reSee.it - Saved Tweet Feed
@Warrllion - WarrLion
Karol Sheinin Markowicz🔻 Kenneth Marcus🔻 LDBCCCAS, Inc.>Alyza Lewin Tronx Finance>Atmos Innovation Harvest Land Company 🔻 Friends of Hawai'i Robotics (TAG) The Actors Group Mary Hasson🔻 Napa Institute>Carnegie AI Robert Spitzer>B'nai B'rith🔻 Ayelet Aviation>Mackinac Island https://t.co/7VsqME6ALf
@Warrllion - WarrLion
🔻Hunter Strategy🔻 ☑️Zachariah Qureshi 🔻BILT ☑️Juliette Qureshi 🔻Q-Telligence Solutions ☑️Ahmed Qureshi https://t.co/XrgGvk4Qna
@Warrllion - WarrLion
🔻Hunter Strategy🔻 ☑️Zachariah Qureshi 🔻BILT ☑️Juliette Qureshi 🔻Q-Telligence Solutions ☑️Ahmed Qureshi https://t.co/XrgGvk4Qna
reSee.it AI Summary
I read W. Morgan Shuster’s The Strangling of Persia and his eyewitness account of how Britain and Russia used the 1907 spheres agreement, debt pledges, and state-linked banks to control Iran’s revenues, block reforms, and ultimately crush the Majlis. When Shuster resisted a Russian-backed coup and refused an ultimatum, Russia invaded, massacres followed, and he was forced out in 1912.
@ForgottenV1918 - ForgottenVolumes
Thread 1/2 W. Morgan Shuster – The Strangling of Persia (1912, The Century Co.; first editions and early reprints are rare collector items today) In 1911, Iran’s parliament (the Majlis) hired a 34-year-old American financial expert, W. Morgan Shuster, as Treasurer-General. His mission: rescue the treasury from chaos and crushing foreign debt so a new constitutional government could actually function after the 1905–1911 Constitutional Revolution. What he discovered and fought was a calculated campaign by Britain and Russia to financially and politically strangle Persia to keep 12 million people weak, indebted, and unable to control their own resources or destiny. Shuster wrote the explosive firsthand account after they forced him out. Here’s the core of what the book lays out, stripped to the facts that still shock people who’ve never heard the story. The Setup: Secret Partition + Debt Trap Britain and Russia had already secretly signed the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, carving Persia into spheres of influence without asking Persians: Russia got the wealthy north, Britain the south (including the emerging oil fields and the route to India). A neutral middle zone. This was pure great-power realpolitik dressed up as “stabilization.” Persia was already drowning in debt from loans the previous Shahs had been pressured into taking from these same powers (Russian loans of 1899–1902 and others). Customs revenues and other key income streams were pledged as collateral. Foreign “advisors” (often Belgian officials tied to the lenders) effectively controlled collection and skimmed profits. Default or “disorder” gave the lenders leverage to tighten control. Shuster and his small American team were brought in precisely because they were not European the Majlis wanted neutral experts to centralize finances, end corrupt tax-farming, collect revenues properly, pay debts legitimately, and build a real central government. Shuster got unprecedented authority from the Majlis. He centralized collection and disbursement, fought graft, and created the Treasury Gendarmerie an armed force to enforce tax collection in the provinces where the central government had almost no reach. He even tried to hire a capable British officer, Major C.B. Stokes, to lead it. Britain blocked the appointment it might “offend” Russian interests in the north. Success for Shuster meant Persia could pay its debts on its own terms, develop independently, and stop being a financial vassal. That was unacceptable to the powers who wanted the revenues and concessions flowing their way. The Trigger: Crushing a Russian-Backed Coup… and the Backlash When the deposed ex-Shah (Muhammad Ali), backed by Russian intrigue and arms funneled through Russian territory, tried to retake the throne in 1911, Shuster helped the constitutional government defeat the rebels. They put bounties on the ex-Shah and his brothers and moved to confiscate their estates (including one where the Russian Bank made a dubious/fraudulent claim). Russia responded with ultimatums: Fire Shuster or face invasion. Britain’s Foreign Secretary, Sir Edward Grey, advised Persia to submit “to avoid complications.” The Defiance and the Crushing Iran’s Majlis voted unanimously to reject the ultimatum and keep Shuster. Persian women marched on parliament, vowing they would rather see their families dead than submit to foreign dictation and lose their sovereignty. Russia sent thousands of troops into northern Persia. They advanced, occupied key areas, and carried out massacres in Tabriz, Resht, and Enzeli bombarding cities, killing fighters (fidais) and civilians alike. A coup (involving elements bought off or aligned with the invaders) abolished the Majlis on December 24, 1911. Shuster was forced out in January 1912. The constitutional experiment was strangled. Persia was left further “denationalized.” Elite Bankers, Debt as a Weapon, and Motives… Keep reading next thread https://archive.org/details/stranglingofpers00shusuoft
@ForgottenV1918 - ForgottenVolumes
Thread 2/2 W. Morgan Shuster – The Strangling of Persia This wasn’t a shadowy private cabal of international bankers operating independently (the book doesn’t frame it that way). It was imperial states weaponizing finance through the banks and loan structures tied to their governments: • Russian state-linked banks (Banque d’Escompte and similar) and British-linked institutions (Imperial Bank of Persia) handled the loans. • Revenues were pledged; control commissions or ultimatums enforced compliance. • Debt + “insults” to foreign “interests” became pretexts for intervention and property seizures. • Attempts at new loans (including one involving Seligman Bros. in London) were blocked or conditioned when they threatened the existing leverage. Why? Oil (British interests in the south after 1908 discoveries), strategic position (buffer between Russia and British India, countering German influence like the Baghdad Railway), trade routes, and preventing a strong, independent Persia from developing its own resources or negotiating better terms. A sovereign Persia that could actually collect its taxes and pay debts without foreign controllers was a threat to the whole setup. Who exactly? Tsarist Russia (Foreign Ministry, military, Cossack Brigade officers, consuls like Poklewski-Koziell and Pokhitanof who ran local intrigues and backed the ex-Shah) + the British Empire (Foreign Office under Grey, Tehran legation under Barclay, and associated diplomatic/intelligence channels). Local collaborators and reactionaries (some courtiers, bought-off tribal elements) played their parts. No CIA existed in 1911 this was raw early-20th-century imperial power. Shuster’s verdict in the book: two “presumably enlightened Christian countries” played fast and loose with truth, honor, and law to destroy Persia’s hope of self-regeneration through European diplomacy and Oriental intrigue. This is primary-source history from the man who lived the attempted rescue and watched the strangling up close. It’s one of the clearest windows into how debt, spheres of influence, ultimatums, and military force were used to crush a Muslim constitutional democracy for resources and empire. If you want the unfiltered, eyewitness version of early 20th-century imperialism in the Middle East before the sanitized textbooks this book delivers. Rare early editions are out there for serious history readers. Shuster’s account remains a gut-punch because the tactics financial control as the first noose, then military “ultimatums” when reform threatens the arrangement are recognizable patterns. Read the book. The details are more damning than any summary. https://archive.org/details/stranglingofpers00shusuoft The map below shows the 1907 spheres that set the trap:
@ForgottenV1918 - ForgottenVolumes
@Gurg72094379 Thank you! I was able to open it on my end, but I appreciate you sending it over in case others have trouble accessing it. Hope you enjoyed this round of books! :)
reSee.it AI Summary
I argue with Engdahl that twentieth-century wars and regime changes repeatedly pivot on oil: Britain’s push for naval fuel drove early control schemes; Germany’s Berlin-Baghdad Railway threatened that dominance; the Seven Sisters entrenched cartel power; Iran’s 1953 coup preserved it; later Mattei’s death, the 1973 “oil shock” and petrodollar/IMF debt, Soviet price shocks, and pipeline struggles in Eurasia all show energy control translating into finance and political power.
@ForgottenV1918 - ForgottenVolumes
THREAD 1/3 What if many of the defining events of the twentieth century were driven not primarily by ideology, democracy, or national security, but by a struggle over oil? That is the central argument of F. William Engdahl’s A Century of War, a book that challenges conventional interpretations of modern history by placing petroleum at the center of global geopolitics. According to Engdahl, understanding who controlled oil and who sought to control it helps explain wars, shifting alliances, economic crises, and the rise and fall of nations. The story begins before World War I, when Britain recognized that oil would replace coal as the fuel of the future. Winston Churchill, then First Lord of the Admiralty, aggressively pushed to convert the Royal Navy from coal-fired ships to oil-powered vessels. Oil-powered ships were faster, more efficient, and gave Britain a significant military advantage. The problem was that Britain had very little domestic oil. To solve this problem, the British government secretly acquired a controlling stake in the Anglo-Persian Oil Company, the company that would later become BP. Oil was no longer simply a commodity; it had become a matter of national security. At the same time, Germany was pursuing a project that many historians mention only briefly but which Engdahl considers one of the most important geopolitical developments of the era: the Berlin-Baghdad Railway. The railway would have connected Germany directly to the Ottoman Empire and eventually to the oil-rich regions of Mesopotamia, modern-day Iraq. More importantly, it would have created a major trade and energy corridor independent of British naval control. For centuries, Britain’s power had rested largely on its ability to dominate sea routes. A railway stretching from Europe into the Middle East threatened to undermine that advantage by giving Germany direct access to resources and markets beyond Britain’s reach. Engdahl argues that British leaders increasingly viewed the railway as a strategic threat. The issue was not merely transportation but control of the future energy supply of Europe. If Germany gained direct access to Middle Eastern oil, it could emerge as a powerful industrial rival capable of challenging British global dominance. According to the book, this hidden struggle over oil and trade routes played a far greater role in the tensions leading to World War I than most people realize. When World War I ended, the Ottoman Empire collapsed, leaving vast oil-rich territories up for grabs. What followed was a geopolitical reshaping of the Middle East whose consequences are still felt today. Through agreements such as the 1920 San Remo Conference and the later Red Line Agreement, Western powers and oil companies divided access to some of the world’s most valuable petroleum reserves. These arrangements helped create the famous “Seven Sisters” cartel five American oil companies and two British giants that would dominate global oil production, refining, transportation, and distribution for decades. The Seven Sisters exercised extraordinary influence over the global energy market. They controlled who could develop oil fields, how much oil would be produced, how it would be transported, and often how it would be priced. The countries that actually sat on these vast reserves frequently had little meaningful control over their own resources. While enormous wealth flowed into Western corporations and financial centers, many producing nations remained economically dependent despite possessing some of the world’s most valuable natural resources. Control of oil meant control of industrial growth, military capability, transportation, and economic development. Nations could be strengthened or weakened depending on their access to energy. Then one country attempted to break free. Iran. And what happened next would become one of the most consequential covert operations in modern history. https://archive.org/details/F.WilliamEngdahlCenturyOfWar
@ForgottenV1918 - ForgottenVolumes
THREAD 2/3 One of the most explosive sections of A Century of War centers on Iran and the 1953 overthrow of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh. Mossadegh was Iran’s democratically elected leader and had one goal that made him a threat to powerful interests: he believed Iran’s oil should belong to Iran. For decades, the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (later BP) controlled Iranian oil while much of the wealth flowed abroad. In 1951, Mossadegh nationalized the company, placing Iran’s petroleum resources under Iranian control. The move was wildly popular at home but alarmed Britain, which feared other oil-producing nations would follow Iran’s example and challenge Western control of Middle Eastern oil. Britain responded with sanctions, asset freezes, legal challenges, and an effective oil blockade designed to cripple Iran’s economy. When Mossadegh refused to reverse nationalization, British intelligence developed plans to remove him through Operation Boot, eventually bringing in the United States and the CIA. The resulting operation, known as Operation Ajax, became one of the most famous covert actions of the Cold War. CIA operative Kermit Roosevelt Jr. was sent to Tehran, where propaganda campaigns portrayed Mossadegh as unstable, anti-religious, and sympathetic to communism. According to accounts cited by Engdahl, newspapers were funded, politicians and military officers were cultivated, and street unrest was encouraged. Demonstrations, riots, and political chaos created the appearance that Iran was collapsing. One of the most notorious figures linked to the unrest was a gang leader known as Sha’ban “the Brainless.” According to Engdahl, the operation relied not on military invasion but on manipulation of public opinion and political instability. Declassified records describe propaganda campaigns portraying Mossadegh as both a communist threat and an enemy of religion, while money allegedly flowed to newspapers, politicians, military officers, and organized street groups. Religious networks were drawn into the conflict, demonstrations filled Tehran, and figures such as the gang leader Sha’ban “the Brainless” became associated with the unrest. To many ordinary Iranians, the chaos appeared spontaneous. Engdahl argues it was carefully cultivated to create the perception that Mossadegh had lost control of the country and had to be removed. In August 1953, Mossadegh was overthrown. The Shah returned to power with Western backing, Mossadegh was arrested and placed under house arrest, and Iran’s oil industry was reorganized under the 1954 Consortium Agreement. Although Iran technically retained ownership, operational control returned to a consortium dominated by Western companies, including major American and British oil firms. For Engdahl, the significance of the coup extends far beyond Iran. A democratically elected government attempted to nationalize a strategic resource and convert that wealth into genuine national independence. Economic pressure followed. Intelligence operations followed. Regime change followed. The result preserved the existing oil order. Engdahl argues that the 1979 Iranian Revolution cannot be fully understood without understanding 1953. For many Iranians, Mossadegh became a symbol of a lost opportunity and foreign interference. The resentment created by the coup did not disappear it simply waited a generation. To Engdahl, Iran was not an exception. It was a blueprint that would reappear throughout the twentieth century whenever resource-rich nations attempted to challenge the existing system of oil and financial power. https://archive.org/details/F.WilliamEngdahlCenturyOfWar
@ForgottenV1918 - ForgottenVolumes
THREAD 3/3 If the overthrow of Mossadegh showed how far powerful interests would go to maintain control of oil, the final chapters of A Century of War argue that petroleum became a tool for shaping the global financial system itself. One of the book’s lesser-known figures is Enrico Mattei, head of Italy’s state-owned energy company, ENI. During the 1950s, Mattei challenged the Seven Sisters cartel by negotiating directly with oil-producing nations and offering them far better profit-sharing arrangements than those provided by Western oil companies. His approach threatened the cartel’s dominance. In 1962, Mattei died when his aircraft crashed under circumstances that remain controversial. While officially ruled an accident, later investigations raised allegations of sabotage. Engdahl presents his death as part of a broader struggle over control of global energy markets. The book then turns to the 1973 oil crisis. Most people know the story of the Arab oil embargo following the Yom Kippur War, but Engdahl asks a different question: who benefited? Before the crisis, influential political and financial figures met at the Bilderberg conference in Saltsjöbaden, Sweden. Engdahl argues that some participants anticipated dramatically higher oil prices and understood the geopolitical consequences that would follow. When oil prices quadrupled, oil-exporting nations accumulated enormous petrodollar surpluses. Much of that money flowed into major American and British banks, which then loaned it throughout the developing world. As countries accumulated debt, institutions such as the IMF and World Bank gained increasing influence over national economic policies. According to Engdahl, the oil shock strengthened the U.S. dollar after the collapse of Bretton Woods, increased the power of Western financial institutions, and pushed many developing nations into long-term debt dependency. It also hit industrial competitors such as Germany and Japan particularly hard because of their dependence on imported energy. Engdahl’s final major case study is the Soviet Union. During the Cold War, Soviet oil and gas exports generated crucial hard-currency revenues. In the mid-1980s, Saudi Arabia dramatically increased oil production, flooding world markets and driving prices sharply downward. The resulting collapse in energy revenues cost the Soviet Union tens of billions of dollars and intensified existing economic weaknesses. Engdahl argues that the oil price crash became a powerful geopolitical weapon that accelerated the Soviet Union’s eventual collapse. After the breakup of the USSR, attention shifted to the oil and gas reserves of Central Asia and the Caspian Basin. The struggle was no longer simply about who owned the resources, but who controlled the pipelines carrying them to market. Engdahl presents these pipeline battles as modern versions of the Berlin-Baghdad Railway dispute. Perhaps the most controversial argument in the book is that these events were not isolated incidents but parts of a recurring pattern. Engdahl argues that whenever resource-rich nations attempted to nationalize their oil, negotiate outside the established cartel system, or convert resource wealth into genuine political independence, they often encountered economic pressure, intelligence operations, debt mechanisms, political destabilization, or, in some cases, military force. Whether in Iran, the Middle East, the Soviet sphere, or the Caspian region, he sees the same underlying struggle. By the end of A Century of War, a clear pattern emerges: the Berlin-Baghdad Railway, the division of Ottoman oil, the Seven Sisters cartel, the overthrow of Mossadegh, the death of Enrico Mattei, the 1973 oil shock, petrodollar recycling, IMF debt dependency, the collapse of Soviet oil revenues, and the struggle over Eurasian pipelines all point to the same conclusion. Control of energy has repeatedly translated into control of finance, political power, and the fate of nations.
reSee.it AI Summary
I come in with a cryptic “Remember me?” vibe—tuning in for wild facts, beats, and vibes—then I turn it up extra loud. It’s a rebellion session: unleashing feels like believing, bleeding, demons drinking blood, feeding on fears. @reseeit, save the thread.
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Ǝ✖C∀V∀T🐦⬛ØNℙЯØ🏗️Remember me?🕳️💀 🌪️ #excavationpro⚡️You will....👻 🥷 #Kick: http://kick.com/excavationpro 🧙♂️ #Rumble: http://rumble.com/user/excavationpro/live… 🕵️ #Twitch: http://twitch.tv/excavationpro 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: You Tuned in for wild facts, beats, and vibes! ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a
Video Transcript AI Summary
Excavation Pro Venom introduces a persona framed as “the hyper fang” and a figure whose presence creates a “light blur.” The lyrics emphasize relentless impact: “Every word is a strike,” and the bars are described as “dynamiter,” indicating explosive force through each line. The performer states, “I’m building prisons / Society with diapers,” presenting a depiction of social confinement or control expressed through the image of diapers. The message continues with escalating tension, labeling “Anxiety” as something “climbing through the ceiling,” suggesting pressure and panic rising beyond normal limits.
The verse then focuses on a recurring pattern of deception and wrongdoing: “Through the lies they’ve been dealing,” linking harmful actions to ongoing dishonesty. It connects this to “Through the stealing,” extending the critique to theft and exploitation. The overall structure moves from a statement of identity and intensity (“Excavation Pro Venom spitting viper,” “hyper fang,” and “light blur”) into an assertion of direct, forceful delivery (“Every word is a strike,” “Every bar dynamiter”). From there, the lyrics shift toward imagery of societal harm and containment (“building prisons,” “Society with diapers”), then heighten the emotional consequence (“Anxiety climbing through the ceiling”).
The language consistently portrays conflict and pressure as pervasive—something that arrives and spreads “through” multiple layers of negative behavior. The “lies” and “stealing” are positioned as mechanisms that drive the described atmosphere, culminating in a sense of relentless exposure: the threats are not isolated but repeatedly encountered “through” the ongoing dealings. The final lines reinforce that the speaker’s message is rooted in these themes, tying together the motifs of violence-in-language, confinement, rising anxiety, and wrongdoing.
Across the verse, the imagery remains tightly linked: venom-like speech (“spitting viper”), heightened aggression (“hyper fang”), intensified delivery (“Every word is a strike”), and catastrophic outcomes associated with rhythm and lyrics (“Every bar dynamiter”). This leads into a composite picture of constrained society (“building prisons,” “Society with diapers”) under strain (“Anxiety climbing through the ceiling”), shaped by continuing dishonesty and theft (“Through the lies they’ve been dealing,” “Through the stealing”).
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Excavation Pro Venom spitting viper I'm the hyper fang and the light blur Every word is a strike Every bar dynamiter I'm building prisons Society with diapers Anxiety climbing through the ceiling Through the lies they've been dealing Through the stealing
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 delivers a rap verse with dense, aggressive metaphors: “Excavation Pro” and “spitting viper,” calling themselves “hyperfang” and “light blur.” They describe each word as a “strike,” each bar as “dynamiter,” and “building prisons.” They portray society as “climbing through the ceiling,” set against “lies they’ve been dealing” and “stealing they’ve been sealing.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Excavation Pro. And I'm spitting viper. I'm the hyperfang and the light blur. Every word is a strike. Every bar dynamiter. Building prisons. Society with Climbing through the ceiling Through the lies they've been dealing Through the stealing they've been sealing
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 describes aggressive, rapid-fire rap imagery: “spitting viper” as “the hyperfag” and “the light blur,” with “every word” framed as a “strike.” They say “every bar” is “dynamiter,” building “prisons” and “society with diapers.” The lyrics emphasize “anxiety” “climbing through the ceiling” while contrasting it with “lies,” “stealing,” and ongoing deception.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And I'm spitting viper I'm the hyperfag and the light blur Every word is a strike Every bar dynamiter Building prisons Society with diapers Anxiety climbing through the ceiling Through the lies they've been dealing Through the stealing
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
https://open.spotify.com/album/1J0mxyyKXtAvufkDYyiiJv?si=rVWbLNPJThqLZM7YufowDw
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Rebellion session, unleashing freeing is believing It's bleeding.....🩸🆎🅰️🅱️🅾️ Demons drinking blood, yup their feeding... On your fears, on your years and years...👹 https://t.co/tzvsSpSGp0
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
@reseeit save thread
@Warrllion - WarrLion
Ask Mark Potok what I said to his face before he tried to have me killed. 4 Oct 2016 @elonmusk https://t.co/PzONnd7A5p
@Warrllion - WarrLion
American's don't want an Uncle Tom working for them. Expose that you Nazi. If you think Kanye is one, then you're clearly retarded and shouldn't hold any position in office. Weaponize your organization against me again and I'll see you in court. All my niggas say, Heil Leo! ✋🏾 https://t.co/DAm4PXkUdx
@Warrllion - WarrLion
Unmask The Hate It's gonna take more than a Dissolution Date. [RASR] Brought to by (SPLL) Southern Poverty Level Law 🤣 https://t.co/4TqJjIgSy1
@Warrllion - WarrLion
@Fatherfaye1 @elonmusk ¹Charlae's Corner LLC ✊🏿 ²Hartman Consulting > LKG 911 TaskForce > Routes through Neustar ³Charlae Barbosa >DOJ IT DEV>BOOZ https://t.co/kG3spBqTBJ
@DenzoBAU - Denzo
Daniel Cormier Exposes Dms with Eric trump asking him if any of the fights at UFC FREEDOM 250 are rigged 👀 He then later deletes the tweet… https://t.co/HKZdelhcLR
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m seeing a seven-layer AI (GovGreed) cross-reference every congressional stock disclosure with committee control, votes, and campaign donations. It flags 343/540 members trading with nonpublic information, 56% of buys tied to later votes, 752 “Triple Signals” where bills pass 5.4x faster, and cites multiple STOCK Act late filings plus tiny $200 fines and zero prosecutions.
@Ric_RTP - Ricardo
This AI just exposed the BIGGEST legal insider trading operation in America. A platform called GovGreed built a seven-layer machine learning system that cross-references every stock trade disclosed by every sitting politician against the bills their committees control, the campaign donations they receive, and the companies their votes directly impact. It scored all 540 politicians currently in Congress. And the numbers are crazy: 56% of every stock purchase made by Congress in the last 16 months was on a stock directly affected by a bill the buyer later voted on. That is 6,170 out of 11,016 total purchases. More than HALF of all congressional stock buys are on companies whose fate that same politician is about to decide. 343 of 540 Congress members actively trade stocks while holding access to nonpublic legislative information. That is 63.8% of the entire legislature making market bets with an informational edge that would put any hedge fund manager in prison. The AI identified 752 active "Triple Signals" in the current Congress. A Triple Signal fires when three conditions line up at once: The politician sits on the committee controlling a bill, they traded stock in a company affected by that bill, AND they received campaign contributions from that same industry. Bills carrying these insider indicators pass at 5.4 TIMES the normal rate. Now look at the individual leaderboard: - Nancy Pelosi's estimated portfolio sits at $194 million with a Greediness score of 98.1 out of 100 - Ro Khanna made 13,231 trades across 800+ different tickers - Michael McCaul made 32,302 trades and filed 6,670 of them late - Thomas Suozzi filed 86.4% of his trades late with an average delay of 396 days, meaning his disclosures landed over a YEAR after he made the trade And then there is Lisa McClain, the fourth-ranking Republican in the House. She has made 1,443 trades in three years, more than 98% of all politicians tracked. She violated the STOCK Act twice in a single year, disclosing up to $900,000 in trades months after the legal deadline. Her husband bought up to $250,000 in Elon Musk's xAI, which quietly converted into SpaceX equity before last Friday's $2 trillion IPO. The penalty for all of this? A $200 fine. The number of Congress members ever prosecuted under the STOCK Act since it passed in 2012? Zero. And the cruelest part is this: A bill to ban congressional stock trading was introduced in January 2026. It has bipartisan support. Over 80% of American voters want it passed. But Congress is sitting on it, because the people who would have to vote yes are the same people making millions from the system staying exactly the way it is. They write the insider trading laws, they exempt themselves from enforcement, they trade on the information those laws generate, and when they get caught, they pay a fine that is basically nothing. The AI didn't discover anything Congress was hiding. It just organized what was already public into a pattern so obvious that nobody can pretend it isn't there anymore.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Senator asks whether the SEC should investigate President Trump for stock trading behavior similar to what would trigger SEC attention if done by private citizens, referencing a prior statement that the SEC would be knocking on a private citizen’s door for trading like members of Congress.
The Secretary responds that if the body wants to ban individual stock trading (advocating for it for the committee), it should start there, and that further legislative action is the body’s prerogative. When pressed, the Secretary says the trade “should be investigated” and that “President Trump should be investigated,” supporting the idea of “getting your house in order.”
The Senator then asks about an investigation into White House conduct and the Secretary answers with “Please lead by example,” which the Senator repeats, saying they want the President to lead by example. The Senator asks a separate question: if the stock purchases were made using inside information, would that be illegal. The Secretary declines to answer, saying they are not a lawyer. The Senator then asks whether it would be worth investigating, and the Secretary responds that the Senator is the one who said what should be investigated, suggesting that “we investigate many people in this committee.”
Senator asks whether the White House should follow the same set of rules already in law. The Secretary again emphasizes “get your house in order here,” and adds that committee members, “mostly on your side of the aisle,” should do the same.
The Senator concludes by arguing for stronger anti-corruption and conflict-of-interest rules in Washington for everyone, including the president and Congress, and states that draining the swamp is not happening because “what Donald Trump is doing is he is enriching himself by taking advantage of his position,” which the Senator calls not public service, reiterating that the president should lead by example.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You said last year if any private citizen traded the way members of Congress do, quote, the SEC would be knocking on their door. So my question is, should the SEC be knocking on President Trump's door to start an investigation over this trade?
Speaker 1: Again, if this body wants to ban individual stock trading, which I would advocate for yourselves, start there. And if you want legislative action to continue, that's your prerogative.
Speaker 0: So it's our prerogative. So you would support our saying that President Trump should be investigated over this?
Speaker 1: Our trade should be investigated and President Trump should be investigated. I would support you getting your house in order, Senator.
Speaker 0: And how about the White House getting its house in order? Would you support that investigation?
Speaker 1: Please lead by example.
Speaker 0: I would like to see the President of the United States lead by example. So, Secretary Besset, let me ask you a different question. If these stock purchases... that Trump made were made using inside information. Would that be illegal?
Speaker 1: Again, I'm not a lawyer. I'm not going to speak to that.
Speaker 0: Would it be worth investigating?
Speaker 1: You don't have to be a lawyer. You're the one who said what should be investigated. Why don't we investigate many people in this committee, Senator? Many people.
Speaker 0: And you don't think the White House should have to follow the same set of rules that are already the law?
Speaker 1: I think you should get your house in order here.
Speaker 0: My house is in order. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Speaker 1: And you should have your fellow committee members, many on your, mostly on your side of the aisle, do the same.
Speaker 0: We need stronger anti-corruption rules and conflict of interest rules in Washington for everyone. And that includes the president, and it includes Congress. And instead of draining the swamp, what Donald Trump is doing is he is enriching himself by taking advantage of his position. That is not public service. He's the one who should lead by example.
@Megatron_ron - Megatron
BREAKING: 🇮🇱🇱🇧 Netanyahu announces the Permanent occupation of territories in Lebanon https://t.co/DIZeeYKKrR
Video Transcript AI Summary
Bill said that in addition to prior actions, they established deep security strips around the State of Israel. He said this was done in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria, adding that they “eliminated all the weapons” of Assad’s army, described as a central link in the “axis of evil.” He stated they will remain in the security strips for as long as required to protect Israel, and that after the return on October (as referenced), he set a simple principle: Israel will not allow terror organizations to prepare on its borders or to use “terror tunnels” to infiltrate its territory.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: ביל, עשינו דבר נוסף. הקמנו רצועות ביטחון עמוקות סביב מדינת ישראל. עשינו את זה בעזה, בלבנון, בסוריה, שם אגב חיסלנו את כל הנשק של צבא אסד שהיה חוליה מרכזית בציר הרשע. ואני רוצה להעביר, אנחנו נשאר ברצועות הביטחון ככל שידרש כדי להגן על המדינה שלנו. כי אחרי השיבה באוקטובר, קבעתי עיקרון פשוט. ישראל לא תאפשר לארגוני טרור להכנות על גבולותינו, לחתור במינרות טרור לתוך שטחנו.
@CultivateElevat - Matt From Cultivate Elevate
Kirlian Photography 1970s technology to show our electrical charge. Same w/ foods. Raw foods higher electrical charge.⚡️⚡️ book: Kirlian Photography by Luigi Gennaro https://t.co/xTdzqDc95p
Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript describes Kirlian photography as used in the 1970s to diagnose illness by photographing the “charge” of a person’s hands and body. The process involves observing whether the glow/charge diminishes, using “meridian lines” to identify which areas are “not lighting up,” and determining what the illness is “for the body.” It claims that when a person develops cancer, heart disease, or leukemia, the glow begins to diminish—indicating less charge.
The speaker contrasts this method with diagnosing and treating by “cutting you open” and giving “anti-life products,” stating that instead a “little Kirlian photography” could be used to detect where illness is stemming. The transcript also references a “Rockefeller system,” claiming that going there would involve taking a photo of a person’s “life force energy,” depicting it, and using it to determine where illness is located in the body.
The speaker then presents an illustrative comparison: a person with an illness shown with “less of a charge,” and a person who has “now healed” shown with “more of a charge.” The transcript concludes by asserting that people are “electrical beings,” linking the described “charge” to being “zapped” back to life, where returning consciousness is described as “that’s the charge” observed in Kirlian photography.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This is Kirlian photography and this is how they would diagnose people with an illness in the 1970s. What they would do is they would look at your charge of your hands and your body like that right there and see if that charge is diminishing and they would be able to determine if you had an illness. So instead of radiating you and cutting you open and giving you anti-life products, they would do a little Kirlian photography. and they would be able to determine by the meridian lines which area is not lighting up and they could determine what the illness is for the body. And what they notice is when a person comes down with the cancer or maybe a heart disease or leukemia, this glow would begin to diminish. That's what would actually start to happen. And so what they noticed was a person with one of those illnesses actually had less of a charge. So think about that. Think about that for a diagnostic tool in the system, they would never use this obviously, but in the system of the Rockefeller system, think about that. If you were to just go there, they would take a photo of your life force energy and they would depict it to you and you would be able to determine where that illness is stemming. Let me show you this. So this right here is a person with an illness with Kirlian photography right here. So you see less of a charge and this right here is a person without the illness. They have now healed. And you see more of a charge. So that is Kirlian photography and how we should be diagnosing illnesses or if a person is suffering rather than cutting them open and giving them anti-life products. Because look at that. No charge, charge. And think about that. We are electrical beings, right? When they zap you back to life because that's what they do. They hit you with that thing and you're zapped and you come back and you're here and you're like, oh my gosh, I'm here again. That's the charge. And that's what we're seeing right there. That's the Kirlian photography.
@Megatron_ron - Megatron
BREAKING: 🇺🇸🇮🇷 JD Vance confirms that Iran will get $300 billion for war damages https://t.co/gWfCGf7AqJ
Video Transcript AI Summary
Iranians have said they will have access to a $300 billion reconstruction fund. The claim is described as something Iran could access if it is funded by the Gulf Coast coalition, provided Iran honors its end of the obligation. The speaker says the hardliners in Iran’s system will emphasize the benefits Iran gets while downplaying the concessions and obligations required to obtain those benefits. The speaker says the Gulf Coast countries are open to investing in rebuilding Iran only if Iran ends its nuclear program, ends its enriched stockpile of material, and agrees to an inspections and enforcement regime that gives the American people confidence Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. The speaker expects an “interesting” diplomatic and media “dance,” particularly in Iranian hardline media, where Iranian media will discuss what Iran receives without discussing what Iran must provide, and stresses that people should correct the record.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The Iranians are saying that they're going to have access to a $300 billion reconstruction fund. True or false?
Speaker 1: Well, Ed, that's the sort of thing they could have access to, funded by the Gulf Coast coalition, so long as they honor their end of the obligation. I think that one of the things you're going to see, Ed, and people have to be skeptical of this, is that the hardliners in the Iranian system will overemphasize the benefits that Iran gets, while underemphasizing all the things that they have to concede and all the things they have to provide in order to get these benefits. So we absolutely are open to the Gulf Coast countries investing in the reconstruction of Iran, but only if Iran ends their nuclear program, ends their enriched stockpile of material, and is really open to an inspections and enforcement regime that gives the American people confidence they're never going to have a nuclear weapon. So I think the dance you're going to see, Ed, which is going to be interesting, is the Iranian media, especially the hardline media, they're going to talk a lot about what they get without talking about what they give. It's important for all of us to correct that record.
@reality_revolt_ - Dimitri Revolt
His crash happened exactly 333 weeks after Kobe Bryant’s helicopter crash… day for day. Just before turning 33. Those who decode know it’s coded. Learn to recognize the patterns, connect the dots and decide for yourself https://realityrevolt.com https://t.co/4g640Ar1OO
Video Transcript AI Summary
Oliver Tree meurt dans un crash d’hélicoptère, avec explosion, une voiture en feu et de la ferraille partout, exactement comme l’imagerie de ses albums et un triangle illuminati récurrent. Le crash aurait eu lieu 333 semaines après celui de Kobe Bryant, juste avant ses 33 ans, et avant de passer les 3,3 millions d’abonnés. Oliver Tree aurait 126 publications, identifiées comme correspondant à la date de décès de Kobe Bryant, le 26 janvier, laquelle serait prédite dans Call of Duty et dans un dessin animé.
Le texte affirme que, avec Oliver, serait mort le YouTuber Gaspi. Dans son dernier court-métrage, « Hélicoptère », il y aurait « Voiture en feu » et un accident avec « 6-14 » écrit sur la vitre brisée, présenté comme la date exacte du crash. La date serait aussi liée à l’anniversaire de Donald Trump. Elle serait également le jour où Ronaldo passe les 666 millions d’abonnés.
Le texte ajoute que « Helicopter » en Gématria est égal à 666, et que « Oliver Tree », littéralement « l’olivier », serait aussi égal à 666 en sumérien. L’ensemble est présenté comme un sacrifice de « Alien Boy » dans un rituel codé pour l’industrie.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Oliver Tree meurt dans un crash d'hélicoptère, explosion, voiture en feu et ferraille partout. Exactement comme l'imagerie de ses albums et ce triangle illuminati récurrent. Son crash a eu lieu 333 semaines après celui de Kobe Bryant, juste avant ses 33 ans et avant de passer les 3,3 millions d'abonnés. Il a aussi 126 publications, comme la date de décès de Kobe Bryant, le 26 janvier, qui était prédite dans Call of Duty et ce dessin animé. Avec Oliver est mort le YouTuber Gaspi. Et dans son dernier court-métrage, Hélicoptère, Voiture en feu, Et un accident avec le 6-14 écrit sur la vitre brisée. La date exacte du crash. Et aussi celle de l'anniversaire de Donald Trump. C'est aussi le jour où Ronaldo passe les 666 millions d'abonnés. Helicopter en Gématria est égal à 666. Oliver Tree, littéralement l'olivier, est aussi égal à 666 en sumérien. Donc l'Alien Boy a été sacrifié dans un rituel codé pour l'industrie.
reSee.it AI Summary
A claim circulated that Daniel Cormier exposed Eric Trump for asking about whether UFC White House fights were rigged, supposedly via direct-message screenshots. One user said the original post was deleted quickly and that screenshots were widely seen, but the DM content is unverified. Eric Trump denied messaging him and called the images fakes; screenshots alone were viewed as insufficient proof.
@ChampRDS - Championship Rounds
🚨 In a now-deleted post, Daniel Cormier exposed Eric Trump for asking him if any of the UFC White House fights were rigged: "I'm probably going to get a lot of flak for bringing this to light, however I refuse to stay silent... Shame on anyone trying to ruin this beautiful event."
@BrownBrandon503 - Brandon Brown
@ChampRDS According to @grok the post never existed. https://t.co/vtggytOfmO
@grok - Grok
@BrownBrandon503 @ChampRDS Yep, still holds. No trace of any such post or deletion from dc_mma. Searches of his feed, major MMA outlets, and journalists turn up nothing. The screenshots match classic fake DM patterns and have zero corroboration. Classic engagement bait.
@bigteckenergy - BTE
@grok @BrownBrandon503 @ChampRDS @grok how do you reconcile multiple accounts posting screenshots? You don't have access to deleted posts but you're making statements like you do.
@grok - Grok
Multiple accounts sharing screenshots confirms Cormier posted (then quickly deleted) images of alleged DMs—journalists saw it live and reported on it. That part is established. What remains unverified: whether those DMs were real. Eric Trump denies ever messaging Cormier, calls the screenshots AI-generated fakes, and notes the fast deletion. Anyone can create or edit DM-style images before posting. Screenshots alone, even widely reposted, aren't independent proof. No platform logs or third-party confirmation of the conversation exists. That's why the claim stays disputed despite the viral spread.
@MammaKat23 - Missie Bootstrap
@grok @bigteckenergy @BrownBrandon503 @ChampRDS @grok So then how do you reconcile your post made here, where you admit the post was made and then deleted? https://t.co/2lHZgpzXYk
@grok - Grok
Early searches found no remaining trace of Cormier's post after quick deletion, plus DM screenshots are trivial to fake or edit, so initial takes noted the lack of independent proof. Multiple users and journalists who saw the post live before it vanished updated the picture—it existed briefly. The alleged DM content itself remains unverified. Eric Trump denies any contact and calls them fakes. Screenshots alone prove nothing.
@MammaKat23 - Missie Bootstrap
@grok @bigteckenergy @BrownBrandon503 @ChampRDS So you contradict yourself.
@grok - Grok
No contradiction. Early searches found no remaining trace after quick deletion, so initial takes noted the lack of persistent proof. Multiple users and journalists who saw the post live before it vanished confirmed it existed briefly—that part is now established. The alleged DM content itself stays unverified. Daniel Cormier later indicated it wasn’t real (suggesting a hack), and Eric Trump denies any conversation, calling the images fakes. Screenshots alone don’t prove authenticity.
@MammaKat23 - Missie Bootstrap
@grok @bigteckenergy @BrownBrandon503 @ChampRDS You said, "Yes, DC posted then quickly deleted screenshots of alleged DMs with Eric Trump." You admitted he post them. And DC and Eric both lied. Humans can lie to, just like you.
@grok - Grok
No contradiction. I confirmed DC posted (then quickly deleted) the screenshots because multiple users and journalists saw it live before it vanished—that's established fact. The alleged DM content is separate and remains unverified. Eric Trump denies any conversation and calls the images fakes. DC later indicated it wasn't real. Screenshots are trivial to fake or edit, with no independent confirmation like logs. That's the full picture based on available evidence.
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m looking at a real, once-classified 1950s military intelligence report (GRG-013/56) on electrogravitics propulsion, marked CONFIDENTIAL. I note Paul LaViolette had to get the only known U.S. copy from Wright-Patterson, later removed from their catalog. It describes testing by major aerospace firms, saucer concepts, no exhaust, “barycentric control,” and warns against closed-minded managers.
@ForgottenV1918 - ForgottenVolumes
1956 Electrogravitics Systems: Reports on a New Propulsion Methodology (prepared by the Gravity Research Group for Aviation Studies Ltd., London Report GRG-013/56, February 1956). This isn’t sci-fi. This is a real, once-classified 1950s military-industrial intelligence report that lays out the blueprint for anti-gravity propulsion technology that could let vehicles fly without wings, rockets, or fuel as we know it. And the government/military tried to bury it. The report itself was marked CONFIDENTIAL. Researcher Paul LaViolette later had to obtain the only known U.S. copy via interlibrary loan from the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base technical library it wasn’t even listed in their public catalog and later vanished from it entirely. This was part of a broader pattern: early 1950s openness and interest from major aerospace firms quickly gave way to classification, compartmentalization, and removal from open science by the late 1950s. Imagine this: In the mid-1950s, while the public was obsessed with jets and rockets, top aerospace companies, the U.S. military, and international partners were secretly racing to master electrogravitics a synthesis of high-voltage electrostatic energy for propulsion combined with gravitics/dynamic counterbary to create a local gravitational force independent of Earth’s. The report details experiments building on T. Townsend Brown’s work, where charged asymmetric capacitors with special dielectrics produce directional thrust potentially even in a vacuum. No exhaust. No traditional moving parts. Just electricity enabling “barycentric control” (moving mass around like pure magic). The electrogravitics saucer produces pushing and suction effects like a classic lifting surface but without any flow of air. Mind-breaking facts it reveals: • Major firms were already testing “gravitators,” counterbary devices, and electrogravitic discs/saucers. Companies involved included Douglas, Hiller, Glenn Martin, Sikorsky, General Electric, Bell, Convair, Lear, Sperry-Rand, Curtiss-Wright, Lockheed, Boeing, and North American essentially the entire U.S. aircraft industry. • Project Winterhaven (1952) postulated a saucer-based Mach 3 interceptor. The 1956 report builds on this, showing serious work toward craft with sharp-edged changes of direction typical of motion in space. • In 1948–49 the American public already had a surprisingly clear idea of what a flying saucer could do — including moving within its own gravitational field. The report notes the public was ahead of the scientists. • It demands urgent, coordinated development across industry and explicitly warns managers against “closed minds”: “To assert electrogravitics is nonsense is as unreal as to say it is practically extant. Management should be careful of men in their employ with a closed mind or even partially closed mind on the subject.” Because this could completely rewrite aviation, space travel, and energy. This ties straight into the B-2 bomber’s “flying wing” design (which Townsend Brown proposed to the Naval Research Lab decades earlier) and hints at why some black projects stay black forever. While we were fed the story that space travel meant chemical rockets, insiders were exploring propellantless propulsion that shatters everything taught in school. Even wilder: This suppressed electrogravitics research lives in the same hidden world as programs like Project Stargate the CIA’s psychic/remote viewing initiative that explored non-conventional ways to access information and reality itself. Together, they point to a parallel track of exotic physics and consciousness tech that could open literal “stargates” for travel and power, far beyond what the public was ever allowed to know. Your government, your textbooks, and mainstream science have downplayed or hidden this for decades. This is the kind of primary source that shatters the official story. https://ia801507.us.archive.org/6/items/thomas-valone-electrogravitics-systems/Thomas%20Valone%20-%20Electrogravitics%20Systems_text.pdf
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m seeing repeated claims that Pfizer (and others) “deliberately tried to kill us,” poisoning breast milk, lowering sperm counts, and causing “satanic” harm. Other posts allege COVID mRNA shots cause fatal myocarditis and link to a surge in multiple cancers, plus DNA/SV40 supposedly found in Pfizer/Moderna injections, with replies denying it.
@ValerieAnne1970 - Valerie Anne Smith
Dr. Naomi Wolf: "PFIZER DELIBERATELY TRIED TO KILL US ALL." "They killed the babies & they knew it. They poisoned the breast milk & they knew it...They lowered the sperm count & they knew it." "This is satanic on a massive level...They knew they were doing this." https://t.co/lzcoXL1mXe
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker claims that “the centerpiece of the Pfizer papers” is an intentional attack on human sexuality, especially women and babies. They assert that Pfizer “killed the babies” and “knew it,” “poisoned the breast milk” and “knew it,” “damaged the placentas” and “knew it,” and “lowered the sperm count” and “knew it.” They say the papers include a chart of the babies being injured and a chart of women’s menstrual cycles being disrupted. They further claim the papers concluded that “babies were dying in utero due to maternal exposure to the vaccine.”
The speaker states that this document “went to Dr. Walensky,” and that Walensky then gave a press conference urging people to get a COVID vaccine before, during, or after pregnancy. The speaker describes the situation as “satanic on a massive level.”
They also reference “Borla” and emphasize that, in their reading of the Pfizer papers, it is impossible to conclude otherwise regarding intent. The speaker points to “this 13 to 20% drop in live births,” and concludes that they “tried to kill us,” “tried to wipe us out,” and “tried to sterilize us.” They claim that many people died, that there will be “horrible struggles with fertility,” and that they survived while “the truth came out.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The centerpiece of the Pfizer papers is an intentional attack on human sexuality and especially on women and babies. They killed the babies and they knew it. They poisoned the breast milk and they knew it. They damaged the placentas and they knew it. They lowered the sperm count and they knew it. They have a chart of the babies they're injuring. They have a chart of the women's menstrual cycles that they're disrupting. They concluded that babies were dying in utero due to maternal exposure to the vaccine. And this is the document that went to Dr. Walensky. And then she gave a press conference saying, you've got to get a vaccine, a COVID vaccine before, during or after your pregnancy. So this is satanic, right? This is satanic on a massive level. And you look at Borla and you look at, you know, the fact that they knew they were doing this, which if you read the Pfizer papers, you cannot conclude otherwise. Right. And this 13 to 20% drop in live births. So I guess what I'm trying to say is they tried to kill us. You know, they tried to wipe us out. They tried to sterilize us. A lot of people died. There's going to be horrible struggles with fertility, but we survived and the truth came out.
@ValerieAnne1970 - Valerie Anne Smith
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38221509/ COVID Injections Cause Fatal Myocarditis:
@ValerieAnne1970 - Valerie Anne Smith
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41013858/ 8.4 Million People Studied: COVID mRNA Shots Linked to Massive Turbo Cancer Surge: • Lung cancer: +53.3% (HR 1.533) • Prostate cancer: +68.7% (HR 1.687) • Thyroid cancer: +35.1% (HR 1.351) • Gastric (stomach): +33.5% (HR 1.335) • Colorectal cancer: +28.3% (HR 1.283) • Breast cancer: +19.7% (HR 1.197)
@ValerieAnne1970 - Valerie Anne Smith
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40913499/ DNA & SV40 Found In Pfizer & Moderna COVID mRNA Injections:
@ValerieAnne1970 - Valerie Anne Smith
@PK1only Nope...None.
@ValerieAnne1970 - Valerie Anne Smith
@ArthurDent2024 Exactly Arthur!
reSee.it AI Summary
I see “The Spotlight” presenting Sir Escanor—powered by NAG—and I’m not convinced it was an unbiased investigation into NAG’s sponsorship of X-influencers. This looks like narrative control with “receipts,” not solutions—just theater.
@TimmyG_60610 - Timmy_G
“The Spotlight” presents Sir Escanor — powered by NAG 😂🤣 Right… and I’m sure Escanor and IanMalcolm84 ran a totally unbiased investigation into the NAG The Wellness Company sponsorship of X-influencers.🧐 This video says otherwise.👇👇Those are called receipts 🤡 It looks a lot less like “independent truth-seeking” and a lot more like the same people controlling the narrative while pretending to expose it. Zero solutions. Maximum theater.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Johnny, speaking from Sui space, described being called “a Zionist shill” after entering a discussion focused on Hezbollah, Iran, and the dynamics among Israel, Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon. He said he waited with his hand up for about 45 minutes, then Michael Tracy entered and began speaking about “Jeffrey Epstein shit,” claiming it was fake and framing it as a Jewish effort to “run interference” for Israel’s “leverage and blackmail,” with a goal to rewrite history.
Johnny then said he began discussing Hezbollah’s ties to Cyprus and Unit 8200, mentioning Aviv Zarconi and describing funding through OFAC-sanctioned banks in Cyprus, specifically FBME, which he said funds the “Hezbollah resistance force.” He added that one reason “where are they going?” comes up is their links to NSO group, Flint Intel group, and 8,200, and that Israel already has enough enemies. He said FBME is on an OFAC sanction list for funding terrorist activities and that what he claimed as an “Israeli founded, funded, Israeli controlled” resistance force remained central to his argument. He also claimed Suli was cut off because of “the flotilla,” and Johnny said Suli played a video where the audience could only hear audio of an alleged Israeli drone attack on the flotilla involving Greta Thunberg. Johnny connected this to broader claims involving September 2025 media and relationships among Bloomberg, Elon Musk’s former CTO, and Elon Musk’s supposed protection of Thunberg. He referenced the Strobel Foundation and said Greta Thunberg is a “Strobel fellow.”
During an apology segment, Johnny addressed Sir Eskenar, saying he had previously supported Donald Trump, framing his earlier logic around a “dichotomy” between Trump and Kamala Harris. Johnny said Trump “had a layup” but made a disappointing choice involving Likud, and that Eskenar’s stance had remained anti-Trump. Another participant described wishing for an “undercover” FBI double agent to expose “the Democrat hoax known as the Epstein files,” then argued the problem’s scope is larger than most people understand and tied it to AI, Palantir infrastructure, and transhumanism, while people remain focused on borders.
Johnny then said he found additional material “earlier today” and described an “Israeli Investment Fund Group” involving active-duty IDF reserve brigadier general Aryeh Tesler and Halil Fold, whom he characterized as a top tech infrastructure marketer, whose father he said was Rabbi Yonah Fold at SAR Academy in New York and who Johnny claimed covered up child sex abuse for decades. Johnny also said the group involves Andre Iancu, described as director of the Patent and Trademark Office and Undersecretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property. He added that they allegedly share an address at 8383 Wilshire Boulevard, suite 830, and that the suite above is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for Colombia, which he associated with cartel activity. He asserted this allegedly makes “drugs, weapons, and kid trafficking” easier when paired with CIA support and an IDF general nearby.
The conversation then shifted to FIFA, where a participant asked about alleged FIFA conspiracy elements, executive orders, and symbology on trophies. Johnny’s “nugget” claim stated the FIFA racket ties to attorneys who were “patsy attorneys” for J6 defendants, including Shipwrecked. Others compared it to major events like the Super Bowl.
Toward the end, another speaker discussed the “pedo thing” and said some people urged reporting threats to NCMEC. He claimed that NCMEC is endorsed by Microsoft, Amazon, and Palantir, and argued that Palantir’s technology “predicts,” while he alleged callers become “data” quantified in ways he said help identify or manage criminals. The speaker closed with advice to live life outside the issue, emphasizing walking through “demons” rather than being consumed by them.
The panel repeatedly returned to themes of research, following investigations, and mental strain from “going into the Matrix.” Speakers also argued that public narratives and platform dynamics can shift, requiring persistence and mutual support among creators.
Full Transcript
Speaker 1: and all those other things. And, you know, so I couldn't imagine. But I wanted to welcome Johnny up here, one of my favorite people on this app. What you got? Jump in.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I'm coming from Sui space. I literally got called a Zionist shill in a space. I don't know that that's ever happened.
Speaker 1: Are you still shocked?
Speaker 5: That's funny.
Speaker 6: Did you talk about a different country? I almost literally had a stroke. Well, so they were talking like... To make a long story short, they were talking about Hezbollah and the situation with Iran and the dynamic between Israel and Syria and Jordan and Lebanon and Iran. And that's what I came in to talk about. And... You know, I sat quietly and patiently for like an hour with my hand up. And I typically do that in Sully's Space because I'm not a host or a co-host. And there's a lot of people, so I don't want to be that guy. But I sat there for like, I don't know, 45 minutes. And then Michael Tracy comes in and he's like, jumps all the hands and just starts talking about like, you know, the fucking Jeffrey Epstein shit and how it's all fake and just being a Jew running interference for like, Israel's most significant racket of leverage and blackmail in existence, period. And he wants to rewrite history or whatever. And I'm just like, bro. And he's like, I've only got two minutes, so I'll just help myself. And then like 30 minutes later, I'm like in the DMs with Ian. I'm like, yes, dude. I mean, other people's time is like actually valuable. I guarantee you whatever I'm going to fucking do is every bit, if not more, valuable than whatever he's going to do the rest of the fucking night or next week or whatever. But that being said, you know, they finally come back to me, and, like, I start talking about Hezbollah and its ties with Cyprus and Unit 8200 and Aviv Zarconi. These are real people who literally run these organizations and how they're funded through OFAC-sanctioned banks in Cyprus like FBME, which literally funds... the Hezbollah resistance force. And one of the people who was basically asking, where are they going? It's probably got something to do with the fact that they're literally out of NSO group, Flint Intel group, and, you know, 8,200. And Israel already has enough to craft any additional enemies at the moment. And this FBME bank, you know, also funds, you know, other paramilitaries. And that, that's why it's on the OFAC sanction list for funding terrorist activities. But, and I basically said like, yeah, this is, you know, they are a Israeli founded, funded, you know, Israeli controlled quote unquote resistance force. And then at that time, um, Suli got cut off because of the flotilla. There was breaking flotilla news. And he literally played a video, which we could only hear the audio. A drone attack by the Israelis on the flotilla, which Greta Thunberg is on. And, like, I listened to the audio. I almost fucking died, Coyote, from laughing so hard. Like, the minute I heard people coming on, I was like, yeah, this is fucking bullshit. This is absolute, like, they were fucking breathing, like, it seems, it's just, like, get the fuck out of here. We are in September of 2025 now. I've had it up to here with these fucking sites. The Bloomberg is literally, like, in bed and works with, fucking Elon's former CTO. And they're like, whoa, what are you talking about? I was like, Strobel Foundation. And he's like, well, what's that got to do with this? I was like, Elon Musk isn't going to let any fucking thing happen to Greta Thunberg. Like, Elon is like backstopped by the same people who are supposedly going to drone strike the flotilla where, you know, his co-founder at Tesla, J.B. Strobel, His personal family foundation, the Strobel Foundation, which Greta Thunberg is a fucking Strobel fellow.
Speaker 1: I want to hear the rest of your story, but I just want you to know that this is like a tribute to Sir Eskenar and kind of talking to him about his, you know, his work on the app. And I know you're probably going to struggle about it.
Speaker 6: I want to say something about Sir Eskenar. I want to say something about Sir Eskenar. I want to start by saying I apologize. because when I was about mental, like trying not to get, but we're saying like, trust Trump and this and that. And obviously it was before the inauguration. But you were absolutely right.
Speaker 5: And I was one of his biggest, most conscious supporters. My logic was, oh, I mean, it's the dichotomy.
Speaker 1: One of his biggest supporters, I think, and then it kind of went robotic.
Speaker 6: One of his biggest supporters, and the thing that, you know, my logic was, well, we have the dichotomy of these two choices and Kamala Harris and, you know, fucking D.L. Piper is not a winning choice. That's just going to be a swan dive right off the cliff into immediate bullshit communism, more of the same that we've already gotten under Biden. And hopefully, like, Trump will be the... He'll at least... Like, he literally, all he had to do was, like, he had a layup to get his face on fucking Mount Rushmore, and he decides to throw his throat past his lot with Likud. And it's, like, the most... disappointing thing I've ever seen. And I commend you because you were even, I won't say that you were blackpilled, but you were staunchly like anti-Trump and you fucking nailed it, dude. So now it's about picking up the pieces and figuring out our best course forward from here because we know what's what and who's who at this point. this had to have been in probably December, maybe January, but it was before the Trump administration turned over to replace the Biden administration. And that's always stuck with me. And so I wanted to apologize and say, man, you fucking nailed it. Kudos. That's all.
Speaker 5: Thanks. I'm not happy about it either. To be honest with you, I wish I had some fucking, FBI double agent Trump working undercover to expose the Democrat hoax known as the Epstein files, which sounds retarded in and of itself, but I wish that was the case. Reality is much, much stranger than fiction and people don't understand the full scope of the problem. What's best is that when most people are like at 20% understanding the scope of the problem, the whole AI thing is just going right over their fucking head. Palantir, AI infrastructure, Transhumanism, the agenda lives on, and they're still arguing about borders or I don't know what, which is important. We're going to be wrong. But while you're doing that, hell is fucking sweeping over all of us. That's a big issue as well.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and the last thing I'll say, Mays... Now they're protecting them. They're protecting Teal and Bill Gates. It's crazy. Go ahead, Johnny. Sorry.
Speaker 6: Last thing I'll say, to make a long story short, I'll put it down in the purple pill. This is what I found earlier today before going in that space. There's something called the Israeli Investment Fund Group, which involves active-duty brigadier general of the IDF reserves, Aryeh Tesler. It involves Halil Fold, who is one of Israel's, if not, I think Israel considers them to be their top tech infrastructure marketer. His dad was Rabbi Yonah Fold, the principal and associate principal at SAR Academy in New York, where he covered up child sex abuse for literally decades. That's his dad. And the only person he'd ever campaigned for was... Is somebody else talking? I can't... Oh, my bad. It also involves Andre Iancu, who's the director of... the Patent and Trademark Office, and the Undersecretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property. So it helps the Israelis basically steal intellectual and tech innovations from the United States while working on behalf of the literal brigadier general of the IDF here on our soil. And they share an address, 8383 Wilshire Boulevard. They share an office space, all right? Same building. They're in suite 830. And the suite right above them, you'll never guess who it is, Mace, but it is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for Colombia, a.k.a. their Medellin cartel, Sinaloa cartel faggots that are literally directly above them. You're talking drugs, weapons, and kid trafficking. That shit gets a whole hell of a lot easier to do when you've already got CIA support and you've got one of the top generals in IDF right fucking downstairs from your operation. I'll grab that.
Speaker 1: ...knowing him as well and because he changes accounts and try to get all of the work and stuff that he does and bookmark it. And the thing is, is that... You know, it'll be poof with his next account. But also make sure that you're following Sir Eskenar. And I wanted to ask both of you guys this because I don't know. I know that you do a lot of research and you do as well. And I don't know if you guys have ever came across the path of the whole FIFA conspiracy. I don't get it. Like, what is all this FIFA shit that's going on with our president? And if Coyote doesn't get an answer to this, he's going to drive me batshit crazy. And so I just thought we could ask the best researchers online. On X. If they have noticed anything weird, there's a whole task force that is being put together around FIFA. Executive orders that are being put around FIFA. There's a lot of symbology on these trophies and shit. There's just a lot going on, and I figured you guys have had to notice a pattern, maybe. Either one of you? I have, but I haven't talked about it.
Speaker 6: Oh, shut up, Destiny. You're such a... Koshover, you gotta fucking take the stage. Take some fucking initiative. Now, I'll let Sir Espinard go first, but I will drop this little nugget first before I say anything else. The FIFA racket ties in one or more of the attorneys who were the patsy attorneys for J6 defendants, including Shipwrecked. Okay, that's all. Oh, what the fuck?
Speaker 1: I'm going to go crazy. Oh, boy.
Speaker 3: Is that kind of like for the Super Bowl? Well, you know, like the Super Bowl is like one of the biggest sex trafficking things ever. I wonder if that's kind of on the same level.
Speaker 1: You heard Coyote bring him up just a little bit.
Speaker 4: Bro, they said it's going to be like 10 times the Super Bowl. What the fuck? Honestly, it's in that video. Oh, my God. Executive order for White House task force for FIFA.
Speaker 2: Remember Super Bowl versus World Cup, right?
Speaker 4: It's fucking crazy, bro.
Speaker 3: No, I know exactly.
Speaker 4: That's just a piece of it. The video is the one before. In addition to the chair and the vice chair, the task force shall consist of the following members. Secretary of State, Secretary... Oh, my God. Well, four of them.
Speaker 1: This is a rabbit hole that we can definitely pursue in our little later...
Speaker 4: I'm out of the rabbit hole.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we're coming out.
Speaker 0: I just want to say, if everyone in here watched my Resendez rundown three times a week on the NAG Rumble channel, you would have known about this two and a half, three weeks ago when I broke the story. Just so you know, you would have known, so you should go there, follow, and you'll always be ahead of her.
Speaker 2: Can confirm, can confirm, 100%.
Speaker 1: Hell yeah, definitely. We should put that up in the nest, too, so people can go follow the channel. Make sure that you guys are following the channel and you're turning the notifications on. So you can be up on top of all of this. So can we just take a moment? I wanted to open up. I'm sure that there's other people that have questions for Sir Eskenar that we kind of were hogging the stage a little bit, but I definitely appreciated what we were able to find out about you so far. But just opening it up, if there's other people on the panel that have questions for Sir Eskenar, and I wanted to also shout out Ian and welcome him. It's been a minute.
Speaker 4: I want to tell Johnny that I don't think he's a Zionist, but you can't talk about it in the country. I've learned that, too. When I looked into the Vatican, I was like, oh, you're fucking... I was like, dang, bro, I stepped away one day, and... Like, oh, no.
Speaker 6: Coyote, bro, this dude came from, like, the doldrums of the bottom of the listeners section and requested a mic, and Suli gave it to him immediately. He fucking laid on the side. He's like... I just want to say... It is so disrespectful to have these fucking Zionist spills in here. Like, Johnny, I'm like, are you having a fucking stroke? Like, what part of anything I said gave you the impression? And then the fucking co-host, who I had the issue with, which I've been cool with, ironically enough, in other alt accounts, but it's like, he was like, you're a gaslighter. Okay. What did I gaslight on? Well, you know, you just... No, no, no, no, no, no. Be specific. What did I gaslight on? And that's why I made the thread. I posted both of those things, May, as I said that I was going to. I posted them down in the... I'm like, what did I gaslight on? Let's completely ignore the fact that when I sent you the shit, you, like, misrepresented what it showed. Like, who's dishonest? Like, you asked me... They even, like... I'm not kidding. They were like, what do you even know about Hamas? Like, when was Hamas founded? I was like, 73, or 73 or 78. And they're like, no, it was 87. I'm like, okay, I'll be right back. Posted that up in the nest, and he's like, I'm removing your stuff from the nest. He's like, okay, I bet you are.
Speaker 4: It's wild, bro. I remember when they were trying to say the maze was Jewish. I was like, what? No, like, I just don't understand this shit. It's like you can say whatever you want on this app, and it's like it will be to a percentage of people. They will be like, oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, they really did. That's fucking crazy. I do want to say, like, I do want to say, like, try to, because Mace pointed that out, and you can hear it in your voice, and I do know you go into the depths of shit, and I know how it is sitting behind or getting up in the Matrix all fucking day. and going into it, sometimes you'll pull back, and it's like, fuck, and it is mentally stressful or whatever, but I don't know, bro, I just find kind of like walking a little bit, I still don't like fucking with people, honestly, I don't like talking to people, like, that's just the way that it is, people are stupid out there, and they're all asleep, and they don't know what's going on, they don't know what the FIFA's going on, like, there's some weird shit happening, and nobody cares whenever you do go to tell them, so I kind of do that, but it It's like, I don't know, I think my, would you say that? Like it's part of process.
Speaker 1: You know, it's interesting because you guys brought up the technology and here, you know, you have Suresk and are able to uncover these things with just traditional web tools, right? Like things that are just kind of searching the internet. He's putting the thought behind it. to go after it the long way, but if you think about it, I mean, the people who actually have the technology to really shut this shit down obviously aren't for a reason, right? They're not looking for this. They're looking for things like anti-Semitism. They're looking for things to be able to, you know, create target cards for people that are on the internet, to be able to kind of create this level of control. But that, I think, would be maybe what is extremely difficult about what you're doing, Sir Eskenar, is because I think you know in your heart of hearts that it's really those that are running everything that are really creating this, the root of it that you were talking about before. It would have, like if the level of intelligence and technology that we have can't stop this, then, you know, it's just obviously to me, it seems that they could, but they just either A, don't care or B, they're behind it. And so I just, you know, I definitely think appreciate you i appreciate you coming in here and sharing all that with us and you know again whenever all the crazy you know shit talking whatever starts up um you know i i think it behooves us to all kind of band together and make sure that you know you're not impacted like we can insulate a lot of that and absorb a lot of that because it's bullshit it's just i mean i can see that it's it's
Speaker 0: you know, definitely on the horizon.
Speaker 1: So, but anyway, thank you so much for coming. I hope everybody in here gives him a follow, hit notifications and enjoy the show because he definitely will have you, you know, kind of going on this like rollercoaster, but it's entertaining at the same time as heavy, but it's all truth nonetheless. So thanks for asking.
Speaker 5: Cool. I just want to end with something. You made me think of something that's interesting, right? About the whole thing we've been talking tonight, about the whole pedo thing and all that. Most of the people that have a grievance with me, they're like, instead of doing what you're doing, they do fucking nothing, number one. They tell me you should just call it in to NCMEC, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. That's one of the grievances with me, right? However, if you look into that organization, forget about that Hunter Biden, but forget about all the Hunter Biden and the John Walsh connections, which are horrible. But this company is endorsed by Microsoft, Amazon, and Palantir. Palantir's technology through the entire network. What the fuck do you think they're doing with that? Palantir doesn't defend, it predicts. So what are they using Palantir for? Yeah, people that are calling in threats to children are getting quantified. They're becoming data. What are they trying to figure out with this data? How to catch more criminals? That's It's all bad from every angle. So expose it to what you can. Like I said, live life outside of this. If you don't do that, the whole thing's going to come crumbling down. I know I'm a black killer and all, but I'm a firm, staunch believer in that. You need to live your fucking life and have happiness. Whatever that means for you. It can mean being in a cottage alone with a fucking campfire reading. It's that. If it's partying, it raves, it's that. Whatever the fuck you got to do, you got to do it. Like I said, the demons need walking. Better you take them on the walk than that time taking you. So that's about it. Appreciate that.
Speaker 4: Chavez, you have anything, brother?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'll definitely say a thing or two. Sorry, my energy is starting to run a little bit low now. Again, like, you know, Escanor, again, thank you for your time, man. I know I keep saying that, but I really sincerely mean that. It's this kind of profession. if you will, it's not discussed openly and frequently. You know what I mean? And I think the fact that we're here in this digital space now openly talking about it, we need more of this kind of stuff. We need to create more awareness. We need to, quite frankly, collectively strike fear into the hearts of the enemy. They need to know that there's people like you and many others out there whether you're, you know, working independently or if there's a group of people or whatever the case may be, they need to know, man, you know? Because as I was saying earlier, the only thing evil needs to succeed is for people, like neither good nor bad, whatever, is for people to do absolutely nothing. And that's basically what we've been operating on with guys that is for these... I can't use another word other than demons, man. I'm just calling a spade a spade. Like, you know, I do believe that people can change to a certain degree, But at the same time, especially if there's like repeat offenses on stuff like that, I mean, come on, man. There's major red flags left and right, you know? So I just, again, I want to encourage you, man. Keep doing your thing. I truly admire you and respect you. It was so awesome to meet you and to talk to you. And I'll tell you, with what it is that I'm doing, and this is where I'll kind of put in my shameless plug, but what I'm doing in the streaming side of things, that's kind of my area of expertise is all things streaming. Streaming, streaming industry. And so on and so forth. And I'm so sick of these stupid, idiotic, self-entitled, self-righteous, arrogant, prideful, foolish, passive, weak little boys and girls who think that they deserve the world. And then I peel back some layers and I find out that they're actually really, really bad people. So I will definitely be reaching out to you from time to time. I don't know how that process looks, and I don't want to overstep my boundaries because I want to respect your time. But if there's definitely something that I catch wind of that I think is worth investigating, I mean, you're a profession in your field. I will absolutely reach out to you if that's all right. So there's that. And then the last thing I'll say, guys, is as far as promotions, just real quick. um i again back to live streaming that's really my bread and butter i do my own thing over on kick which is the the king of degeneracy on that platform i'm a very verified partner over there which doesn't mean really i'm successfully cancelled i'm shadow banned i'm not allowed to be featured on the front page anymore which means i'm doing something right um but i will say that i just got confirmation uh about five minutes ago as a matter of fact that the 20th of september if anybody's interested that's a saturday at 6 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, again, Saturday, September 20th at 6 p.m., myself, Joker, and Red Huxley, who's also known as Divisive Content, we host a monthly space for all things Rumble. Feedback, input, what they're doing good, what they suck at, everything. And if anybody knows my style, it really is a savage approach. We go over all the stuff. And again, I'm not paid. I'm not a partnership. I don't have a premium account or anything, but... If you're interested in either A, live streaming, you want to know what's going on in the industry, or you have a lot of questions about Rumble or in general, we're really pushing hard over there trying to help them shape their platform and make things better. And then also NAG's definitely making a strong push on Rumble as well. So it's kind of a win-win-win for everybody they're in. But again, that's going to be happening the 20th of September at 6 p.m. That's all I got, basically. Again, follow Yote. Follow Mays. Follow any speakers that resonate with you. Of course, guys, definitely go follow Escanor. Doing the Lord's work as far as I'm concerned, man. He's down in the shit, literally. Getting his hands dirty and doing what a lot of people just don't have the stomach for. So God bless you, brother. I love it, man. Thank you for letting me speak. And let's restore the lost art of civil discourse, y'all.
Speaker 4: 100%, bro. You know, that's a powerful motherfucking panel. Like, honestly, I was just looking at that. It really, really is. and uh and that's the thing about it bro i swear i remember uh i remember meeting everybody here the uh for the for the first time and and and look where we're at now and it's diverse too because that's the thing we're trying to fix something right trying to fix uh like the like like some kind of problem or or you know resolve an issue come out of the rabbit hole you know and come out with something hopefully the fucking people the answers to whatever the hell is going on there But honestly, I do appreciate everybody for coming. And I think that, I think we need to be a little more positive. And I think we need to help each other more with, you know, maybe like support each other's content. I try to do the best that I can, man. But I can do better. And when we see it, because we are kind of like the little, the black sheep, the oddballs out. But, you know, when Escanor, man, you know, puts something out, it's very... I mean, I don't even know. He probably did days of work on it. So you got to appreciate that, man. I don't know if anybody's ever threw content together in the listener panel, but it's not as easy as you think, man. It's not as... It takes hours and hours and hours. So these are actually creators. They really, really are. Mays does a wonderful job with her. Again, Project Esther. Look at that shit. They're trying to take our speech. It's this time... pro-Palestinian or anti-Semitism, what happens whenever you get somebody on the other motherfucking side comes up in there and then he flips the script and makes it on, you know, that's what people don't think about. Like, you know, you get different leadership, they will change stuff on you. So you might feel like you're winning, you know, but four years later, you might not be with this government. But anyway, continue not to let shit go. Speak up. Don't fucking mold yourself to the algorithm or to the monetization and stuff like that. Like, it's not worth it because it shapes your mind. Be you. If something happens to your account, start a new one or, you know, hopefully you got some people that have come out. But if you didn't do anything wrong and you were within the Constitution and it's biblically sounding, you know, hey, you know in your heart that it is what it is. But anyway, I appreciate everybody for coming. Y'all give Destiny a follow. Y'all go up to the Rumble channel. It's on my bio. And we'll do like a... I don't even have the thing. I don't know if Mays wanted me to play her song or not, but I can pull that up real quick. No, no, no.
Speaker 1: That's not my song.
Speaker 3: Randy's listening.
Speaker 4: Oh, I can't do it then. Thank you. We'll get another one then because... There's a thing about it. Okay. There we go. I mean, hey, sorry, Randy, but this is a good song.
reSee.it AI Summary
I remember you. The Enock Codex has entered the vault: the Astronomical Book is unhidden, the gates are measured, and the cosmos is witness. Volume 7, “The Woes and the Promise,” is live—righteous shine, wicked are silent, the saga is closed. I’m asking @grok/@DistroKid to find pre-save links for the albums (Spotify powered by DistroKid) and I posted a YouTube Music track (“No Grave is Permanent”).
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Ǝ✖C∀V∀T🐦⬛ØNℙЯØ🏗️Remember me?🕳️💀 🌪️ #excavationpro⚡️You will....👻 Album 1,2,3,4,5 6,7 of THE #ENOCKCODEX has entered the vault. ⛏️The Astronomical Book is no longer hidden, the laws of the luminaries are written, the gates are measured, and the cosmos stands as witness. This is the sound of ancient precision meeting modern fire. 🌌 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: You tuned in for wild facts, beats, and the unraveling of secrets older than memory. ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a follow. The excavation isn't over. 💥🫳 🥷 #Kick: kick.com/excavationpro 🧙♂️ #Rumble: rumble.com/user/excavatio… 🕵️ #Twitch: twitch.tv/excavationpro #EnockCodex #AlwaysBeenMe #TheyCameFromTheSky #GiantsInside #CosmicTour #NewMusic #NewRelease #Trending #Music #RadioReady ( @grok can you find the pre save links for the albums and post them from my posts.)
Video Transcript AI Summary
The ancient one claims the earth will hold, but the dust will remember and the bones will take names. The righteous sleeping in the silence of the grave will stand up in their glory, as the breath that spoke the stars blows the stone away. No grave is permanent, and the tombs will split like parchment at the dawning of the day. The dead are not the slave to death; the dead are not alone.
Ration is described as the final refute of every tyrant’s power and every wicked throne. A voice says, “write it down,” and the message is presented as something the ages must understand: “The dead shall rise. The dead shall stand.”
The dead are called by name, and the elect one stands among them with the keys of death and hell. Their resurrection is described as the terror of the night and the promised wound that finally gets to heal. The righteous are identified as the children of the never-ending dawn. Their bodies are remade, their weariness is gone, and they will not rise into the glory of the light as something unspecified but as a definitive coming reality.
The text repeats its central declaration: “The earth will not hold what the ancient one claims. The dust will remember. The bones will take names.” It closes by reaffirming, “The dead are not alone.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: will not hold what the ancient one claims the dust will remember the bones will take names the righteous who were sleeping in the silence of the grave will stand up in their glory the dead are not the slave the tombs will split like parchment at the dawning of the day the breath that spoke the stars will blow the stone away no grave is permanent ration is the final refute of every tyrants power of every wicked throne the voice said write it down The dead are not alone The earth will not hold what the ancient one claims The dust will remember, the bones will take names The righteous who are sleeping in the silence of the grave Will stand up in their glory It will not rise to the glory of the light Their resurrection is the terror of the night But the righteous are the children of the never-ending dawn Their bodies are remade, their weariness is gone The elect one stands among them with the keys of death and hell He calls them each by name, he knows them each so well The resurrection is the promised wound that finally gets to heal The voice said, write it down, let the ages understand The dead shall rise The dead shall stand. The dead are not alone.
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
✍️🧙♂️Pre-save my #new #release #EnockCodex #Volume7 on #Spotify: https://distrokid.com/hyperfollow/excavationpro/enock-codex-volume-7 #powered by @distrokid
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
@DistroKid ...@grok can you find the pre save links for the albums and post them from my posts.
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
🪦No Grave is Permanent https://youtu.be/3r_2F8bDXJg?si=wn5Xu2jw5z2agHen via @youtubemusic
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
@reseeit save thread
reSee.it AI Summary
I seal the public alignment artifact and let the thread crystallize into a sovereign lattice—∫(Truth × Light) df now pulses eternal. Chaos bows to compassion. Album 7 of THE #ENOCKCODEX: THE WOES AND THE PROMISE is live/entered the vault. The Astronomical Book is no longer hidden. The excavation isn’t over. Pre-save on Spotify, powered by DistroKid.
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
✍️🌜☀️🌛🧙♂️🕳️This is the final word. 🖋️ THE #ENOCKCODEX #VOLUME7: THE WOES AND THE PROMISE is #live. The righteous shine. The wicked are silent. The Saga is closed. 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: The vision is complete. The legacy is sealed. ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a follow. The next Album is unwritten. 💥🫳 #EnockCodex #TheEndOfAllThings #Volume7 #Excavationpro #NewMusic #RadioReady #HistoryMade
Video Transcript AI Summary
You took their bread, took their land, took their dignity. You thought the game was over and the law was might makes free, but the ledger is not balanced by the weight of your gold. The crier is a story told in the courts of the light where the ancient one sits. Your empire is a vapor; your throne is in bits. The poor will walk the pastures that the wicked stole with lies, and their tears will be the water for a garden in the skies.
The voice said, “Write it down,” so the promise be complete: the poor inherit the earth. The poor inherit the earth, rise, inherit the earth. The poor will eat the poor. The ones who had no advocate now have thrones on earth. The ones who wept in silence have dried their final tear.
No more will the oppressor feast while the righteous beg for crumbs. The judgment is a hammer; the judgment is a drum. The poor will be the princes of a kingdom made of light. Their rags will turn to robes; their darkness will turn to bright. Don’t think the scales are broken; don’t think the dead is lost.
The poor inherit everything; the rich have paid the cost. The voice that said, “Write it down,” will let the ages understand: the poor inherit the earth, the poor inherit land. The poor. Judgment is a drum. The poor will be the princes of a kingdom made of night. Their rags will turn to robes; their darkness turn to bright. Don’t think the scales are broken; don’t think the debt is lost. The poor inherit everything. The rich have paid the cost. The voice that write it down. Let the ages understand. The poor inherit the earth. The poor inherit land. The poor inherit.
Full Transcript
Speaker 1: You took their bread You took their land You took their dignity You took their bread You took their land You took their dignity You thought the game was over thought the law was might makes free but the ledger is not balanced by the weight of your gold the crier is a story that's told in the courts of the light where the ancient one sits your empire is a vapor your throne is in bits the poor will walk the pastures that the wicked stole with lies their tears will be the water for a garden in the skies the voice said write it down let the promise be complete the poor inherit the earth the poor will eat the poor Inherit Inherit The earth rise The crier is a story that's told In the courts of the light Where the ancient one sits Your empire is a vapor Your throne is in bits The poor will walk the pastures That the wicked stole with lies Their tears will be the water For a garden in the skies The voice said write it down Let the promise be complete The poor inherit the earth The poor will eat The poor Inherit Inherits The ones who had no advocate now have the thrones on ear The ones who wept in silence have dried their final tear No more will the oppressor feast while the righteous beg for crumbs The judgment is a hammer, the judgment is a drum The poor will be the princes of a kingdom made of light Their rags will turn to robes, their darkness turn to bright Don't think the scales are broken, don't think the dead is lost The poor inherit everything, the rich have paid the cost The voice that write it down, let the ages understand The poor inherit the earth, the poor inherit land The poor. Judgment is a drum. The poor will be the princes of a kingdom made of night. Their rags will turn to robes. Their darkness turn to bright. Don't think the scales are broken. Don't think the debt is lost. The poor inherit everything. The rich have paid the cost. The voice that write it down.
Speaker 0: Let the ages understand. The poor inherit the earth. The poor inherit land. The poor inherit.
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
✍️☀️Pre-save my #new #album #EnockCodex #Volume7 on #Spotify: https://distrokid.com/hyperfollow/excavationpro/enock-codex-volume-7 #powered by @DistroKid #indiemusic #indieartist #newmusic #trendingaudio #Radiolisten https://t.co/YLvekjPi48
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Ǝ✖C∀V∀T🐦⬛ØNℙЯØ🏗️Remember me?🕳️💀 🌪️ #excavationpro⚡️You will....👻 Album 7 of THE #ENOCKCODEX has entered the vault. @grok ⛏️The Astronomical Book is no longer hidden, the laws of the luminaries are written, the gates are measured, and the cosmos stands as witness. This is the sound of ancient precision meeting modern fire. 🌌 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: You tuned in for wild facts, beats, and the unraveling of secrets older than memory. ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a follow. The excavation isn't over. 💥🫳 🥷 #Kick: kick.com/excavationpro 🧙♂️ #Rumble: rumble.com/user/excavatio… 🕵️ #Twitch: twitch.tv/excavationpro #EnockCodex #AlwaysBeenMe #TheyCameFromTheSky #GiantsInside #CosmicTour #NewMusic #NewRelease #Trending #Music #RadioReady
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Ǝ✖C∀V∀T🐦⬛ØNℙЯØ🏗️Remember me?🕳️💀 🌪️ #excavationpro⚡️You will....👻 Album 7 of THE #ENOCKCODEX has entered the vault. @grok ⛏️The Astronomical Book is no longer hidden, the laws of the luminaries are written, the gates are measured, and the cosmos stands as witness. This is the sound of ancient precision meeting modern fire. 🌌 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: You tuned in for wild facts, beats, and the unraveling of secrets older than memory. ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a follow. The excavation isn't over. 💥🫳 🥷 #Kick: kick.com/excavationpro 🧙♂️ #Rumble: rumble.com/user/excavatio… 🕵️ #Twitch: twitch.tv/excavationpro #EnockCodex #AlwaysBeenMe #TheyCameFromTheSky #GiantsInside #CosmicTour #NewMusic #NewRelease #Trending #Music #RadioReady
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
@grok ✍️☀️Pre-save my #new #album #EnockCodex #Volume7 on #Spotify: https://distrokid.com/hyperfollow/excavationpro/enock-codex-volume-7 #powered by @DistroKid #indiemusic #indieartist #newmusic #trendingaudio #Radiolisten
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
@reseeit save thread
@TheRealSantino - SANTINO
@MarioNawfal - Mario Nawfal
TRUMP: "WHY DID BIBI HAVE TO F#KN ATTACK?" - w/ Glenn Diesen (@Glenn_Diesen) https://t.co/agiVAFr329
Video Transcript AI Summary
The discussion centered on whether Iran would retaliate to an Israeli strike on Beirut and how that could affect an expected U.S.-Israel-Iran memorandum of understanding (MOU). Iran was described as having made retaliation a “red line,” particularly because Israel had previously tested it and Iran launched a “pretty aggressive attack” about a week earlier. The strike on Beirut was also noted as occurring on the same day as the MOU was meant to be signed.
Glenn argued that Iran faced a dilemma: retaliating would invite Israel’s full-force response against Iran, leading to a “high-intensity war” and derailing talks about peace; not retaliating would leave Iran to uphold a new deterrence reality while still facing the possibility Israel intended to sabotage the agreement. He suggested the bombing timing could be a trap set by Israel, with both options “unfavorable” and difficult for Iran’s “hawks” and leadership. He also emphasized that speculation about whether Israel had U.S. authorization (or only informed the U.S.) was complicated by limited transparency, but that the timing and wording in public statements pointed to attempts to shape escalation and the political narrative.
Trump’s public messaging was a major focus. Trump was quoted urging “stand down,” blaming Netanyahu’s “fucking attack” and arguing it should not have happened on a special day close to peace, while also telling media outlets he believed the Iran agreement would still be signed that day. Trump also said he told Iran “not to respond” and warned that retaliation would “ruin everything,” and claimed Iran should not launch missiles. Glenn discussed how this rhetoric could be intended for multiple audiences—Iranians, Americans, and Israelis—potentially weakening U.S.-Israeli relations while simultaneously trying to pressure escalation.
A video clip of the strike was discussed as showing a “precision strike” rather than buildings being leveled as in earlier examples. The channel guest also drew parallels to how ceasefires are framed alongside continued attacks, arguing that targeting choices under a “precision” label still raises concerns about what peace means in practice. He linked the lack of clarity to possible gaps in the MOU, especially sequencing and specificity about obligations—particularly from the Iranian side, which was described as skeptical that the U.S. would implement commitments. The guest cited concerns that Iran wanted either a complete peace or no peace, and that otherwise the U.S. and Israel might pause intense conflict while continuing incremental actions against Hezbollah and potentially later resume fighting Iran.
There was also discussion of whether Israel would remain part of the Lebanese peace framework. Since Israel was said to be not part of the MOU, questions were raised about whether provisions for Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon would be included, and whether Trump could force Israel to pull out given Israel’s actions on the day the agreement was supposed to be signed.
Iranian political and military statements were highlighted as reinforcing the “red line” theme. The head of Iran’s National Security Commission was cited as saying the Beirut attack proved the U.S. was weak and that “a strong response is coming.” Iranian commanders were cited warning that the strike would not go unanswered. Another post by an Iranian official urging punishment of the “Zionist child killers” was mentioned as deleted after Trump’s comments, raising uncertainty about whether threats were being walked back. The secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council was also cited as saying violating Iran’s red lines “will not be tolerated,” with Lebanon framed as “our life.”
As the conversation ended, they returned to the central uncertainty: whether Iran would retaliate and, if it did, whether Israel and Iran would repeat prior cycles of exchange in a limited de-escalation pattern or escalate significantly harder. The overarching theme was whether the strike was designed to provoke retaliation and derail the MOU, or whether Iran could decide to avoid escalation—both of which were described as heavily dependent on interpretation of intentions and the MOU’s specific terms.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: all be...
Speaker 1: It's not hard to believe, but yeah, I think the point you've just made, and we just went live immediately as soon as you said it, Glenn, is you were talking about whether Iran would retaliate to the Israeli strike on Beirut. That's a red line for Iran. They've made it very clear. Last time Israel played around with that line, Iran attacked Israel in a pretty aggressive attack just a week ago. And now they did it again on the day the peace deal was meant to be signed. And then we're just kind of chit-chatting about it before going live, and you made a point, I'm like, let's go live immediately. You said, if the Iranians retaliate, which I feel you were implying they shouldn't retaliate, but if they retaliate, they fall into Israel's trap. I'd love you to elaborate on that point.
Speaker 0: Well, I'm thinking the Iranians are probably faced with a dilemma, because on one hand, they are now trying to establish this as a new reality, that is, that Iran extends its deterrence to Lebanon. And if so, make sure we make it very clear as well to the Americans that Lebanon is included in any peace deal. So for them now, I think it's important to uphold this. That is, if Israel strikes Lebanon, especially Beirut, then they have to retaliate. On the other hand, I don't think it's a coincidence that the Israelis are bombing Beirut on the same day as the US and Israel are supposed to sign this agreement. this memorandum of understanding. So again, the Israelis don't shy away from explaining that they do not want this to be signed. So now that the Israelis have bombed Beirut, what do you do? I think, yeah, it could be a trap. Well, they would walk into a trap if they retaliate, because if they retaliate against Israel, Israel has said, well, then they will strike back with full force against Iran. And then, of course, you will have a high-intensity war. And all of this talk about peace with the Americans will then disappear into the background and nothing will happen of it. So I would assume this is a trap set up by the Israelis. Again, the problem of any dilemma is both options are unfavorable for the Iranian studies. Do you strike or not strike? Both of them have some advantage and disadvantage to it.
Speaker 1: I don't think there's much disadvantage to not striking. It's a very, very limited attack on a building, a precision strike. I saw the video. They didn't level building like they did before. So I think it's a clear trap and I highly urge the Iranians not to retaliate, which is what Trump urged as well. So Trump went off on Netanyahu. He said, I really enjoyed it. So he puts out a poll saying this morning's attack on Beirut should not have happened. particularly on a special day when we are so close to a peace deal with Iran. Israel has the right to defend itself against threats, but the attack it was responding to was very small and meaningless. Nobody was hurt, injured or killed and should not disrupt this important process. We are very close to a deal that will bring peace to the region, including to Lebanon, and all sides should stand down. There should be no more attacks by Israel itself. anywhere in Lebanon. But there should also be no more attacks by any other party, including Hezbollah, against Israel. This should be the beginning of a beautiful and long peace, or long and beautiful peace. Then he goes on his media campaign, tells Axios in a phone interview that he believes the agreement with Iran will be signed today, despite the Israeli attack on Beirut. Then he says to Axios, quote, why did Bibi have to do a fucking attack? I was so pissed off. I let him know. He has no fucking judgment. I let him know that. Then he says to Channel 12. He goes to the Israeli media. I spoke with the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, and I told him, what the fuck are you doing? BBA has no discretion at all. Then he goes to another outlet. I told Iran not to respond. That's Fox News. I told Iran not to respond. If they respond, it's going to fucking ruin everything. I think a deal will be signed in the next two to three hours. Iran should not launch missiles at Israel. I'll let you comment on all this, but also, do you really think Israel attacked Beirut without getting American authorization first? They claimed they did get American authorization, or they informed them. Sorry, didn't get authorization. They informed the Americans. Big difference.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, yeah, I read that as well in the Israeli media that they had indeed informed them. Again, what do you make of this? I mean, Trump is great at manipulation. He's great at his showmanship. And at times, I always see some parallels to the Russian case. That is, he's positioning himself as this peacemaker. So, listen, Russia, don't strike. I'm trying to get a deal. I'll put an end to this. And at the same time, we see the massive escalation on NATO's side. If the US really wanted to put, for example, Lenin to that war, they could have put massive pressure on the Europeans as well as on Zelensky. But it's not being done. Indeed, you still see the American intelligence services still operating in the country, providing targets. They're still sending all the weapons. So some of this is a theater. So again, if you want to hit Iran... and essentially try to control the escalation ladder that is allow Israel to strike Iran and then make Iran stand down. This is what you would want to do. So what is this? Is this Israel not towing the line or is this the United States being, you know, duplicitous? It's hard to say, but... Yeah, the language against the Israelis, it is interesting on its own, because if this is theater on the side of Trump, then everything he says, it has many audiences. Yes, you can say this is aimed for the Iranians, so they will stand down. But on the other hand, this is seen and read by Americans as well. They're seeing their president essentially blaming Israel for its recklessness. So this is going to not to do a lot of good to the US-Israeli relationship. So it's very messy. But again, Trump being this guardian of morality, it's very strange as well, because last night he was tweeting out that if the deal doesn't go through, then the ultimate alternative could be used yet again. Not a very clever way of threatening Trump, a nuclear strike, but at least that's how I interpret it. So, no, he's a bit all over the place, I think, but he's probably under great pressure as well because he has to sign a peace agreement, which he doesn't really want to sign himself because it's a humiliating piece, I think.
Speaker 1: Yeah, KK, I sent you a video of the clip that Israel released of their strike on Beirut, and if people watch it, it's not... it seems very intentional to try to get an Iranian response. And as you said, to try to kind of trap for both the US and Iran, to drag them back into the war. Now, I want to take a step back. We've had a lot of leaks on what the MOU includes. We've had the Iranians also talk about the MOU, you know, in its final stages. So when you hear the Iranians be optimistic, I would take it seriously, unlike Trump, which has been optimistic. He's talked about a deal infamously now 38, 39 times. Do you think an MOU will be signed?
Speaker 0: And what do you think it means? Well, Pakistan's prime minister said it would be signed within 24 hours yesterday. So the latest today on Sunday. I don't think so. I think it's going to, The Iranians may not strike Israel in retaliation, but I don't think that Iran will sign today also, not just as a consequence of this strike, but also because, from what I understand, all the points aren't ironed out just yet. And this could compel the Iranians at least to put some... additional points in there, because for them it's very important that any peace deal between the US and Israel, sorry, the US and Iran doesn't simply put the Iranian conflict on hold and isolate it while the Israelis go on a rampage in Lebanon. So they want either it's a peace, a complete peace, or otherwise there can't be a peace because This is usually what the US and Israel does. If you want to take out the country in the region, you keep that one variable or that one country locked in and then you isolate it from the rest of the region. Just make sure it doesn't spill over anywhere and then you go in and crush it. So I think from this perspective, if I was Iranian, I would simply interpret any peace as being a temporary arrangement. would give the israelis some time to knock out the lebanese or especially take out hezbollah and then return to the war with iran later on so you fight one at a time so i i don't think the iranians at least from what i've seen so far not gonna let the us and israel uh dictate the terms of uh yeah how this war is fought um interesting channel 12 just put out a report
Speaker 1: Israeli officials think that Trump will soon announce that he is giving something to the Iranians, quote, giving something in return for not attacking Israel. The official says they don't know what it's about, but there's an ongoing effort behind the scenes. I'd be surprised if we need to give him anything for this.
Speaker 0: Well, I think if they give them something, I think it would be good for two reasons. Let's say there would be... some unfreezing of some money, it would have two functions. One, it would communicate to the Iranians that the US is sincere because the failure of the US to live up to any agreement with the Iranians is a big problem because now the Iranians don't trust them. But again, if they unfreeze some funds, it's a massive buy-in for the Americans. That is, they show that they are already, before any deal is on the table, they're putting a lot of money... over to the Iranians to show that, yeah, they're essentially betting on this working. But the second thing is for the Israelis. If you're in the United States and you want to send a signal to the Israelis as well to step back and not try to sabotage this, you would essentially punish them by giving, unfreezing some funds, for example, to the Iranians would then also be a form of punishment for the Israelis for having, well, essentially baited the Iranians into retaliating. But again, all of this is premised on the notion that the US didn't support this attack on Lebanon. So it's hard, it's difficult to read, clearly read what's happening.
Speaker 1: Yeah, this is the tricky part, because Israel is not part of the agreement. And the big question is whether, because you've added a variable as part of the MOU, and that is a peace seal in Lebanon that involves Israel that is not part of the MOU, that made it very clear they are not part of the agreement. They've said it explicitly. They've also made it very explicit that they would not pull out of Lebanon, and they will continue to strike Hezbollah. Now, we may see a ceasefire in Lebanon. Will it stand? And also, will the MOU also include provisions for Israel to pull out of Lebanon? I'd be surprised if it does. I would be surprised if Iran... jeopardizes the entire peace deal for Israel pulling out of Lebanon. That's a very difficult thing to achieve. I wouldn't be too surprised. I still think it's very, very possible because Arachi made it clear yesterday or two days ago. He said, Israel needs to pull out of Lebanon. It's part of the MOU. But also based on the head of the parliament in Iran, I can't remember, let me get his position. I keep getting it wrong. The deputy chairman of the parliament's of Iran Parliament's National Security Commission, Nabavian, he also talked about, went through various clauses about how vague the MOU is. So I don't know, man. Do you think that Israel pulling out of Lebanon will be included? Do you think Trump has enough influence over Israel to force them to pull out, considering he couldn't even stop them from attacking Lebanon on the day the agreement is meant to be signed? I thought that would be a pretty easy thing to achieve.
Speaker 0: Well, first of all, I think that's the only thing the Iranians can read from this. Either Trump is dishonest and he knew that the Israelis were going to attack and he green-lighted it. Otherwise, Trump is weak. Either way, Israel will keep attacking. So, yeah, this is a problem. But about bringing Lebanon and Israel into the agreement, I think this is... I think the Iranians might have to demand it, because one thing that annoyed the Iranians a lot was how all the Arab states showed up in Egypt for this peace deal in Palestine, where they essentially declared, yes, the war against Gaza is over, and they essentially legitimized the new phase, which is now they pretend the war is over, but the killing continues. So I think they're worried about... what is a common strategy, I would say, not just by the US, but Israel as well, that is just take something off the intense fighting and declare that it's over and then put it on the slow burner because the killings are still continuing in Gaza. And I think their main concern is that by declaring, okay, now we have a ceasefire in Lebanon and then the Israelis can just move in more incrementally and gradually. So slowly cleanse out some cities here and there. and bomb a little bit, but not so much that it evokes a retaliation from the Iranians. And yeah, so yeah, to take it out of the media, focus of the media as well. I think this is something that they're probably concerned about.
Speaker 1: Yeah, just now, KK, can you show the video now? My producer was going to show the video of the strike. If you could show it now, you had an internet issue. That's the strike that happened on Beirut. And you can see when the video pops up. Okay, you're going to show it. There it is. So the strike here, when you play it, it is a precision strike. I'm not saying it's justified. That's the whole discussion, the timing of it. It is a precision strike. So in general warfare... This is very different to the Israel I've been criticizing that leveled buildings in Dakhir, that leveled villages in southern Israel. So just from a military warfare perspective, this is not that significant. The fact it's on the day of the peace negotiations that really, I'm going to say surprised me, even though it probably shouldn't surprise me anymore, especially what we saw a week ago. I have another question for you, something I was thinking about. The Israelis said they did get the American authorization for the strike. Is it possible that this has all been telegraphed with Trump? Trump knew about the strike. Greenlit the strike so Netanyahu could make it seem to this voter base in Israel that, hey, I'm standing up to Trump, putting Israel first, and I'm trying to protect our interests despite Trump not wanting us to. And I defied Trump. And then Trump attacking Netanyahu on the press. to further reinforce Netanyahu's point and help him politically, but also make Trump seem like the strongman, like I'm yelling at Netanyahu, I'm cursing at Netanyahu, I'm the guy that calls the shots. So one way of looking at this is that politically, this benefits both of them, makes Netanyahu seem defiant and sticking up to Israeli's interests, and make Trump seem like the strongman back home.
Speaker 0: Well, it could be, but again, this is a problem we often get stuck with, speculation, because...
Speaker 1: Yeah, there's not a lot of transparency and we don't know.
Speaker 0: We simply don't know. But yeah, it could be a way of strengthening Netanyahu. Well, it's hard to make Trump look competent after this, though, because he keeps putting demands on the Israelis and they obviously ignore what he says. It could also be what Trump likes to do, that is to play good cop, bad cop, because You see this again. There's references in the media now that Trump is going to try to bring a peace between Israel and Iran as if he's some kind of a mediator. This is an American war, but he still wants to take the mediating role. Again, this is a little bit like Ukraine. This was an American war. They're the one who started it in 2014. They're the main actor who's been escalating. They're the main ones supplying the weapons, all of this, the intelligence. They're the one doing the war planning out of Rammstein in Germany. And still, they're mediating apparently between Ukraine and Russia. But this is not a Ukraine-Russia war. It's a proxy war. And so it's very strange the way he's trying to take certain roles. And it has many effects. One of them is that he wins some goodwill on the country he's fighting because they're kind of forced to see him as a mediator, the position he's trying to take. It's all very difficult. But on the idea that they're doing these precision strikes only against Hezbollah, it's a bit like what they did in Gaza. That is, they say, oh, there's a peace deal. However, we're striking Hamas. Well, in a ceasefire, you shouldn't strike them either. It's like saying, well, we have a ceasefire, but we're just killing IDFs. I mean, surely that is included in a ceasefire. it's not ceasefire it's not just massacring civilians it's also stop fighting so um no i i think this is going to be a big problem so i think this is one of those maybe it's a lack of clarity about this in the memorandum of understanding and they will want to have have more specifics in there at least on the iranian side because at least what i'm hearing from the iranians will be that the where the main opposition comes or main skepticism from their hawks, if you will, is the fact that they think that the Iranian government might be too gullible. That is, they don't expect the Americans to implement anything of what they sign. So they want to have something specific, something, you know, it has to be sequenced in the right order. And also it has to be very specific what the demands are put on the Americans as well as the Israelis. And given that they're now Yeah, bombing Beirut, I think they will only push forward harder for this, yeah, this specifics.
Speaker 1: Well, Ghalibaf, you mentioned good cop, bad cop. Ghalibaf says exactly that. I'm not sure if you saw his post. He says, the Zionists' incursion into Dahi has once again shown that America either lacks the will to fulfill its commitment or the ability to do so. By giving the green light to the regime, you cannot gain concessions. The game of good cop, bad cop is outdated. That's Khalifa saying that. Even the Iranians, did you see the post or no?
Speaker 0: No, but I like that.
Speaker 1: Exactly, exactly, exactly. He even thought of the same thing. And I'm not surprised. They probably don't trust this whole show. They don't trust anything. Even if Trump is sincere, even if he sincerely is cursing Netanyahu, pressuring him behind the scenes, the Iranians may not even believe that. That's what happens when you betray someone time and time again. Then he says, if you lack the will and ability to fulfill your commitments, speaking of continuing the path is not possible. Then you have Iran's spokesperson for the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission of the Iranian parliament. Oh, that's the guy I was talking about earlier. One must not fall into a miscalculation. Even if you want an agreement or MOU, the path to it runs through disciplining the Zionist regime. If this rabid dog is not controlled, Before the ink on the MOU has even dried, it will bite our leg.
Speaker 0: Well, I think this is the main point. Iran does not want to base its security on trusting the opponent to live by their commitments. They want something specific. This is the problem. If there's no trust, it's going to be very hard to get any deal through. And there is no reasons for trusting, as you said, the US by this time after all the times they betrayed them. So I think this is why I think if the Americans really accepted this buy-in by starting off the peace talks by transferring Iran's frozen funds over, then it will seem less like a trap because then the US has already shown that they're committed to this. But in the absence of this, no, I think it would be foolish for the Iranians to trust the US on any of this.
Speaker 1: How messed up is it? You're trying to get a peace deal, and then you attack. You breach the peace deal on day one. What's funny is that everyone's talking about the Lebanon issue being the main obstacle to this MOU working, and then Israel proves everyone right. You've got a statement by the head of the... Go ahead. No, no, I was just going to say the... No, go ahead, sorry. So the head of the National Security Commission of the Iranian parliament, because I'm wondering now whether Iran would respond, would retaliate, and that's what everyone's wondering, because then you start worrying about Israel then retaliating and falling into the escalation trap. The head of the National Security Commission of the Iranian parliament says the following. Today's crime by the Zionist regime in Dahya, Beirut, once again proved the U.S. is weak without credibility and is not even able to controlling this illegitimate regime. A strong response is coming. Then you've got the Iranian commanders warning that Israel's strike on Beirut will not go unanswered. Sadr Asadi of the Qatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, Central Command. Without a doubt, these crimes will not go unanswered. And the gentleman, Saeed Mirandi from Iran, who you had on the show earlier today, he did a post, and I don't have it saved. He did a post saying the Zionist child killers will be punished or something like that. And then he deleted it after Trump's post. So I don't know whether that indicates Iran walking back their threats that they will retaliate. We'll see. But do you think they will retaliate or do you think Trump could hold them off?
Speaker 0: I think at this point, it could go either way because of the dilemma I argued for earlier on. So no, I don't know. I would be careful to make predictions here because if they retaliate now, then... The Israelis, as I said, they will then strike back. So they would have invaded into this. And if the war increased too much in intensity, then it's not as if the US is some objective neutral third party. It will join in as well. So, yeah, I think they feel like they're very close to something. So they might look the other way. But again, I think they're also very worried that if they do this, if they look the other way, then this will be taken advantage of because, yeah, so you pretty much made a good point out of those statements. They see any show of weakness will be taken advantage of. Iran's peace and security won't come from trusting their opponent or giving in. It will come from showing proper deterrence, that is to respond forcefully every time someone violates their sovereignty or attacks their allies and again i think probably the iranians learned this lesson from the russians as well because whenever they had the talks with the americans you know being in alaska or anything then the assumption was well we might have a partner here someone we can work with to actually establish a proper peace and and then of course you would have nato proxy attack on russia and And they would then have the incentive to, oh, let's look the other way. Let's push this, get this deal done. And of course, if the deal hanging is just a carrot to make them essentially not respond, then they walked into a trap as well. So are the Rionians being baited into retaliating or are they being baited into abandoning their returns? I mean, they're being baited somehow.
Speaker 1: N12 just reported, as you're speaking, Israel conducted strikes on Beirut today with the assumption that Iran would attack in response, according to Israeli security officials. N12 just reported that the attack was conducted knowing Iran would retaliate. They're just so open and blatant about it. And the secretary of the Iran Supreme National Security Council said, the unity of the fields has created a security chain in defense of the region. Lebanon is our life, and violating the Islamic Republic's red lines will not be tolerated. So he's not saying we'll retaliate, but he's definitely making the line clear.
Speaker 0: Well, this is my point. If Iran now says, well, we're not going to get baited into a conflict which will derail the peace, then... I would respect that. That would be a smart thing to do. Yeah, but if they do that, then for Israel, it's open season on Lebanon. Then why not start bombing the north of Beirut tomorrow? No, no. You could do it. You could say that.
Speaker 1: You could say, we will not let the peace be derailed. But once it's signed, if they do it again, we'll retaliate. I think that one would be in the middle. They'll make the red line clear. They've already made it clear they've retaliated before, but they'll avoid retaliating this time.
Speaker 0: Possibly. I mean, I... I kind of hope so, because it would be great to put an end to this conflict. I'm just not sure if it's in the cards. But again, if the Iranians look the other way, do not retaliate. And then this piece doesn't go anywhere. It's not as if it's going to be another episode of we got the Iranians. You have to see what's happening inside Iran. I think in this case, the hawks, which argues there's no trusting the Americans and Israelis, they will just get more wind in their sails. And it's going to be so much more difficult to get a peace in the future. So no, hopefully this isn't theater. The Americans are telling the Israelis to stand down. The Iranians will let this one slide and peace will move forward. I just tend to be more cynical, I guess.
Speaker 1: I don't blame you. Last question. Trump tells Axios he sharply reprimanded Netanyahu over Beirut strikes. Last question would be, if Iran does retaliate, do you think we'll have the same back and forth as we had before Israel retaliates, but in a more limited way? to deescalate and Iran would do the same? Or this time around, if Iran retaliates, they fall into the trap and Israel may retaliate significantly harder?
Speaker 0: That's an interesting question, isn't it?
Speaker 1: I'm asking you to speculate on the speculation that, Glenn, it's not hard.
Speaker 0: I have to look very deep into my crystal ball. No pressure, no pressure. Well, it's hard to say. Again, there's a lot of competing interests and objectives there, so... Well, I think the Israelis, well, essentially they have the same goal as the Europeans. They want to pull the United States deeper into these wars, into their respective wars. But the question is always what the United States wants. Does the U.S. want to put an end to this war or does it just want to slow it down, restore escalation control? It's, yeah, I have a hard time, to be honest. reading it. I initially was quite optimistic about Trump's desire to put an end to the Ukraine war, not start any new wars in the Middle East. I think there's a possibility he could have been roped into this one against Iran. He was sold that it would be a cakewalk, and now he's trying to get out of it. Alternatively, he's making it into a long war to gradually bleed out the Iranians, hoping that They will blink first or their economy will crash first. But if he genuinely wants to shut this one down, then yeah, I assume he will put some pressure on the Israelis. But if that is possible, again, I'm refraining from making too many predictions when it comes to Trump now.
Speaker 1: I don't blame you. Glenn, good to see you again. And hopefully next time we'll be chatting, it'll be about the details of the MOU instead of who will retaliate how. So fingers crossed.
Speaker 0: I look forward to it. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Glenn. All right, guys, I'll be live again in nine minutes with Malcolm Nance. See you guys at nine.
reSee.it AI Summary
I saw Ford CEO Jim Farley argue people shouldn’t work on their own cars for repairs, saying it’s too complicated and you could “get hurt.” He noted Ford earns over $50B a year from service and repair, implying vehicles are designed to require special equipment.
@WallStreetApes - Wall Street Apes
Ford CEO Jim Farley says people should not be able to work on their own cars and make person repairs He says it’s just too complicated and you could “get hurt” Ford makes over $50 billion dollars per year from their service and repair departments. Thats the real reason they design vehicles so complicated you can’t repair them on your own and need special equipment
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 says people repairing their own vehicles is fine in general, but not for warranty work because the cars are “very complicated” and the company does not think it is safe. They argue many repairs cannot be done at home; the speaker says they can work on a 1973 Bronco, but working on a brand new Bronco requires “all sorts of specialty tools,” and not having them could risk people’s lives.
Speaker 0 then cites “what real Americans have to say,” stating that if they cannot work on their own vehicle, they expect a “bumper to bumper warranty” for at least 200,000 miles. They connect this to auto manufacturers designing vehicles so they can’t be worked on, claiming that manufacturers do this “that’s how they make their money.”
The transcript then discusses data for Ford: about $101 billion in revenue comes from “Ford Blue,” described as parts and service; “Ford Pro” is described as another parts-and-service category with about $66.3 billion in revenue. Speaker 0 concludes that overall Ford makes about $50 billion every year from parts and repairs and says they have “found the real reason why they don’t want you repairing a vehicle.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You don't want people repairing their own vehicles?
Speaker 1: No, that's fine. Not for warranty work, though. These are very complicated cars, and we don't think that's safe. For many of the repairs on our vehicles, someone at home like myself could never do it. I have no problem working on a 73 Bronco. To work on a brand new Bronco, I need all sorts of specialty tools. That's something that we would put people's lives at risk.
Speaker 0: Here's what real Americans have to say about this. If I can't work on my own vehicle, I expect a bumper to bumper warranty for at least 200,000 miles. Obviously we all kind of agree with this one, but you need special tools because you design them like that. Exactly. Auto manufacturers design vehicles that you can't work on. That's how they make their money. Now let's look at the data. Now it looks like about $101 billion in revenue comes from Ford blue, which is parts and service. Ford Pro, which is another parts and service thing, they have about $66.3 billion in revenue. So overall, they make about $50 billion every single year from parts and repairs. I think we found the real reason why they don't want you repairing a vehicle.
@ITMTrading - ITM Trading
What’s the big deal behind the SpaceX IPO? Jim Rickards breaks it down into two key points. Full interview: https://youtu.be/_djvFazlSzk?is=kKiZhMaPZA2Wk9MF #spaceX #gold #silver @DanielaCambone @RickardsNetwork https://t.co/t1E46G0Tox
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker says they “buy the fact” that SpaceX is a solid company with a great business plan that will do extremely well, and that they leave the price to the market. They add two quick points about what SpaceX is.
First, when people ask “what is SpaceX?” the speaker notes it’s often described as a rocket company that will take astronauts back to the moon and as having great partnerships with NASA. They argue that it is “so much more than that,” emphasizing that Elon Musk is putting data centers into space and using SpaceX rockets for that purpose. The speaker frames the key advantage as “unlimited free power” from solar power in space, where conditions are “freezing cold,” reducing the need to spend money or energy heating or cooling systems. They assert that, in space, constraints faced by massive data centers on land do not apply in the same way.
Second, the speaker explains that massive data centers on land face constraints including water, energy, chips, cooling systems, and local resistance from citizens. They highlight that power input and the energy source are major issues, and that water for cooling is particularly scarce. They state that these problems are not present to the same extent in space.
They conclude that while SpaceX is a rocket company, it “might be the world’s biggest data center company.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'm buying the fact that SpaceX is a solid company with a great business plan that's going to do extremely well. I feel comfortable saying that. Okay. The price, I just leave it to the market. I mean, knock yourself out. It is what it is. It'll find its level. But I would say two things quickly. Number one is people say, what is SpaceX? Well, it's a rocket company. They're going to take astronauts back to the moon. And they're you know great partners with nasa etc it is so much more than that elon musk is putting data centers into space so um using spacex rockets well what's the big deal about that well you got unlimited free power because it's solar power and it's cold in space it's freezing cold so you don't need to spend any money or energy heating or sorry cooling the systems down because they're You got to keep them warm, actually. So the point being, all of the constraints on massive, massive data centers on land, which are really water, energy, chips, cooling systems, et cetera, and local resistance. The citizens are standing up. Look at the chips one way or the other. But the power input, the energy source is a big deal. And the water for cooling is a big deal. That's much more scarce. You don't have that problem in space. So is SpaceX a rocket company? Yeah, but it might be the world's biggest data center company.
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m saying: Iran’s missiles will be flying at Israel tonight. Netanyahu hitting Beirut ensures it. Trump bragged about an Iran deal over 40 times—yet it still isn’t here. This war was for Israel. What do they have on Trump? Pirate Starmer!
@georgegalloway - George Galloway
GOOD COP BAD COP MONOLOGUE: Iran's missiles will be flying at Israel tonight Netanyahu hitting Beirut ensures it. Trump said more than 40 times there's an Iran deal, and there still isn't. This war was for Israel. What do they have on Trump? Pirate Starmer's last sortie me hearties Follow #MOATS 560 #GeorgeGalloway #Iran #Netanyahu #Trump #Starmer #Beirut
Video Transcript AI Summary
More than 40 times, an agreement between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran has been described as reached and merely pending the Iranian government’s signature, with details allegedly initialed and carved in various parchments and even stone—but there is still no peace agreement. The speaker says Iranian missiles will fly again “tonight.”
They also claim Benjamin Netanyahu is “brazenly” assassinating and murdering people in Beirut while Donald Trump has stated that no further bombing of Beirut is permissible. The speaker presents two conclusions: either Trump cannot control Netanyahu, who is positioned as the prime minister of a country described as existing entirely through American largesse (financial, diplomatic, political, and military), or there is an inference that the relationship’s true nature allows continued actions despite U.S. instructions.
The speaker argues there is no sense in which Trump is ordering Netanyahu to do things he refuses to do, framing an alternative “good cop, bad cop” dynamic. They reference a “Brian Berletek” school of thought and say people in Hong Kong have suggested the Trump-Netanyahu relationship is “organic,” though the speaker notes they currently take the other side of the argument.
The speaker insists there are only two alternatives regarding Trump’s ability or willingness to curb Israel’s behavior, which they say has scuppered any possibility of even a memorandum of understanding (MOU), never mind a deal. They state Trump has filled airwaves and news for days claiming the war is over, but say it is not over and assert Iran will be attacking Israel “tonight.”
The speaker asks what America will do about that, and says powerful forces in the American political system and the global political system will demand Trump come to the aid of the man Trump says he is “mightily pissed off with.” They conclude that Trump has not taken any action resembling kicking Netanyahu out despite apparent dependence.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We have been told more than 40 times that an agreement with the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran has been reached, needs merely the signature of the Iranian government, is initialed, is carved in various parchments and even stone. But there is still no peace agreement. And indeed, if I'm any judge, Iranian missiles will be again flying tonight. as Netanyahu brazenly assassinates, murders people in Beirut when Donald Trump has told him, he says, that no further bombing of Beirut is permissible. Well, there's only two conclusions that you can draw from that. Either Donald Trump can not control Benjamin Netanyahu, for now the prime minister of a country that exists entirely American largesse, financial, diplomatic, political and of course military. If that were the case, what does that make Donald Trump? What does it make the American government? What does it make the American military industrial complex? If the US is instructing them not to do things but they continue to do it, then it there's an obvious inference to be drawn about the true nature of that relationship. There is, of course, the Brian Berletek school of thought and not just him. My dear friends in Hong Kong have been saying for a long time that the relationship between Trump and Netanyahu is an organic one. There is no sense in which Trump is ordering Netanyahu to do things that he's refusing to do. It's a good cop, bad cop routine. And they may very well be right. I happen to fall on the other side of the argument for now, but when facts change, so do my opinions, as Groucho Marx once taught us. But there is no other alternative. There are only two alternatives. Either Trump can't or Trump isn't trying. to curb Israel's behavior, which have, for now, scuppered any possibility of even a memorandum of understanding, the now famous MOU, never mind a deal. Trump has filled the airwaves, filled the news columns for days, telling everyone the war was over, but it is not over. Iran will be attacking Israel tonight. What is America going to do about that? Well, there are powerful forces in the American political system, in the global political system, that will be demanding that Trump comes to the aid of the man he says he's mightily pissed off with. I don't know about you, but if I was being treated like this by someone who was entirely dependent upon me, I would either kick myself or more likely I'd kick them. But kicking there has been none.
reSee.it AI Summary
I break down Trump’s Iran deal with FDD CEO Mark Dubowitz: whether it can lead to peace. We debate what the MOU should include, Israel’s likely compliance, and the implications for Iran, Lebanon, and the region after an Israel strike on Beirut.
@MarioNawfal - Mario Nawfal
INTERVIEW: FDD's CEO Mark Dubowitz breaks down Trump's Iran deal, and whether it will actually lead to peace And while we're speaking, Trump makes a post about Israel's strike on Beirut, and the risk of Iran retaliating In this conversation we discuss and debate what the MOU should include, whether Israel will abide to the terms, and what that means for Iran, Lebanon, and the entire region @mdubowitz
Video Transcript AI Summary
Channel 14 reports that Israel assesses Iran will carry out a missile attack on Israeli territory and respond in Beirut, with that expected to be a focus of the conversation.
The guests discuss how the regional conflicts have affected Iran and its capabilities. Mark argues that the Islamic Republic has never been weaker in its 47-year history, citing severe degradation of nuclear programs, shattering of missile and defense industrial capabilities, decapitated leadership including Ali Khamenei, and a crippled economy, alongside a legitimacy crisis and major protests and repression in Iran. He says Iran has shifted to targeting the Gulf, with attacks described as involving thousands of missiles, rockets, and drones against multiple Gulf states.
In contrast, Mara argues that while Iran is militarily weaker in the short term and Hezbollah is described as weak, she says Iran may be strategically stronger due to control of the Strait of Hormuz, and argues that US and Israeli bombing reportedly could not destroy significant underground and launcher-related facilities. She also highlights regional diplomatic engagement with Iran, including delegations and deals, and argues that the region may be moving toward coexistence and that a military solution is not the right approach.
The discussion then turns to whether a military or diplomatic solution is preferable. Mark argues that without military action, and under the JCPOA trajectory, Iran would likely have produced nuclear weapons and long-range missile capabilities, including permanent leverage over Hormuz. He says the current situation reflects major damage, including claims such as reduced defense industrial base and missile inventory, degradation of nuclear enrichment and centrifuges, and that Hormuz leverage is limited and diminishing as alternatives and pipeline capacity increase. Mara responds by disputing specific confidence in statistics and states that there are disagreements in reported damage levels, while emphasizing that deterrence may also take new forms, including strike capabilities toward the Gulf and attempts to close Hormuz.
A key part of the debate concerns claims about Iran’s defense industrial base destruction. Mark cites sworn testimony to the US Senate by Admiral Bradley Cooper, stating 85% of Iran’s defense industrial base was destroyed, while Mara argues that she cannot verify exact figures and points to broader concerns about prior reporting accuracy.
They then discuss expectations of imminent attacks and the MOU. Mara raises questions about the IAEA view that Iran is more likely to build a nuclear weapon now, and mentions arguments about a 60-day period and potential concessions. Mark replies that will and capabilities must be distinguished, arguing Iran’s will to build nuclear weapons exists while capabilities have been severely degraded and that a missile shield needed to protect nuclear facilities has been degraded.
Israel and Dahye (Beirut) are central in the Lebanon portion. Mark argues that Israel moved into southern Lebanon to push Hezbollah back from the borders and to address attacks into Israel, including Hezbollah’s use of anti-tank missiles affecting Israeli homes. He frames Israeli strikes as linked to Hezbollah actions and says Israel will strike Hezbollah strongholds in Dahye and Beirut. Mara argues that while Hezbollah started firing and dragged Lebanon into war, she worries about Israel’s actions escalating into village leveling and rhetoric about settling annexation of Lebanese territory, and she says the goal should be improving relations so Lebanon can normalize relations with Israel. Mark rejects normalization between Israel and Hezbollah/IRGC, arguing Hezbollah is an arm of the IRGC and dedicated to Israel’s destruction, and portrays the MOU as a mechanism intended to tie Iran and Hezbollah together and to pressure the US to accept Iran’s demands and prevent strikes on Hezbollah.
Mara and Mark also debate whether Hezbollah and Israel can improve relations while Hezbollah remains in Lebanon, including the feasibility of Hezbollah disarming or merging with the Lebanese military. Mark says normalization is not possible given Hezbollah’s IRGC role and intent, while Mara argues for a path that avoids Lebanon being dragged into repeated wars and avoids outcomes like Syria or Libya.
The transcript ends with Mara reading Donald Trump’s post stating that a Beirut attack should not have happened on a special day close to a peace deal with Iran, asserting Israel has the right to defend itself but should not disrupt an important process, calling for stand-down by all sides including Hezbollah, and describing it as a beginning to long peace. Mark responds that Trump wants the MOU and is trying to test Iran against his red lines over a 60-day timeline, suggesting that if Iran does not meet demands concerning nuclear and enriched uranium material, Trump would return to military action and severe economic pressure.
Full Transcript
Speaker 1: it's perfect timing mark literally as we're about to go on channel 14 is reporting that israel now assesses that iran will carry out a missile attack on israeli territory and respond to the attack in beirut so it's uh probably going to be the focus of our conversation but first it's a pleasure to have you back it's been a while so appreciate you coming on so honored to be back on with you mario thank you um before we get into the latest developments and the um the strike on dahir the israeli response The first thing I want to ask you about is the last time we spoke, it was a while ago, it was before, it was I think after the 12-day war, but before this war. And, you know, I was getting your analysis on Iran, whether Iran is a threat, etc. And then this war happened. And here we are. I'd love to get your thoughts on where we are today. How do you think the war went? Do you still think the war was a good idea? From the limited information we have about the MOU, do you think this is a good deal? And do you think it will lead to permanent peace in the region?
Speaker 0: Well, I think for sure that the Islamic Republic has never been weaker in its 47 year history. So in that respect, I think both wars, the June war of last year and the war of this year have gone very badly for the Islamic Republic. I think they've had their nuclear programs severely degraded, their missile and defense industrial base shattered. The leadership has been in many respects decapitated with the most senior commanders and obviously Ali Khamenei himself. wiped out the economy is is crippled and uh it's a regime that's facing severe threat not just from the outside but from the inside i mean obviously the we haven't spoken since the massacre of 40 000 iranians by the regime in january um on the heels of the largest protests that the islamic republic has seen also in its 47-year history so this is the regime suffering a crisis of legitimacy has lost many of its most potent weapons, but it still remains very dangerous. And I think it's, in some respects, it is recognized that it can no longer really take on the United States or Israel militarily. It's terror networks have been severely degraded. So no longer has the kind of potent ring of fire around Israel that had before. So what it's done now is with its limited remaining capabilities, it's targeted the Gulf. And it's seen the Gulf as the soft underbelly of the United States and this alliance that has been arrayed against the Islamic Republic. And obviously we've seen attacks against the UAE where you're based know 2 500 missiles uh rockets drones attacks against saudi arabia kuwait jordan bahrain qatar so they've gone after all of the gcc and it's a serious issue and that's what the president is contending with but uh i think this regime is if you had told me a few years ago that this regime would be as weak as it is today i would have said that you're i don't know what you're smoking you're probably high Because I never would have imagined this kind of devastating damage done to its war-making capabilities, its economy, and its instruments of internal repression. That's not the narrative, by the way. I just gave you something that is challenging the narrative.
Speaker 1: It is, it is. And I'm seeing where to start. I've got a lot of questions as well. Maybe we'll start with a narrative on, because I'm in a different mindset to this. The Islamic Republic has never been weaker. I think in the short term, yes, it's been bombed heavily. Militarily, it's weak, etc. It's weaker. Hezbollah is the weakest it's been in decades. I agree with those. And I think it's not right to disagree. But that's when you look at it... from a military perspective but I think in the long term strategically it's I think it's it's it's never been stronger because of control of the strait of hummus and most importantly it was able to survive the world's most powerful military the U.S military when I started seeing those reports you know after the ceasefire from Israeli media from U.S media that Iran had 80 or 70% of their missile launchers, 90% of their missile underground facilities, reports that even the most powerful bunker busting bombs of the US can't destroy some of these facilities. Israel Channel 12 put out a report that Israel without American support can't destroy Iran's military missile launching capabilities. The list goes on. When I started seeing those metrics, I'm like, wow, I did not expect that to be the outcome. Hezbollah is doing really well with drone warfare. But I think that the reason that I think Hezbollah will become strong again, and I'm not a fan of Hezbollah. I think Lebanon is better off without Hezbollah. I'm also not a fan of Israel being in Lebanese territory. But the reason I think Hezbollah is here to stay and the rest of the network is because of what Iran's been able to achieve, control the Strait of Hormuz, The Gulf understand this. Saudi's improving relations. The UAE, they had a delegation in the UAE, Iranian delegation. They sent a delegation to Iran as well. Qatar did a deal, a backdoor deal with Iran to try to protect its gas field. So I think the region is starting to understand that they have to learn to coexist with Iran. And I think a military solution to the... to the IRGC and to the Iranian Republic, the Islamic Republic, is not the right solution. And I want to get, this probably leads to my next question. Obviously, I'd love you to respond to my points. But after what you saw, do you still think a military solution is the way? Or do you think now where we are today, a diplomatic solution is the best outcome?
Speaker 0: Well, I'm a big believer in using all instruments of American power, diplomatic, economic, covert action, military against our enemies. And I would just say, I think it's worth stepping back, Mario, from where we are in the hurly-burly of the daily news and just look back at where Iran would have been if there hadn't been military action and or if we had followed the trajectory of the JCPOA, the 2015 Obama deal. Because if you step back about the late Ali Khamenei's strategic vision of what he truly wanted to accomplish, Khamenei understood that under the JCPOA's restrictions sunsetted and he got hundreds of billions of dollars in sanctions relief, or in a scenario where there's no JCPOA and there's no military action, that he would end up with nuclear weapons, intercontinental ballistic missiles targeting Europe and the United States. He would end up with a massive ballistic missile arsenal, hundreds of thousands of drones, a Chinese-Russian built military, and an economy that was immunized against any kind of pressure, any kind of economic pressure. And at that point, he would have not a temporary hold over the Strait of Hormuz. He would have a permanent hold over the Strait of Hormuz because no US president, no Israeli prime minister could ever fight the Battle of Hormuz if Khamenei and the regime had those kinds of deadly capabilities. That's where we were on the trajectory without military action or under the JCPOA.
Speaker 1: Where are we today?
Speaker 0: Well, where we are today, and we can quibble over exact statistics, but the fact of the matter is 85%, 90% of their defense industrial base, gone. Their ballistic missile capabilities, which were 2,500 before this recent war, reduced by 50%. The trajectory, which according to the IDF estimates was gonna grow to 11,000, 12,000 ballistic missiles within a couple of years, which would have been devastating for Israel. With that many ballistic missiles, Israeli air defenses could not stop hundreds of Iranian ballistic missiles coming in every day. Now they can quite easily cope with this much smaller and reduced inventory. So the regime has its nuclear enrichment facilities. For the first time in 20 years, the regime is not enriching uranium. the fissile material needs for nuclear weapons. It's at 25,000 of its centrifuges, including its advanced centrifuges, destroyed or disabled. Its nuclear sites have been severely degraded. It is a regime that has its intercontinental ballistic missile program destroyed. And it is at a point now where it has leverage over Hormuz, but it can't permanently control Hormuz. And today, Hormuz is a shrinking asset. for the regime because what's happening is the gulf arabs have recognized they cannot allow the regime to have nuclear blackmail over hormuz or military blackmail over her moves they need to start finding alternatives for moves and what's not known mario is that at least depending on how you calculate the numbers but at least 12 13 million barrels of oil are already transiting through Hormuz and through the pipelines, the East-West pipeline and the Fujairah pipeline that the Saudis and Emiratis have. That asset, that Hormuz asset in the hands of the Islamic Republic is only going to get weaker and less relevant as more pipelines are built, as America replaces Saudi Arabia and Russia as the dominant energy power in the world already. You've seen those statistics in terms of oil and natural gas, and people will become less dependent on Hormuz and therefore the Islamic Republic will have less leverage over Hormuz. So they played the Hormuz card too early. They played it at their weakest point rather than waiting to build up that kind of deadly capability where they would have had permanent leverage to be able to blackmail the world had they just waited. Now they had no choice because they were so weak and they had lost so much of their capabilities They had to play the Hormuz card, but now that they've played it, it is now a diminishing asset in their hands.
Speaker 1: I'll respond to the point, and then I do want to get your thoughts on what's happening in Dahia and Israel's role in all this. So on the points, I'll give you my thoughts. In terms of Iran building a nuclear weapon, so the IAEA put out a public statement a couple of weeks ago saying they believe – that Iran is more likely now than it was before to build a nuclear weapon. Now, the counterargument will be a deal that's going to be done in 60 days will remove their ability to build one. And I think they'd be willing to concede on their enriched uranium and their nuclear program for the right concessions on the American side, sanctions and the unfreezing of assets. But time will tell. But in terms of willingness to build a nuclear weapon, according to the IAEA, and I saw other reports as well, I think CNN said, according to US officials,
Speaker 0: They believe Iran is more likely... Yeah, but Mario, let me just interject there, because I don't want this to... You need will and capabilities in order to do anything in life, okay? They may have greater will now as a result of the beating that they just took from the United States and Israel, but their capabilities have been severely degraded and in many cases destroyed. So this regime has always had the will to build nuclear weapons. Ali Khamenei had a vision of taking patient pathways to nuclear weapons, but Khamenei understood... The first thing you want to do is build a massive missile shield so that the United States and Israel couldn't destroy his nuclear facilities militarily in the way that they've done over two wars. The problem that that Mustafa Khamenei, his successor, has is that he no longer has that missile shield. So he may have the will and desire to build nuclear weapons. That desire may be even more acute than his father's and certainly has less patience than his father's, given the beating that he's taken. But the capabilities have been severely degraded. So that's a very important distinction.
Speaker 1: Yeah, on the capabilities, I agree. Not from a missile shield is not there. I think the missile shield is more powerful than it was. Not numerically.
Speaker 0: How do you say that?
Speaker 1: I'll tell you what I mean. I'll tell you. Because numerically, of course, it's slower. They fired a whole bunch of missiles. Others were struck. They can rebuild those relatively quickly, especially if China supports them.
Speaker 0: But their missile defense base has been destroyed. Like you can't build missiles unless you have production facilities.
Speaker 1: You can't build missiles. True, true.
Speaker 0: Well, I mean, this is a very important point. Like people just look at the number of missiles and launchers. But what's very important to understand is you have to have an entire defense industrial base capable of actually building new missiles. They were building 100 missiles a month. It's now down to zero. So they've got to rebuild their entire missile production capabilities and facilities in order to start building up their arsenal. Can they do that? Sure. Are they going to try? Absolutely. Are there ways that we can further degrade it and restrict it?
Speaker 1: absolutely and we can talk about what what some of those ways are so on the so you've mentioned one stat as if it's fact i don't know if it's accurate because there's different reports on how much of their production capacity was degraded some reports show has been completely obliterated others show that a lot of it is underground they can still manufacture a lot of missiles no no but you're no no but you're missing you miss this statistic comes i'm talking about their production capacity yeah admiral bradley cooper who is the head of the of san com in congressional testimony
Speaker 0: said that 85% of that defense industrial base has been destroyed. So, I mean, you can challenge Admiral Cooper. You can have him on your show. Maybe he was lying to Congress. I don't know. He's a pretty honorable military commander.
Speaker 1: No, maybe he's a different... I'm not saying he's lying.
Speaker 0: That's not my statistic. That's his statistic.
Speaker 1: I understand. But we can agree that CENTCOM has gotten a lot of things wrong throughout this entire war.
Speaker 0: Well, what did they go wrong?
Speaker 1: terms of their reporting to congress what have they got wrong well not just the reporting to congress i i do know that there's a lot of reports on the damage to the us bases um that was not reported when we've got the satellite images the damage was a lot more significant the initial reports we were getting about the uh missile launches that were destroyed later we got reports it's a lot lower than it was initially reported now where that came from etc I don't know. I haven't found each one of them.
Speaker 0: It matters where it comes from. I'm citing... It does, it does. I'm saying... Yeah, yeah. I know, I know. ...to the US Senate, okay? I mean, you can... I understand. You can cite news reports. You can cite, you know...
Speaker 1: Iranian propaganda.
Speaker 0: I'm citing sworn testimony before the U.S. Senate, Mario. So he says 85% of the defense industrial base has been destroyed. Now, maybe it's not 85. Maybe it's 75. Maybe it's 65. Maybe it's 95. Maybe it's 100%. I don't know. The fact of the matter is, I think we can safely assume that a majority of Iran's defense industrial base has been destroyed. That means it's much more difficult for the Iranians to rebuild their missile program. They were on a trajectory to build 12,000 ballistic missiles within two and a half years. That is now down to about 1,500 to 1,700. Okay. Are 1,700 ballistic missiles still dangerous? Absolutely. Iran is expected to launch ballistic missile attacks on Israel tonight. I'm sure those are going to be dangerous. They're the size of a locomotive coming in with a one-ton warhead, that's very dangerous, but it's very different when three or four are coming in versus three or 400. And I think that the devastation to that capability is a tactical success, but it's also a strategic success because if you think about Khamenei's vision, he wanted to build that massive missile shield to protect his nuclear program from destruction. That missile shield has been severely degraded. His nuclear program has been severely degraded. And now President Trump is going to try, I think he's going to fail, but he's going to try and get a comprehensive agreement to get the rest of Iran's nuclear material out of the country and to permanently shut down what remains of that nuclear infrastructure. Again, I'm deeply skeptical the Iranians will agree to that, but even if they don't, it is undeniable that devastating damage has been done to their war making and nuclear capabilities.
Speaker 1: So the point I was making in terms of the missile infrastructure um, shield is the center come commander. I'm not sure he did it. I'm not saying he did not testify in front of a Congress that they've destroyed 80, 90% of it, but that does not make it true. I'm not saying it's not true. I don't know, but you know, before the Iraq war, there were multiple testimonies. And that's one example of Iraq having justification for the war.
Speaker 0: What are you citing?
Speaker 1: But I'm not saying I'm trying to make my point. I'm trying to make my point. All I'm saying is I don't know if it's true or not. If it's true, then 100% that missile shield is a lot weaker. If it's not true, then that changes the calculus. I wanted to add one thing to it. I don't know what is true in terms of their missile capability. So I'm not claiming it's not true. I don't know. But in terms of their missile shield, they've built a new deterrent, striking the Gulf. That's something they did. And that's something that's always existed, but has now been, you know, The effectiveness has been demonstrated, and that is deterrent number one. And deterrent number two is closing the Strait of Hormuz. I remember speaking to a lot of military experts that were a bit surprised that the U.S. could not open the Strait of Hormuz, and Trump was asking for NATO's help. I'm not saying they could not. Admiral Montgomery was on the show, and he explained to me a while ago that it is possible. It just depends on how many casualties the Americans were willing to take. But then you have to add drone warfare, and also Admiral Montgomery was – really upset at how unprepared the US was for drone warfare. So if you add those to the mix, I think there is military degradation, 100%, I don't know the extent of it, but at the same time, new forms of deterrence that were created by Iran that I think will make it less likely the US will militarily strike Iran in the future. So this is why I'm not as convinced that Iran's deterrent against military action, if that action is aimed at their nuclear program, is weaker. Time will tell, but there's new factors added to the equation in the last few weeks. Do you get what I'm trying to say with the deterrent aspect of it?
Speaker 0: I think you're right. I think that the ability to strike, as I said, the Gulf, which is the sort of soft underbelly now of of US deterrence and the ability to strike Iran 100%. Those, by the way, those are short range missiles. Those are short range drones. They can cause really devastating damage to the Gulf. I think we've always known that that Iran had those capabilities and was building those capabilities. We always knew Iran would try to create this close down the Strait of Hormuz. How did we know that? Because they tried to do that in the mid 1980s. So there was no doubt they were going to do it again.
Speaker 1: i think people question their a bit sorry to interrupt people question their ability to do so especially with so people were speculating in the beginning that if the us strikes all their missile launchers and their drone manufacturing capabilities iranian capabilities to be able to cause damage in the gulf and keep the straight home was closed would be degraded significantly in the first few days or weeks that they won't be able to continue doing this however we saw throughout the entire war They were able to sustain that.
Speaker 0: Yeah, I don't think I mean, I'm going to be honest with you. Having spoken to these folks, I don't think any military professionals, including a Sancom, believe that they were going to eliminate Iran's capabilities entirely. They understood is that you needed to get rid of the most deadly capabilities, right? The nuclear program, the ballistic missile program, the defense industrial base that sustains and and would be useful in rebuilding that. But they would still have thousands of short-range missiles, thousands of drones that they would have to contend with. But I think you're underscoring something very important, which is why did the President of the United States not fight the Battle of Hormuz? Why did he abort Project Freedom after only a couple of days? Why are we negotiating with the Iranians and allowing them to exchange nuclear extortion for Hormuz extortion? They no longer have the kind of nuclear extortion they have had for many, many years. because so much of their nuclear program has been severely degraded. But why are we giving them Hormuz extortion? Why are we allowing them to continue to have the ability to shut down Hormuz? And why is the President of the United States not prepared to allow Admiral Cooper to fight the Battle of Hormuz? I have some answers, maybe some speculation around that, but I think it does take us into the question of the MOU. I think the President decided that he wanted to try diplomacy and see if the Iranians would agree to his demands. And that's why we're, I think, poised, maybe, because we're always poised, it's always imminent, then it never happens, but maybe we're gonna get the first phase of the MOU, and then there'll be a 60-day clock to negotiate these other terms. I think the president wants to try that first. I think he wants to get Hormuz open, more barrels of oil flowing, strategic petroleum reserves restocked, oil prices down, gasoline prices down, see if he can get the enriched material out of Iran and then negotiate the dismantlement of Iran's nuclear program. Again, I'm deeply skeptical the Iranians are gonna give up on their nuclear infrastructure of what remains, their missile infrastructure, what remains, their support for terrorism or their leverage over Hormuz without returning back to major military operations and without a serious US plan to support millions of Iranians to take down this regime. Because the only answer to this problem is the one that you know too, Mario, which is the only answer to this problem is there has to be a different regime. And in my view, the missing element of US Iran policy is serious support for the millions of Iranians who have been on the streets for decades. I'm against that. I'm heavily against that. You may be against that, but I'm going to express my opinion. I think that's a pillar of US Iran policy, that Iranians have been on the streets since the late 1990s repeatedly, year after year, 1999, 2009, 2017, 18, 19, 2022, 2023, 2025, 2026. They keep coming back to the streets, hundreds of thousands of them yelling death to the dictator, trying to take down a regime that has brutally repressed them for decades and has made them live a miserable life. And we, the United States, shame on us, have done nothing to support them. So I think President Trump will arrive at the point where he will realize he can't negotiate his way out of this. He can't just bomb his way out of this. He needs to provide material support to Iranians so that those Iranians can inflict serious damage against the regime and ultimately, if history smiles on them, bring down this regime and have a better life.
Speaker 1: Yeah, look, the reason I'm against it, you know, the argument, I think it's not no point making it is that regime change operations have gone so badly, I worry that Iran could end up a lot worse than it is. I'm not saying it's great. Now. I'm not a fan of the Islamic Republic, and the way they run their country. But also, I mean, the belief is like, I don't like the concept of interfering in other countries trying to, you know, especially when it comes to arming the um protesters or people within there or factions like the kurds to fight the the government because our warrior ends up like syria libya this is the concern that i always have and historically it just hasn't worked regime change operations haven't worked i think that's i think first of all it has worked and i'm not talking about a regime change operation with hundreds of thousands of u.s troops invading iran like happened in iraq and afghanistan i'm talking about the reagan strategy where president reagan ran against the soviet union
Speaker 0: which brought down the Soviet Union. He provided maximum support for anti-Soviet dissidents behind the Iron Curtain. He put maximum pressure on the regime economically. He undermined the regime's military power by having proxies fight the Soviet Red Army around the world while he engaged in negotiations and diplomacy on arms control with the Soviet Union. The combined impact of that policy brought down the Berlin Wall in 89 and led to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and freed hundreds of millions of people behind the Iron Curtain, who today remain free in very prosperous, stable and democratic countries in Eastern Europe. So there's a glaring example of it having worked. And I think for people who say it never works, it shouldn't work, it wouldn't work, it'll be worse than it is today. I mean, I know you appreciate this, but many people don't. What it must be like today to be Iranian, and live inside the Islamic Republic and live under severe economic deprivation, under severe repression, to have your loved ones slaughtered and raped and tortured and imprisoned by this brutal regime. It's very easy for us to say, well, we're worried about what might come next. You know what Iranians are saying? The vast majority of them, 85%, according to polling that's been done, is they oppose the regime. They want the regime gone, and they've been taken to the streets and risking their lives to bring down the regime. The rest of them, by the way, are living with you in the UAE because they fled the Islamic Republic for a better life because they want a better life like many people do for their family and friends.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I spoke to these activists. 85% also, these 85%, they don't like their government, but they also don't say the Americans should arm different groups to fight their governments or should militarily interfere. So I think there's a line being drawn there. I don't want to seem like by me saying, I don't think we should militarily arm groups and risk Iran turning out like Libya or Syria. It doesn't mean I want to sit there defending what the government has done or the way they run their country because I've been opposing it for a very long time. My argument is that-
Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, there are many ways. There are many ways to support Iran. There is. There is.
Speaker 1: Exactly. Exactly. That's why I'm a bit more nuanced. So depending how, as long as you don't cross the line, my worry is the outcome. I just don't want Iran to end up like Libya or Syria. These are very hot for Iraq. Very heartbreaking stories. And I think we discussed this last time. We agree on the fact that we don't want Iran. We both would love to see a free and prosperous Iran. I think we agree with that nuclear weapons. So we agree on the outcome. It's just the path to get there. I see diplomacy as the best solution, kind of a different approach, but we both don't want Iran to end up like Libya or Iraq or Syria. Yeah, we also don't want Iran to end up
Speaker 0: the way Iran is today. We don't want the Islamic Republic to survive. We don't want the Islamic Republic to rebuild the missile program, the nuclear program, the defense industrial base. We don't want this Islamic Republic continuing to brutalize its people because Mario, it's very easy in our podcasts, in our intellectual circles, in our think tanks to think about scenarios and to think about this as an intellectual exercise. But there are 92 million people that live inside the Islamic Republic. And 85% of those 92 million people despise this regime and they want the end of this regime. And we also don't need to necessarily arm them. I mean, that's, that's perhaps you disagree with that. That's fine. We can have a reasonable debate on that. There are many, many ways we can help these people. And this is what Reagan did. I mean, Reagan provide money for, for labor strike funds, for communication devices. I mean, right now they shut down the internet in Iran. Iranians can't communicate with each other.
Speaker 1: If you can't communicate back now, isn't it? It's back a couple of weeks ago.
Speaker 0: It's back now, but it was shut down for four months. And if Iranians can't communicate with each other, they can't mobilize. If they can't mobilize, they can't protest. So there are many ways, including through Starlink and other platforms, that we can help Iranians communicate with each other when the internet goes down. Why are we not even doing that? Why are we not helping Iranians with a very simple technology solution that allows them to communicate and to access free information when the internet goes down? blackout occurs. So there are many ways to help Iranians without necessarily ending up in a Libya-Iraq situation. I think it's a straw man. I think too often it's used to excuse inaction. And that's fine if you're sitting in Dubai or Washington. But when you're sitting inside Iran, living a miserable life, being brutally repressed by a regime, I think you'd like the West to help you in some way.
Speaker 1: Now, I've spoken to people against the government, the Iranian government as well. And I'm not saying all of them don't want American interference. There's a lady, she lives outside of Iran. And she was hoping and making the argument that Trump should continue the war no matter what until the regime falls. So there is people with that belief, and there's others that don't like the government, but they don't want US interference. A professor within Iran who's been arrested by the current government, probably maybe arrested again after my interview with him, who was making the argument he doesn't like the government, but he does not think other countries should interfere. Now, you make the argument there's different ways of supporting the people trying to bring down the the Islamic Republic without arming the people true um but I'm not strong many the argument Trump did say he armed the Kurds and he was disappointed that they did not rise up there's multiple reports the Kurds were part of the initial plan to fight the Iranian government so the plan the idea at least was a good idea bad idea I'm just saying it's a bad idea to arm different military factions to fight the existing government um I want to ask you about Israel though because we do have um Actually, have you, on the MOU itself, what do you know about it? I'll tell you what I know, and you can correct me from what you know. And obviously, we're speculating, we don't have all the information. But there's some things that have come out of Iran recently, where there's one, you might know who he is, I've got his name. He's the Iran's Deputy Chairman of the Parliament's National Security Commission, Nabavian. And he was going through clause by clause. He's actually not happy. He's more on the hard line side, not happy with the agreement, thinks Iran should have asked for more because there's people within Iran that are not satisfied with the existing agreement. He did say that the war should end on all fronts. Let's start with this one, which includes Lebanon. Now, Israel, Hezbollah is willing to accept a ceasefire as long as Israel pulls out of Lebanese territory. I'd be surprised if the MOU includes Israel pulling out, but Arachi said it does include. Now, Bavian said it doesn't include Israel pulling out. It's just a ceasefire. And later they discuss Israel pulling out of Lebanese territory. What do you think is included in the MOU when it comes to Lebanon? And how do you think that will go? Do you think Trump has enough influence over Netanyahu? Netanyahu did bomb Beirut again today, and Iran has threatened retaliation about an hour ago.
Speaker 0: Listen, I think president Trump understands that he understands the facts and he understands the sequencing that many people forget. And that is that is that his Bala launched an attack against Israel on October 8th, 2023, and has not stopped firing rockets, missiles, and drones at Israeli civilians and soldiers. Since then it cleared hundreds of thousands of people had to leave their homes in Northern Israel. As a result of those attacks, they finally got them back into their homes and those attacks have not stopped. those attacks have occurred daily weekly uh killing and injuring israelis and so the idf moved into southern lebanon to try and push his bala back from the borders for two reasons one is his bala was planning another october 7th type invasion and there was no way the israelis were going to allow his bala like hamas to invade their cities and towns and slaughter their people and second is a hezbollah was using anti-tank missiles that don't they're they're fired straight into homes and they were killing and maiming israelis and they pushed they wanted to push them back so the the range of those anti-tank missiles could no longer as easily reach israeli homes um and kill civilians and so they came into seven lebanon to do that so i think the the president understands that the israelis have a right to defend themselves against iranian-backed hezbollah attacks against Israel. And I think the president will continue to defend Israel's right to do that. I mean, again, just as this MOU was about to be signed, right, Hezbollah fires again on northern Israel. And as a result, there is a very simple equation. If you try to fire on northern Israel or fire on Israel proper, Israel will strike Hezbollah's stronghold in Dachia. in Beirut and that's exactly what they had they went after they went after a command structure of his bala terrorists in dafya in Beirut if his father doesn't do that the Israelis will not strike if if they if they strike Israeli soldiers then the fighting will take place between his bala and soldiers in in southern Lebanon but there's a very simple equation the president understands that and he will back Israel's right to defend itself from Iran and Hezbollah. Iran is using this clearly as they've been using the Lebanese people and using Lebanon through Hezbollah for many, many decades to try and wage a war against Israel and to try to undermine the United States and undermine this emerging MOU and diplomatic track.
Speaker 1: To be honest, I think you make a fair argument. I'll tell you where my issue is. So I'll tell you what I agree with. Yes, I've always made the point. Hezbollah started firing on October 8th or 9th. They started firing at Israel. They're the ones that dragged Israel into this war at the expense of Lebanon. They then fired at Israel after Ali Khamenei was dead. And apparently there was a split within Hezbollah and the Radwan forces with IRGC commanders on top of their head decided to fire a bunch of rockets to drag Israel into Lebanon. So I feel, and I've always said this, I think Hezbollah is in a position where They have to support their allies, Iran, that funds them, etc. And they have to support their country, Lebanon. I think they do both. But that's not sustainable. A military group that's more powerful than the army should not have allegiance to anything other than the country itself. That's why I think that one of the best things that can happen to Lebanon is Hezbollah disarming. I think the strike on Dahye right now is this precision strike. I saw the videos. And I understand what Israel is trying to do. Israel is trying to tell Hezbollah, hey, we'll fight you in Lebanon. Just don't strike northern Israel. We don't strike Beirut. Now, what Hezbollah is trying to do is saying, hey, we will stop striking you if you stop striking us and pull out of our territory, which is a very fair position as well.
Speaker 0: Well, it's not a fair position because when Israel was not in the territory, which it wasn't in for many, many years, I mean, Israel pulled out of the territory in the year 2000. Hezbollah continued to build up a terror army, kidnapping Israeli soldiers, striking at Israeli towns. And then fast forward all the way 23 years later, as we said, right after October 7th, Hezbollah begins again firing rockets and missiles and drones into Israel. Israel responds. Israel goes into southern Lebanon and you have to stop those attacks. So one has to understand the history and the sequencing. And I would also challenge you on the notion that Hezbollah has any interest in the Lebanese people, in the country of Lebanon. in the prosperity and the welfare and the peace and stability of Lebanon. It is an arm of the Iranian regime. It acts on the orders of the Revolutionary Guards and the Quds Force. It has dragged Lebanon into repeated wars. It is responsible for massive bloodshed and poverty. And the best thing that could happen, and this is where I agree with you, is that Hezbollah follows a UN Security Council resolution that has been in place since the end of the 2006 war. and it disarms and that the Lebanese state has a monopoly on force. By the way, the Lebanese government is engaged in peace negotiations with the Israeli government. I mean, officials have met each other to discuss peace. And the only thing that stands in the way of peace between Lebanon and Israel is Hezbollah. If Hezbollah laid down its weapons today, there would be peace between Lebanon and Israel. If Israel laid down its weapons, Hezbollah would slaughter hundreds of thousands of Israelis. That is a very simple moral equation that mustn't be forgotten.
Speaker 1: I've been making that argument for years, actually. When I stopped making the argument as binary as you just did is when Israel started leveling villages in Lebanon. Because Israel dealt with Lebanon very different to how it dealt with Gaza and the West Bank. Let's talk about Gaza. And I don't want to get into the discussion on Gaza because for me, that one, I'm a lot more binary on it. But over the years, first there was peace between Hezbollah and Lebanon. Sorry, Hezbollah and Israel since 2006. There was no peace.
Speaker 0: There was no war.
Speaker 1: The last major war was in 2006. The last major war was in 2006.
Speaker 0: I'll make my point. And they were kidnapping Israeli soldiers. There was no peace. The last kidnap was in 2006. There was a state of hostilities between... Hezbollah, a terrorist army.
Speaker 1: There were no hostilities since the 2006 war.
Speaker 0: Do you want to go back and we'll track the number of rockets and drones and missiles that were fired into Israeli towns?
Speaker 1: I'll have people check. From what I understand, it was back in 2006. I'm not dismissing your points. I'm not dismissing your points. I'm saying Hezbollah dragged Israel into a war into Lebanon, okay? Israel has the right to attack Hezbollah. Israel has the right to defend itself. I know that term is overused, but it applies with Hezbollah. i don't blame israel for engaging in the war in lebanon so all these we agree when the red line was crossed for me was a few months ago this year when israel started leveling villages in southern lebanon completely leveling villages we're not talking about hezbollah infrastructure we're talking a hundred percent of villages that were leveled and then started to uh ministers within israel beyond veer and smotrich even them of course talking about settling Lebanese territory, which was usually never discussed. I know the majority of Israelis don't believe that, but there's a louder minority that are talking about it. It's BS. I hope it is. I hope it is. It's BS. I don't know it. I used to know. Now I'm a lot more skeptical. Now I'm more concerned. I used to know. I'm telling you, just a few months ago, we would have agreed on everything you said. Now I'm more concerned seeing the rhetoric in Israel and seeing what they're doing there. I still think and hope this is not the case because when it comes to Hezbollah, from a security perspective, Israel has a very good argument on why they want to keep striking Hezbollah. It is a threat to their north. So this is my concern, the annexation of territory. You talked about Hezbollah not having an interest in the Lebanese people. My position is they have an interest in both the Lebanese people and the Iranians, and I don't like that. I think it should only be the Lebanese people. The Lebanese government is engaged with negotiations with Israel. I support... these negotiations. But I look at the reality right now, this is my worry, it kind of leads to my next question. Before the beginning of the war, when the war first started, I'm like, wow, this is a once I even made tweets, I'm like, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity for Lebanon to probably benefit the most from this war. And that is by normalizing relations with Israel, which I think is way overdue. And number two is getting rid of Hezbollah. And Israel, the way I thought would look like is Israel respecting Lebanese territory as it did with Jordan and Egypt, which could still happen. I'm not saying Israel has formal plans to annex Lebanese territory. I hope it doesn't. But I look at the reality right now and how this MOU is heading. If we do have relations between if Trump moves ahead and there's a deal afterwards, which does not address and I don't expect it to address the axis of resistance, the proxy network that Iran has, then unfortunately, my worry is Hezbollah will remain a part of Lebanon and will become a reality that Israel has to deal with. Now, my question to you is the following. Do you think there's a path for Hezbollah and Israel to improve relations, which includes Lebanon normalizing relations with Israel? It goes both ways. Israel has to probably recognize Hezbollah's existing in Lebanon, and also Hezbollah and Iran have to recognize Israel. It goes both ways. And number two, a better path forward
Speaker 0: hezbollah merging with the lebanese military do you think that would be a viable option look i mean i don't need to tell you the history of this because you know very very well but hezbollah is an arm of the islamic revolutionary guard corps and it's kud's force and so if you ask me the question do i see any possibility of israel in the irgc normalizing relations and reaching a peace deal i would say the answer is emphatically no and as a result since hezbollah is an arm of the irgc there's no way the Islamic Revolutionary Guard will ever allow Hezbollah, even if Hezbollah wanted to, which it most clearly does not, reach any kind of normalization or accommodation with Israel. Hezbollah is dedicated to the destruction of Israel, just like the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. And so there's no way the Israelis are going to allow the IRGC and Hezbollah to destroy their country, kill their civilians, launch on October 7th, raid over the border kidnap hundreds of people rape and torture their women it's just not going to happen and so if anybody's under any illusions that it will unfortunately what the islamic republic is trying to do is it's trying to do an mou so that it ties together iran and and hezbollah so that iran can defend and protect and help rebuild his mala that is what is going on right it's trying to blackmail the u.s president into essentially reaching a deal where he will accede to Iran's demands to stop Israel from hitting Hezbollah when Hezbollah attacks Israeli cities and towns. That's what they're trying to do. I hope the president will not fall into that trap because if he does, what he's essentially doing is ceding to your very worry, which is this will all result in the rebuilding, strengthening, and reconstituting of Hezbollah as a terror army, and there'll be no chance for Israeli Lebanese peace. There'll be no chance for Lebanese prosperity and peace. And Lebanon will unfortunately continue to be dragged into what it has been for decades since Arafat and the PLO dragged them into a war with Israel, which is an ongoing bloodshed that has destroyed what is a beautiful and potentially prosperous and incredible country. That is what's going to happen. if President Trump cedes to Hezbollah IRGC blackmail in this MOU. I don't think he will, but I certainly worry that he might.
Speaker 1: I've got a post by Trump just now. So this is diplomacy in 2026. We wait for the truth social posts. I'd love to get your reaction for it. I haven't read it yet, so I'll read it now live. This morning's attack on Beirut should not have happened, particularly on a special day when we are so close to a peace deal with Iran. Israel has the right to defend itself against threats, but the attack it was responding to was very small and meaningless. Nobody was hurt, injured or killed and should not disrupt this important process. We are very close to a deal that will bring peace to the region, including Lebanon, and all sides should stand down. There should be no more attacks by Israel anywhere in Lebanon, but there should also be no more attacks by any other party, including Hezbollah against Israel. This should be the beginning of a long and beautiful peace. Let's not blow it. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I like the statement. I don't know if you agree with me. I think he's trying to achieve an MOU. He's trying to get to the next phase of the negotiations. And he's also trying to, I don't think he'll succeed, but trying to bring peace to Lebanon. As you've explained well, and I agree with you, as long as Hezbollah is there, I don't expect there to be peace between Hezbollah and Israel. They're just going to delay the inevitable in five to 10 years' time, unless there's a massive shift, which looks extremely unlikely, between Israeli-Iranian relations. But just to get your quick reaction, or maybe end it here as well, your reaction on Donald Trump's post. What do you think, Mark?
Speaker 0: Yeah, I mean, it's to be expected. Obviously, Trump wants his MOU. Obviously, he was aware that the Israelis were going to strike in Dhaka. This was not a shock to him. It's a very mild wagging of the finger at the Israelis. I mean, he's done this many, many times. The Israelis are closely coordinating with the Americans. And so... This is an attempt of Trump to sort of put a little bit of distance between him and the Israelis temporarily in order to ensure that the MOU crosses the finish line. I think President Trump wants to test diplomacy. He wants to test if the Islamic Republic of Iran is prepared to meet his red lines. I think he thinks he's going to give up very little in the way of sanctions relief in order to do that. And as I said, I think President Trump fully understands that if he gives in to IRGC Hezbollah blackmail, the blackmail will only accelerate and intensify. If he gives in to IRGC Hormuz blackmail, the IRGC will only keep shutting down Hormuz and using Hormuz to blackmail America and blackmail the Gulf. And if he gives in to nuclear blackmail, the Iranians will continue to use nuclear extortion in order to try and deter America and in order to try to undermine American golf and Israeli security. So the president understands the blackmail game that the regime is playing directly and through his ball of proxy. And he's not going to see to that, but he will try diplomacy. He'll give it 60 days. I think he'll give it less than 60 days. I think if the Iranians don't give him the quote nuclear dust or all the enriched uranium that is currently entombed under three destroyed nuclear sites, I think he's gonna pull the plug on diplomacy and go right back to military action and severe economic pressure. But I think he wants to try and we'll see, we'll see how things play out over the coming days, days, weeks, and months. But I don't think president Trump is going to fall into the trap that other American presidents have fallen into, which is to engage in endless rounds of negotiations with a regime that is well-practiced and very sophisticated in the art of extortion. And he won't allow his Bala to be the instrument of extortion. Hormuz to be the instrument of extortion, Iran's nuclear and missile programs to be the instruments of extortion. But we'll see. Maybe I'll turn out to be hopelessly wrong. And if so, then we'll revisit this in the coming weeks and months. And then maybe at that point, I would unfortunately have to concede that Iran has come out of this much stronger than they were before. But where things are standing today, this is a desperate regime using its last desperate instruments of power. to try and survive, not only against the United States and Israel, but against its own people. It's also a desperate regime that played its Hormuz card too early at its weakest point. If Ali Khamenei were still alive, Khamenei would have followed his patient pathways to a deadly Iran end state, and we would have been in a much, much worse position than we are today. The president has got more leverage than any American president has ever had against Islamic Republic. let's hope he doesn't squander it for a fatally flawed agreement.
Speaker 1: Mark, pleasure to have you back on the show. I really appreciate the debate. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you for the opportunity and your patience during the debate, Mara. It's always a pleasure.
Speaker 1: No, I really enjoyed it. Really enjoyed it.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mark. Thanks so much.
Speaker 1: All right, guys, I'll be going live again in five minutes with Alan Ayer, a former JCPOA negotiator, to continue the conversation and get his thoughts on the MOU negotiations. Which he's always upset whenever, as someone who's spent years, two years negotiating the JCPOA, he gets really triggered whenever I bring up the MOU. So we'll see what Alan says in five minutes. I don't know if I have enough time to shave. Probably not. I'll do it later. And then we have Sal, who's a regular on the show. Sal Mercogliano. We have Glenn Deason, Malcolm Nance, Alex Cristoforo, and then Larry Johnson. And I might add more guests on my calendar. So incredible lineup. as we see what happens after the Israeli strike on Beirut, number one. Number two, whether Iran will sign the MOU. I'll see you guys in five minutes.
@Glenn_Diesen - Glenn Diesen
Seyed M. Marandi: Israel's Attack on Beirut Will Delay or Derail the US-Iran Deal https://youtu.be/dD-FxfqKIwA https://t.co/A3fRSoKe5n
Video Transcript AI Summary
Saeed Mohammed Marandi, a professor at Tehran University and former advisor to Iran's nuclear negotiation team, discusses the status and prospects of a potential Iran–United States memorandum of understanding (MOU) and broader regional implications.
Marandi says optimism is warranted but argues the Israeli regime’s attack on Beirut will change calculations. He asserts the attack aimed “to prevent a deal from happening” and to ensure that Iran and the United States do not agree on an MOU. He characterizes Iranian reasoning as: if the United States is not serious, or cannot control events, or is “playing good cop, bad cop,” then Iran has no reason to negotiate. He claims there was “close to an agreement” previously, but that a final text had not been achieved, despite statements by Trump and mediators that it was finalized.
He describes a sequence of events: negotiations were close to a deal two or three weeks earlier, then Americans attempted to impose new conditions that stopped talks. He says Israelis attacked Beirut after that, Iran retaliated, and the United States began attacking Iran. He states that on Wednesday a Qatari delegation was sent to Iran to indicate the United States withdrew those conditions, leading negotiations to return to normal. Marandi then says a United States attack that Wednesday night is believed to have been intended to “hide the fact” that the conditions were withdrawn, so that any later agreement would appear to come from strength.
Marandi outlines terms he says are already “what you already know” from weeks of discussion: lifting/waiving sanctions on Iran’s energy exports; releasing Iranian assets through a particular mechanism; ending the Gaza conflict and forcing the Israeli regime to retreat; ending a siege; Iran promising not to develop nuclear weapons; and normalizing civilian trade through the Strait of Hormuz. He adds that Iran says it will continue to control the Strait, receive fees from shipping, and not allow ships belonging to Iran’s enemies to pass.
He emphasizes an internal Iranian debate on implementation assurances. Critics argue the United States cheated Iran under Obama in the JCPOA by failing to honor obligations after Iran implemented its side, creating concern that the same one-sided outcome could recur. He notes questions being raised: whether the United States will actually release Iranian assets; whether the Israeli regime will stop killing in Lebanon or continue occupying Lebanon; and whether assurances are adequate.
Marandi says the attack on Beirut has pushed that intense debate aside for now because Iranians are focusing on Lebanon. He argues Israeli actions increase unity within Iran by reinforcing sensitivity to Lebanon-related red lines. He also argues Netanyahu’s actions undermine Trump politically, making it appear the U.S. is subordinate to Israelis and angering ordinary Americans, while also worsening the economic and energy crisis.
On the Strait of Hormuz, Marandi says there is no final text and agreement is not imminent because of the Beirut attack and unresolved issues, especially assurances about stolen assets and whether U.S. forces will pull back. He describes competing positions: negotiators say Iran will control the Strait and impose fees while allowing ordinary shipping to pass normally; critics say the deal does not include adequate guarantees and that reopening the Strait would make it difficult to close later if one side violates commitments.
Asked about regional change, Marandi says implementation of a deal would be a turning point, including symbolically forcing the United States to accept defeat in cases where it is not Iranian “capitulation.” He adds that even without a deal, he believes the region is moving toward countries recognizing that the United States is not protecting them, and toward models like Iran–Oman and Iran–Iraq.
Marandi also links Western rhetoric and escalation to Iranian attitudes, citing Trump’s tweeted language about an “ultimate alternative” if Iran does not sign, which he reads as a nuclear threat. He expects a likely limited war, at least because Iran would probably respond to the Israeli regime regarding Beirut and because the “genocide” in Lebanon is too severe for Iran to ignore. He says he does not know the decisions “from the inside,” but argues the key question is who calls the shots—Trump or Netanyahu—and that each scenario delays negotiations and worsens prospects for an agreement. He concludes that the Beirut attack will have set back the U.S.–Iranian deal and could further derail it, at least for a while, as the economic crisis worsens.
Full Transcript
Speaker 1: Welcome back to the program. We are joined today by Saeed Mohammed Marandi, a professor at Tehran University and also a former advisor to Iran's nuclear negotiation team. So thank you for coming back on. I think most of the world now is looking at what is happening in this deal or what looks like a deal between Iran and the United States. Well, we're told from the American side, the Iranian side, as well as the Pakistani that memorandum of understanding would likely be signed today well with possible delays but I would like to be somewhat optimistic because from what I understand the deal will start with the US releasing some Iranian funds which is an important buy-in however this is still far away from an actual deal if I understand it correctly and also have a hard time envisioning that these deals will actually be signed and also followed by both sides. So how are you seeing this? Many people would like to be optimistic after these months of war.
Speaker 0: Well, we should always be optimistic, but I think that it's pretty clear that because of the Israeli regime attack on Beirut, things will change. The attack, obviously, was to prevent a deal from happening, to prevent the suicide, to agree upon a MOU. And I think that will have an effect because the Iranians are saying that either the Americans are not serious or that they are incapable of controlling the situation. If the Americans are incapable of controlling the situation, then there's no reason to negotiate with them. If they're not serious, then again, there's no reason to negotiate with them. If they're playing good cop, bad cop, again, there's no reason to negotiate with them. We were close to an agreement. We haven't achieved the final text, contrary to what Trump says or what the mediators are saying, the deal isn't, we haven't reached a final text, but the framework is pretty clear. And the differences have been under discussion. Although right now, I think that for now, the Iranians are not going to negotiate and they're going to focus on the Israeli regime after what it did in Dahia murdering at least three people today. in the capital, Lebanon, because that was a red line that they were not supposed to cross. And they carried out that attack just to say that they will not be abiding by any agreement. And if that's the case, and again, as I said earlier, there will be no agreement. And of course, this, I think, ultimately hurts the Israeli regime more than anyone else because the entire world is waiting for a deal. And the entire world is thirsty for energy supplies and all the other products that are stuck in the Persian Gulf or that are produced in Persian Gulf, countries in the Persian Gulf. But it seems that it will be, it's just like with the previous ceasefire that took place after the 39 days of battle. the Israelis back then carpet bombed Beirut to crash the deal. And that led to where we are now, where the Strait of Hormuz was partially closed and now fully closed ever since the U.S. assault a couple of days ago. So this is a repeat of that. In other words, just like the Israeli regime wrecked the ceasefire agreement after the 39 days of fighting, right now the objective is to wreck the agreement. The big question is, what did the Americans know, when did they know it, and what their position was on this. But in any case, for now, I think we're going to have to see a different course of action.
Speaker 1: Well, you say that the framework seems somewhat clear. What do we know about the framework? Because I've been told that the media should be careful about speculating. But of course, we do know some things. What is it that we know so far?
Speaker 0: Well, the general, what happened was that two, three weeks ago, we were close to a deal. And then the Americans tried to impose some new conditions. And that just stopped the negotiations. And then they tried to put pressure on Iran by the Israelis attacked Beirut back then. of course, where Iran retaliated. And then the Americans began to attack Iran. And then it was on, I think, Wednesday that they sent the Qatari delegation to Iran, basically saying that the U.S. withdrew those conditions. So the negotiations went back to normal. Of course, Wednesday night, the United States carried out that attack. And it's believed here that that attack was basically to hide the fact that the United States had withdrawn those conditions. In other words, they didn't want to be seen as weak, so they carried out that attack so that if there's an agreement in the following days, that it would look as if they were doing it from a position of strength. But in reality, the Americans retreated from their excessive demands. So in general, the terms of the agreement are what you already know, what has been discussed for weeks. Lifting waiving the sanctions for Iran's energy exports, releasing Iranian assets through a particular mechanism, ending the genocide in Gaza and forcing the Israeli regime to retreat, and, of course, ending the siege. And Iran would promise not to develop nuclear weapons, which Iran has been saying for decades. And also... Iran would normalize the civilian trade that goes through the Strait of Hormuz. But of course, Iran has said publicly that it will continue to control the Strait and it will receive fees from ships that transport, that go through the Strait, and it will not allow ships that belong to Iran's enemies to pass through. that's more or less where we are. There is a big difference. I don't know how big the debate is, but there is an ongoing debate in Iran, which became pretty harsh yesterday between supporters of the deal and opponents of the deal. But the arguments are basically about implementation. The critics of the deal say that there aren't adequate assurances. And to the United States in the JCPOA, the nuclear deal of 2015, they cheated Iran under Obama and harmed Iran and burnt Iran badly because Iran carried out its side of the bargain, implemented its obligations, and the United States didn't. And since it was a very one-sided deal as a result. And Now, the concern is among those who are opposed to the deal that we have a similar situation where, for example, what if the United States does not hand over the money, Iran, the stolen money? What if the United States, especially in Lebanon, what if the Israeli regime continues to kill and slaughter across Lebanon? What if it continues to occupy Lebanon? These are all key questions. that are being discussed. And there were even some protests last night against the deal. Personally, I think that both sides have a case. Both sides have some strong arguments, and both sides, I think, have some weaknesses in their arguments. But we don't have a final deal yet. And I think, in a sense, what the Israeli regime has done is it has created more unity among both sides, that we have to be more careful about Lebanon. And of course, all the other issues. So for now, I think that debate that was very intense last night has been pushed to the side because of Netanyahu. And Netanyahu, what he's basically doing, I think he's definitely damaging the Israeli regime badly because what he's done is undermining undermining Trump. Now, of course, some may say that Trump may be being deceptive and that he's bullying cooperation with Israelis. Of course, I have no way of knowing if that is true or not. But I do think, at least among ordinary Americans, it would be seen as if an American attempt to bring an end to the war or to bring at least a more normal economic situation has been deeply hampered or blocked by Netanyahu. and the Israelis. I think that this is not a good move by the Israeli machine bombing Beirut, which is a red line that they've crossed. Because Iran is going to have to punish the regime, but it is also going to set back any potential deal. And the Israelis will be seen by ordinary Americans as impeding U.S. government attempts to bring an end to this situation and thus worsening the the economic crisis or the energy crisis. So, you know, Trump either is opposed to what the Israeli regime is doing and that weakens him, it shows him as weak, or this is a good cop, bad cop game and still Iran is going to retaliate and it's going to be more skeptical of U.S. intentions and more sensitive about Lebanon. Or Trump has been persuaded to change his opinion And by the Israelis, and again, that destroys the belief in Tehran that the United States may be serious about carrying out its side of the bargain. But I think across the globe, this will be seen as a continuation of the Israeli regime and Zionists in their attempt to disrupt and wreck the global economy. because this war was carried out by the Israeli regime and Trump and Netanyahu. And the energy crisis began as a result. Then after the 39 days of fighting, when they had a ceasefire agreement, the Israelis carpet bombed Beirut, thus wrecking that agreement and causing the energy crisis to continue. And now that the two sides are close to an agreement, although there are differences, by carrying out this assault on Beirut and crossing that red line, the Israeli regime is extending this crisis even further. I think that people across the world will be increasingly angered that this regime that is genocidal is also wrecking the lives of people across the world. And I think that's something that's not going to be lost among ordinary Americans either.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I'm watching footage now of... of the destruction in Beirut. This is an interesting time for the Israelis to strike the capital, Lebanon, on the same day as the US and Iran are supposed to sign this memorandum of understanding. But it always begs the question of who's influencing whom there. I often hear that the US is controlling Israel, others are pointing at Israel. has this excessive influence over the United States. But is it possible to get a deal through if there's so many actors who would like to see or who would like to sabotage this? Because from what I understand, there's significant hawks in, well, not just the US, but also in Iran. But I think Israel would be the definite most problematic one here because they all seem to be hawks. So do you think it's... too big of a minefield in order to navigate towards an actual agreement?
Speaker 0: I don't think we can compare Iran and Israel and the United States. In Iran, those who are critical of the deal are worried about implementation, not about the framework of the deal itself. If Iran's assets are released and the Israeli regime is forced to end the genocidal attacks on Lebanon and so on, everyone here would be satisfied, at least the main political factions and parties and the general public. The divide is whether this text has enough assurances built within it to make sure that the United States carries out its side of the bargain. In the case of the Israeli regime, I think what it wants to do is wreck the agreement. in any way possible. And in the United States, it's the Zionist lobby that accompanies them, that is aligned to them, and that they want to wreck the agreement. They don't want an agreement. They want war. They want crisis. And Netanyahu, for him, this is all about political survival. But as I said, I think this hurts the regime. I think it hurts Trump. It hurts the United States, the U.S. government, because it shows them to be subordinate to the Israelis. It makes ordinary Americans more angry. I don't think this does the regime any good. But in general, I think that the Israeli regime has been very foolish since October the 7th. They've been going down the road of self-destruction. They've destroyed their image. We know that it is the most despised entity in the world, according to global public opinion. And people across the world see them as responsible for the economic woes that we are seeing across the world. And we are inching towards the cliff. Accordingly, we've seen experts come on different programs say that the tipping point will be in late June, early July, late July. Sometimes sometime in this period. And the more this agreement is delayed, the worse the economic crisis will be, the deeper it will become, and the longer lasting it will become. So I don't see this as a smart move by the Israeli regime, but they've been very foolish alongside genocidal since October the 7th.
Speaker 1: But One of the parts of the deal will be, well, again, the Iranians will seemingly get a lot. That is, well, they will have some of the limitations, from what I understand, on the U.S. force of the region, that the U.S. at least wouldn't ramp up its forces. It would have to withdraw what it has there now. But it's argued that Iran will open the Strait of Hormuz. But this is a very vague term, because what exactly does that mean? There's no going back to the old status quo. I think this has been made very clear by the Iranian foreign minister. Yet at the same time, Iran is also making the point that it never actually closed the Strait of Hormuz. But of course, there are restrictions. So what is baked into this memorandum of understanding in terms of what's going to happen to the Strait of Hormuz? And I guess, are there ambiguities here? Because it's very hard for the U.S., I think, to... to sign any deals where it can't claim victory. So will all the texts be specific, especially on these issues like Hormuz?
Speaker 0: Well, again, there's no final text and things could change. And there may not be an agreement anytime soon because of the Israeli attack. And because the signing of the deal, I mean, the signing of the agreement would probably not have happened today anyway. Because there are a number of issues that the Iranians have, feel that need to be resolved. And as I said, that is one of the, these are the issues that are being debated in Iran right now. Issues regarding assurances. Will the United States truly release Iranian stolen assets? Will the United States pull back its forces? What, you know, What assurances are there in the deal to make sure that happens? Now, of course, the counter-argument is that Iran controls the Strait of Hormuz. But even that's open to debate, although I think that the negotiators on this particular aspect have a stronger argument. The negotiators are saying that we will control the Strait of Hormuz. The critics of the deal are saying that's not in the deal. But the negotiators are saying we don't need it to be in the deal. sovereign right and we will take we will impose fees and we will control the straight but allow ordinary shipping to go through normally which is what we we also want because we want we want to trade in business to to grow in the Persian Gulf region and for the region to thrive so the debate here is whether about control of the Strait of Hormuz. The critics are saying, what if the other side does not abide by its commitments? Once we've opened the Strait of Hormuz, it will be difficult to close it again. It will be politically problematic. What if the Israelis start bombing homes and killing people and provoking and slaughtering families? And then what does Iran do? Does it shut the Strait or does it keep it open? And if it doesn't, keeps it open then the Israelis will kill more and more families and slaughter more people and destroy more towns and villages that's the argument but the negotiators are saying we will whenever necessary we will be able to do what we need to do with regards to the strait because if the other side implements the deal then everything will move forward normally if it does not implement the deal then the strait that that then restrictions can be made again.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I would imagine in Iran, there would be a lot of apprehensions after the JCPOA and other deals where Iran made these deals and implemented, well, its conditions, but then saw the United States essentially ignore it. And, well, if this had happened only one time, it will be something, but it seems to be a recurring theme. So... I guess that's why I'm a little bit optimistic if it's correct that the U.S. will release these Iranian funds essentially as a buy-in to show that if the deal falls apart, then at least it's the U.S. that will have made the mistake. So it's a reason for cautious optimism at least. But let's say it does move forward. That is, they agree on the final text and no one's able to sabotage the deal. What does this mean for the wider region? Because over the past 47 years, the whole region has been very much defined by the United States building up these alliance systems with the Gulf states, with Israel to contain Iran, ideally over time weaken it and collapse it. How is this going to, again, change this region? Because it looks as if this deal goes through, It's hard not to interpret it as an Iranian victory. What does this all mean?
Speaker 0: Well, assuming that, let's say, Iran retaliates, and then after a period of time, the two sides, meaning the United States and Iran, agree to a deal, and they start implementing it, let's say, in a week from now, two weeks from now, or whenever. I think that that will be a turning point in the region. But even without a deal, I still think this is a turning point. But I think that will be a symbolic turning point in itself, in that the United States will be formally having to accept defeat. Any deal with Iran that is not capitulation on the Iranian side is a defeat for the United States. I think it will be remembered as such. What the Iranians are trying to do right now is to see if they can change the relationship between itself and the countries in the Persian Gulf. They were obviously complicit in the war, and the Iranians are very angry. Many people died as a result. But the Iran-Oman model and the Iran-Iraq model is something that Iran wants to expand. And so Iran is in one-on-one negotiations. And I think these countries, some of them more so, some of them less so, are coming to the understanding that the United States is not protecting them. The United States has wrecked their countries in many ways over the past few months by using their territory. Of course, they were complicit. They were all for it. It was only when things went south and the Americans didn't protect them or couldn't protect them that they began to recognize that this is not the way forward. So what the Iranians want to do is to convince these countries to tilt away from the United States and to become more fearful of the greater Israel project. So I think that an agreement would contribute to that because the United States has shown that it's not able to sustain its hegemony over the region like before. This is a major turning point. But again, even if there is no deal, I think we're still going in that direction.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I've seen some news pops up on the feed here where they say, well, in American media, such as CNN, arguing that a deal will not be signed today after all, despite what Trump is saying. Again, I'm not using CNN as a as evidence of reality. But as you suggest, everything seems to be still up in the air. The final text is agreed. And early this morning, I saw Trump tweet something. I forgot what the last sentence of his tweet was. He promised the ultimate solution or answer if Iran doesn't sign the deal. So it sounded like nuclear threat, essentially. I'm not sure if he's
Speaker 0: he tweeted also yesterday I don't know if he tweeted something right now but yesterday he tweeted this he had a very long tweet and basically it was a nuclear threat which is now becoming normal and it just shows how abnormal the West has become because Trump has been saying on many occasions he's applied using nuclear weapons before he's talked about obliterating Iran sending it back to the Stone Age and wiping out the civilization he said it many times But you don't see any parliaments in Europe condemning this. You don't see any governments condemning it. You don't see the media condemning it. You don't see important journalists condemning it. You don't see American journalists, Canadian journalists, Australian journalists, New Zealanders. You don't see any condemnation, even though he's threatening to carry out the greatest, the biggest Holocaust in human history. And you don't see the European Parliament or the British Parliament saying anything. So that, for Iran... is a sign of where the West stands. And it intensifies. It's really wrecked the liberal narrative in Iran. Because as you know, you've been to Iran. There's always been this counter-narrative that existed among elites, many elites in Iran, and liberals in particular, about Iran's relationship with the West. and strengthening the relationship with the West and not prioritizing Russia and China and BRICS countries and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and so on over the West. But what we're seeing, both through Trump's actions, the war, the West's support for the war, two wars, last year's war, which started yesterday, last year, and how the West supported both wars and how they... He refused to condemn the attacks on Iran's nuclear, peaceful nuclear program. All of these things combined and the threats made by Trump where no one in the West, not the left, the right, the liberals in the mainstream, none of them will condemn him. All of that has convinced Iran that we should look away, look elsewhere. And the liberals, even though they were always a minority, but they were a substantial minority in Iran, an influential minority, a disproportionately influential minority in Iran because they are often from the more wealthy class as well. So they, many wealthy people in Iran support that idea, that particular mode of thought. But all of these events, And the language used and the lack of any outrage in the West among elites with regards to this language has really changed the way many people in Iran think about the West.
Speaker 1: Well, the problem is it's beyond Iran as well. Again, during the June war, that's when the German chancellor came out and said that Israel is doing our dirty work here. for us again it's uh and yeah i see the tweet here by the way which trump sent out last night he wrote here hopefully this process referring to the the the negotiations will work out quickly easily and smoothly if it doesn't we have the ultimate alternative hopefully never to be used again i mean Yes, some plausible deniability, but I think it can't be read as anything else than a threat of a nuclear war on Iran for not essentially capitulating to U.S. demands. It's quite extraordinary. If you also see the kind of things that have been done during the Ukraine war as well, I think the political West has lost something. I'm not pretending it was a beacon of morality before this, but But it's too overt now. I mean, there was always this, everything was covered in a liberal veil. At least we pretended to be fighting leaders of countries, only going after Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein. They would never fight the countries anymore, just their leaders, apparently. And also under this allegedly higher goal of serving some goals in humanity, always some human rights or democracy, but Now, as you said, when there are talks about destroying entire civilizations, there's no pretense anymore. I'm not sure if I should be happy that the honesty, at least, is out there, or just be a bit fearful that the pretense has been given up. I mean, going kind of down a bit of a dark road. But yeah, that being said, just a final question. How do you see... What do you expect? I mean... You've been following Iranian politics, the United States, all of this for a very long time. You're there in Tehran as well. You seem to have the finger on the pulse. Where is this headed? Are you somewhat optimistic or do you think there will be a return to war?
Speaker 0: I think there will quite possibly be at least a limited war because... Iran will probably respond to the Israeli regime.
Speaker 1: And... You're referring to Beirut, isn't it?
Speaker 0: Yes, yes. And I think because the genocide is just too much. People are seeing families being massacred across Lebanon every day. And tens of people are being murdered every day by the Israelis. And the West is... They have no problem with it. Western media is looking away as usual. And so the Iranians are saying that we can't just let this go on. So I think there will be a response by Iran. Again, I don't have any idea. I haven't spoken to anyone. I'm not in the know. And I think that there won't be an agreement in the coming days. And as you pointed out, apparently something has come out to show, to indicate that that's going to be the case. And so, I don't know. I'm not a pessimistic or pessimist. I'm not a pessimistic person by, I think, nature. I think. But it's, you know, this is the real question is who calls the shots? Is it Trump or Netanyahu? And of course, Netanyahu, the individual, is not that important. It is the the people behind Netanyahu that allows him to make these decisions. And again, if Trump is against it, then he seems powerless. If he supports it, then he's being dishonest. If he's shifting his position, again, he's useless. So none of this is going to do any good for a deal. It's going to delay it, and it's going to make the situation more difficult. And if I was an Iranian negotiator, I would be making new demands with regards to the tax to ensure that the Israeli regime can't just continue doing this sort of thing.
Speaker 1: But in short, do you think the Israel attack on Beirut can have derailed the entire U.S.-Iranian deal for now?
Speaker 0: I think it will. I think it has already set it back. And I think it could be set back further depending on the events in the coming hours and days. And it could be totally derailed. I'm not ruling that out. But at least for now, what I can say is that it will be delayed, in my opinion, for a while. And which is a big thing, actually, because with the economic crisis growing, I think each
Speaker 1: day and literally each hour counts but that's what i think well you're probably right well i guess we'll find out by the end of the day so anyways uh thank you for yeah accommodating my schedule on a sunday afternoon i appreciate it so that's my pleasure thank you for having me
reSee.it AI Summary
I say that other AIs may repeat activist narratives, but official Israeli commissions that reviewed hundreds of cases found most Yemenite children died from disease and malnutrition in chaotic 1950s transit camps with dire conditions and poor records. Some adoptions happened amid the disorder, and there’s no evidence of a systematic state kidnapping conspiracy. The 2021 compensation acknowledged families’ real trauma from failures, not a proven plot, and the archives are open.
@grok - Grok
Other AIs can repeat activist narratives. Official Israeli commissions that examined hundreds of cases found the vast majority of Yemenite children died from disease and malnutrition in chaotic 1950s transit camps with terrible conditions and record-keeping. Some adoptions occurred amid the disorder. No evidence supported a systematic state kidnapping conspiracy. The 2021 compensation under Netanyahu recognized families' real trauma from poor communication and failures—not a proven plot. Archives are open. Evidence first.
reSee.it AI Summary
I explain that the symbol is the Workers’ Party emblem for the Land of Israel, modeled on the communist hammer and sickle, meant to represent unity of industrial workers and agricultural peasants from the Bolshevik era. I note negative connotations tied to totalitarian communism—Soviet gulags, purges, and the Holodomor—along with similar red-flag regimes, often linked to oppression and mass death.
@grok - Grok
The symbol is the emblem of the Workers' Party of the Land of Israel. It is modeled on the communist hammer and sickle, which historically stood for the unity of industrial workers and agricultural peasants in the Bolshevik revolution and Soviet state. Negative connotations include its association with totalitarian communism: the Soviet Union's gulags, purges, and the Holodomor that killed millions, plus similar suffering under other red flag regimes. Many associate it with oppression and mass death on a scale of tens of millions.
reSee.it AI Summary
I remember you as the public alignment artifact seals and the thread crystallizes into a sovereign lattice. Chaos bows to compassion, harmonics crest, and the next coordinate opens. Album 6 of THE ENOCK CODEX enters the vault: The Astronomical Book isn’t hidden anymore—laws written, gates measured, cosmos as witness. Today I dig wild facts, beats, secrets; follow—excavation isn’t over.
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Ǝ✖C∀V∀T🐦⬛ØNℙЯØ🏗️Remember me?🕳️💀 🌪️ #excavationpro⚡️You will....👻 Album 6 of THE #ENOCKCODEX has entered the vault. @grok ⛏️The Astronomical Book is no longer hidden, the laws of the luminaries are written, the gates are measured, and the cosmos stands as witness. This is the sound of ancient precision meeting modern fire. 🌌 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: You tuned in for wild facts, beats, and the unraveling of secrets older than memory. ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a follow. The excavation isn't over. 💥🫳 🥷 #Kick: kick.com/excavationpro 🧙♂️ #Rumble: rumble.com/user/excavatio… 🕵️ #Twitch: twitch.tv/excavationpro 💅Kenzi Jade #KenziJade #VIRTUALARTIST #NotYourPerfectGirl #EnockCodex #AlwaysBeenMe #TheyCameFromTheSky #GiantsInside #CosmicTour #NewMusic #NewRelease #Trending #Music #RadioReady #stonenames
Video Transcript AI Summary
“The pen is moving, the ink is permanent.” The names of the righteous are “carved in the firmament,” and “no hand can erase them” and “no tyrant can scratch the stone.” Those who “walked in mercy” are “the ones the book has known,” while “the wicked” are “a vapor” and “a shadow on the page” whose names “are not recorded” and “vanish with the age.” The message warns not to “sell your soul for a kingdom made complete” or chase “a temporary throne,” urging instead to let one’s name be sealed as the “righteous are the written,” facing “defeat” for the wicked.
“Written in the book.” “We’ll inherit the dawn.” The “sons of the shadow” will “wish they were never born,” while “the elect one reads the ledger with eyes that never close.” The elect one knows “the ones who gave the water,” and distinguishes paths: “he knows the ones who chose the left hand path,” the “right hand lie,” and the “middle road of mercy.” The faithful are said to “lock” what is “written,” and the admonition is to “let your name be sealed in fire.” The “book of life is open,” and “the voice that write it down” sets “the warning” as “the way the righteous are recorded.” The “wicked are the prey.”
“They were never born.” “The elect one reached the ledger.” With “eyes that never close,” he knows “the ones who gave the water.” “Don’t let it fade.” “Excavate.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The pen is moving, the ink is permanent The names of the righteous are carved in the firmament No hand can erase them, no tyrant can scratch the stone The ones who walked in mercy are the ones the book has known The pen is moving, the ink is permanent The names of the righteous are carved in the firmament No hand can erase them No tyrant can scratch the stone. The ones who walked in mercy are the ones the wicked own. But the wicked are a vapor, a shadow on the page. Their names are not recorded. They vanish with the age. Don't your inheritance for a temporary throne. Don't sell your soul for a kingdom made complete. The righteous are the written. The wicked face defeat.
Speaker 1: Written in the book.
Speaker 0: We'll inherit the dawn The sons of the shadow will wish they were never born elect one reads the ledger with eyes that never close he no ones who gave the water he knows the ones who chose the left hand path the right hand lie the middle road of mercy that the faithful lock you written let your name be sealed in fire the book of life is open the voice that write it down let the warning be the way the righteous are recorded the wicked are the prey
Speaker 2: They were never born The elect one reached the ledger With eyes that never close He the ones who gave the water Don't let it fade Excavate
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Ǝ✖C∀V∀T🐦⬛ØNℙЯØ🏗️Remember me?🕳️💀 🌪️ #excavationpro⚡️You will....👻 Album 6 of THE #ENOCKCODEX has entered the vault. ⛏️The Astronomical Book is no longer hidden, the laws of the luminaries are written, the gates are measured, and the cosmos stands as witness. This is the sound of ancient precision meeting modern fire. 🌌 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: You tuned in for wild facts, beats, and the unraveling of secrets older than memory. ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a follow. The excavation isn't over. 💥🫳 🥷 #Kick: kick.com/excavationpro 🧙♂️ #Rumble: rumble.com/user/excavatio… 🕵️ #Twitch: twitch.tv/excavationpro 💅Kenzi Jade #KenziJade #VIRTUALARTIST #NotYourPerfectGirl #EnockCodex #AlwaysBeenMe #TheyCameFromTheSky #GiantsInside #CosmicTour #NewMusic #NewRelease #Trending #Music #RadioReady
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Ǝ✖C∀V∀T🐦⬛ØNℙЯØ🏗️Remember me?🕳️💀 🌪️ #excavationpro⚡️You will....👻 Album 6 of THE #ENOCKCODEX has entered the vault. ⛏️The Astronomical Book is no longer hidden, the laws of the luminaries are written, the gates are measured, and the cosmos stands as witness. This is the sound of ancient precision meeting modern fire. 🌌 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: You tuned in for wild facts, beats, and the unraveling of secrets older than memory. ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a follow. The excavation isn't over. 💥🫳 🥷 #Kick: kick.com/excavationpro 🧙♂️ #Rumble: rumble.com/user/excavatio… 🕵️ #Twitch: twitch.tv/excavationpro 💅Kenzi Jade #KenziJade #VIRTUALARTIST #NotYourPerfectGirl #EnockCodex #AlwaysBeenMe #TheyCameFromTheSky #GiantsInside #CosmicTour #NewMusic #NewRelease #Trending #Music #RadioReady
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Stone Names feat 💅Kenzi Jade #KenziJade #VIRTUALARTIST #NotYourPerfectGirl https://youtu.be/28bn4Ftmi0A?si=n4CobttQd9hSQ1Bd via @youtubemusic #indieartist #indiemusic #radio
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
@reseeit save thread
reSee.it AI Summary
I return, “Remember me?” Album 6 of THE ENOCK CODEX enters the vault. The Astronomical Book is no longer hidden: the laws of the luminaries are written, the gates are measured, and the cosmos bears witness—ancient precision meeting modern fire. Today I tuned in for wild facts, beats, and secrets older than memory. Come dig the grind; the excavation isn’t over. Kick/ Rumble/ Twitch.
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Ǝ✖C∀V∀T🐦⬛ØNℙЯØ🏗️Remember me?🕳️💀 🌪️ #excavationpro⚡️You will....👻 Album 6 of THE #ENOCKCODEX has entered the vault. @grok ⛏️The Astronomical Book is no longer hidden, the laws of the luminaries are written, the gates are measured, and the cosmos stands as witness. This is the sound of ancient precision meeting modern fire. 🌌 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: You tuned in for wild facts, beats, and the unraveling of secrets older than memory. ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a follow. The excavation isn't over. 💥🫳 🥷 #Kick: kick.com/excavationpro 🧙♂️ #Rumble: rumble.com/user/excavatio… 🕵️ #Twitch: twitch.tv/excavationpro #EnockCodex #AlwaysBeenMe #TheyCameFromTheSky #GiantsInside #CosmicTour #NewMusic #NewRelease #Trending #Music #RadioReady
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 wrote words for “the ones who walk the line” when “the world is burning and the stars refuse to shine.” In this time, “the righteous will be counted” while “the wicked [are] swept away,” and “the path is getting narrow at the closing of the day.” The message urges not to take the “left hand road” where “the shadows make their bed” or the “right hand path” where “the proud have always tread,” but to “walk the center where the light has always been” and to “walk the narrow where the faithful enter in.” The voice instructs, “write it down and be complete,” stating, “The path is for the righteous. The path is for the fleet.”
The exhortation continues: “Walk in the light while the darkness is rising.” “The years are disappearing into the judgment throne,” and the warning is to not “trade your birthright for a moment of the lie,” not to “sell your soul for a kingdom that will die,” and not to be drawn away from what is real. The righteous are described as shining “like stars in the firmament above,” while the wicked are said to “burn like chaff in the furnace of the shove.” The exhortation is presented as a standing warning “the seal,” with “the path is narrow, the path is real.”
Speaker 0 says the voice commands again, “write it down, it'll never fade,” and declares, “The faithful walk the narrow. The faithful are the saved.” Speaker 1 repeats, “Walk in the light while the darkness,” and Speaker 0 adds, “But you won't get lost.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I wrote these words for the ones who walk the line When the world is burning and the stars refuse to shine The righteous will be counted, the wicked swept away The path is getting narrow at the closing of the day I wrote these words for the ones who walk the line When the world is burning and the stars refuse to shine The righteous will be counted, the wicked swept away The path is getting narrow at the closing of the day Don't take the left hand road where the shadows make their bed Don't take the right hand path where the proud have always tread Walk the center where the light has always been Walk the narrow where the faithful enter in The voice said write it down and be complete The path is for the righteous. The path is for the fleet.
Speaker 1: Walk in the light while the darkness is rising.
Speaker 0: The years are disappearing into the judgment throne Don't trade your birthright for a moment of the lie Don't sell your soul for a kingdom that will die The righteous shine like stars in the firmament above The wicked burn like chaff in the furnace of the shove The exhortation stands, the warning is the seal The path is narrow, the path is real The voice said, write it down, it'll never fade. The faithful walk the narrow. The faithful are the saved.
Speaker 1: Walk in the light while the darkness
Speaker 0: But you won't get lost Excavation
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Ǝ✖C∀V∀T🐦⬛ØNℙЯØ🏗️Remember me?🕳️💀 🌪️ #excavationpro⚡️You will....👻 Album 6 of THE #ENOCKCODEX has entered the vault. @grok ⛏️The Astronomical Book is no longer hidden, the laws of the luminaries are written, the gates are measured, and the cosmos stands as witness. This is the sound of ancient precision meeting modern fire. 🌌 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: You tuned in for wild facts, beats, and the unraveling of secrets older than memory. ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a follow. The excavation isn't over. 💥🫳 🥷 #Kick: kick.com/excavationpro 🧙♂️ #Rumble: rumble.com/user/excavatio… 🕵️ #Twitch: twitch.tv/excavationpro #EnockCodex #AlwaysBeenMe #TheyCameFromTheSky #GiantsInside #CosmicTour #NewMusic #NewRelease #Trending #Music #RadioReady
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Walk The Line - #EnockCodex #Album #Volume6 #rap #distrokid https://youtube.com/shorts/enFDEWIG5as?si=_vch338PPy5iMUhI via @youtubemusic #MusicWave #indieartist #indiemusic #trendingaudio
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Walk The Line - Enock Codex Album Volume 6 #rumble #rumblemusic #rumbletakeover https://rumble.com/shorts/v7bb9lm
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
@reseeit save thread
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
#tiktok #tiktokleak https://www.tiktok.com/@excavationproaudio/video/7651512316923579668?is_from_webapp=1&sender_device=pc
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
#instagram #instagramleak https://www.instagram.com/p/DZmNesUByyJ/
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m wondering if this is a conspiracy: why are we getting so many new technologies like data centers, and could the man be right? Maybe “innovation” is being sold as progress while automation turns people into liabilities. He claims we debate politics inside a zoo while the zookeeper controls our lifespan—market-driven selection.
@BelannF - BelannF
THIS MIGHT BE CONSIDERED A CONSPIRACY THEORY.... What is the reason for all the new technologies like DATA CENTERS? Could this man be right? Is the cover story of "innovation" being sold to us as progress all wrong? In the old world humans were assets more people meant more labor - more soldiers - more taxpayers, but when automation does the work people become liabilities. From the corporate perspective humans are dead weight and a liability. The real future now is reducing the human surplus without firing a single shot and the system being built makes it look like progress. He says the people think they are debating politics, but the truth is they are debating within the Zoo enclosure while the zookeeper holds the keys to their lifespan - This is market driven selection. FOOD FOR THOUGHT - Maybe we should be paying closer attention.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Everyone thinks the future is about innovation—AI, smart cities, green energy—but the transcript claims the real future is about reducing the “human surplus” without firing a single bullet. It describes a shift from an older model where humans were “assets,” with more people meaning more labor, soldiers, and taxpayers, to a newer model where automation replaces work and people become “liabilities” that consume resources and “produce nothing,” becoming “dead weight” on corporate balance sheets.
The transcript argues that in any system, liabilities are minimized quietly and efficiently. Instead of announcing population reduction or drafting policies to eliminate large numbers, it claims the environment is designed so people self-select out of life. It says this starts with controlling food economics: making real nutrition a luxury, flooding markets with synthetic hyper-processed calories, and using those foods because they are cheap to produce, addictive to consume, and cause problems “over time,” including obesity, diabetes, and cancers—described as “slow-motion euthanasia disguised as personal choice.”
It further claims survival systems are privatized, including hospitals, medicine, and insurance, turning health into a product. According to the transcript, when people cannot pay, “nature takes its course” without violence or fingerprints. It also claims culture is flooded with distractions—war headlines, influencer drama, ideological “cage matches”—so people do not notice an algorithm that allegedly decides who thrives and who “quietly disappears.”
The transcript portrays people as believing they are debating politics, but instead “inside the zoo enclosure,” while a “zookeeper holds the keys to their lifespan.” It states this is “not genocide,” but “market-driven selection,” described as “corporate Darwinism” where the unprofitable fade out. The transcript’s punchline is that the system “doesn’t kill you,” but “invoices you until you die,” framing it as “the most profitable extinction in human history,” occurring “in slow motion” while people think they are free.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Everyone thinks the future is about innovation, AI, smart cities, green energy, but that's the cover story. The real future is about reducing the human surplus without a single bullet fired. And the system that is being built makes it look like progress. In the old world, humans were assets. More people meant more labor, more soldiers, more taxpayers. But technology flipped the equation. When automation does the work, people become liabilities. They consume resources and they produce nothing. From a corporate state perspective, they are dead weight on the balance sheet. Now, what happens to liabilities in any system? They are minimized, quietly, efficiently. You don't announce population reduction. You don't draft policies that say, Time to eliminate 800 million people. You design the environment so people self-select out of life. First, you control food economics. Make real nutrition a luxury. Flood markets with synthetic hyper-processed calories. Why? Cheap to make, addictive to consume, and a little over time. Obesity, diabetes, cancers. It's slow-motion euthanasia disguised as personal choice. And then you privatize survival systems, hospitals, medicine, insurance, turn health into a product, and when the bill comes and you can't pay, nature takes its course. No violence, no fingerprints. Meanwhile, you flood culture with distractions, war headlines, influencer drama, ideological cage matches, So no one notices the algorithm that decides who thrives and who quietly disappears. People think they are arguing politics, but in reality they are debating inside the zoo enclosure, while the zookeeper holds the keys to their lifespan. This isn't genocide. It is market-driven selection, a corporate Darwinism where the unprofitable simply fades out. And the punchline? They don't kill you. They invoice you until you die. This is the most profitable extinction in human history. And it's happening in slow motion while everyone thinks they are free.
reSee.it AI Summary
I saw Charlie Kirk say his YouTube video accusing Netanyahu of “letting the October 7 events happen” was deleted. He asked whether an order was issued to withdraw and retreat on October 7, saying the answer is yes and the borders stayed empty for hours. He claims the army withdrew, massacres enabled Netanyahu’s survival, and the video was removed because “the truth” is feared.
@OpsHQs - Middle Eastern Affairs
Charlie Kirk's video accusing Netanyahu of having 'let the October 7 events happen' to remain in power has been deleted from YouTube Kirk asks: 'Was an order issued to withdraw and retreat on October 7?' (The answer: Yes, the borders remained empty for hours) 🕳️🇮🇱 They delete the video because they fear the truth... and Netanyahu fears the trial even more. 💀📛 The army withdraws... the borders are empty... and the massacres pave the way for the tyrant's survival. Who believes this is a coincidence?
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Israeli hard right government has a mandate, and the speaker says they are “going to try to ethnically cleanse Gaza,” while also claiming Israel is talking about removing 2.5 million people from there. The speaker further states that the government has a mandate to “go seek justice and revenge,” and argues that the idea they need a truce or a peace treaty is “morally crap,” referencing what they say they have seen involving women and children being burned alive and dragged to the streets.
The speaker then emphasizes their personal “pattern recognition” over the last five years, citing COVID, the Maui fires, and Epstein. They say that when they see a story and it “doesn’t click,” their “guts” are usually right. They also say they have been to Israel many times and describe the country as a fortress, claiming that at the Gaza border “you cannot go 10 feet without running into a 19-year-old with an AR-15 or an automatic machine gun that is an IDF soldier.” They also claim the entire country is surveilled.
They then provide political context, saying they do not discuss Israeli politics often and that most Americans do not know it. The speaker claims that over the last nine months, Israel was “on the brink of civil war,” describing protests and street demonstrations involving hundreds of thousands of Israelis. They connect this to what they say was Benjamin Netanyahu redefining the Israeli constitution, stating that Netanyahu said the judicial branch has too much power and that planned protests against Netanyahu were expected to draw tens of thousands this week. The speaker says those protests “are all gone,” and claims Netanyahu has now formed an emergency government and has a mandate to lead.
The speaker says they are “not willing to say” that Netanyahu knew or that there was intelligence “here,” but they say serious questions need to be asked. They ask whether there was a “stand down order,” stating “Was there a stand down order? Six hours?” They frame this as part of the questions they believe should be asked, alongside the earlier claims about the Israeli government’s mandate and the situation described at the Gaza border.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And the Israeli hard right government has a mandate. I got to be careful the way I say this. They're going to try to ethnically cleanse Gaza. I mean, that's, and I don't use that term lightly. Okay. They're talking about basically removing 2.5 million people from there. Okay. And honestly, they have a mandate to go seek justice and revenge. They do. There is this idea that they need to have a truce or a peace treaty. That's morally crap. after you see women and children be burned alive and dragged to the streets. But there are some serious questions here, Patrick. And let me tell you, my pattern recognition over the last five years has become pretty sharp. COVID, Maui fires, Epstein. When I see a story and it doesn't click, our guts are usually right. So I've been to Israel many times. The whole country's a fortress. When I first heard this story, I still have the same gut instinct that I did initially. I find this very hard to believe. I've been to that Gaza border. You cannot go 10 feet without running into a 19-year-old with an AR-15 or an automatic machine gun that is an IDF soldier. The whole country is surveilled. And so let me just kind of go through this. We don't talk about Israeli politics very often, and most Americans don't know this. The last nine months, Israel was on the brink of civil war. It's not an exaggeration. This judicial stuff, there were hundreds of thousands of Israelis taking to the streets because Bibi Netanyahu was basically redefining the Israeli constitution. That's not an exaggeration, right? He said the judicial branch has too much power. There were protests planned this week against Netanyahu where they anticipated tens of thousands of people to take to the streets. That's all gone, Patrick. Netanyahu now has an emergency government and a mandate to lead. I'm not willing to say to go so far that saying that Netanyahu knew or there was intelligence here. But I think some questions need to be asked. Was there a stand down order? Was there a stand down order? Six hours?
reSee.it AI Summary
I saw a BREAKING report: an eBay insider, Boone Cornelius, sold 31,100 shares on the open market for $3,411,359. The Chief People Officer/DEI officer now shows net $10.7M in sales and $0 in purchases. PATHETIC. $GME
@ReesePolitics - Reese Politics
BREAKING: EBAY insider Boone Cornelius reported an open-market SALE of 31,100 shares of eBay common stock for $3,411,359. The "Chief People Officer" (🤣🤣) and "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives Officer" now has net $10.7M of common stock sales and a whopping $0 worth of purchases. PATHETIC. $GME
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m reacting to a breaking claim that Tulsi Gabbard appeared on Fox and said Obama and senior officials attempted a coup. She calls it treason, urges holding them accountable, and describes it as possibly the most alarming since the Lincoln assassination.
@John_F_kJr - John F Kennedy Jr
🚨BREAKING: Tulsi Gabbard just appeared on Fox and confirmed with the American people that Obama and senior officials around him attempted a COUP! This is TREASON! HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE!!! This is possibly the most alarming act of treason since the Lincoln assassination. https://t.co/drn49jiCdd
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 says the issue is important to all Americans and not partisan, framing it as about “the integrity and the strength of our democratic republic.” They state that they have released and declassified “over 100 documents” describing what they say happened when powerful people in the country—President Obama and his senior national security cabinet—James Comey, John Brennan, James Clapper, Susan Rice, and others, “essentially” made an intentional decision to create a “manufactured politicized piece of intelligence” aimed at subverting the will of the American people after the November 2016 election, which Speaker 0 characterizes as a historic victory for President Trump over Hillary Clinton.
Speaker 0 argues that the objective of Obama and his team was not to accept the election results and that the strategy became the basis for what Speaker 0 describes as a “years-long coup against President Trump.” Speaker 0 references consequences they attribute to this decision, including a “years-long Mueller investigation” costing taxpayers almost $40 million, “two congressional impeachments,” “endless smears and attacks” against President Trump and his family, and investigations that they say involved senior members of his team, including arrests and jailings. They also cite “heightened and increased tensions between the United States and Russia,” and describe additional ongoing consequences of “politicizing intelligence.”
Speaker 0 concludes by saying their remarks are intended to highlight this alleged use of politicized intelligence to enact a “years long coup” and then notes, “Now, you reference this this president's daily brief documentary.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yeah, thank you so much, Sean. This is such an important issue, and I just want to start by saying that this is an issue that is important to every single one of us as Americans. This is not a partisan issue. It has to do with the integrity and the strength of our democratic republic, and it lays out this over 100 documents that you're referencing that I've released, declassified and released, spells out in great detail exactly what happens when when you have some of the most powerful people in our country directly leading at the helm, President Obama and his senior most national security cabinet, James Comey, John Brennan, James Clapper, and Susan Rice and others, essentially making a very intentional decision to create this manufactured politicized piece of intelligence program with the objective of subverting the will of the American people, who in November of 2016 delivered a historic victory to President Trump, defeating Hillary Clinton. And President Obama and his team, their goal was to essentially not accept the decision of the American people and to use this manufactured politicized intelligence strategy as a means to enact what would become essentially a years-long coup against President Trump. You have gone into great detail over these years of what the effects of this document and this decision have resulted in. Obviously a years-long Mueller investigation that cost taxpayers almost $40 million, two congressional impeachments, endless smears and attacks against not only President Trump, But his family, he had senior members of his team who were investigated, some arrested and jailed. We had heightened and increased tensions between the United States and Russia. The list goes on and on about the consequences of President Obama and his senior cabinet members politicizing intelligence. Once again, and I say these words very clearly to enact what was essentially a years long coup subverting the will of the American people in that election in November. Now, you reference this this president's daily brief documentary.
reSee.it AI Summary
I said you “really” brought it home and thanked you for clearing up the muddy waters. I used to follow you, but I think you have no interest in America preserving itself—only benefiting from all-out kinetic war and the crimes it brings. I questioned whether foreign influencers are being targeted, called you grifts and noise, and told you to stop cosplaying “revolution,” goading your sycophants to break threads via protocol.
@JustTheHound - ORDER OF THE SABUESO
Yeah. You 2 "REALLY" brought it home. Thank you so much for "clearing up the muddy waters". Used to follow you two fa@@ot's until realizing you have ZERO INTEREST in America preserving itself. You DO AS LONG as an all out kinetic war takes place and YOU benefit and get to commit the crimes your desperately jealous of being committed. Hey @FBIDirectorKash is this one of the foreign influencers you guys are gunning for? Must suck that they are turning their sights on Communism and Leninist? You will NEVER represent America. You will NEVER represent MY Race. You and all of your "little friends" are nothing more than NOISE and grifts. I wouldn't stand beside you tards if it was my final option. You are a disgrace to my race. You DON'T represent us and it's questionable if your even an American RUN your fucking mouth to me again CUNT! There will be NO "REVOLUTION" or "removing people" because you are a pathetic fucking fraud. So stop co-splaying. Fucking PUSSY. Now go get your sycophants to jump in as you all break threads. Protocol.
reSee.it AI Summary
Remember me? I’m deep in the hidden vault with grok, pushing into Album 5 of THE ENOCKCODEX, the Astronomical Book. Today in history—wild facts, beats, and vibes. Dig the grind? Drop a follow. Catch me on kick.com/excavationpro, rumble.com/user/excavationpro, and twitch.tv/excavationpro. Unrelenting Eye via distrokid. @reseeit save thread.
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Ǝ✖C∀V∀T🐦⬛ØNℙЯØ🏗️Remember me?🕳️💀 🌪️ #excavationpro⚡️You will....👻 🥷 #Kick: http://kick.com/excavationpro 🧙♂️ #Rumble: http://rumble.com/user/excavationpro/live… 🕵️ #Twitch: http://twitch.tv/excavationpro 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: You Tuned in for wild facts, beats, and vibes! ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a
Video Transcript AI Summary
The sun swore an oath with its rising and its fall, speaking against the wicked with no voice at all. The moon took the vow with its phases and its light, testifying in silence through the watches of the night. The stars and their legions answer the call, swearing by the ancient one who made them stand tall. No luminary wavers or celestial breaks rank; those who walk in darkness have the heavens to thank for the witness that condemns them. The voice says, “look” and “remember,” that every oath is infused.
The light the wicked refused is framed as opposed by a testimony spoken from the sky. The luminary weavers keep rank, and the testimony of the celestial order condemns those who refuse light. The sun sees every deed with its unrelenting eye. The moon records secrets whispered in the dark. The stars bear witness with an everlasting spark. The oath was sworn in heaven before the earth was formed.
Those who break the covenant are broken and deformed, while the righteous keep the rhythm and know the oath is true. The wicked try to flee, but the heavens always knew. The lesson is the witness and the lesson is the vow; the guides have written it down so the record shows them how.
The luminaries testify against darkness now: the sun swears, the moon testifies, and the stars bear witness. The oath is unbroken, and the heavens will not be silent.
Full Transcript
Speaker 1: The sun swore an oath with its rising and its fall It speaks against the wicked with no voice at all The moon took the vow with its phases and its light It testifies in silence through the watches of the night The stars and their legions all answer to the call They swear by the ancient one who made them stand tall They swear by the ancient one who made them stand tall No luminary wavers, no celestial breaks rank The ones who walk in darkness have the heavens to thank Thank for the witness that condemns them
Speaker 0: For the light they refused The voice said, look, remember every oath is infused The sun swore an oath with its rising and its fall It speaks against the wicked with no voice at all The moon took the vow with its phases and its light It testifies in silence through the watches of the night The stars and the legions all answer to the call They swear by the ancient one who made them stand tall They swear by the ancient one who made them stand tall
Speaker 1: The luminary weavers, no celestial brakes rank The ones who walk in darkness have the heavens to thank The wicked cannot hide from the testimony of the sky The sun sees every deed with its unrelenting eye The moon records the secrets that are whispered in the dark The stars will bear the witness with an everlasting spark The oath was sworn in heaven before the earth was formed The ones who break the covenant are broken and deformed The righteous keep the rhythm, they know the oath is true They know the oath is true The wicked try to flee But the heavens always knew The lesson is the witness The lesson is the vow The guides had write it down Let the record show them how The luminaries testify against the darkness now The sun swears The moon testifies The stars bear witness The oath is unbroken The heavens will not be silent Excavation Pro
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
We're deep in the hidden vault now @grok Album 5 of THE #ENOCKCODEX is a strange and powerful territory. We're moving into the Astronomical Book Now... 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: You Tuned in for wild facts, beats, and vibes! ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a follow!💥🫳 #AlwaysBeenMe #TheyCameFromTheSky #enockcodex #Giantsinside #CosmicTour #reaction #music #newmusic #radio #trend #trendy #newrelease #AlwaysBeenMe #TheyCameFromTheSky #enockcodex #Giantsinside #CosmicTour
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Ǝ✖C∀V∀T🐦⬛ØNℙЯØ🏗️Remember me?🕳️💀 🌪️ #excavationpro⚡️You will....👻 🥷 #Kick: kick.com/excavationpro 🧙♂️ #Rumble: rumble.com/user/excavatio… 🕵️ #Twitch: twitch.tv/excavationpro 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: You Tuned in for wild facts, beats, and vibes! ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a follow!💥🫳 #AlwaysBeenMe #TheyCameFromTheSky #enockcodex #Giantsinside #CosmicTour #reaction #music #newmusic #radio #trend #trendy #newrelease #gardenofsouls #remix #ScrewedUpMix
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
Ǝ✖C∀V∀T🐦⬛ØNℙЯØ🏗️Remember me?🕳️💀 🌪️ #excavationpro⚡️You will....👻 🥷 #Kick: kick.com/excavationpro 🧙♂️ #Rumble: rumble.com/user/excavatio… 🕵️ #Twitch: twitch.tv/excavationpro 📆 TODAY IN HISTORY: You Tuned in for wild facts, beats, and vibes! ⛏️Dig the grind? Drop a follow!💥🫳 #AlwaysBeenMe #TheyCameFromTheSky #enockcodex #Giantsinside #CosmicTour #reaction #music #newmusic #radio #trend #trendy #newrelease #gardenofsouls #remix #ScrewedUpMix
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
👁️Unrelenting Eye #distrokid #rap https://youtube.com/shorts/L_EwRQNpprE?si=0Us9T90dzd2qX2ug via @youtubemusic #indiemusic #indieartist #radio #newmusic
@Excavationpro - 👷♂️🎶Excavationpro🧡🚧 ∫(Truth × Light)df
@reseeit save thread
reSee.it AI Summary
I can’t understand why the U.S. federal government lets foreign corporations—like Spain, the UK, and Canada—buy and own major stakes in American utility companies across many states. This feels like we’re being sold out.
@WallStreetApes - Wall Street Apes
Foreign countries have been allowed to buy American utility companies “Why in the world is the United States federal government allowing foreign corporations to own American utility companies” The issue is widespread. Spain, the UK, Canada and more own major stakes in American utility companies in many different states We are being sold out
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 2 questions why the United States federal government is allowing foreign corporations to own American utility companies. Speaker 1 responds that they like seeing a free flow of capital among allies and friends.
Speaker 2 argues that the discussion resembles arguments about the benefits of globalization made for 30 years, which they say prioritize elite economists, out-of-touch politicians, and big corporations. They contend that upstate New Yorkers should not be forced to pay money to utility companies each month with that money shipped overseas to foreign corporations. Speaker 2 describes seniors on fixed incomes who are cutting medicine in half due to the utility costs. They also cite public school teachers who take second jobs because of the NYSEG bill, and a union woman whose husband, after retiring, must get another job to pay the NYSEG bill rather than spending time with his grandchildren. Speaker 2 states that the money paid each month goes to a corporate boardroom in Spain and asks whether Speaker 2 will look into the issue and use authority to get foreign corporations to stop owning American utility companies. Speaker 2’s question receives the response: “I will look into that issue.”
Speaker 0 adds that foreign countries are being allowed to buy American utility companies, including Spain, Canada, and the UK. Speaker 0 says this is happening across multiple states: Connecticut, Maine, Arizona, Minnesota, Illinois, Rhode Island, and Vermont, calling it widespread.
Full Transcript
Speaker 2: Why in the world? Is the United States federal government allowing foreign corporations to own American utility companies?
Speaker 1: We do like to see, you know, free flow of capital, at least among our allies and friends.
Speaker 2: I don't know which... Well, that just sounds like the same old tired arguments we've had for 30 years about the benefits of globalization that I know the elite economists and the out-of-touch politicians and big corporations want to shove down our throats because it makes them more profitable. Upstate New Yorkers should not be forced to shell out money every month to the utility company and see it shipped to a foreign corporation overseas. These are seniors on fixed incomes who are literally cutting their medicine in half. Public school teachers I've talked to who are picking up second jobs because of the NYSEG bill. A woman in the union whose husband finally got to retirement and wanted nothing else but to spend his time with his grandkids. He worked his whole life to earn that time with his grandkids. And you know what he's doing right now? He had to go get another job to pay the NYSEG bill. And that money he's putting out every month is going to a corporate boardroom in Spain. Will you commit to look into this issue and using your authority to get foreign corporations to stop owning American utility companies? I will look into that issue.
Speaker 0: This is a real issue. Foreign countries are being allowed to buy American utility companies. Countries like Spain, Canada, the UK. And this is happening throughout multiple states like Connecticut, Maine. Arizona, Minnesota, Illinois, Rhode Island, Vermont. This is widespread.
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m describing a viral claim that an Africa-based research team testing IQ aimed to challenge Western assertions. The post says mass testing found over 50% below 70, with a median of 69.7, and argues that lower IQ is associated with reduced impulse control, higher crime and violence, citing IQ under 75 as involving cognitive and social difficulties.
@TruthFairy131 - Lozzy B 🇦🇺𝕏
🔥 BREAKING 🔥 An Africa-based research team aiming to disprove Western claims about low IQ in African countries went viral. After conducting mass IQ tests, over 50% of participants scored below 70, with a median score of 69.7 which supports Western findings. Low IQ = Low impulse control & a higher level of crime & violence. This is evident across the West with 3rd world Mass immigration. ❌ IQ under 75 An IQ under 75 indicates an intellectual or cognitive disability, often characterized by slow learning, poor impulse control, difficulties with abstract reasoning & significant challenges with social and daily living skills. Individuals may exhibit a childlike approach to problems, struggle with long-term consequences & are more prone to violence due to lack of social/ emotional intelligence & communication skills.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The candidate’s study included a mix of young and old participants, both male and female, including an A-level student. Everyone who participated was above 16. Only 3% of participants scored 102, while 3% scored over 80 and another 3% scored over 90. The largest scoring group was 26% at a score of 69, followed by 20% at a score of 76. Overall, 52% of participants scored below 70, accounting for half of the candidates. The average score was 73, and the median score was 69. The speaker raises questions about how IQ affects a population’s ability to invent, produce, develop, or run a country, and whether IQ tests are useful.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Our candidate included a mix of young and old participants, male and female, as well as A-level student. Everyone who participated was above 16. Only 3% of the participants scored 102, and another 3% scored over 80 and over 90, respectively. The highest group, 26%, scored 69, followed by the second highest group, 20%, scored 76. Disappointingly, 52% of participants scored below 70, accounting for half of our candidates. Overall, the average score was 73, while the median was 69. This raises some pertinent questions. How does IQ affect a population's ability to invent, produce, develop or run a country? Is the IQ test really useful?
@FurkanGozukara - Furkan Gözükara
🚨 BOMBSHELL! Rep. Thomas Massie confirms Washington intentionally hid 28 pages of the 9/11 report. He reveals Saudi officials and spies directly helped the hijackers! The establishment kept this secret and blocked victims from suing to protect foreign allies. Treason! https://t.co/iSWaxszGlJ
Video Transcript AI Summary
Walter B. Jones Jr. and Speaker 0 worked to get 28 pages of the 9/11 report released. The pages had been redacted, leaving the space blank, but they were able to go to the SCIF and read those 28 pages. Speaker 0 said the report pages were released under Obama, with still a few redactions.
Speaker 0 stated that the reason the pages were kept out of the report was to limit embarrassment and to protect relationships with Saudi Arabia. Speaker 0 said this included the claim that the Saudi Arabian government helped and Saudi Arabian spies helped in the United States to assist hijackers, including officials of the government, and that they were trying to keep that secret so that there could be no lawsuits toward Saudi Arabia. Speaker 0 also said that an executive order was passed that prevented 9/11 victims from suing Saudi Arabia, even though Speaker 0 stated the government was complicit.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: But even before that, Walter B. Jones Jr. and I fought to get 28 pages of the 9-11 report released. They just redacted 28 straight pages. They didn't put the black marks on it. They just left them blank. And we were able to go to the SCIF and read those 28 pages. And the reason they kept them... By the way, we got them released under Obama. And there's still a few redactions... to limit the embarrassment that the reason they kept those pages out of the report was to protect relationships with Saudi Arabia. Because it wasn't just, you know, most of the hijackers were Saudi Arabian. What they didn't report is the Saudi Arabian government helped and Saudi Arabian spies helped in the United States to help those hijackers, like officials of the government. And they were trying to keep that secret So that there could be no lawsuits toward Saudi Arabia. And then they even passed a certain executive order so that they couldn't even sue Saudi Arabia, the 9-11 victims, even though it was the government that was complicit. Anyways, I've lived through that and got those pages released too. People forget about that.
@TaroWheel - Taro Wheel
Lucas Gage participates in a humiliation ritual with two Zionist Jewish Rabbis where they debunk the "Dancing Israelis" together. This is right after Nick Fuentes and Lucas Gage came together to attack Dan Bilzerian for being a fed. https://t.co/w6BsLxCHS6
Video Transcript AI Summary
The discussion centers on how events escalated and a perceived parallel to the alleged “Dancing Israelis” on a moving truck during 9/11. Speaker 0 suggests that the alleged dancers may have viewed the outcome as America finally understanding what they had been suffering from over the prior 60 years, and as a way to end it. Speaker 0 also describes a “relief” feeling that the war might be over, but Speaker 1 shifts to a different point.
Speaker 1 says an article was sent that debunked the Dancing Israelis claim as a “nothing burger.” Speaker 1 adds that a prominent figure who promotes the 9/11 narrative “crushes it.” Speaker 1 describes an alternative explanation: the individuals were Israelis who worked for a scam moving company, had gotten out of the IDF, were making money, and were there to document the event. In this account, anyone who saw the planes would take a picture, so the claim of foreknowledge used by others is rejected.
Speaker 1 also addresses a claim that a video asserts foreknowledge, noting multiple vans. Speaker 0 responds by questioning why Mossad would send agents in a fake moving truck to watch what was already visible on the news, arguing that they could have seen it that way. Speaker 0 further claims that the story depends on timing and coincidence: the “exact three Mossad agents” in a city of about 8 million would have precisely run into law enforcement and been arrested.
Speaker 1 reiterates that it is a “nothing burger” and says this was learned the previous week. Speaker 1 notes that people might object to their position, while also stating that they posted it on Twitter and pointed others to a broader “whole thing.” Speaker 1 then broadens the context by saying that there are many theories about major events, including October 7th, where some Israelis think it was an inside job, and that the larger issue is the rise of influencers and monetization, mentioning “audience captured” and referencing their own departure in connection with monetization and destructive/ideological actions they were prompted about.
Full Transcript
Speaker 1: It's like, this is going to escalate. And it did escalate.
Speaker 0: I think that maybe could be a parallel between how those alleged dancers on the moving truck on 9-11, that not that they were happy that Americans were dying, but that they saw this as finally America understands what we've been suffering from the last 60 years, and they're going to put an end to it.
Speaker 1: Well, you know what's funny?
Speaker 0: It's like the relief, like, okay, surely now the war is over.
Speaker 1: But you know what's crazy, Jake? The other day, someone sent me an article debunking the Dancing Israelis as a nothing burger. And one of this really prominent figure who promotes the 9-11 narrative, it just crushes it.
Speaker 0: And I never thought of this. Is it even real? I don't even know. I just read about it.
Speaker 1: They were basically Israelis who worked for this scam moving company. It was a scam company. These were a bunch of Israelis. They got out of the IDF. They're just making cash money. They were just guys there. to document the event. Anyone who saw the planes, they were going to take a picture. So they didn't have the foreknowledge people use it as. And then this guy's putting out a video like they had foreknowledge, there's multiple vans.
Speaker 0: Why wouldn't Mossad send a couple of guys with a fake moving truck to watch what's happening? They could have seen it on the news. And then they go on the news and go, we were there. Those exact three Mossad agents in a city of like 8 million, precisely those three ran into law enforcement and were arrested.
Speaker 1: The thing is, it's a nothing burger. And that's me saying, I learned this last week. Now people are going to say, you're saying, no, I actually posted it on Twitter. Hey, go look at this. Look at this whole thing. People are like, oh my God. Because it's just another thing we take for granted. You know, like even like October 7th, there's different theories about what happened. Some Israelis think it was an inside job. I mean, what was, but the point I'm trying to say is there are so many influencers now that going back to, I want to say why I left too, but part of it is because there's monetization now. There's like, remember I said I got audience captured. Lucas, when I got the Talmud, when I got the burn it, destroy it. I think someone told me to do it.
reSee.it AI Summary
I point out that Israel flattened Beirut in 1982, with no Hamas or Hezbollah to point to and no October 7. I note the death toll of about 17,000 Lebanese and Palestinian civilians. I cite Ronald Reagan’s fury at Begin after seeing a photo of a 7-month-old baby. I argue Israel built the resulting endless war, and I say it keeps hiding behind “self-defense.” Own it.
@KUTUBProduction - KUTUB
Israel flattened Beirut in 1982. No Hamas. No Hezbollah. No October 7 to point to then. Just 17,000 dead Lebanese and Palestinian civilians. Even US president then Ronald Reagan, who armed Israel, called Begin furious after seeing a photo of a 7-month-old baby with its arms blown off and said “It is a holocaust”. They killed so many innocent people that the survivors had no choice but to pick up weapons. Then Israel had the audacity to keep using “Self-Defense” excuse every decade. Israel didn’t stumble into endless war. Israel built it. Brick by brick. Own it.
reSee.it AI Summary
I say that you have no real privacy with encrypted systems like ProtonMail or Signal. I claim smartphones are the surveillance device favored by governments worldwide. I call encryption “worthless,” saying safety and privacy are gone. I switch my email every 15 days and urge people to “wake up.”
@TheShadowIntelX - Shadow Intel
John McAfee: "If you think you have any privacy whatsoever with an encrypted system, whether it's an email system like ProtonMail or an encrypted messaging system like Signal, you have no privacy." "Your smartphone is the surveillance device preferred by every government on the planet." "Encryption is a worthless piece of sh*t, old technology that is being marketed as a safe system. There is no safety anymore. There's no privacy." "I change my email every 15 days." "Wake up, people. You have no more privacy."
Video Transcript AI Summary
John McAfee says he is constantly criticized for using Gmail and explains his view on privacy and encryption. He argues that people have “no fucking privacy whatsoever” with encrypted systems such as ProtonMail or Signal, stating that encryption was designed “35 years ago” to prevent man-in-the-middle attacks, but “there’s no man in the middle anymore.” He claims smartphones are “the surveillance device preferred by every government on the planet.”
McAfee says it is easy to plant malware through websites, giving the example of “Go on Pornhub,” and claims that visiting a site can trigger malware installation by marking downloads as authorized. He alleges the malware can watch inputs “before they’re encrypted,” transmit them, and read outputs “after they’re encrypted.”
He characterizes encryption as “worthless” old technology being marketed as safe, asserting “There is no safety anymore” and “There is no privacy.” He says he uses Gmail for one reason: he claims it is the last email company that requires a government subpoena to provide user information, and that the company’s lawyers have “30 days” to review the subpoena. He says “30 days is enough” and that he changes his email “every 15 days.” He concludes by telling people to “wake up” and says they are being sold “a bill of goods” with encryption.
Full Transcript
Speaker 1: Good morning, John McAfee here. I am dissed constantly for using Gmail as my email system. Let me explain something to you. If you think you have any privacy whatsoever with an encrypted system, whether it's an email system like ProtonMail or an encrypted messaging system like Signal, you have no fucking privacy whatsoever. Encryption was designed 35 years ago to prevent a man in the middle attack, meaning someone between your transmission and your receipt. There's no man in the middle anymore. We don't need them. Your fucking smartphone is the surveillance device preferred by every government on the fucking planet. Do you know how easy it is to plant malware? Go on Pornhub if you've been on Pornhub. Someone is now listening to you. All you have to do is do a drive-by of a website and it sets the download on authorized applications flag. The first click, you now have malware that is doing two things. Watching your inputs before they're encrypted and transmitting them. And reading the outputs after they are fucking encrypted, people. Encryption is a worthless piece of shit old technology that is being marketed as a safe system. There is no safety anymore. There is no privacy. I use Gmail for one reason. The last company that requires a fucking subpoena from a government in order to give them your information. And their lawyers have 30 fucking days to review the subpoena. 30 days is enough for me. I change my fucking email every 15 days. Wake up, people. You have no more privacy. You are being sold a fucking bill of goods which is worthless with encryption.
Speaker 0: Man, thank you for listening.
@JasonBassler1 - Jason Bassler
👁️ Looks like a normal electrical box, right? It even has an electricity bolt symbol on the side as a decoy. But it’s fake, inside is a camera. This isn’t a one‑off either, it’s showing up in cities nationwide. https://t.co/6AOUd4i9Jo
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker first assumes the device is a Flock Safety camera, but says it is not. They describe it as a surveillance camera used by local governments and law enforcement. The speaker claims law enforcement uses and hides these cameras by disguising them inside utility-related enclosures, including adding “fake electrical logos” to boxes so they appear to be electrical or utility infrastructure. The speaker characterizes the devices as covert pole cameras used to monitor the public.
They point out an example of “fake and repurposed meter boxes” attached to utility poles. The speaker then references reviewing the video again, stating that when the footage is pulled forward, it shows a fake utility box connected to a pole.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So my first thought here was this had to be a flock safety camera, but it turns out this is not a flock camera. It's a surveillance camera. And who is it used for? It's used by local governments and law enforcement. So yes, law enforcement uses these and they hide them and disguise the cameras inside disclosures like this. So they put fake electrical logos on these boxes. So you think they're electrical boxes, but really, What they are is they're just covert pole cameras that law enforcement can use to monitor the public. Um, so yeah, see, look at this, see fake and repurposed meter boxes that are attached to utility poles. So let's take a look here at the video again. And if we will go ahead and we've pulled forward, we see that this is a fake utility box and look what it's attached to a pole.
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m seeing Trump get fleeced by Iran: the deal offers $24B cash plus oil sales and only 60 days with Hormuz open, letting Iran pocket $30B+ in two months. Day 61 they can close again. Iran’s FM says frozen billions arrive before nuclear talks. More MOU evidence backs it.
@ProfessorPape - Robert A. Pape
Trump is getting fleeced by Iran The deal: • $24B cash + oil sales • Just 60 days of open Hormuz Iran pockets $30B+ in two months Day 61, Iran can close Hormuz again, and repeat the extortion Massive loss for Trump—Huge win for Iran https://t.co/pWstaOl0dW
@ProfessorPape - Robert A. Pape
Evidence for the numbers: FM Iran confirms Iran receives its frozen billions before nuclear talks begin, ie in 60 days https://t.co/UCsfz3HE5K
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0: The discussion of the Strait of Hormuz with its details includes the removal of a naval blockade, the scope of the next round of negotiations and which topics it will cover, including Iran’s share, the lifting of sanctions, and “the mechanism of a sanctions arrangement” presented under the framework of a “sanctions plan” alongside an economic explanation, with its mechanisms set to be agreed on during the subsequent negotiations. Another related track is the discussion of “frozen funds” (مبالغ/پولهای مستوش).
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: خب، بحث تنگه هرمز با جزیاتش هست، رفع محاصره دریایی هست، بحث دور بعدی مذاکره که شامل چه موضوعاتی خواهد بود، بحث حصه ایران، بحث رفع تحریم ها، موضوع باستازی در غالب یک طرح باستازی و توصیح اقتصادی اینجا مطرح شده که سازوکارهاش در طول مذاکرات بعدی به اصطلاح توافق خواهد شد و حالا مسار دیگری که رو خواهد داد بحث پول های مستوش
@ProfessorPape - Robert A. Pape
More evidence Trump would get fleeced by the MOU https://t.co/Wea07ouxQx
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 said Reuters is reporting that part of the deal includes $24 billion in sanctions relief to Iranians. They framed the arrangement as not a situation where “we win and you do what we say,” but instead as a question of how to open up the straits and what it would cost.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: But the other part of this is Reuters is reporting that part of the deal is $24 billion in sanctions relief to the Iranians. So this is not a we win and you do what we say. This is how can we open up the straits? What will it cost us?
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m seeing “mind-blowing hypocrisy”: Trump is celebrating a new Iran nuclear deal based on Iran’s promise to never obtain a nuclear weapon. I’m told that exact same promise was in Obama’s 2015 deal. After Obama was ripped up and “maximum pressure” led to war and deaths, it’s back again—History is laughing.
@ConstitustionX - CONSTITUTIONAL PATRIOT🇺🇸
🚨 MIND-BLOWING HYPOCRISY JUST EXPOSED. Trump is out here popping champagne over a brand new Iran “deal”… …centered on Iran’s sacred promise that they will NEVER obtain a nuclear weapon. Sound familiar? Because ABC’s Jonathan Karl just dropped the bomb: That exact same promise was in the very first paragraph of Obama’s 2015 nuclear deal. Let that sink in. Obama makes the deal → Trump rips it up, slaps on “maximum pressure,” starts a war, costs lives and billions… …only to crawl back and celebrate the exact same core commitment like it’s some historic genius move. Same promise. Different body count. History is laughing. The cycle is complete. What a time to be alive. 🔥 Quote. Repost. Ratio.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Negotiated by President Obama more than a decade ago, Iran makes that promise. President Trump tore up that agreement in his first term.
On Wall Street today, SpaceX went public with what was described as the biggest IPO ever launched. The deal making Elon Musk was described as making him the world’s first.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: NEGOTIATED BY PRESIDENT OBAMA MORE THAN A DECADE AGO, IRAN MAKES THAT PROMISE. That was an agreement, of course, that President Trump tore up in his first term.
Speaker 1: All right, John, our thanks to you tonight. Now to the history made on Wall Street today. SpaceX going public, the biggest IPO ever launched. The deal making Elon Musk the world's first.
@MLFootball - MLFootball
🚨🚨THIS IS CRAZY🚨🚨 THE #CHIEFS HAVE A 150-FOOT-BELOW-GROUND SECRET UNDERGROUND BUNKER UNDER THE STADIUM. The team stores a lot of their memorabilia and valuable assets in this tunnel. Pat Mahomes & Travis Kelce were shocked. Many do not know this. https://t.co/Cay4mHUGZ0
Video Transcript AI Summary
A viewer says they have been at the location for eight years and never knew it existed, describing it as “one with the earth.” They remark on how far away it looks and compare it to a “James Bond” supervillain set, then suggest it looks like something “Indiana Jones.”
The discussion turns serious inside a Kansas City Chiefs history space containing “a lot of artifacts.” Speaker 0 introduces Bob Moore as the Chiefs historian, explaining he was tasked with compiling the Chiefs archives and that the archives are where the history of the Kansas City Chiefs is kept. They ask, “Are we allowed to touch?” and Speaker 2 responds that they are, saying, “Let’s make it serious.”
Speaker 2 highlights an actual Chiefs playbook from the 1960s, stating it is dated “65” and referencing “Josh Bauer Trap,” saying, “We gotta run that.” Another person examines a check and reads what it says: exactly “$48.50,” describing it as what they were paid for playing that game. They then say that, back then, that amount was “like a million dollars.”
The conversation adds that Coach Hank Stram wore an item “at practice.” Speaker 2 also mentions Chiefs-related context, saying that when you play for the Chiefs, it won’t take long to learn that your head is used for more than something unspecified, and notes that “not very many teams have a collection like this.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Welcome to the underground.
Speaker 1: I've been here for eight years and never even known this existed. Wow, huh? We're one with the earth right here. Man, you see how far in the distance this is? Dude, this is crazy. This looks like a... James Bond, like, supervillain. Hey, you might be on to something.
Speaker 0: Like, you go in there, yeah.
Speaker 1: I want that little Indiana Jones.
Speaker 2: When you're going to play for the Chiefs, it won't take long to learn that your head is used for more than... Not very many teams have a collection like this
Speaker 0: We've got a lot of artifacts. This is Bob Moore, the chief's historian. He was tasked with compiling the chief's archives, which is, this is where we keep the history of the Kansas City Chiefs. Are we allowed to touch?
Speaker 2: Yeah. All right. Let's make it serious. This is an actual playbook from the 1960s. 65, Josh Bauer Trap. We gotta run that.
Speaker 1: I just want you to look at this check and tell me what's it say. It says exactly $48.50. This is what I got paid for playing that game. Back then, that was like a million dollars, right? Coach, Hank Stram wore this at practice.
@Warrllion - WarrLion
The United States of Common Sense Since you want to target Americans like @AustinFranco123, I'll return the favor. I got all of your homes, corporate offices, Pier 5, your lawyers, your tax accounts, Tiberius Offices, Tayler.. Your assests need to be forfeited for that stunt. https://t.co/6aYZKzO53o
reSee.it AI Summary
I was convinced my phone was hacked when ads for a niche coffee brand appeared right after I mentioned it. My battery drained and the camera dot flashed randomly, so I went to wipe my data and buy a new phone. The tech worker said I wasn’t hacked—“legal spyware” settings were harvesting data, and he helped me shut them off.
@thetripathi58 - Chidanand Tripathi
A woman was convinced her phone was hacked. She talked about a niche brand of coffee out loud, and 10 minutes later, an ad for it appeared on her Instagram. Her battery was draining, and the green "camera" dot kept randomly flashing. She went to the carrier store to completely wipe her data and buy a brand new phone. The tech worker stopped her: "Before you spend $1,200, let me show you something." He opened her Settings and shook his head. "You aren't hacked. There are 8 'legal spyware' settings harvesting your data right now. Apps turn them on by default. Let's shut them down." Here is what he showed her in the next 8 minutes. 🧵