they just you know,
Guaido is the only legal president, then just
suddenly they just move on because, oh, we
need this we need to work with Maduro
now because he's got things we need. It
just shows you that they have they're feckless.
They have no principles.
Especially if what you were to be told
that they're all monster terrorists, but now we're
gonna let them profit because we did this
to ourselves, I guess.
But not only Moscow, but has even begun
to remove sanctions from Iranian oil. Though pack
though packaged by the Trump administration as strategic
five dimensional chess, these moves appear to be
clear acts of desperation.
Truly, nothing is working out for Donald Trump.
He is now figuring out why no other
president dared to launch a direct war against
Iran. By the way, as Robert rightly told
you now again, it's maybe still early for
some people. Maybe it'll flush out the way
you think it would. But Robert has, for
years, told you that this is how this
would go. And I do believe he's right
about how it's going.
He said that, you know, that they've he's
figuring out why no other president has gone
this path before him despite
their strong ties, and that's a gentle way
to say that, to the Israel lobby. It
was not due to a lack of support
for Israel in the past, but rather an
understanding that such a conflict would wreck The
US economy and likely their presidencies.
Now either Trump doesn't care about that, he's
not able to make them say no, or
he was manipulated into thinking this was somehow
gonna be his most important point of his
legacy.
Although there is no conclusive public evidence to
support the theory, enough evidence exists from within
the documents from the Epstein files alone to
support the notion. Not prove, but support the
notion that The US president has been compromised
by Israeli intelligence.
Now I I
I argue it. You could quite literally prove
that there is influence,
demonstrate,
demonstrable.
But whether he's controlled,
that's that's a strong word. And I I
argue you could point out examples where Trump
seems to kind of go his own route.
Like, maybe sees that he's being kind of
manipulated, doesn't call it out, which shows you
the influence, I argue, if I'm right about
that. But ultimately, still kinda buffs it stops
it. I think that shows you some level
of awareness. That's all my opinion, but
I think it's the evidence is quite clear.
I think everyone's coming to terms with that.
At minimum, he writes, this is what an
FBI source concluded in 2020 report. The link
there for you to check out. The only
other explanation for launching this war is that
the entire Trump administration is criminally incompetent.
Well said.
So going from that forward,
this is what Hegseth just said.
Think about where we are right now.
Like and and again, that they're now dealing
with. We'll get to. I mean, that's what
we're that's the main point for today, is
the Trump administration offers a 15 cease fire
plan. Not to some lone defector somewhere, but
to the Iranian government he just got done
telling you are not important, aren't in control,
and we shouldn't talk to them. And then
they do this, which either tells you he's
not even in control of this, or he
just lied for some reason, or he didn't
he said the truth then and then desperation
drove him to this now. I don't know.
But you have to acknowledge how stupid this
is. So in midst of all this, this
is what we keep getting from these people.
I'll end with a point too later about
leave it saying something similar.
He this is Higgseth comes out and says,
never has a modern military been so rapidly
and historically
obliterated.
Okay. Obliterated is very specific. In fact, I,
I I have that somewhere in here. Let's
see.
Yes. Obliterated.
Destroyed so thoroughly as to be unrecognizable
or imperceptible.
Like, doesn't exist. That's what it means. Made
in
illegible or imperceptible by erasing or breaking away.
Like, it's gone.
It doesn't exist. Not that it's just broken
up and and destroyed. No. But there there's
meaning to these words.
So what's funny to me is using it
because Trump is. But so if you're gonna
tell us that this has been obliterated, then
how are they bombing right now? Why haven't
you rolled in and taken over? Because that's
not what's happening.
Defeated from day one, he says, with overwhelming
firepower.
Again, if you're not paying attention, and I
don't even think Hegseth is even aware of
this, but pretty much everybody with knowledge of
this,
whether pro State Department information or not, was
saying, look. It's not even debatable. Iran is
very aware that they're gonna lose. They they
were not even trying to really fight the
the air war.
They knew that would happen. They dug in,
and they're fighting the long war. They said
that before this even started.
So So you can't can't even call it
a lie since they said it before we
got here, and now they're literally doing it.
And the experts are speaking up again. Even
from within US discussions are saying it's clear
that they're not giving up, and it's clear
they're not weak like they're being told were
being told.
Boasts about military success. Defeated from day one.
Historically,
never have they been so obliterated.
Okay.
So here's what Trump said yesterday, and this
is super important to get into before we
talk about this article,
which just goes over the large you know,
the the last two, three days of the
defector conversation.
Here's what he said. And I think the
end of it is the most important. Well,
I'm probably just gonna skip to that for
the most part about where he said he
was given a gift. Right? And that it
was a demonstration
that showed him that this guy was real.
And then the next day, he's making a
deal with Iran or trying to, and they
declined it.
Other question. You haven't been here in a
while. Well, in Iran,
can you give us any
war's sense of who exactly
in Iran and is it there with government
pressure and others you're speaking with? Yeah. We
had I I hate to say this in
front of these young
people. They're not children. They've I spoke to
most of them. They sound like adults to
me even though they are sort of children.
Right? They'll always be your children.
But,
I
By the way, somebody was saying yesterday that
there might be, like, a little a group
of kids that are, like, younger people that
were right over there on the wall. Yes.
Because yesterday, remember, I I that wasn't what
we're talking about, but I just caught that.
I was like, what did he just say?
Was he pointing it at Bondi? Like, it
just it was weird. But if that would
explain it, for those that watched yesterday's show,
that I guess right over there, I get
there might be, but look into it. I'd
find it interesting if there wasn't. I still
you know, all of them seem to be
having little gaffes all over the place, but
that aside
Just say it, but
we killed all their leadership.
And then they met to choose new leaders,
and we killed all of them.
And now we have a new group, and
we can easily do that, but let's see
how they turn out. It's
we have really
regime change. You know, this is a change
in the regime,
because the leaders are all very different than
the ones that we started off with that
created all those problems. So this was I
think we can say, Jason, this is regime
change. Right? What makes you trust them?
I don't trust anybody. I don't trust you.
I mean,
that's only because I know you.
I think it's important to point out again
right there. Right? That I mean, you again,
if we're not being not letting partisan narratives
influence us, but just if you've never seen
these people in your life and you walk
into this room, you would hear them hear
them saying that, and you would go, oh,
okay. So he's suggesting that that they've that
they've that's over. Right? That that they've met
their goals, kind of. Right? That, well, they're
out of the way, and we got them
out of the way, and all the people
that were bad. Why would you say that
if the point was that we're gonna go
take those ones out too? It just it
feels like he's trying to give himself a
potential lane for an out. That's what a
lot of people recognize. As well as the
fact that you just casually discuss, well, let's
see if they will we can kill them
too, but let's see how it works out.
But let's keep pretending this is some kind
of Iran picking democracy situation where you're gonna
let them give them some leash and see,
and then we'll just bomb them too because
just casual murder and war crimes is just
where we're at today.
But, if I didn't know you, I'd probably
have more trust.
But,
I don't trust anyone. Why do you why
do you say that why do you say
what makes you try do you think I
trust them or don't trust them? Then why
bother talking?
Because they're gonna make a deal. They're gonna
make a deal. They did something yesterday.
Isn't that funny, though? I don't trust them,
but they're gonna make a deal. So you
know that? How do you know that? It
hasn't happened yet. Right? So that means at
some level, you're trusting what they tell you.
Right? Words have meaning.
That was amazing, actually. They
gave us a present,
and the present arrived today.
It was a very big present worth a
tremendous amount of money.
And I'm not gonna tell you what that
present is, but it was a very significant,
prize.
And they gave it to us, and they
said they were gonna give it. So that
meant one thing to me, we're dealing with
the right people. Is that nuclear related? No.
It wasn't nuclear related. It was oil and
gas related,
and it was a very nice thing they
did. But what it showed me is that
we're dealing with the right people. Because, you
know, you don't know because
the leadership was killed, all gone.
Khomeini, all gone,
as the expression goes. Except not though, since
his son is in power. Right? And everyone
who he was before this, and despite him
claiming that they killed multiple layers, this was
the next person. It's just it's just funny
to me how they have to bluster, and
everyone can tell they're lying if we're not
children. The past supreme leader,
and then the new supreme leader was,
racked up, at a minimum, racked up pretty
good,
and everyone else was gone.
And then many of the people in the
third tier are gone,
but we're dealing with a group of people
that I think,
turn out. And and the
the present, the gift they made to us
was very significant. And they said they were
gonna do it, and it happened.
And they're the only ones that could have
done it. Jennifer?
Only ones that could have done it. Right?
So what that shows me, like I said
yesterday, which which is important for what we're
gonna talk about, is that he is essentially
saying, if it's the truth, that some they
they they said, I'm gonna do this,
and doing this
will prove to you that I'm genuine.
I mean, that's that's that's what that framing
was right there. And they did the only
one that could have done it, and so
they did it. So it's it's for sure.
And so that is definitely a level of
trust, by the way, beside despite him wanting
to be all like, I'm strong, and I'm
not afraid of anything. I don't trust anybody,
but I trust you know, it's just what
he does. But,
clearly, that would suggest that they were dealing
with somebody,
Whether it was somebody in Iran or somebody
pretending to be Iranian or are these lying
about entirely to make you think he's dealing
with somebody.
Today
changes that entire point.
So who was he given something?
If not, why would he lie about that?
And and what are we if it was,
what are we talking about? Is what kind
of oil related present or gift or prize
are we talking about? To me, that makes
it feel like it's something like the island
we're talking about or something like that.
So let's get into the rest of this.
So here's an article,
originally from Yahoo News, but this for some
reason, that website was acting funny, so it's
on this platform as well. Iran launches new
strikes, denies Trump's claim of very strong talks.
And it's from yesterday.
Here's what happened on on the twenty fifth
day of the war.
Iran miss Iranian missiles and drones continue to
strike Israel. Now this is really important right
out of the gate, guys, because what it
shows you is right there, they were not
just diminished and weak and failing and obliterated
at the very least and very clearly, as
everyone's highlighted, have continued to increase and made
sure that the way they conducted their strikes
demonstrated they were not weak, but in fact
the opposite, showing or at the very least,
they held back a whole bunch of, you
know, salvos of missiles just to be able
to pretend that they have a lot. You
know, you could think that way. It's worth
asking those questions. But my point is that
tomorrow and the next day, and they keep
showing you this. They keep demonstrating that they
are not, you know, that they are far
from weak and failing and obliterated.
Now it says, Iraq they they,
fire missiles and drones, continue to strike Israel,
and it says Iraq, Bahrain,
and Kuwait. Now I'm interested by this because
I haven't been able to suss this out,
and I think there's more in this we'll
get to. But the general point is, don't
forget,
actually, I think I've got this right here.
Even Reuters reported Patriot missile involved in the
last Bahrain blast was likely US operated. That's
from Reuters media.
So and let's for let's not forget. This
was on March 22. The drone point where
it was shown that the Israel US elements
could basically conduct drone strikes and make it
look like it was Iran.
And Iran made it clear that they were
not gonna be attacking these locations should they
not be involved. And as far as I
can tell, they have not claimed, at the
very least, any of the attacks on these
groups since the last
series of attacks when they got the the,
Qatari,
major $1,100,000,000
installation in a lot of different locations.
That doesn't mean they haven't, clearly. They could
just lying about it, or maybe they did
because they thought they were continuing to help,
which some of them are. My point, though,
is that I haven't seen that be claimed
by them, and they claim that they haven't.
So it's worth considering, especially with the the
brain point where we know that the or
is it reporting shows that it was likely
US operated, but they blamed Iran anyway, that
it might not be them bombing these locations.
Because whose interest is it to drive,
essentially, the US government to spin out and
go to crazy war against everybody? Or Israel
has been trying to make this happen our
entire lives,
and they're clearly involved with this. It's not
a secret. It's not some conspiracy theory. He's
literally standing next to him pointing at things,
and
and Trump seems to be jumping at it.
Now Kuwait, again, was the location he just
seen he just claimed accidentally shot down three
US ship US, planes
accidentally
with three US munitions,
I called the yes. I don't that's that's
very odd to me. Funny how those are
the locations. And Iraq, by the way, which
is a place they're illegally occupying
and host the,
PMU elements and as well as the Iranian
Kurd elements that you could argue are adversarial,
right, to even Iran in some cases. The
point, though, is that these are locations that
don't really make sense to me, not in
the way that it's being done. But it
does make sense in the way that you
wanna make it look like Iran for certain
reasons. Just question it all. And this is
even after president Trump claimed The US and
Iran had launched very, very strong talks,
a claim Tehran has denied. Now seeking to,
speaking to reporters during an Oval Office appearance
later Tuesday, which is what we discussed yesterday,
Trump, nonetheless, repeated his claim that the other
side would like to make a deal. So
at this point, we were going, okay. Is
he talking about this defector? Is there some
other group? Is and he was suggesting that
they're really in charge, and it's all kind
of
maybe. Right? And so then that's what I'm
interested on the overlap to today. It says,
quote, they're talking to us and they're making
sense, Trump said. So maybe they were. Maybe
he was talking to somebody not from Iran
and thought it was.
In the The New York Times reported late
Tuesday that The US had sent Iran a
15 plan, which we'll show you in a
second, which they immediately denied or rather just
turned down,
to end the war.
So this is as of today.
Two officials briefed on the diplomacy.
The and now it's it's public reporting. They
even the 15 points that they offered. K?
Now it says the officials said the plan,
which reportedly addresses maritime routes as well as
Iran's nuclear program and ballistic missiles, had been
delivered by Pakistan.
Now remember what Iran was saying before, which
is why it already went down the way
it did. They've been doing this the entire
time, trying to send around other people, and
they're just ignoring them. At least that's what
they say.
Or, you know, at the very least, just
not just not responding. We're not engaging. We've
set the table with what we said because
you drove us here. We were trying to
engage. We were showing restraint, and you kept
bombing us during diplomacy, so we're done. That's
essentially what they're claiming anyway. And so they've
been claiming they're ignoring all of these secondary,
messages.
And so one thing I wonder is whether
that's what Trump is dealing with right now,
where they're sort of, like, sending these conversations
and acting like that's what's happening. Now it
says The US and Iran have sent conflicting
signals
about possible talks. Now they meet to me,
that's not really accurate. That's coming from sort
of a US perspective on the conversation.
Pretty much every source I can see that
has any standing in Iran has been very
clear that this is not happening.
Even the person who Israel claimed they were
talking with. That's an important way to hear
that too. Because,
Gal what is it? Galibov,
who was the for speaker speaker of Islamic
Republic the parliament,
He's the one that, they were pointing to
in the beginning saying he was the one
he might be speaking to. Now Israeli
officials reported to Central US media that he
was the one who was gonna meet with
Trump.
He spoke up and said, nope. Not happening.
Doesn't mean he's maybe he's just hiding it.
Right? But that's important
to hear. So when they say the impossible
talks,
Iran has said conflicting signals, says Trump threatened
to hit and obliterate Iran's power plants within
forty eight hours unless the Islamic Republic agreed
to fully open the street, which we talked
about. The forty eight hours came to pass.
But on Monday morning, roughly twelve hours before
it was become the the deadline, Trump said
he had delayed his strikes on Iranian energy
infrastructure for five days, claiming that The US
and Tehran had launched very good and productive
conversations regarding a complete and total resolution of
our hostilities in the Middle East, which Iran
just just said was not true. It is
unclear who The US is talking to or
what might come of such conversations according to
New York Times and everybody else.
Asked about the possibility, White House press secretary
Caroline Levitt said in a statement that, quote,
these are sensitive diplomatic discussions, and The US
will not negotiate through the press. Yeah. Of
course. Even though they will literally tell you
things they shouldn't when they want you to
think a certain thing, half the time, those
things are untrue. This this is just one
of the most dishonest well, you know,
just think it over. Like, from Caroline Leavitt's
perspective, they are always this bad. They lie
about literally everything. That's their job.
I shouldn't even say literally, but, you know,
they lie about almost everything they present to
you because their job is to manage the
way you view these things. And today, especially
in this, like, cartoon falling empire we're in,
everything's a lie because they have to bluster
even on things they don't have to, it
seems.
But so the point is we won't negotiate
to the press. It's not what do you
mean negotiate to the press? You're not you
guys are now failing to even give it
the the the internal intelligence community
in congress. You're you're not even giving them
insight, and there's a part about that we'll
point to. They're complaining. No one's even telling
us what's going on. People who are like
people like like Clarence, who are inside the
circle. I think that speaks volumes where we
are. Again, guys, I wonder whether Trump is
even the one in charge of what's happening.
There's so many reasons why that's very possible
today. I mean, in regard to, like, the
military actions and and the actual decision making.
And, I mean, look, taking a step back,
let's not forget that Trump even said in
his first administration, which is demonstrating that already
in this administration, that he said he gave
the the military leaders the ability to make
these decisions without his input.
That's well, it's very easy to look up.
And I think that's a very alarming point
to hear with where we are right now,
where Hegseth is a very clear
religious Zionist and where his influence may be
driven for something else or any other point
we could make.
Meanwhile, Israeli prime minister Netanyahu said his forces
would continue, of course, to strike Iran and
Lebanon.
Because that makes perfect sense. Right? We're in
a joint war, and we're in the middle
of a negotiation. And so we're we're gonna
keep bombing, though, until until we yes. It
does make sense, actually, because Israel's done it
every single time. And they know that, which
is why they're not even pretending this is
real
from Iran's perspective.
We will preserve our vital interest in every
situation, which means we'll continue to illegally bomb
both these locations. We'll continue to illegally
steal and occupy rape and torture. And that's
what they're doing, guys, right now. These aren't
just hyperbolic statements every time. They're they are
doing that in Lebanon right now. Every word
I just said. They are literally bombing schools
and hospitals in every location.
I'd like to think we can come to
terms with this today, seeing as how it's
so widely reported.
So is the war about to end or
not? They write. Here's everything you need to
know to make sense of what's happening in
The Middle East. Now it says a new
barrage of Iranian strikes
yesterday
showed that the regime is still capable of
inflicting damage on its Gulf neighbors. Most people
pointed out too that the the
amount and and and the timing showed you
that they were not diminished like they claimed.
But either way, they just told us they
were completely done. They have nothing. They're completely
defeat and then they kept striking.
A volley of six Iranian ballistic missiles killed,
they tell you, six Kurdish fighters and wounded
30 others
according to the government of Iraq's semi autonomous
Kurdish region.
Now and this is interesting seeing as how
what they're doing with the Kurds in Iran
might well make that logical to the sense
of, you know, what they see that as
an element that's representing
the US government's interest against them.
Now it says in and this is why
I'm this is why I question all of
this. In Iran, an Iranian missile, they claim,
killed a Moroccan contractor working for an Emirati
armed forces and injured five Emirati service members.
And and, okay, you know, you could argue
if we're talking about service members that they
might have seen them as a military target.
And if they were service members and based
on their involvement with the war, they would,
by everyone's logic, be considered military target. But
I think there's something more to this. And
it says, and the Kuwaiti army said on
social media, it had based multiple drone and
missile attacks.
Interesting groups. Right? So first of all, there
are elements in in in Iraq that by
that might make sense. But there let's not
forget, there's also, I think, even more so
people that are the PMU, for example, that
they tell you are Iranian proxies. And so
now they're bombing these locations. On top of
that, they're on we just showed you. We're
being told that US elements are the ones
reported by Reuters actually in control or operating
the strikes that are hitting this location in
this
example. So when another one hits something that
seems to be, you know, a random contractor,
maybe we should ask whether that's not Iran.
Or the Kuwait conversation, we were just told
they accidentally shot down three US planes with
US munitions.
I think there's more happening here. On top
of all that and I it's not about
just decidedly blaming Israel. It's not what I'm
doing. In fact, like I keep saying, it's
just as likely Iran, but recognizing
that Israel has the ability to use drones
that they can make look like Iran. And
I would be willing to argue the exact
reverse.
Think both consider both of those. Now also
stand back and consider the precedent
and past actions
and which groups continue to show that they
are willing to do these and which groups
continue to show restraint. Of course, that matters.
You can always they're just you know, I
can always go I can keep going further.
I think it's important to play that game
for some people, but, you know, they maybe
they're doing that to lie to you. It's
like but that is the right way to
think about these things. Now it says speaking
to reporters in Florida, Trump insisted
on Monday
that we are in the throes of a
real possibility of making a deal. Real the
the same deal that you just literally murdered
them while they were discussing. Right?
And it and it says, and that Ron
wants one very badly.
This is while they're literally laughing at him
while he keeps saying that.
Quote, if I were a betting man, I
bet for it, he says. But, again, I'm
not guaranteeing anything.
When pressed for details, Trump said that his
Middle East and boys, of course, Witcoff and
Kushner,
had launched very, very strong talks. So right
there is an obvious point. Maybe they're lying
to him. Maybe they are deceiving him like
they just did according to everybody,
including Trump's own people.
And Trump even said, well, that's what Kushner
told me.
Right? Wouldn't you think he's smart enough to
go? Maybe they're misleading me this time if
that's what happened last time.
And it says on Sunday with a respected
Iranian leader. So, again, to be clear, the
one who he will not name, that was
the defector conversation. He's telling you that Kushner
and Witkoff are the ones who spoke to
him.
Very suspect. He he did say that it
was not Iran's new atoll. That's important because
today, they're dealing with them. Seems to belie
this whole conversation.
Talks would continue on Monday, Trump said, with
the major points of agreement. Now it says
as for some terms of a possible deal,
the president said that The US would demand
an end to Iran's nuclear capabilities, which don't
exist, and they already agreed to that in
the JCPOA the last time and have already
agreed this time. And I'll show you this
yet again. Actually, this person, Dylan Williams, I'm
familiar with, but he posted this, which I
think is important. And I'll also include this.
Which one was it? The,
oh, it's just some of those for some
reason, I'm just things are dropping out of
my mind today. This point, this this was
the main point. There was something I was
gonna add to it, but this one is
the as I've often pointed out for you.
Dylan says, Iran agreed, and it's the the
post from Trump saying, I don't wanna say
in advance, but they've agreed and and but
I'm gonna do it. But they've agreed to
never have nuclear weapons. Yeah. Like they already
did. Right? Like they already have. Like, they
already have. Like, Tulsi Gabbard told you they
didn't have. Like, everybody everywhere other than Israel
has told you, they're not even seeking. And
the evidence backs that up. But it says,
Iran agreed to that exact point in the
very first paragraph of the original Iran deal
that Donald Trump, because Israel drove him to
or suggest or manipulated him into,
unilaterally pulled out of.
This is the same plan I just showed
you, where in article 36, it explicitly says
that should anyone and it was aimed at
the US government knowing, which as we can
see, they always do. If any of them
unilaterally pull out of the deal, they have
the right to continue to enrich uranium
within safeguards. That's the point. Same thing with
the current point today. The Witkoff lied about
the 60%.
As the IAE as the International Atomic Energy
Agency will tell you, as you can read
for yourself, that was within their safeguards. I've
included this every time.
And I just think it's important to know
how vividly, how obviously Witkoff was lying to
everybody knowing he's lying. And then even try
to play it off that he's just not
that smart when it comes to this tech.
No. Then why would he be in this
position?
Uranium stockpiles remain under safeguards in accordance with
Iran's comprehensive agreement. That's the 60%, the 420
65 kilograms. This is from the director general
themselves at the 2025.
Now
as for terms of the possible deal, the
president said that he would demand an end
to their nuclear capabilities.
But it's important to hear that over and
over, guys. That's not where they currently are,
and I think that Trump believes
if rather the most likely in my mind
right now, if this is not something he
thinks he's dealing with, this is sort of
a play, I think Robert was leaning towards
as well, of simply going,
well, they just agreed
to not have weapons. And and I did
that. I'm the one that made this happen.
And then just kind of going forward as
if they made that happen, knowing that that's
where they already are.
And so even if Iran goes, oh, no.
That's a lie. We didn't do we're not
agreeing to anything. He's gonna go, oh, they
just don't admit it, and we already made
the deal, you know, hypothetically.
I that's just one lane I can see,
but you can see where that might make
sense. Right? That ultimately, you you act like
you reached the deal that they've always been
at. And that's a weakness. That's because, you
know, you lost, and you wanna make it
framed as if you got what you wanted.
They've done this many times already.
And he goes, we want to see no
nuclear bomb, no nuclear weapon, not even close
to it. No. That's where they already are.
And you guys have already created the situation
to drive them further away from that, actually.
Oh, wait. It was my spot. Here we
go. Trump also said it would be easy
for The US to re retrieve Iran's stockpile
of enriched uranium.
If oh, that's what it was. I'm glad
I remembered that. And really just so you
to read it if you haven't already, because
it's really important to see the timing on
this.
Remember,
the day like, literally, the day before they
bombed this stuff, the,
the foreign minister of Oman came out and
said they were willing to give up their
entire stockpile. They were they agreed to no
nuclear bomb just like the last agreement and
the one before that. And, I mean, of
course, you could always go they're lying, but
that's not what they're even saying. Trump keeps
claiming they just won't agree to it, but
they literally did. So right there, you have
to understand, that's either Witkoff and Jared just
lying to somebody who is incapable of looking
at the most basic details,
kinda makes sense, or Trump knows he's lying
to you. Because the reality is it's been
there the entire time.
And then, again, he said, nope. They they're
gonna give it up. They're gonna agree to
the deal. And he said, peace is actually
within reach. If they just let it happen,
then they bombed him just like every other
time. That this is act that's one of
the most important points in this.
So that's why when he says, no more
nuclear weapons.
And what we and he says that, well,
go go in and get the uranium. Well,
that's what they agreed to before you bomb
them. That's off the table now because you
bomb them, and that's what they're saying. If
we have a deal with them, we're going
to take we're going down and we'll take
it ourselves, he says.
Now I argue that's an opening from probably
the strategic perspective to justify an invasion, should
they claim we have to go in and
take it even though they offered it freely
before you bomb them.
Quote, they want peace, Trump said. They've agreed
they will not have a nuclear weapon. Like,
just the repetition, the incessant,
nonstop BS.
Ask Tuesday if he trusts the Iranians his
administration claims to be talking to, Trump alluded
to a gift as we just showed you
the video that signaled they were dealing with
the right people.
So, apparently, dealing today is with the wrong
people, but that totally makes sense because the
right people was the special gift. But today,
you're dealing with Khomeini in Iran. And how
does that make sense? Why would you deal
with the wrong people?
They gave us a present. The present arrived
today. You you you just saw it. That
was a very big present. I'm not going
to tell you what it was, but I'll
tell you what it was or kind
of. He goes on to say the president
well, he goes on to say the article.
The president went on to say the gift
was oil related. Now it says Tehran appeared
to reject Trump's claim that the two countries
were making progress
toward ending the war, which is now in
its fourth week. On social media, the speaker
of Iran's parliament denied the direct talks had
taken place. Quote, no negotiations have been held
with The US.
Now that was Khaleboff, the person they said
they were speaking to, and we showed you
that as well. The paper added, however, that
there have been initiative
or initiatives by regional countries to deescalate tensions.
So the other element of this is Trump
could be simply pretending he's the one making
something happen when what we're talking about is
Pakistan or somebody else trying to drive this
to deescalate this.
Not to a place where there's any kind
of an actual agreement, but just where there's
no more,
you know, murder taking place. And Israel is
the one that will relentlessly keep going. They've
made that clear as I just showed you.
They're gonna keep bombing regardless.
You can't miss how obvious that is. Narrative
aside, that's always the case.
Prior to Trump's remarks about a deal and,
again, schools, civilians, like,
objectively. It's on the ground. People are filming
it. You can watch these things. I mean,
even AP and and what was it? Like,
CTV or the,
the the Canadian platform? They just told they
casually reported the bombing apartment buildings.
It's as if it doesn't even matter anymore.
Prior to Trump's remarks about a deal, Iranian
foreign minister, Aragasy, acknowledged that he talked by
phone with his Turkish counterpart
over the weekend. Turkey has previously served as
an intermediary. So now I'm wondering on, you
know, one of the many possibilities
is that whether or not this is, you
know, Turkey or Pakistan or somebody talking to
them and him just trying to kind of
glom onto that because he knows they're losing.
Iran's semi official news agency, Tasneem,
which is close to the country's paramilitary,
the the the revolutionary guard military elements, also
insisted that no direct talks had taken place
even though, quote, this is important because they're
acknowledging that's other part of it, even though
messages have been sent to Iran by some
mediators.
So they're saying we we're getting those. We're
just not engaging with it. It characterized Trump's
comments as psychological warfare and claimed the tactic
would not help the Strait Of Hormuz return
to prewar conditions or bring calm to the
energy markets. Various Iranian news agencies also sought
to portray Trump as backing down in the
face of threats to US targets.
In a video comment statement on Monday, Netanyahu
said he had spoken to Trump, who told
him that The US might be able to
leverage US Israeli military achievements to, quote,
realize the objectives of the war in agreement
with Iran.
As Netanyahu,
right, spoken to Trump, told them that they
might be able to leverage their achievements
to realize objectives, like, fee think that through,
especially with what seems to actually be happening.
It's almost as if they're saying we're gonna,
you know, like, take, for example, hypothetically, Card
Island, and say that we're gonna seize that.
Right? We're gonna take advantage and use the
leverage of our achievements to realize the objectives
of the war
and then end as if that's sort of
like the agreement that was made. I mean,
there's you know, all this is hypothetical. But
you I mean, we know who these people
are. If you've been watching with what they're
doing right now in multiple countries, there's something
there. But Netanyahu said that Israel would continue
to strike Iran and Lebanon in the meantime,
of course, because that's totally normal. When you're
in the midst of potential negotiations, it's totally
not. Israel later said it was not part
of any possible talks between The US and
Iran as if Qatar.
So Israel's flatly just going, we don't even
care. You you run I don't know what's
going on. Now I don't actually believe that.
I think that whatever's happening, Israel is well
aware of every part of it.
Egypt's foreign ministry said in a statement that
it had been making constant efforts to end
communications with all concerning parties in recent days
to avoid reaching the point of no return.
So Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey, it seems like they're
just trying to stop this from spinning out
of control knowing that Israel is hell bent
in making that happen. And then, you know,
you you understand Turkey has made that clear
many times over the years. You know, despite
the more weird relationship that's actually going on
there, he's been very critical of them. An
Egyptian official told the Associated Press that Washington
and Tehran exchanged messages over the weekend through
Egypt, Turkey, and Pakistan.
But that's an Egyptian official.
Iran's denying that. They're They're saying we got
them, but we're not returning any information. This
is the top priority right now, the official
said. I think they will be trying to
drive that to happen, maybe even with good
intentions.
Keir Starmer from from, the British prime minister,
Keir Starmer, told senior lawmakers on Monday that
his government was aware of talks between The
US and Iran. Of course, he just means
what Trump is claiming is happening and that
the priority was to achieve a negotiated agreement
which puts tight con conditions on Iran,
particularly in relation to nuclear weapons. Just tired.
It's just tiring, Al Khan. Just let's see.
There's just lie after lie after lie.
Now when we get into the actual 15
points they put forward, it's only gonna make
this more ridiculous.
Unrealistic.
Stocks and bonds climbed on Monday after Trump
said The US had started productive talks to
end the war, which many people argue was
the entire point of what might have been
a lie. The price of Brent crude and
the international oil benchmark briefly dropped from a
$114.
Do you remember a point when they were
telling us over 100 could maybe collapse the
world economy?
And it went back down to 96, which
is way higher than it was before. So
this is a this is a game a
losing game, and it's just to try to
get momentary wins.
Seems very ill advised.
Then it rose to roughly a 100 because
that's what I keep telling you. It is
it's a it's a it's a game of
kind of back and forth, but what they're
doing seems to be guaranteeing it's gonna keep
going up, which is what everyone seems to
be saying.
I mean, what was it? I think it
was, was it cutter or somebody else said
it was gonna go up to, like, a
150? Like, that that's just estimation, but it's
not a good thing.
Yeah. And that rose back up after Iran
denied what the what was that they were
even having conversations. On Tuesday, today, oil prices
resumed their rise, as I've been telling you,
and stocks fell in the absence of any
concrete developments toward peace. The Philippines declared a
national emergency
saying that high oil prices were threatening energy
security.
So there's that point again.
Some places, Sri Lanka and others,
despite the IEA
saying it was, you know, suggestions,
There are places like Sri Lanka that are
making it mandatory.
Literal alert,
energy lockdowns. As we read on wake up,
the idea of saying, you know, if you
have an odd license plate, you can only
drive on these days.
Guys, this is how this I mean, right
now, I'm willing to bet you that you're
gonna find examples of this starting to roll
out through this administration
even though that is identical
to the point that we all fought against
during COVID nineteen.
I hope I'm wrong, but watch. Because clearly,
guys, this is something that they are actually
involved in. And it's not I mean, the
smart city, Freedom city, Gaza,
you know, network state,
digital tokens, digital control, I mean, they're building
that. That's Trump's administration right now. He presented
his global board of peace to the Davos,
to the UN. He's present he you know,
all the same stuff we talk about. The
point is that this is that the energy
lockdown is a part of this potential
the the worry that it leads to,
I the similar tactics, but to some kind
of a global control structure.
Oil and gas prices have skyrocketed in recent
weeks
because Iran has effectively closed the Strait Of
Hormuz. Now I disagree with that. Effectively is
better than saying they closed because it's not
closed. But remember, the point is that they
threatened
early on and then made it clear many
times over, by the way, that they're only
doing this to Israel and The US and
people that are helping them. Now maybe that
just suggests that everyone's afraid to go through
because they're all being manipulated by Israel and
United States. Either way, they've been clear about
that. And I there's examples of other tankers
going through. And I just think it's important
to realize that it may just be The
US and Israel sort of gaslighting everybody to
not let it happen because that's what they
wanted from the beginning, to claim they shut
it down and to manipulate the world opinion.
The US state department issued a worldwide security
alert on Sunday, urging Americans abroad to exercise
an increased caution after recent threats from Iranian
officials and affiliated groups,
which again, guys, this is this is so
funny to me.
Actually, I'll read this too, and we'll go
over both of these. The, oh, this last
part anyway.
On Friday, a top Iranian military spokesman, we
were told,
threatened to pursue US and Israeli officials beyond
active conflict zones. From from now on, based
on the information we have about you, even
parks, recreational areas, and tourist destinations anywhere in
the world will no longer be safe for
you. Now there is a statement that was
made. Of course, the context makes it a
lot different, which is typical from your corporate
media who wants you to think Iran is
just going, we're gonna kill anybody
anywhere. No. That's what Israel and The US
are claiming, and they do, by the way.
We'll come back to that real quickly. But,
sir, remember, the point is that or secure
alert. Iran may kill Americans around the world.
Okay. Well, when's the last time that happened?
What do you think? Let's find out.
Where was that?
When's the last time Iranian government killed an
American outside of a response to a US
Israel attack? Which clearly makes a difference, doesn't
it? If they're bombed, they respond to a
US base in Iraq, for example, which is
pretty much mostly what they're gonna talk about
down here. Well, the most recent confirmed case,
they claim, was November 2022. Now understand, this
is the the confirmed case, and this is
anywhere.
And November 2022 is the last time you're
gonna and they're gonna put on a worldwide
threat that we're gonna go just kill random
Americans. Why? Because you're that's not what Iran
does, guys,
despite all the propaganda
and what it says. And the operation involves
specific intelligence gathering and recruitment of operative operatives
against a perceived spy.
Now, of course, maybe they're wrong. Maybe maybe
it's Iran's terrorism. They killed America, and that's
how they covered it. You can consider that
for yourself. But I hope you can also
consider that US government very much does con
conduct clandestine operations in foreign governments all the
time. And if they were caught, then they're
treated like a the the US government would
kill somebody. That's that's treason. Or rather, not
treason, but, whatever the term would be for
outside spy.
So my point is that even this case
has the layer that it says, well, they
there was a spy. Okay? But then September
2022.
Iranian and even that though, guys, is not
Iran killing an American wandering through some foreign
country. That is very different. Okay? And this
one is Iranian forces launched rocket and drone
strikes into Iraqi Kurdistan.
Right? Remember this story? Killing a US citizen.
The US condemned this as an unjustified violation.
Well, the reality, as we widely covered, was
it was actually a Iranian person and cur
and a Curtis a Kurd a a Kurdish
Iranian
who lived in the Kurdish area in Iraq.
And, yes, he had US citizenship, but worked
for the state department and was aligned with
the US government. And the point becomes
very different than killing a random American. Now
it is to me, American is an American
whether born in the country or not. But
it does make a difference for the conversation
when we're talking about today if you're talking
about a person who lives somewhere else who
happens to have citizenship versus somebody who is
an American born in this country who they
see as representing the American culture. That's the
point you can make in that conversation. Either
way,
we're talking about here is an example of
somebody associated with the US government who is
illegally occupying Iraq. Now you can still call
it a crime if you want, but the
the point is it's a little bit different,
isn't it? And that's the only two examples
they can come up with before that, pre
2020, mostly attributed to other proxies they claim
is Iran, which are not.
And this is what they want you to
be feel fearful of. Don't Iran may kill
you. This is hyperbolic. This is fear mongering.
It's propaganda.
And then let's address the top Iranian spokesman,
and we'll come back to this.
Now this actually I'm not familiar with the
the person's substack, but this is something I
found came across.
Seymour Rocks is their,
substack.
Fake news says Iran threatened to attack tourist
sites worldwide. Now if you check out every
single left or right western top, Western platform,
you will get this kind of statement. And
check this out, guys.
Of course, New York Post is just one
of the worst today. Iran makes chilling threat
to target
tourist sites.
Oh, is that what they did? First of
all, even if you take the first statement,
which was inaccurate, they're claiming to target,
you know, US officials
in places around the world, not just target
tourist sites. These are such disgusting people who
are deliberately trying to manipulate you as spring
break kicks off.
And then, of course, you get the Jesse
Water types and the Jones and the rest
that all hyperbolically scream about threat. That's what
they do.
So you can read this if you want.
She goes over the article I'm gonna show
you. I think it's worth pointing out somebody
who called this out, and I think rightly
so, because you can look this up for
the actual quote because that matters to me.
Now I'm not gonna say that may maybe
Iran's going to do that. Maybe that was
their intention. The statement is not what they
said, though.
This is the this is for Press TV,
which Press TV has the interest of flavoring
things the way any other platform does.
But recognize that it's
a perspective that's more from the what Iranian
is looking at versus what The US and
government is. In this case, the statement is
accurate.
Assassination of Iranian officials, commanders expose enemy's desperation.
Here's the point.
The spokesman, the general they're talking about, the
general staff of the Iranian armed forces,
says says excuse me. The spokesman for the
general staff of the Iranian armed forces says
The US and Israel are conducting acts of
terror against the country's officials. They are. They
aren't even hiding that. They just claim they're
all terrorism. So therefore, well, that's even if
you claim terrorism, it doesn't make it no.
You these are nonmilitary targets. Khamenei was a
nonmilitary target. They don't care. They've assassinated military
scientists countless times, and The US praises it.
It's these are horrible Objective crimes.
In this
case, Israel is conducting these attacks on officials,
commanders, but, like, people like military personnel, that's
considered military target, but not like the president,
for example, would not be. Well, I guess
that's a different point. I you could argue
the commander in chief would apply, but let's
just take a a senator, for example. Technically,
that's not considered military target. Now not because
of the enemy's power, but because of their
desperation, they argue, that they're just assassinating anyone
they can get a hold of. We know
that it's happening. Anyone end up dying that
is just a very dishonest person because Israel's
admitting it. It says he added that Iranian
officials are living like people,
which at least you could see videos of.
They could be lying about that. But what
do you get from the HECS test? The
rest are they're in their secret bunkers, and
they're terrified, and they're hiding. And, well, I
see plenty of evidence to counter that, but,
again, question it.
What what they're saying is Iranian officials are
living like people unlike the criminal Israeli and
American officials who then you get the same
thing in reverse, who are hiding in shelters
and underground facilities due to their lack of
ability in the face of the resistance of
the brave Iranian nation.
Now look. Let's be very clear about this
in regard to US person.
They when's the last time you saw any
American politician wandering freely through a big open
crowd?
I don't think you're gonna see that because
they know how reviled they are. On top
of that,
the underground what do you think Benjamin Netanyahu
and everybody? This is a documented reality. They're
always in their shelters, while Helvive is the
open she human shield that they've admitted to.
There's right underneath that. Important.
So but, again, whether you agree with the
framing or not, the commander emphasized
that the cowardly US and Israeli officials and
commanders
so commanders,
along with malicious pilots' troops,
are under surveillance
of the Iranian forces. So too are the
in reverse. We know that. And it goes
on to say, who are, quote, firmly determined
to continue crushing attacks against enemies.
He goes on to say further that the
based on information available to Iran,
recreational areas, tourist destinations, and leisure centers around
the world would no longer be safe for
enemies.
So clearly a little bit different than we're
gonna target tourist locations, clearly. But then even
taking what the first point said, the
really, what it seems to be suggesting is
we're targeting military personnel, but I would still
add
in locations that are not militarily active, so
those would still be a crime.
Context. Right? Also being objective and pointing out
the reality, whatever side you think people are
on. But the point is, it's not what
they're saying. Right? The idea that they're targeting
tourist sites is just to get you to
think Iran, everything is terrorism.
Why would you need to lie about stuff
like that if they're as bad as you
guys all say?
On top of that, even even the
AOL article
says that you've promised to target,
you know, basically target
just officials outside of certain conflict zones. It's
not really the way they said that, did
they? Now, really, even further, if you read
the sentiment in the entire article, his point
is you guys are doing this to us.
So we may very well end up targeting
you there. What he what he said was
we're watching you and we know where you
are.
No. That's the fact, guys. Read it for
yourself. But it's disgusting, isn't it? As we
know Israel and US are deliberately doing it
without even trying to hide it. They're simply
saying we could do that and we're watching
you, and it gets turned into this kind
of hyperbolic nonsense by propaganda platforms.
Now lastly, this is just interesting.
Iran says, as of yesterday,
non hostile ships can pass through Strait Of
Hormuz. As I was just saying,
Iran has agreed to allow non hostile vessels.
Now I believe that's what they've already done.
But just to emphasize the point, to reiterate
the point, not just only this group or
that group, but anybody who is not hostile
to us can go through. Israel and The
US are trying to make sure nobody sees
that. I'm convinced. They need people to feel
like they're restricting their actions too.
Now
here again is the Calabib person who said
no negotiations.
Just make sure you see that and says
that, you know, bay basically the quagmire that
which The US and Israel are trapped.
These are all the points I was referencing
within that.
And here we are to the 15 plan.
So Trump administration offers after all of that
15 cease fire plan today.
After claiming he had a secret person he
was talking to, that it was totally not
the Iranian government because they're not even exist.
They don't even that's that's why I played
the first part of that. We killed them
all. Right? But now we're making a deal
with them.
I just don't think that makes sense, other
than if they're somehow doing both simultaneously.
That's certainly possible, I guess.
But here's what it says. The plan was
submitted to Iran by intermediaries from Pakistan. So
you see, that's why that point was important.
So around it all, Pakistan,
Turkey, it looks like they were trying to
create some kind of conversation.
Now if you if you've heard me already
say it, just the point is that they've
already denied this, guys. And that shows you
continually if they eat, one, are not this
weak thing, they just could roll over and
take over because they wouldn't be continually offering
a deal that they know they're gonna turn
down while lying about some other secret deal
if that's the case.
But so Pakistan is the one that presented
it, who who was who, who have offered
to host renewed negotiations between Washington and Tehran,
which there's no reason why they would do
that because they've been tricked and lied every
single time they've done it. According to a
person,
the person speaking to them is the one
that said Pakistan put that forward, spoke on
a condition of anonymity.
It says The New York Times was the
first report that the plan had been delivered
to Iranian officials. Now this is important.
Like, it's making it clear more than once
that we're talking about the current government.
The Pentagon is also in the process of
deploying two marine units that will add about
5,000 marines and thousands of sailors to the
region.
Yeah. So much for the no no new
wars, boots on the ground, and long past.
Just like we all told you would happen
because we were paying attention.
Israeli officials who have been advocating for president
Donald Trump who con to continue to the
war against Iran were surprised, they write, by
the submission
of a ceasefire plan.
Now what's interesting is I'm getting different reports
from that. And in some cases, you have
officials claiming as you port it, but what
they're reporting is that the officials Israeli officials
claim they were, like, taken off guard, surprised
by the fact that Trump put forward a
plan. If that's the case, I argue it
speaks to more of of the awareness of
the dual agendas here. Or at the very
least that he feels even if they're on
the same agenda that Israel plays them or
the US government often.
My opinion. But if that's the case, it
does speak to some kind of a, you
know, a schism right
there. Now it says Iran has denied that
any negotiations are taking place. Now this is
again. Like, yesterday, they were denying the claim
of any kind of a negotiation. Now today,
on top of it, they're still saying, look,
we're not negotiating.
We're not in a place. And I it's
important to hear what they've set up until
now. Not just that we're taking a pause.
They stood up and made it very clear.
We have been doing it before. We show
restraint. We show compassion or whatever you wanna
claim, and these are things they've said. And
then every time we give an opening for
peace, you guys take advantage. You bomb us.
You violate your agreements. You have nothing sacred.
So why are we gonna keep pretending you're
gonna deal with us? Donald Trump lies to
us every time. That's essentially paraphrasing what they
said.
Iran remains highly suspicious of The United States,
which, as even a people report, twice under
the Trump administration, has attacked during high level
diplomatic talks. It's actually more than that. Seeing
as how they've done it in the past,
they've done it twice in this administration. You
could even include Lebanon and Soleimani if you
wanna understand how this actually plays in. So
that's just what they do, guys. This is
a policy. It's not an accident.
Including with the February 28 strikes that started
the current war.
That's why that Oman article is important because
that very day, he was saying, we're gonna
do this. They agreed to give up everything,
and then that's why Israel rushed to bomb
the country, it seems.
So going forward,
here is the WION platform. Trump sends 15
plan piece,
to point plan, peace plan translation, from no
nuclear,
no no, nuclear weapon to end of sanctions.
So here's what they actually put forward.
This is just embarrassing, guys. I mean, honestly,
it makes me think that this is designed
to not happen.
The New York Times quoting unnamed officials now,
again, there's an element of that this may
not be you know, this is what got
put out, but it could be something different.
In fact, we know the administration, especially Trump's,
has done that in the past, like, deliberately
to get people to jump at the wrong
thing, for example. But here's what's being reported
as the
unnamed official releasing.
Said The United States sent the 15 plan
to Iran through Pakistan, which is confirmed by
other reporting. Israeli,
channel twelve said that Trump was proposing a
one meet month ceasefire.
A 15 framework sent by Trump reportedly.
One month cease fire.
Dismantle all nuclear capabilities,
which means civilian too, by the way. And
they might agree to that, but I doubt
they will.
No pursuit of nuclear weapons already been there.
Like, that's already been met. They've never they
agreed to it three times already, and the
evidence shows they were not.
And all uranium enrichment, again, that's the same
as nuclear capabilities. Uranium enrichment is used for
civilian programs. And by the way, they did
so I could even I I mean,
nuclear capabilities,
maybe I'm I don't wanna speak. I'm not
an expert on the topic. I wonder if
there's an opening there without enrichment, but let's
just say for a second conversation, they have
agreed to give up their enrichment,
which means the no civilian pro civilian program,
I would argue. And so they did. They
just agreed to that. Now I argue they're
not going to now.
Why would they do it again? But they
did already. Number five, transfer all nuclear material
to the IAEA. Yeah. They agreed to this
already. That's what the foreign minister of Oman
was already saying or at least to another
counterpart that they would downgrade it or get
rid of it or or really both to
get, you know, downgrade what they currently have
and then basically export it out and get
rid of it all.
Close
not, Natanz. Basically, they're nuclear sites, which you
know, see, these are all this is what
I guess Trump was trying was saying that
one, two, and three are all nuclear site.
Well, these things are not gonna be like,
these are unjustifiable
for obvious reasons.
Unrestricted
a, International Atomic Energy Agency inspections. Now that's
always been the case. That has been the
reality since the JCPOA,
even after these broken deals.
Now I mean, I would maybe say unrestricted
now, but at one point, that's what the
reality was.
Abandon regional proxies.
I mean, come on. This is just ridiculous.
So now now now this is the same
thing you're doing with Gaza and Hamas. So
you can't have any allies? Because we're not
talking about proxies here. We're talking about groups
that they're allied with. And so right now,
that's already met because they don't have these
proxies as best as the evidence shows to
me. So all you're really saying is stop
having any association with people you that's just
an effort to isolate these groups.
Halt funding and arming of proxies. Well, okay.
Again, like, let's right now, the evidence doesn't
show that that's the case other than weapons
tray, you know, like, anything allies,
like, US allies do with other people.
Weapon sales,
support.
That's different than a proxy, guys. A proxy,
for example, is what you're seeing with the
Kurds where they just basically dump everything in
their hands and then direct them on what
to do in Iran. That's what they're doing.
The point though is how do you prove
something that might not be happening?
But if it is happening,
what they're the ones that they I mean,
right, like, for example, they make a deal
in Gaza or any other deal, and they
just they they go there lying and don't
take their word for it. So why were
they there?
Keep Strait Of Hermos open. Well, that's already
happening. Of course, they mean for them.
Limit missile program later. I don't even know
what that means later, but this again could
be some kind of a truncated version that
maybe it will come back to that. There's
not they're not going to give up their
ability to defend themselves.
Defense only military forces. Well, if you're talking
about missile program,
limit it. Well, well, all you're gonna end
up doing is getting they're in a position
where they can be taken over easily, and
that's exactly what happened with Libya.
Miss, defense only military forces is just unreasonable,
unrealistic.
And, of course, what you're ultimately talking about,
anything could be used as a weapon, guys.
It's just a game. Lift all sanctions.
So what are we talking about?
Are we talking about lifting sanctions on Iran?
This is a point that Trump sent forward.
So Trump is asking them to lift sanctions?
I mean, it's an interesting point. Then it
says support,
bush Bushier nuclear energy
and snap back sanctions. At the end of
the day, guys, all of this has been
discussed over and over and over. It's a
ridiculous time to put this forward based on
what they just did, and that shows weakness.
I mean, think about this. Again, he just
said that these people are gone.
No one's in power. They don't even know
what's going on. They're all hiding in their
bunkers. That's why we're speaking with this guy
who's high up, and he's the real and
then today, you do this?
Either not in control
or desperately spinning out.
Here's what they said. Hey, US very close
to meeting main goals in Iran while Iran
is going, no. Thank you.
That's how do you not see that as
weakness? Now if this ends up where they're
lying and this all comes to pass the
way he said it would, well, then then
then that's what we'll report when it comes
to pass. Right now, the evidence doesn't suggest
that. The evidence clearly shows
the like, for example, what we just showed
you in regard to the back and forth,
Trump is being caught saying things that you
could prove aren't true. Now as I said,
that may mean something or it may mean
something else. What I think it clearly suggests
is that you're yeah. If you have to
lie about that, then you're in a weak
position. That's always been clearly, I've stated my
opinion.
My point, though, is that, you know, anything
could change tomorrow. I just think that it's
unlikely that's gonna go that direction. But if
it does, what it would probably suggest
would be that this was something that they
were trying to maneuver because there was, like,
with, Syria or Venezuela.
And that makes sense that you're hiding the
transition, but let's be real.
It's a crime.
The whole thing. Everything they're doing. And this
ultimately means that they're surreptitiously doing it anyway.
To lie and, again, lying about a deal
to get what they want. It's what they
do.
Iran dismisses the ceasefire plan, which is what
I mean, I don't know why. And, again,
I think The US knew this would happen
because they already told them that. Iran, on
Wednesday, dismissed the American plan to pause the
war, issuing its own counterproposal. And I'll show
you that next.
And then launched more strikes on on Israel,
and they claimed Gulf Arab countries. Again, I'm
I'm not sure if I can verify that
seeing as how they have not seen me
to claim those. But it says Iran issued
its own plan via state TV, which includes
a halt to killing of its officials,
means to make sure no other war is
waged against it, which you know, do you
really think Israel is ever going to give
anything up? Reparations for the war, which they'll
never do, the end to the hostilities, and
Iran's exercise of sovereignty over its trade of
Hormuz.
Now reparations for the war, can you imagine
what a future administration would say if Trump
gave them money just like they're trying to
make it about Obama?
It's just they're not I don't think this
is gonna happen.
Iran says no negotiations
will take place
until their five conditions are met, and this
is what they already were saying before this.
Iran also says it will end the war
at a time of its own choosing
and only if the conditions are met that
it has set forward.
Now this is the,
Kabisi letter and just gives you the five
conditions, then we'll read it directly from one
of the platforms or two of them, in
fact.
Iran has officially rejected The US proposal,
and their conditions include, one, immediate end to
attacks
and assassinations
on Iran. Which it's a crazy they have
to even say that seeing as how they're
all crimes, and the world should do something
about that or at least acknowledge
that objectively.
Establish of establishment
of concrete
guarantees
against future US attacks, which why you know,
what is that gonna be?
Liars telling you they promise? I don't know
why, you know, but at least they're putting
it there. Clear determination of guaranteed payment for
war damages. I just doubt they'll ever do
that.
An international recognition of Iran's authority over the
Strait Of Hormuz, which it's the reality, guys.
It's like any other thing. It's like The
US and it's like Suez Canal. It's it's
the same point. They just go bad guy.
And then I don't want they don't we
don't agree. Not their prerogative.
An end to the war across all fronts,
including for all Iranian proxies in the region.
Now that's how this is being framed. That's
not what Iran is saying. We now wait
a res we await response from The US.
What they're really saying is an end to
all the war across all fronts. And any
Lebanon,
Syria, any of them, Gaza, Hamas, they're not
gonna do that. Israel will refuse.
Iran rejects US proposal, lays out five conditions
for ending the war. Iran has responded negatively
to American proposal aimed at ending the ongoing
imposed war, insisting that it will only occur
on Tehran's own terms and their timeline.
The official with knowledge of the details of
the proposal speaking exclusively to press TV today
said Iran will not allow US Doc President
Donald Trump, and it's important, to dictate the
timing of the war's end.
So if at least it feels like they
think they're in a position of power. Right?
And if Trump clearly is trying to draw
this to an end and maybe even lying
about things, it seems to speak about weakness.
Again, this is all breeding the wall right
in the wall. It's hard to know for
sure. Or the rather the tea leaves, I
guess. Is the right way to say that?
The point
is that
they're they're saying we're not gonna let you
wrap this up because what they think is
this is them,
you know,
confronting their weakness. Like, basically,
threat threat threat. We didn't follow through. We
didn't believe you. And so now Trump is
being forced to walk it back, but can't
say that. So we have to frame it
as somehow him having a success because that's
what weak people do.
Quote, Iran will end the war when it
decides to do so and when its own
conditions are met, the official said, emphasizing Tehran's
resolve to continue its defense and inflict heavy
blows on the enemy until its demands are
fulfilled, which, by the way, those demands were
not being demanded until the US government in
Israel illegally started this war.
They were being discussed. Right? There was conversations,
but they're the ones that drove this to
an ultimatum all or nothing standpoint.
But now watch as they carry on blaming
Iran for that.
Every time. According to the to the official,
Washington has been pursuing negotiations through various diplomatic
channels, putting forward proposals that Tehran views as
excessive and disconnected from reality.
That's my point. That's been not just these
last two, but continually. They've been just going,
we're not we're done with this. I've been
telling you that. The official drew parallels with
two previous rounds of negotiations held in the
2025,
characterizing them as deceptive.
Yeah. That's that's a soft word seeing as
how they literally murdered people in the negotiations.
In both instances, the official stressed The United
States had no genuine intention to engage in
meaningful dialogue and subsequently carried out military aggression
against Iran. Isn't it funny how you get
this framing? Where is this anywhere else in
the conversation?
Don't don't believe that you shouldn't make that
shouldn't then turn
it shouldn't create the thought that then press
TV is always the truth or that they're
the right one. It's not the case. But
just realize that there's a, you know, there's
a perspective you're getting from Iranian people and
Iranian media. There's nowhere else in the conversation.
They're just going, look. We're done. This is
so obvious that we are not but, again,
it could be bluster. They could be fronting
that kind of strength.
That's to me, it doesn't seem likely.
Tehran has therefore categorized likely that they're front
they're bluffing. It seems that this is the
reality.
Tehran has therefore categorized the latest overture, which
was delivered via friendly regional intermediary, as a
ploy to heighten tensions, and it responded,
negatively.
Now, again, think about this. Why would they,
through an immediate
intermediary, send this plan
to a group they just told you is
irrelevant
while allegedly dealing with, like, somebody they just
told you was actually in charge?
I just don't see how that possibly lines
up. The official outlined five specific conditions under
which Iran would agree to end the war,
which we already read for
you. The official further noted that these stipulations
are in addition to demands previously presented by
Tehran during the second round of negotiations in
Geneva, which
took place just days before The US and
Israel carried out a fresh round of aggression
on February 28, starting this whole illegal war
or continuing it really when you understand how
it's always been going. But that's very important
to hear.
So not just saying just these five, but
everything else we've been demanding, and that's where
you put us. That's where you have driven
us to.
Iran has communicated to all intermediaries acting in
good faith that the ceasefire is contingent upon
the acceptance of its conditions.
That's it.
No negotiations, they say, quote, will be held
prior to that.
The official stressed, reiterating that the commute the
continuation of Iran's defense operations
because, I mean, if anyone's trying to frame
this as anything other than that, this is
not a a Russia Ukraine thing, guys. This
is very clear. They have not been they
I mean, at this point now, they're they're
I would I mean, yeah. No. There are
cases I can see right now where they
were they're they are initiating attacks.
The point though, though, is this is a
war of defense from their war of aggression.
And, clearly, as they've already demonstrated, this would
stop if they stop. You may disagree with
that, but I would bet anything that that's
the way it would go because they've done
it before. And every action they do seems
to suggest that exact reality.
The difference, though, is that now Israel and
The US are on their back foot, not
just kind of momentarily, but because of where
they put themselves. So it removes the whole
thing.
It says the end of the war will
occur
when Iran decides it should end, not when
Trump envisions its conclusion.
That's very important, and I'm guarantee you that
is driving him crazy. They put out this
video of, like, a Lego little Lego video
with actually a pretty catchy song calling him
a loser.
And it's I guarantee it got and and
my opinion is that that stuff really bothers
him. Because and in my point as well
is that's a very, I think, a bad
move because it's probably gonna drive him to
act irrationally, and that's probably not in their
interest.
Iran wants Lebanon
included in any ceasefire. Now that's super important.
You know why?
Because Israel is not gonna give that
up. I would that's a reason that I
made it important to make this to include
that. They just kind of absorbed Lebanon into
this current motion knowing that that doesn't even
line up with their narrative despite that, you
know, Lebanon is Iran or whatever they're claiming.
But realize, guys, that the Lebanese government is
largely on the side of their agenda,
and there's lots of people in this country.
And so you're effectively bombing the country, which
is
even at at least half on your side
to a degree or, you know, there's a
there's a nuance there.
But they're just bombing indiscriminately bombing people's homes,
but that's the same when they bomb Syria,
bomb you know, even government buildings and the
gov the government there goes, we don't care.
This is fine because they're working with them,
and those are the terrorists they put there
just like every other place they work with.
But Iran correctly is making this case. That
when we do a ceasefire, not like with
Gaza, we this all has to stop because
it's all part of the same conversation. We
all know that. I just think that's gonna
very clearly cause a problem for the negotiations,
which is probably what they're trying to accomplish,
knowing that they're not really, truly engaging with
this. Now to wrap up here, there's some
points that we just need to see. With
all we just went through, the absurdity
of what you're about to hear.
I I just it it just it
pales in comparison to anything I've ever seen.
Like, it gets worse every day. And I
think it's not just because they're just especially
bad liars. I do think that I mean,
KJP was probably one of the worst, to
be honest. But nonetheless,
it's it's the the the situation they're in.
Right? It's it's the or not unless, but,
you know, in addition to it's the situation
they're in. It it's only God it it's
like I've said before, when you're when you're
lying about everything, eventually, you're going to contradict
something you've lied about before. But imagine being
in this position where you all you do
is lie. And now on top of that,
the government narrative and everything around it is
is you just you are going to make
yourself look like a fool.
And speaking of fools, here's Eric Daugherty
just going breaking news. Whatever Caroline said, like,
earlier in the day, so it's not breaking
news, confirms that Iran is literally
begging
president Trump for a deal
and for the war to stop.
As always,
these people deserve ridicule by just it's embarrassing.
The kind of ones even if that ends
up being the truth, this a journalist
does not
blindly report what the government says they want
people to think. That's just stupid, guys. That's
just that's just bad not intelligent anything,
especially with how often they've lied to us
over the years. But then even if that's
the case, look at what we're dealing with
right now. What indication
anywhere is there that either begging Trump for
a deal? Not even Trump is saying that.
First of all, his very need to reveal
very badly came from this alleged single person
yesterday.
Then today, they send a 15 plan that
Iran immediately
denies,
and then they kind of continue to so
how does that look like begging for a
deal, Eric?
Now this gets even more embarrassing when you
listen to Carolyn leave it.
Continues
unabated.
From the outset, president Trump and the Department
of War estimated it would take approximately four
to six weeks to achieve this critical mission.
Twenty five days in, the greatest military the
world has ever known is ahead of schedule
and performing exceptionally.
Is it just cringey?
Because look. The real thing is
there's nobody in the conversation that's like, that's
all they this is people who are proud
to to gloat or over to to overdo
the like, they they just wanna support the
team. You know? And they like, the idea
is I don't think anybody anywhere, even her,
actually thinks that's the reality. But they've just
gotten so comfortable with what we're supposed to
overdo it. Isn't that what we all do?
Isn't that what Trump wants from us? Just
constantly push out the biggest, most that's what
Trump does every single time he opens his
mouth.
You even if you're in the number one
position, it becomes not just that we're the
leader, but we're the leader of all leaders
that have ever led in the history of
leaders. It's just dumb, and everybody knows it.
I don't know why we don't laugh about
that. And I mean, you there's plenty of
things that I think were way worse about
Biden.
But this is especially bad for him. And
it's just something that has become obnoxious for
most people who are just tired of pretending
like it's not obvious. And this is our
government. It's where we are today. And so
what she's saying is, you know, the most
powerful now the the US government has very
clearly spent the most on its military. But
the real question and what we're very clearly
coming to terms with today is that the
representation of being the most powerful militarily is
not necessarily what The US is doing today
or rather what they've invested in. Like, we
have been manipulated. Like, the the fact that
we've got, like, 11 all the the aircraft
carriers,
the war has changed. As everyone is now
coming to terms with, as Rubio told you,
their drones and what they're building, they're gonna
eventually surpass us. Yeah. But let's spend 30,000,000
more dollars on a single jet. You know,
like, it's it's it's clear that we have
been dragged into this military industrial complex that's
kind of lumbering into this technocratic complex. It's
all the same conversation. They'll just keep spending
money on things they want you to invest
in that don't interest Americans at all because
it's about the system. How long have I
told you this country rather, as always, this
government
runs on the blood of other governments, other
nations? I just can't get that right today.
The point is clearly they're not us. The
government's doing it. But what they're doing is
running on the blood of other nations, the
peoples.
How do we not see this? This country,
this government, and the country, because the government's
the one running to the ground, would ultimately
collapse should the war industry stop.
I don't know why we can't see that.
So all of this is in in, like,
any historical point. This is this is a
dying empire, and everyone's starting to call that
out. That doesn't mean the American people or
what civilization
we can create, you know, create going it's
this government that we're talking about.
The outset, president Trump and the Department of
War estimated it would take approximately
four to six weeks to achieve this critical
mission.
Twenty five days in, the greatest military the
world has ever known is ahead of schedule
and performing exceptionally.
Mhmm. Day by day, the Iranian regime is
being crippled, and their ability to threaten The
United States and our allies is being significantly
weakened.
Oh, weakened. Didn't Trump say it was obliterated?
Didn't Hegseth say on day one they were
obliterated? He did. So maybe you guys should
get on the same page about your terms
and understand what's simply happening. And even what
she just said is objectively not true. Every
day, they're showing you that's not the reality,
but they just keep saying it. I don't
know what you call that other than weakness
or I guess being misinformed by your allies
is possible.
Their ambitions of building a nuclear weapon have
also been crushed to an See my point?
Even greater degree. Oh, an even greater degree.
Oh, see. Because she just can't get past
the fact that we were it was obliterated.
And, yeah, anyone saying otherwise is fake news.
And, well, now it's back, and now it's
even more obliterated than it was ever obliterated
in the history of obliteration.
Keep going. Doing great.
Then they were in Operation Midnight Hammer Right.
In June When it was obliterated. 2025.
That's why you're beginning to see the regime
look for an exit ramp. They recognize they
are being crushed. Their ability to attack American
and allied forces as well as their ability
to defend their own territory
is dwindling.
I mean, look. Aside from the last point,
which you the this they included that for
a point a reason to say, you know,
we're that's what they keep doing. We are
on our jets are controlling the airspace. Again,
that was a given. They didn't even really
fight against that. Now did that there that's
a that's a superiority for sure.
But that's not going to win the war
unless the point is to just nonstop carpet
bomb every single thing, which is kinda where
they're leaning into and it's kind of what
Israel's doing. The point, though, is that they
have dug into this and planned for this
exact kind of thing, the genocide included, by
the way, and that's nobody's fault other than
The US and Israel. But just think about
what she is saying. They're desperate for a
deal. This is not represented
anywhere in the conversation.
Literally hour by hour
following president Trump June 2025.
That's why you're beginning to see the regime
look for an exit ramp. They recognize And
that that's demonstrated by Trump offering a plan
that they flatly deny twice
because that just perfectly makes sense. They are
being crushed. Their ability to attack American and
ally forces
as as well as their ability to defend
their own territory is dwindling. Windling. Okay. But,
yeah, defending, maybe, but not in the sense
of what we're talking about on the ground
because they are effectively
largely defending.
But their ability to attack, they keep trying
to sell you on the idea that it
just dwindle losing every day.
Even the corporate media is admitting that's just
not true. So why did they keep lying?
You know the answer. I mean, the the
the most logical answer anyway, weakness.
Literally hour by hour.
Following president Trump's powerful threat on Saturday evening,
it was made clear to The United States
that Iran wanted to talk. Oh, yeah?
It's powerful threat that they laughed at. They
literally laughed at you guys. They sent videos.
Now, again, you could argue that's bluster. And
even behind the scenes, maybe they're cowering and
wanting a deal. That's possible.
I I don't know why we would take
it to face value. And, again, the physical
reality does not back that up.
President Trump is willing to listen. As president
Trump announced on Monday, The United States has
been engaged over the last three days in
productive conversations,
which led the president to temporarily instruct the
Department of War to postpone planned strikes against
Iranian power plants and Oh, crimes, by the
way. Massive crimes. But what she just talked
about was that supposed secret defector point,
but that's not what we're dealing with today.
So I kinda get the sense that they're
just trying to mash those things together and
hope that we don't catch on. Energy infrastructure
only. The
But, yeah, here's Eric going, woo. We did
it. We won. They're over. They're losing. And
tomorrow, it'll be something else, and whatever they
said was breaking news. Obliterated is very clear
as I said before.
Destroyed so thoroughly as to be unrecognizable, imperceptible.
It means it is gone. Did not say,
you know, annihilation is a good
a synonym.
It just means it's it's completely ceases to
exist. And so you can't again, you could
make it more, you know, being too specific,
but those are words he used. It's words
he's repeatedly stressed
and then used again. And they obliterate and
then they're bombing. We obliterated them and then
they're bombing. You know? It's like it's just
we have to laugh at how dumb that
is. Well, exactly.
And then here is an even more ridiculous
thing that she just said.
Trump
does not bluff, and he is prepared to
unleash hell. Iran should not miscalculate
again. Their last mix miscalculation
cost them their senior leadership, their navy, their
air force, and their air defense system.
Any violence beyond this point will be because
the Iranian regime refused to understand they have
already been defeated and refused to come to
a deal. Oh, okay. I guess they just
they're not aware. They they they're stop firing
your rockets, Iran. You've already stopped the ability
to fire them. Don't didn't you hear that?
That mean you learned that you're not capable
of doing the thing that you're doing right
now? Stop. You've lost already.
This I just don't understand
where they think this is going.
You know, you could genuinely argue this is
just incompetence and somehow they are winning and
they just don't know how to relay that
to you. Kinda would make sense, but my
god.
And, also, just take note of her, like,
literally reading line to line and, like, stumbling
her words. These people are off their balance,
guys. I we have to be able to
see that.
I just think this is I mean, the
ideal I gotta play that again. Force in
their air defense system.
Any violence beyond this point will be because
the Iranian regime refused to understand they have
already been defeated. Yeah. You've already you've already
lost.
Makes sense. Right? As demonstrated by their repeated
attacks, as demonstrated by their continued
deals returned to you, as demonstrated by your
continued capitulation
to them.
I just think this is crazy. I you
know, I I all I'm trying to highlight
today is the obviousness of where it all
points. I was clear in the beginning that
I don't think this is definitive at all,
but I think it's very clear where most
of this is leaning. Now to end in
general the idea of where this is gonna
go, it seems. As Nathan points out, we
went from no more wars to Fox News
showing where US troops are going to invade
Iran.
That's what they're showing, guys.
I mean, it's they're just normalizing this. This
is this is important to see. This is
where it's going. They're trying to get you
okay with this possibility. Take it on the
chin. Right? It's what they're actually saying. Okay.
Gas prices are going up. It's okay. We,
you know, got it it's okay to stop
them. We got a nuclear bomb. That's not
what's happening. True stream media says this is
like a test to see how far people
who have been propagandized their entire lives can
be driven to support their own demise.
Glenn Greenwald,
bombing somewhere
and then waiting for rescue workers to and
first responders to show up to also bomb
them is called a double tap. We've talked
about this for a long time. It happened
a lot in in Yemen, Saudi Arabia. It
happened a lot in Syria. It happened a
lot in Gaza. We covered and, you know,
gee, can you find the correlation there?
It's it's it's one of the worst in
my mind, war crimes. What you're doing is
you are bombing a location.
In fact, you've have you seen,
I'm forgetting the name of the movie now.
Anyway, the point is, you know, bomb a
location
with the intention of drawing
in the medical workers,
and then you really bomb them.
They do this this I mean, Israel has
policy names for these things, like the the
higher doctrine or mowing, you know, mowing the
lawn or or they do they've literally write
down why this is supposed it's about maximizing
the psychological terror. It's about the harm to
children and women. I mean, they write about
these things. In this case, US drones and
this is from thirteen years ago. This is
just
Glenn speaking with The Guardian.
US drones strike target rec
strikes target rescuers in Pakistan,
and the West stays silent.
Reports
from the twenty fifth from Tehran that US
and Israel struck a rescue site while rescue
workers were trying to clear the rubble from
the site previously struck by US and Israel.
And these are reports. But if you understand
that they have I mean, my entire life,
every war they've ever been involved in, either
one of them, they have done this
verifiably.
As that's why that's why Glenn is showing
you this because it is something that has
done they've done before, and it's happening again.
That's the people we're dealing with here, guys.
That's who they are.
Now, if you haven't seen this, effective April
20,
as Steve pointed out, interestingly, doing this on
the, I guess, the, you know, kind of,
unofficial cannabis holiday,
the US Army is increasing the maximum enlistment
age from 34
to 42
and eliminating waiver requirements for a single conviction
of marijuana.
Interesting.
Well, see as how that's not the idea
that that's
most con most states in this country have
already agreed that it should be recreational. Like,
they're, like, giving you something that they should
have already done legally a long time ago.
But the point about that is not even
giving you anything. We're only saying, we just
want a conviction. We'll ignore. We'll still convict
you for care cannabis, though. How dumb that
is.
But they're in look. Think how insane this
is. You're increasing it by eight years.
Right?
I mean, you are literally
I mean, the the if you understand what
this means, by the way, this is like
the select service point. You were saying that
people can now be drafted up until they're
42 years old. And all we from from
I remember, it used to be something like,
oh, well, and I mean, this does say
enlistment age, but understand that that does overlap
with the the idea of what if if
and when a draft
is to come to play, that's where that
that's where that comes from. The point, though,
is that it used to be something like
25 or long. It's because of the obvious
point.
Now you got 42 year olds going to
war. That doesn't seem like it makes much
sense for most average 42 year olds. But
either way, what do you think this suggests?
Was this is this the peace president? Is
this what winning looks like? Or is this
the obvious implication that we may be going
to the very war you all swore would
never happen if you voted for Trump?
Dave DeCamp also points out that or rather
mayor Lee Hill points out that the the
house Republican who chairs the armed service committee
after a classified Iran briefing said the Trump
admin is not giving congress enough information about
plans for The US troops in The Middle
East.
So that's what I was saying earlier that
that I think I said intelligence, but it's
the armed services committee.
Classified briefings.
Well, there's they're supposed to be informed about
what's going on. Because otherwise, you just have
executive branch doing whatever it wants, which guess
what, guys? That's where we have been for
a long time. Mike Rogers, just out of
a classified briefing on Iran, said the Pentagon
isn't providing enough information about the administration's plans
in The Middle East, in particular,
troop movements.
We want to know more about what's going
on, what the options are, and why they're
being considered, he told reporters, and we're just
not getting enough answers on those questions.
Dave DeCamp says, seems significant.
Yeah. You know why? Because Squires, they're literally
talking about deployment right now. Fox notes is
talking about where they're gonna go in Iran.
And as I've been telling you, there are
already elements that have been deployed. They told
you this already, in fact. And we know
the Kurds are there. We know that there
was elements of this long before this, including
intelligence.
In this case,
if we haven't come to terms with the
fact that this is actually happening,
everything you were promised has been lied about.
Yeah. And you could be talking to people
that voted for Biden. You could talk to
people that voted for Trump for Obama or
Bush. The same point applies. I should say
everything, but the point is that these people
are always giving you what they think you
wanna hear, and they always seem to be
aiming in the same direction. Until we can
come to terms with that, this will continue
to be the case.
The US is deploying thousands of marines to
the Middle East. Here's what they could be
used for.
Nobody supports this, guys. Not even their I
mean, other than the team sport players and
and, you know, people who pay to say
so, most Republicans are adamantly against this, including
the war itself.
As Ryan Grim points out, Israeli media now
reporting that Netanyahu
expects a ceasefire announcement from Trump this Saturday.
Translation,
ground invasion coming this weekend.
Now it's kind of a joke,
but not
because this is what happens every time. That's
what Iran's telling you. Every time they move,
let's let's come meet for a negotiation, and
they bomb them in Lebanon. Let's meet for
negotiation. They kill Kamini. Let's come on. Come
on, Sawani. Let's talk about peace. So it's
just what they offered him, and they bombed
him in the Iraq airport. It's what they
do. It's not an accident.
So
if he turned those to be correct,
be poor to talk about.
Lastly,
two things I want you to think about
on the way out. Brian it's really just
this one for the most part, but Brian
Baruletic
posted this this, put this post out. The,
quote, blame Israel strategy is part of years
of US policy making regarding a United States
war on Iran.
Now this is very much worth your time,
and he's really referencing the Witch, Bath, the
Persia document we've covered a lot.
What's important about this is there are elements
that you can hear that that's you can
see this.
But just because it's written down from one
think tank or plenty about the idea of
how to frame this as Israel's fault does
not necessarily mean that that's that Israel is
not influencing, if not controlling US policy. It
could.
But what he really gets at is it's
sort of the other way around, that Israel's
US proxy. And a lot of people make
that argument. Look. In my mind, either way
you look at it, it's the same issue.
Different, but the same problem we're dealing with.
Right?
So I think it's still nonetheless worth hearing
this and considering this. You know what I
think? I think the evidence is pretty clear,
but it's worth considering whether maybe I'm missing
something or maybe there's a different way to
look at it and consider whether or not
this is like I've been talking about.
This is why I'm often often trying to
point out that demonstrating our value, the objectivity
we offer, because very few do that, that
it's possible. Right? That this is what you
know, the the the idea that
Israel tricked Trump. It was just to get
people the out to say we knew Trump
was not the one. And that's what Glenn
Beck is doing. That's what Alex Jones is
doing. Right? Surprise, surprise.
So
think about that and consider whether or not
this might be a double edged sword. Maybe
it's one way or the other. My mind
is I think it's a little bit of
both, like I've said before. But I think
you can clearly argue that there's elements of
this that show and and and, like, let's
see it sort of like this. You could
argue that Israel was able to basically control
US policy, but that these think tanks will
still sit around and go, look. We can
do this and then basically suggest that it's
Israel. And even that's not even that's not
even inaccurate.
You see my point? But there's a lot
of ways you could look at it. All
I'm saying is consider
a different opinion. And what Brian is putting
forward is is evidence based and and worth
your time to consider.
And this this is just people talking about
the, you know, where they perceive him being
sort of missing the boat when it comes
to the technocratic perspective. And I that you
could consider that.
I think it's important to consider the opinion
regardless because it opens your mind to another
way to look at things, which is always
in your interest.
Being able to consider
other opinions without fully adopting them is just
simply a sign of intelligence.
Now this one is something else somebody said
to me. Straight theater is what it's called.
Not not really familiar with the substack, but
it's an interesting read. I do think it's
worth your time. And what it really gets
into, and I'll just read the opening, this
was not a war.
It was a,
restructuring
exercise carried out under the cover of one.
The US has done this before. Manufacture or
accelerate a crisis, let the disruption clear the
board, then move in as the stable expensive
alternative.
Golov Tonkin,
Iraq WMDs, Ukraine. The pattern isn't new.
What's new is the scale of the commercial
infrastructure that was already waiting to absorb the
outcome.
Energy infrastructure was repositioned, trade corridors were reset,
proxy liabilities were burned off, market share was
redistributed,
and the region's financial architecture was quietly reengineered
while the public drowned in spectacle.
The violence supplied the legal, political,
and insurance rationale for outcomes already mapped in
in filings, planned documents, and funding commitments years
before the first fake missile was launched. They
call it a war. It was a business
deal, and they were all in on it.
Now
I very much think it is worth your
time to think about this.
But as I just said, the idea, for
example, that the you know, before
the fake missile was launched, you know,
this exact opinion could be the re the
truth, and there could also be a real
war or just real missiles, people dying like
we talk about. False flags could mean faked
or it could mean
actual people dying, but it's still just it's
a it's a manipulated situation. You're blaming it
on somebody else. These people do not have
qualms about killing innocent people, guys. But also
the idea that everyone was in on it.
Right? Maybe. Like I said at the beginning,
it's certainly possible, like, with COVID nineteen, we
did get that insight that this is some
kind of coordinated plan. But it's hard for
me to wrap my mind around with everything
we're seeing happen, with what's being done by
Israel. May look. Maybe this is the plan,
and then Israel is the anomaly causing this
to be a problem. There's so many ways
you could look at it. All I want
you to be able to consider is that
this very well may be something larger than
just a ongoing war, maybe even to the
point to where it's all wag the dog
and it's about the, like I've been talking
about, reimagining of society, the reengineering of where
this all goes.
But as I said to end, I I
do think there's middle little both. And I
think that what you're seeing is very much
what she's talking about. The planned out elements
of how this would go, but I do
still think that just like always, there's internal
divides. There are different agendas. There are people
that maybe care more about their personnel the
than than not. And you there are differences.
So consider both because I very much do
think that what we're seeing is a transition,
but I do think that the war is
real. I think that there are people dying,
and I think that there are different agendas
at play. And as Whitney would point out
that there are different global agendas. There are
different elements that ultimately want to control your
life. They want to control your your life,
your family, your direction, surveil you, but they
disagree on how to end up.
Whether it may be a religious science perspective
or it's a technocratic perspective or maybe those
are the same thing, you can decide.
But consider
it. Because so many people out there want
you to just pick a side,
choose a discussion, and just follow through.
It's not in your interest.
Question everything. Consider all possibilities because that argument
is very sound.
But, you know, you could argue there's just
parts that are added to it. So thank
you for tuning in, guys. You know, this
is what we do here. Right? This this
is why you guys come here. This is
why we continue to do this because there's
so much out there that is trying to
kind of trap you in these ideological bubbles
and false information front. You know, like, basically,
algorithmically control the way you see things and
just kinda trap you in these little false
logic bubbles.
Don't fall for it. Right? As long as
you're willing to stand back and consider everything,
everything with an open mind, even if you
ultimately come back to the same point where
you disagree with it, but openly consider it,
then they won't be able to trap you.
We'll fall forward here and there. But if
you keep doing it, you'll see it and
you'll pull back, and you will fall away
from it. You will eventually stop falling for
it in the first place, I would argue.
But
just keep pushing because I believe strongly that
we're watching this change and what we're watching
play out. And I just mean from, like,
it was right there more so in American
perspective
that this is something that they're spinning out
around. Like, they're losing that control. That shows
us that we're having influence in the conversation.
Now I don't obviously want there to be
negative consequences. I don't want people to be
hurt. I don't want this to cause economic
collapse.
But it may be the reality regardless, unfortunately.
I hope not. And but if it is,
it's because of the people that we're trying
to stop. The answer is not to let
those broken people keep doing the problem because
they've trapped us in the problem. Right? That's
the same logic as Trump and Israel and
whatever else that, well, he had to fight
from within to stop them from doing the
worst thing. So the art the answer was
to let them keep doing the thing?
No, guys. That's never the answer.
Never.
I know you know that. Thank you for
tuning in.
I love you all. As always, question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.