reSee.it - Tweets Saved By @OunkaOnX
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
Israel's regime change fantasy just got reality-checked by CNN reporters walking around Tehran. No panic. No collapse. No uprising https://t.co/hE5lfEYsP9
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 describes a rest stop during a long drive, noting several consistent observations across the area they’ve encountered.
First, they mention taking a quick break for coffee after driving for several hours. This sets the scene of a routine stop during a lengthy journey. The primary observations follow as a set of practical, on-the-ground details about the local environment and daily life at the moment of their stop.
Regarding retail availability, Speaker 0 reports that all the shops are open. This implies normal operating hours and accessible services at the stop or nearby commercial areas. They further note that the shops are “really well stocked,” including fresh items such as fruits and vegetables. This detail emphasizes the breadth and freshness of the inventory, suggesting that grocery offerings are readily available and not depleted.
In addition to groceries, they point out the availability of coffee, confirming that beverages and, specifically, coffee products, are in ample supply at the time of the stop. This highlights continued access to common travel-appropriate refreshments.
Another key observation concerns fuel availability. Speaker 0 states that gas stations have no long lines and that fuel seems readily available. This indicates smooth access to refueling without congestion, which is particularly relevant to long-distance travelers who depend on reliable fuel supply and efficient service.
A broader mood is also conveyed through the absence of panic. Speaker 0 explicitly says that you “don’t see any sort of degree of panic anywhere.” This remark suggests a calm, orderly environment at the moment of their stop, contrasting with possible concerns travelers might have in other contexts.
Taken together, these points form a picture of stable, accessible services at the rest stop: shops open and well stocked with fresh produce, coffee available, fuel readily accessible with no long lines, and an overall calm atmosphere without signs of panic. The emphasis remains on practical, observable conditions that would affect the traveler’s experience, rather than personal opinions or predictions about broader conditions.
In essence, Speaker 0’s notes portray a routine, uneventful stop characterized by normal commerce and steady logistics, with particular emphasis on fresh groceries, beverage options, and dependable fuel access, all occurring in a low-stress environment.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Taking a quick break for a coffee along the way. We've been driving for several hours. There's a couple of things that we've noticed. Number one is that, first of all, all the shops are open. All the shops are really well stocked even with with fresh things, like, for instance, fruits and vegetables.
Coffee, obviously, also available as well. And then also the gas stations, there's no long lines as gas stations. Fuel seems readily available, and you just don't see any sort of degree of panic anywhere.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
Blaming Russia for Epstein is the media's final act of cowardice. They can't touch the Mossad connection because it leads back to the same outlets, politicians, and lobbies that sign their checks https://t.co/d1jGMhzEjR
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses Epstein-related documents and the implications people draw from them. They claim:
- The memo circulated with media suggesting Jeffrey Epstein worked for the KGB, and that Epstein might have had multiple passports, talked to Israeli politicians and Jewish businessmen, and repeatedly invokes his Jewish identity.
- In an email with former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, Epstein says he’s totally not working for Mossad.
- Former Mossad officer Ari Ben Menashe says Epstein was working for Mossad.
- In documents, Mark Iverson states that Robert Maxwell, Ghislaine Maxwell, and Jeffrey Epstein were working for Mossad; the speaker asserts that Robert Maxwell was not a Soviet spy.
- British Foreign Office and Israeli whistleblowers say Epstein was working for Mossad, and he was given a hero’s burial in Israel, not in Russia.
- In an actual email with Peter Thiel, Epstein says that he represents the Rothschild family.
- The speaker poses questions: If a Russian passport proves he works for Russia, does boarding CIA planes prove he works for the United States? If he has a blackmail list on United Kingdom politicians, does that prove he works for the British? If he talks to Emmanuel Macron and prime minister Nicolas Sarkozy, does that prove he works for the French? The speaker concludes that, regardless, Epstein’s primary loyalties are with his people.
- The speaker asserts that Zionists on Twitter claim the Epstein documents are a “nothingburger,” and urge continuing with other topics; they accuse those who disagreed of having low IQ and claim the documents reveal clear content with their own eyes.
- Senator Bernie Sanders is described as saying this is a cautionary tale about wealth and power; the speaker counters by saying “your cousins” are helping orchestrate this, and that Sanders has repeatedly criticized Israel.
- The speaker accuses proponents of diverting attention from the primary culprit and states that such attempts are not working on anyone.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: People think you're really stupid. I'd rather talk about so many other things, but we have to talk about this. The memo went out and the media is trying to say that Jeffrey Epstein worked for the KGB. He might have had multiple passports, but he talked to Israeli politicians, Jewish businessmen, and repeatedly invokes his Jewish identity. In an email with the former prime minister of Israel Ehud Barak, he says he's totally not working for Mossad.
Former Mossad officer Ari Ben Menashe says that he was working for Mossad. In the documents, Mark Iverson says Robert Maxwell, Ghislaine Maxwell, and Jeffrey Epstein were working for Mossad. Robert Maxwell was not a Soviet spy either. Just to get ahead of this one, the British Foreign Office and Israeli whistleblowers say that he was working for Mossad, and he was given a hero's burial in Israel, not in Russia. In an actual email with Peter Thiel, Jeffrey Epstein says that he represents the Rothschild family.
If a Russian passport proves he works for Russia, does him boarding CIA planes prove he works for The United States? Does him having a blackmail list on United Kingdom politicians prove he works for the British? Does him talking to Emmanuel Macron and prime minister Nicholas Sarkozy prove he works for the French? No. His primary loyalties are with his people.
Zionists on Twitter keep saying that, man, these are a snooze fest. The Epstein documents were a nothingburger. Go back to talking about whatever you were talking about before. Or you'd have to be low IQ to think this is even possible. We can see, with our own two eyes, what's in these documents.
Senator Bernie Sanders says this is actually a cautionary tale about wealth and power. Well, senator, it's actually your cousins who are helping orchestrate this, and you've continuously criticized Israel. Why aren't you criticizing Israel now? Let me just say this. The desperate attempts to steer your attention away from the primary culprit are not working on anyone.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
Former CIA Tel Aviv Station Chief admits U.S. and Israeli Mossad work hand-in-glove with terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS and Epstein docs show U.S. helped ISIS. CIA and Mossad created, funded, and managed Al-Qaeda and ISIS. This isn't conspiracy. It's a fact. https://t.co/f9dRvLydUR
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 describes a dynamic of collaboration and tension around Iran, noting that the Israelis are “very American” and that they could have shouting matches in meetings over whose idea is best, but then go have lunch and remain amicable. He emphasizes that Israelis are good allies that the U.S. needs to protect, and asserts that CIA and Al Qaeda “worked closely together in Iraq. And Syria.”
Speaker 1 adds that in Syria the aim was to overthrow Assad.
Speaker 0 explains that there were times when covert action findings allowed meetings to talk to the “quote, unquote, enemies” to try to bring things down, as CIA officers.
Speaker 1 observes that most of the world has a problem with Al Qaeda and ISIS (Daesh), but implies the CIA’s cooperation with ISIS and Al Qaeda lowers that problem.
Speaker 0 argues that if the plan is for the U.S. to work with them, to work on a security agreement, which has been done with enemies before, the U.S. would have played that role side by side with diplomats and other involved countries, and he wouldn’t be surprised if that were happening; he calls it possibly hopeful.
Speaker 1 notes that newspapers in the United States once celebrated Qasem Soleimani as a fighter with American troops against ISIS and Al Qaeda, and now that stance has changed. The speaker concludes with the reversal of priorities: “Now we have to go to Als ISIS and Al Qaeda to go back against Iran.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now we have to go to als ISIS and Al Qaeda to go back against, Iran. What I loved about working with the Israelis is they're very American. We could get into shouting matches during meetings sometimes. Not like we're super mad, but we're trying to really say, well, my idea is best. When my idea is best kind of thing.
And then we'd be like, hey. You wanna go have lunch? And we're all fine. You know? It was just a really it it's a really nice place to work.
They're good allies of ours. We need to protect them. I do know for a fact that that we argue sometimes with them, but I also know for a fact that we're committed to helping protect them, keep their state. You mean CIA and Al Qaeda worked closely together in Iraq. And Syria.
Speaker 1: And And in Syria to overthrow Assad, of course.
Speaker 0: It's it's overthrow Assad and stuff like that. There were times when our covert action would allow us findings would allow us to go and actually have meetings and talk to the, quote, unquote, enemies to try to bring things down as CIA officers.
Speaker 1: Everyone, most of the world, has a problem with Al Qaeda and ISIS Daesh. Right. Right. You have less of a problem because the CIA worked with ISIS Daesh and al and Al Qaeda.
Speaker 0: If we worked with them, we would know what they were doing better. That's for sure. And understand it. If the plan is for us to work with them, to work on a security agreement, which we have done with enemies before. And we've played that part as long as well as side by side with the diplomats, honestly, and whatever other countries are involved.
And so I wouldn't be surprised if that was happening, and I would call it possibly hopeful.
Speaker 1: In fact, that is why the newspapers once in The United States celebrated Qasem Soleimani, the as a fighter with the American troops against ISIS and Al Qaeda. He was,
Speaker 0: and now it's switched. Now we have to go to als ISIS and Al Qaeda to go back against Iran.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
Graham - "To any ally, Canada, Britain, Germany, France, if you try to help the ICC(for arresting Netanyahu), we're going to sanction you." The rule is simple: Israel does what it wants, America attacks who it wants, and law is for the weak. https://t.co/in2bVcSBCa
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 warned that if any ally tries to help the ICC, they will be sanctioned. They said, "we're gonna sanction you," and that "we should crush your economy because we're next." They referenced Justin in Canada and his position, asking, "What should the penalty be?"
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So to any ally, Canada, Britain, Germany, France, if you try to help the ICC, we're gonna sanction you. Well, that means I want every ally. And you saw little Justin in Canada and his position. What should the penalty be? We should crush your economy because we're next.
Why can't
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
DIFFERENT WARS, SAME PROPAGANDA https://t.co/wFd3R8yGxq
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker lays out a prepared, all-options approach to confrontation, emphasizing that both an easier and a harder path are available and acceptable. They assert that the United States will "give them full opportunity to do it the easy way," and when that fails, will proceed with the "hard way," underscoring a willingness to escalate if necessary. The stance is framed as a choice between leveraging an easier, targeted strategy or adopting stronger measures if diplomacy or limited action does not achieve the objectives.
A central motive centers on perceived threats to the United States, specifically naming chemical weapons as a threat. The speaker identifies chemical weapons as a threat to the United States and also flags fentanyl as posing a chemical weapons threat, extending the danger from state actors to non-state crises and illicit trafficking. This framing links conventional security concerns with the broader chemical threat landscape.
The discussion explicitly mentions Iraq and Venezuela as focal points for action, signaling the intention to address activities or regimes in those regions. The speaker highlights the presence of Al Qaeda terrorists inside Iraq and characterizes them as part of “Al Qaeda of our hemisphere,” suggesting a regional dimension to the terrorist threat that could be leveraged to justify intervention or action.
There is a stated belief that removing Saddam Hussein could transform the region. The speaker asserts that getting rid of Saddam "could really begin to transform the region" and describes there as "an opportunity to transform the entire region." This frames regime change in a transformative, strategic light, presenting it as a catalyst for broader democratic and freedom-oriented change.
The rhetoric emphasizes the promotion of freedom and democracy as a guiding objective, describing democracy and freedom as concepts that "can serve as a beacon of hope." The final fragment, "Shark cannot," appears as an incomplete or garbled closing thought, attached to a broader theme of capability or constraint, leaving an abstract or unresolved note at the end.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'm not even gonna play around anymore. Fuck it. Hit me with the works. Iraq, Venezuela. Go.
We're giving them full opportunity to do it the easy way. And when it doesn't work, we'll do it the hard way. If we could do things the easy way, that's fine. And if we have to do it the hard way, that's fine too. Chemical weapons is a threat to The United States.
Fentanyl poses a chemical weapons threat to The United States. Al Qaeda terrorists inside Iraq. Al Qaeda of our hemisphere. If we can get rid of Saddam, it could really begin to transform the region. There an opportunity to transform the entire region.
Bringing freedom and democracy. Democracy and freedom. Can serve as a beacon of hope. Shark cannot.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
The rule is simple: the more oil a country has, the bigger the “threat” it suddenly becomes to the U.S. Funny how that works. 💰🛢️ Venezuela Explained...!! https://t.co/XHrxbFuQty
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 outlines a discussion on global threats and resources. The audience quickly names Russia as the major threat, with China and North Korea also suggested; Venezuela is mentioned by one participant as well. The speaker then pivots to a question about natural resources: which place has the largest oil deposit on the planet, more than Saudi Arabia or Iran? The answer highlighted is Venezuela, noted as arguably the single greatest source of oil and minerals on the planet.
The focus shifts to Venezuela’s leadership: President Nicholas Reyes, who rose to power on nationalist pride and, in six years, has crippled the national economy by half and raised the poverty rate by almost 400%. Reyes is up for reelection. His opponent is Gloria Bonaldi, described as a history professor turned activist, running on a social justice platform. The speaker adds a claim about predictions for Venezuela’s future, stating that as of today the chances of total economic collapse are 87%.
Media framing is contrasted: on the news, Venezuela would be called a crisis, but on the world stage it would be called a failed state. The speaker notes other examples of failed states in recent history—Yemen, Iraq, and Syria. A further point is made that Venezuela is the only one of these places within a thirty-minute range from the US of “next gen nuclear missiles.” The claim continues that you will not hear about any of this on the news because the biggest players on the world stage do not want you to; unstable governments are seen, in their view, as opportunities.
The closing assertion is that Russia and China can never be the most major threat until countries like Venezuela leave the door open to the United States’ backyard.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What would you assume is the most major threat on the world stage? Anybody, just call it out. You don't have to raise your hand. Definitely Russia. Definitely Russia.
That's confident. I like it. Who says Russia? Anybody agree with her? And okay.
Great. Who else? China. Stop yelling at me, but China is a good answer. Anybody?
Who else? China? North Korea. North Korea. Any North Korea takers?
And Venezuela? Anybody? No? Oh, yeah. One guy in the back.
Little worried about Venezuela. Everybody's cool with Venezuela? No threat? Okay. Let me ask you this.
Which one of these places can claim to have the largest oil deposit on the planet? More than Saudi? More than Iran? Wow. Okay.
What about things like gold? More than all the mines in Africa combined? The fact is that Venezuela is arguably the single greatest resource of oil and minerals on the planet. So why is this country in the midst of one of the greatest humanitarian crises in modern history? Let's meet president Nicholas Reyes.
After rising to power on a wave of nationalist pride in a mere six years, this guy has crippled the national economy by half. He has raised the poverty rate by almost 400%. Luckily for the rest of us, he's up for reelection. So who's running against him? This is Gloria Bonaldi.
Now Gloria is a history professor turned activist. She's running against him on a social justice platform and on the strength of, in my humble opinion, just not being predictions as of today have the chances of Venezuela's total economic collapse at 87%. On the news, they'll call it a crisis. But on the world stage, they'll call it a failed state. You've never heard that term.
Other examples of a failed state in recent history are Yemen, Iraq, and Syria. And if that's not bad enough news for you, well, Venezuela is also the only one of these places within thirty minute range from The US of next gen nuclear missiles. You will not hear about any of this on the news because the biggest players on the world stage do not want you to. To them, unstable governments are nothing more than the greatest of opportunity. So Russia, China can never be the most major threat until countries like Venezuela leave the door open to our very own backyard.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
META's Head of Jewish Diaspora, Jordana Cutler, told she used her role to secure "specific protections for Israelis and Jews "We banned content claiming Zionists run the world or control the media..." https://t.co/6HIYaY6spB
Video Transcript AI Summary
Meta’s efforts to engage with the Jewish diaspora and address antisemitism on its platforms are highlighted through a newly created role focused on the Jewish diaspora. The speaker emphasizes that Meta’s commitment to addressing antisemitism has remained steadfast, especially after October 7, and asserts that Meta’s policies are industry-leading in protecting Jewish people and Israelis on its platforms. The company’s community standards include policies that prevent harassment, violence, and incitement, and feature a robust framework to combat antisemitism.
The hateful conduct policy includes specific protections for Israelis and Jews. Holocaust denial and distortion were banned back in 2020, with Meta’s approach shifting industry thinking by designating denial as hate speech rather than misinformation. The emphasis was not only on facts but on protecting people from harmful conduct. Meta banned content with harmful stereotypes about Jews, such as the claim that Jews run the world or other major institutions. The policies were updated to recognize that the term Zionist can be used as a proxy for Jews and Israelis. Meta banned content claiming Zionists run the world or control the media, and it does not allow for dehumanizing comparisons of Zionists.
The speaker notes finding a delicate balance between safety and expression. The role is intended to ensure that the voices of Israelis and the Jewish community are heard in the policy making process.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In addition to my work leading the Israel public policy team, I created a new role specifically focused on the Jewish diaspora. It is a privilege to represent Meta to Jewish communities worldwide. I am proud that Meta's commitment to addressing antisemitism on our platforms has remained steadfast, especially after October 7. Our policies are industry leading in protecting Jewish people and Israelis on our platforms. Our community standards include policies that prevent harassment, violence, and incitement, and include a robust framework to combat antisemitism.
Our hateful conduct policy includes specific protections for Israelis and Jews. We banned holocaust denial and distortion back in 2020. We changed industry thinking on this issue, designating denial as hate speech rather than misinformation. It wasn't just about facts. It was about protecting people from harmful conduct.
We banned content with harmful stereotypes about Jews such as the claim that Jews run the world or other major institutions. We updated our policies to recognize that the term Zionist can be used as a proxy for Jews and Israelis. We banned content claiming Zionists run the world or control the media, and we do not allow for dehumanizing comparisons of Zionists. It's a delicate balance between safety and expression. My role is to ensure that the voices of Israelis and the Jewish community are heard in this policy making process.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
"I SUPPORTED ISRAEL FOR 20 YEARS... I GOT IT WRONG." - UK MP Mark Pritchard https://t.co/rgPYpk0cqA
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker reflects that after twenty years of backing Israel, they have realized they were wrong and now condemn Israel’s actions in Gaza and the West Bank. They state they would like to withdraw support for those current actions. They affirm that hostages should be released and acknowledge Israel’s right to exist, as well as the right of the Israeli people and Jewish people to live in peace, while insisting that the Palestinian people also have the right to live in peace. They reiterate the belief that the life of a Palestinian child is as precious as the life of a Jewish child, asserting that the country has got it wrong.
The speaker calls on the minister to stand up to the United States and to allied partners to make a strong stand for humanity, and to be on the right side of history. They urge for moral courage to lead rather than merely follow the United States, and to make a difference. The message emphasizes that everyone elected should stand up for life, extending protection and dignity to all children, not only Jewish children.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In this house twenty years. I have supported Israel pretty much at all cost quite frankly. But today, I want to say that I got it wrong. And I condemn Israel for what it is doing to the Palestinian people in Gaza and indeed in the West Bank. And I'd like to withdraw my support right now for the actions of Israel, what they are doing right now in Gaza.
Of course, the hostages hostages should be released. Of course, the Israel has a right to exist. Of course, the Israeli people and the Jewish people should have the right to live in peace, but so do the Palestinian people. And I've said it before, and I'll say it again, that the life of a Palestinian child is as precious as the life of a Jewish child. We've got it wrong as a country.
Can the minister stand up to our friends and allies in United States and make a strong stand for humanity? Yes. For us being on the right side of history. Yeah. Yeah.
For having the moral courage to lead, not just to follow The United States, and to make a difference. That's why we're all elected here. Let's stand up for life. Let's stand up for all children, not just Jewish children.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
Ana Kasparian uncovers YouTube’s covert removal of 700+ clips documenting Israeli war crimes — A clear assist to the US in covering up Israeli war crimes https://t.co/W3iQ9Mv3Qb
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker asserts that YouTube quietly deleted more than 700 videos documenting Israeli human rights violations, war crimes, and related abuses as part of an effort by the U.S. government to bury evidence of Israel’s actions in Gaza and the West Bank. According to The Intercept, YouTube surreptitiously deleted these videos in early October by wiping the accounts that posted them from the site along with their channel archives. The affected accounts belonged to three prominent Palestinian human rights groups: Al Haq, Al Mezan, the Center for Human Rights, and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights. These three YouTube channels hosted hours of footage documenting and highlighting alleged Israeli government violations of international law in Gaza and the West Bank. The speaker emphasizes the importance of preserving this record to counter Hasbara and ensure documentation of war crimes for historical record, stating that there is a real and successful effort to wipe the Internet of these videos. The deleted content ranges from investigations, such as an analysis of the Israeli killing of American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, to testimonies of Palestinians tortured by Israeli forces, and documentaries like The Beach about children playing on a beach who were killed by an Israeli strike. The Intercept notes that the deletion affected the groups’ official channels, and not their alternate channels; videos reposted on other channels remain viewable. The speaker adds that while the official channels were deleted, other channels still host copies.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It looks like YouTube has quietly deleted more than 700 videos that document Israeli human rights violations, war crimes, and other abuses as part of an effort by our government here in The United States to essentially bury evidence of Israel's war crimes in Gaza and the West Bank. Now according to reporting from The Intercept, YouTube surreptitiously deleted all these videos in early October by wiping the accounts that posted them from its website along with their channel's archives. The accounts belong to three prominent Palestinian human rights groups, Al Haq, Al Mezan, Center for Human Rights, and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights. These three YouTube channels hosted hours of footage documenting and highlighting alleged Israeli government violations of inter international law in both, Gaza and the West Bank. And it's really important to have that record because as we know, the Hasbara coming from Israel is strong.
Our politicians are bought and oftentimes bought on behalf of Israel on behalf of doing favors for Israel. And I don't want what has happened over the last two years to be misrepresented in history books in the future. I want documentation of the war crimes that have been committed. But there is a very real effort and a successful effort at that to essentially wipe the Internet of these videos. So, the deleted videos range in scope from investigations, such as an analysis of the Israeli killing of American journalist, Shireen Abu Akle, to testimonies of Palestinians tortured by Israeli forces and documentaries like The Beach about children playing on a beach who were killed by an Israeli strike.
So according to The Intercept, the deletion only affected the group's, basically, their official channels. And any of the alternate channels they might have or if the videos had been reposted by other channels. Luckily, those channels are still active. Those videos are still viewable. But
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
Former CIA Tel Aviv Station Chief admits the truth: The U.S. and Israeli Mossad work hand-in-glove with terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS. They manage it, fund it, and use it to topple governments and counter Iran. https://t.co/0yCGbQxoUk
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 discusses working with the Israelis, describing them as “very American” and noting that they could get into shouting matches during meetings over whose idea was best, followed by casual lunch and reconciliation. He emphasizes that Israel is a good ally that the U.S. needs to protect and support, and he asserts that CIA and Al Qaeda had worked closely together in Iraq and in Syria, and that there are times when covert action allowed meetings with the “quote unquote, enemies” to try to bring things down as CIA officers.
Speaker 1 adds that most of the world has a problem with Al Qaeda and ISIS/Daesh, but there is less of a problem because the CIA worked with ISIS/Daesh and Al Qaeda. He suggests that if the CIA worked with them, it would be better to understand what they were doing, and if the plan is for the U.S. to work with them on a security agreement, which has been done with enemies before, then this has been done in concert with diplomats and other countries involved. He indicates he wouldn’t be surprised if that was happening and would call it possibly hopeful.
Speaker 0 continues by noting that newspapers in the United States once celebrated Qasem Soleimani as a fighter with American troops against ISIS and Al Qaeda. He states that Soleimani “was, and now it's switched,” implying a shift in perception or policy. The overarching theme is the idea of collaboration or coordination with hostile or extremist groups in pursuit of broader strategic objectives, including countering Iran, and the possibility that such collaborations could be framed as necessary or hopeful within a complex web of alliances and covert actions.
Speaker 0 ends by reiterating the shift in stance: “Now we have to go to al ISIS and Al Qaeda to go back against Iran.” This underscores a cyclical or ironic pivot in U.S. strategy, moving from partnering with certain adversaries against common threats to reengaging those same groups to counter another adversary. The dialogue presents a candid view of realpolitik, suggesting that relationships with seemingly incompatible actors and shifts in alliances occur as part of broader geopolitical objectives, with collaboration sometimes described as acceptable when it serves strategic goals, and public narratives sometimes contrasting with behind-the-scenes actions.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now we have to go to al ISIS and Al Qaeda to go back against, Iran. What I loved about working with the Israelis is they're very American. We could get into shouting matches during meetings sometimes. Not like we're super mad, but we're trying to really say, but my idea is best. When my idea is best kind of thing.
And then we'd be like, hey. You wanna go have lunch? And we're all fine. You know? It was just a really it it's a really nice place to work.
They're good allies of ours. We need to protect them. I do know for a fact that that we argue sometimes with them, but I also know for a fact that we're committed to helping protect them, keep their state. You mean CIA and Al Qaeda worked closely together in Iraq.
Speaker 1: And Syria. And And in Syria to overthrow Assad, of course.
Speaker 0: It's it's overthrow Assad and stuff like that. There were times when our covert action would allow us findings would allow us to go and actually have meetings and talk to the, quote unquote, enemies to try to bring things down as CIA officers.
Speaker 1: Everyone, most of the world, has a problem with Al Qaeda and ISIS Daesh. Right. Right. You have less of a problem because the CIA worked with ISIS Daesh and al and Al Qaeda.
Speaker 0: If we worked with them, we would know what they were doing better, that's for sure, and understand it. If the plan is for us to work with them, to work on a security agreement, which we have done with enemies before, and we've played that part as long as well as side by side with the diplomats, honestly, and whatever other countries are involved. And so I wouldn't be surprised if that was happening, and I would call it possibly hopeful.
Speaker 1: In fact, that is why the newspapers once in The United States celebrated Qasem Soleimani, the as a fighter with the American troops against ISIS and Al Qaeda.
Speaker 0: He was, and now it's switched. Now we have to go to als ISIS and Al Qaeda to go back against Iran.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
A reported IDF whistleblower claims that supplies from roughly 1,000 aid trucks were dumped into dug-out pits or burned, and that the military destroyed the aid and later accused Hamas for it https://t.co/zZjJIzhgYv
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
This is how deep AIPAC’s control goes — Congress doesn’t debate policy anymore, it takes instructions. 🇮🇱💰 America’s interests come second. Always. https://t.co/IChO7upr1Z
Video Transcript AI Summary
US senators. Last year, 93 out of 100 US senators were people whose campaigns had been funded by Israel, APAC, and the Israel lobby. 93 out of 100 US senators were taking money from a group that represents a foreign government and foreign interests in order to operate our government on behalf of someone else, and they all work here in this building.
This is representative Ro Khanna from California, and he does not take APEC money according to their website TrackAPEC. Here's what he had to say.
"It's too much. I mean, it's too much. If you have people who have a particular point of view, in Apex case, they're basically whatever Netanyahu does is right. That's their point of view. And they're saying, okay, you don't take that view, we may come after you. We may have millions of dollars spent against you."
Now ask any American content creator what the scariest subject to cover is, and the answer is Israel. Even YouTubers I know will say their channels were shadowbanned for months after covering them. And folks, the plot around free speech thickens. News just broke that Larry Ellison, cofounder of Oracle, will be buying TikTok, a platform where young people can freely exchange unfiltered ideas. No Israel connection here.
Right? Wrong. Ellison is one of the IDF's largest private donors, giving the army tens of millions of dollars through Friends of the IDF, a nonprofit that brands itself as a nonpolitical, nonmilitary organization, but somehow also is the official US partner of Israel soldiers.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: US senators. Last year, 93 out of 100 US senators were people whose campaigns had been funded by Israel, APAC, and the Israel lobby. 93 out of 100 US senators were taking money from a group that represents a foreign government and foreign interests in order to operate our government on behalf of someone else, and they all work here in this building.
Speaker 1: This is representative Ro Khanna from California, and he does not take APEC money according to their website TrackAPEC. Here's what he had to say.
Speaker 2: It's too much. I mean, it's too much. If you have people who have a particular point of view, in Apex case, they're basically whatever Netanyahu does is right. That's their point of view. And they're saying, okay, you don't take that view, we may come after you.
We may have millions of dollars spent against you.
Speaker 1: Now ask any American content creator what the scariest subject to cover is, and the answer is Israel. Even YouTubers I know will say their channels were shadowbanned for months after covering them. And folks, the plot around free speech thickens. News just broke that Larry Ellison, cofounder of Oracle, will be buying TikTok, a platform where young people can freely exchange unfiltered ideas. No Israel connection here.
Right? Wrong. Ellison is one of the IDF's largest private donors, giving the army tens of millions of dollars through Friends of the IDF, a nonprofit that brands itself as a nonpolitical, nonmilitary organization, but somehow also is the official US partner of Israel soldiers.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
“Sir, we’re here because you criticized Israel online.” A man in Texas says local police showed up at his door over his posts — looks like free speech expires the moment Tel Aviv gets mentioned. https://t.co/k1VmmUxDrF
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0: We're here because of the comments you made online about The
Speaker 1: US community. Are you So what? I'm saying are are you I have a freedom of speech, dude. Yeah. No.
Speaker 0: We we we get that. We get that. We just we gotta make sure that you're not Do you have warrant? No. And what you're doing is basically soliciting.
Speaker 1: You understand that. Right? Yeah. Means you're not welcomed here. Okay.
Speaker 0: K. Bye. Okay. Stay off the lawn, please.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We're here because of the comments you made online about The
Speaker 1: US community. Are you So what? I'm saying are are you I have a freedom of speech, dude. Yeah. No.
We we we get that. We get that. We just we gotta make sure that you're not Do you have warrant? No. And what you're doing is basically soliciting.
You understand that. Right? Yeah. Means you're not welcomed here. Okay.
K. Bye. Okay. Stay off the lawn, please.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
Mossad's entire business model is blackmail,hacking, and intimidation. Israel isn't a country; it's a criminal syndicate with a flag and a U.S. credit line. https://t.co/hgcsTcGQ1s
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 states that Mossad perfected the art of blackmailing people and also perfected industrial, electronic espionage. They claim everybody snoops, but the Israelis are actually running the electronic systems for the US government. The speaker asserts that in the United States, all politicians are groomed and that you don’t get to be president unless you’re bought and paid for. They further claim that the CIA, FBI, and NSA have been spying on and blackmailing all of the politicians. The speaker adds that veterans understand war is for bankers, war is waste, and that the US should not be going to war; a recommendation is made to close all 1,000 overseas bases and bring the troops home. Finally, they identify a new element of the deep state they hadn’t recognized before: the secret intelligence community, described as the people who smuggle guns, gold, drugs, cash, and small children as part of the totality of the deep state shadow government enterprise.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The the Mossad perfected the art of blackmailing people. They've also perfected the art of industrial, electronic espionage. Everybody snoops, but the Israelis actually are running the electronic systems for the US government. But what I have found in The United States is that all of our politicians are groomed. You don't get to be president unless you're bought and paid for.
Now I've also learned that CIA, FBI, and NSA have been spying on and blackmailing all of our politicians. Veterans understand that war is for bankers, war is waste, and we should not be going to war in America. We need to close all 1,000 of our bases overseas and bring our troops up. One element of the deep state I didn't before was the secret intelligence community. Those are the people who are smuggling guns, gold, drugs, cash, small children as part of the totality of the deep state shadow government enterprise.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
“Sir, we’re here because you criticized Israel online.” A man in Texas says local police showed up at his door over his posts — looks like free speech expires the moment Tel Aviv gets mentioned. https://t.co/k1VmmUxDrF
Video Transcript AI Summary
The first speaker says they are here because of online comments the other person made about the US community. The second speaker asserts freedom of speech. The first speaker acknowledges that but says they must ensure compliance, asking, “Do you have a warrant?” and stating, “What you’re doing is basically soliciting.” The second speaker says, “Yeah,” insisting on freedom of speech. The first speaker notes, “We get that. We just…,” then declares, “You understand that. Right?,” and asserts, “Means you’re not welcomed here. Okay. Bye.” They add, “Stay off the lawn, please.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We're here because of the comments you made online about The
Speaker 1: US community. Are you So what? I'm saying are are you I have a freedom of speech, dude. Yeah. No.
We we we get that. We get that. We just we gotta make sure that you're not Do you have warrant? No. And what you're doing is basically soliciting.
You understand that. Right? Yeah. Means you're not welcomed here. Okay.
K. Bye. Okay. Stay off the lawn, please.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
An Old Puppet Show Mocking Israel's Ex-Prime Minister Is Going Viral For Its Accuracy Over 30 Years Later https://t.co/aaUdLgtwi3
reSee.it AI Summary
I saw Netanyahu on hidden video in 2001 brag about tricking Clinton, crushing Palestinians, and locking in occupation. After 9/11 he pushed US wars to expand “Greater Israel.” Now he calls annexation a “historic mission”—70,000+ killed, 20,000 children dead for settlements.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
In 2001, Netanyahu was caught on hidden camera bragging about tricking Clinton, crushing Palestinians, and locking in occupation. After 9/11, he pushed U.S. wars in Iraq & beyond to expand “Greater Israel.” Today, he openly calls annexing Gaza, West Bank & beyond a “historic mission.” 70,000+ killed, 20,000 children dead — all for settlements
Video Transcript AI Summary
In the described scene, the setting is at a settler’s house, inside the living room, where a video is being recorded. The performer, identified as Netanyahu, is no longer the prime minister at this point in the video. He instructs a boy, “turn off the video camera.” The boy either does not switch it off or deliberately turns it back on, so the recording continues. Despite the ongoing footage, Netanyahu keeps speaking, and his remarks follow.
Netanyahu ridicules “us” and shifts to a discussion about America. He states, “let me tell you something about America. Okay? America is a thing that is easily moved.” He asserts that “80% of them support us.” This is presented as his claim about American public opinion.
Continuing, Netanyahu references Bill Clinton, asserting, “I’m not afraid of Bill Clinton.” He recounts what he did to Clinton, implying a confrontation or pressuring stance, and then summarizes Clinton’s position with “Bill Clinton said yada yada Area C.” In response to Clinton’s assertion, Netanyahu claims, “I said no problem, Bill.”
The assertion broadens into a concrete policy claim. Netanyahu continues by describing his actions regarding Area C, stating, “But then you know what I did? I made it where Area C is this huge military area, two thirds of the West Bank.” This culminates the segment with a description of a significant territorial designation and its geographic impact, specifically that Area C has been made a substantial military zone comprising two-thirds of the West Bank.
Overall, the video captures Netanyahu in a contentious, confrontational moment, moving from a request to stop recording to provocative commentary about the relationship with the United States and former President Bill Clinton, culminating in an emphatic claim about reconfiguring Area C as a vast military area covering a large portion of the West Bank. The sequence emphasizes a blend of defiance, provocative rhetoric about international relations, and a decisive, controversial shift in territorial designation.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In this video, he is no longer the prime minister. At a settler's house in the living room, he tells the boy, turn off the video camera. What's that? And the boy either fails to turn it off or he deliberately turns it right back on again. It's a bit unclear.
But the video keeps rolling and Netanyahu keeps blabbing. And Netanyahu then ridicules us and says, let me tell you something about America. Okay? America is a thing that is easily moved. 80% of them support us.
It's absurd. I'm not afraid of Bill Clinton. Let me tell you what I did to Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton said yada yada Area C. I said no problem, Bill.
But then you know what I did? I made it where Area C is this huge military area, two thirds of the West Bank.
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
🚨 BREAKING: German author and former MP Jürgen Todenhöfer has been arrested in Munich after posting that Israeli PM Netanyahu is doing to Palestinians what the Nazis once did to Jews https://t.co/7KuwCU52hj
@OunkaOnX - Ounka
A different narrative is starting to hit the mainstream https://t.co/hVT3fN7kQb
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker: The speaker begins by saying they used to be a Zionist and are a Holocaust survivor, noting that Zionism was very important for them as a salvation of the Jewish people until they discovered that the state was founded based on the extirpation, the explosion, and multiple massacres of the local population. They insist that this is not historically controversial. They urge taking a longer view to understand the present situation, and argue that the present occupation and the suppression of the Palestinians must not continue in order to move forward.
They reference Sharon, mentioning a previous guest who spoke about fragile coexistence, and assert that there was no coexistence at all. The speaker describes oppression, periodic massacres, land occupation in the West Bank, and the continuous expulsion of the population from their homes. They recount visiting the occupied territories three times, including the first time during the first intifada when they cried every day for two weeks at what they witnessed. They state that this cannot go on.
The speaker then references news about the algin marbles being returned and questions how the other person “changed your mind about that,” specifically regarding returning the land that’s been stolen from the Palestinians—clarifying they are not talking about the state of Israel, but about since 1967 and what is happening now. They insist that there must be some stop to what is happening, and frame this as being for the sake of both Israelis and Palestinians.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now look, I used to be a Zionist. I'm a as you mentioned, I'm a Holocaust survivor. Zionism was very important for me as a salvation of the Jewish people until I found out that the state was founded based on the extirpation, the explosion, and multiple massacres of the local population. And that's not historically controversial. So I'm taking a longer view of this.
And I'm saying that the present situation cannot be understood without looking at the historical context, and nor can we move forward if the present occupation and the suppression of the Palestinians continue. So Sharon, your previous guest, talked about the fragile coexistence. There was no coexistence. There was oppression, periodic massacres, land occupation in the West Bank, the continuous expulsion of the population from their homes. I visited the occupied territories three times now.
The first time back during the first intifada piers, I cried every day out for two weeks at what I saw. So this cannot go on. And I saw the news about the algin marbles being returned and how you changed your mind about that, well, about returning the land that's been stolen from the Palestinians? I'm not talking about the state of Israel. I'm not talking about 1948.
I'm talking about since '67 and what's going on right now. So there's gotta be some stop to what's going on, and that's how I understand it. No. I This is for the sake of both Israelis and Palestinians.