reSee.it - Tweets Saved By @RedactedNews

Posted - June 19, 2026 at 4:09 PM

Saved - June 20, 2026 at 12:47 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

On her final day in office, DNI Tulsi Gabbard released more documents claiming new evidence of Anthony Fauci’s ties to a politicized intelligence apparatus. The materials allege Fauci misled Congress under oath on the lab-leak theory and that records were destroyed in a cover-up. I reference my conversation with Senator Rand Paul on whether DOJ will act or Fauci will evade accountability despite Biden’s autopen pardon.

@RedactedNews - Redacted

On her final day in office, DNI Tulsi Gabbard dropped a major bombshell, releasing additional documents that provide further evidence of Anthony Fauci’s ties to a politicized intelligence apparatus. The release includes new material related to the lab-leak theory, proving Fauci misled Congress under oath, and official records were destroyed in this cover-up. For years, @RandPaul has repeatedly referred Fauci to the Department of Justice for criminal investigation. The question now is whether the DOJ will finally take action or whether Fauci will once again avoid accountability. Here is our conversation with Senator Rand Paul on the case against Fauci, and whether President Biden’s autopen pardon will protect him from accountability.

Video Transcript AI Summary

Speaker 1 says that throughout the Biden administration he sought records about decision-making and why the U.S. funded Wuhan, China research, including why evidence about the virus origin being from a lab accident was being suppressed, but “we got nothing.” He says the Biden administration “stiff-armed” him by preventing access to virtually any documents. He says many of the findings during the Biden administration came from Freedom of Information Act requests by people outside government and from court actions forcing disclosure. He says that after the new election, he received promises from Secretary Kennedy and others that documents would be revealed. He says it took about six months, with resistance he attributes not to Secretary Kennedy but to “minders” around him. He says that after finally receiving documents, they have been reviewed for about a month. Speaker 1 states that in communications between Anthony Fauci and others, including Francis Collins, Fauci is depicted telling others to read materials, then delete them, and that he allegedly instructed them to delete “this material” after reading. Speaker 1 says deleting emails and discussions about government business is illegal for someone in the executive branch. He adds that Fauci testified he did not do that, and says this creates “two crimes”: destroying federal records and a prior sworn statement that he wouldn’t do it. Speaker 1 identifies a “big question” involving what he calls an “auto pen pardon” and says it will have to be challenged. He says there are thousands of auto pen pardons and raises whether President Biden was aware. He says they interviewed the person running the auto pen, who said they never met the president, and that the person said they did not discuss it directly but heard about it from higher-ups who allegedly talked to the president. Speaker 1 says this provides “a lot to go on” and describes it as a chance for the issue to get into court and for the Department of Justice to fight it out. Speaker 1 says he has invited Anthony Fauci involuntarily; if accepted, they will bring him in, and if not accepted, they will subpoena him. Speaker 0 asks whether the alleged wrongdoing falls under the auto pen time frame, noting that in some earlier auto pen matters there were specific time frames. Speaker 1 responds that the “umbrella” was “a decade,” described as leading up to the end of Biden’s term, and says this raises questions about whether a pardon can cover crimes not alleged at the time, whether it can be “all inclusive,” and whether a pardon can be upheld if it doesn’t specify the crime. Speaker 1 contrasts this with how pardons are typically specific to an accused or trial-ready crime. Speaker 0 asks about specific consequences, including prison time, regarding destroying federal records. Speaker 1 says lying to Congress is the biggest issue, that it can be five years in prison as a felony, and that destroying records adds to the crime and is against the law. He then ties this to contemporaneous emails, asserting that while Fauci said publicly he had no idea the virus came from a lab and that it couldn’t have been gain-of-function, privately he was “very worried” about the lab because he knew it did gain-of-function research. Speaker 1 also says gain-of-function research was funded by the United States government with Anthony Fauci’s approval, and claims Fauci’s pandemic guidance about origins and about cloth masks was contradictory to privately discussed concerns, including that Speaker 1 says cloth masks do not prevent transmission.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: So do you think the walls are closing in on Dr. Fauci? Can you walk us through exactly what you've uncovered regarding these alleged requests to delete official records? Speaker 1: So during the entire Biden administration, I've sought records of what went on, the decision making, why did they fund the research in Wuhan, China? Why were they suppressing evidence that the origin of the virus came from the lab, from the lab accident? And we got nothing. The Biden administration stiff-armed us at every turn. They prevented us from getting virtually any documents. Most of the things we learned during the Biden administration actually came from freedom of information, people outside of government challenging, and the court forcing the Biden administration to reveal things. And then with the new election, though, we got promises, significant promises from Secretary Kennedy and others that they would reveal a lot of these documents. It took about six months. There was some resistance, not from Secretary Kennedy, but from minders that were put around him who I think were preventing us from getting the documents. Finally, we've gotten the documents, and we've been looking through them for about a month now. What we've discovered is in the communications between Anthony Fauci and others, including the head of the NIH, Francis Collins, he would say, read this. This is some more crap coming from me, the senator from Kentucky. I want to be done with this. When you're done reading it, delete this material. That's illegal. You're not allowed to delete emails and discussions about government business if you're in the executive branch. So he also has testified that he didn't do that. So it's sort of two crimes. One crime is destroying federal records. The other crime is that he's previously under oath said he wouldn't. Now, there is the big question of the auto pen pardon. And so that will have to be challenged. But I think this is the best case. It's a good case. I think it's very neat and tidy, lied to Congress and then destroyed records. Now he has the auto pen. Does the auto pen pardon hold? Is it enough? Was President Biden aware of what he was doing? There are thousands of auto pen pardons that were issued. I think there's a very good question whether or not Biden was aware of that. They've interviewed the person who was running the auto pen. He says he never met the president. So the person doing the auto pen never discussed it directly. He's hearing it from higher ups who were talking to higher ups who allegedly talked to the president. So I think there's a lot to go on here. And this is a good chance for this to get into the courts and for, frankly, the Department of Justice to fight it out. Whether or not they will do that is an open question. But what I can say right now is I have invited Anthony Fauci involuntarily. If that is accepted, we're done. And we will bring him in. If it's not accepted, we will subpoena him. Speaker 0: A couple of things to unpack there. I guess on the auto pen piece of this, how you know the dates in these emails and where this you know alleged crime might have occurred does it fall under that umbrella of the auto pen time frame because i know in some of these auto pens it was very specific i mean when you looked at hunter biden it was very specific time frames going back to very oddly dated auto pen uh moments so would this fall under that umbrella Speaker 1: My understanding is that the umbrella was a decade. So it was a decade leading up to the end of Biden's term. So it's pretty wide. And that's another question. Can a pardon include forgiveness for crimes that aren't alleged at the time? Can it include crimes that are all inclusive? I mean, would it include murder? I mean, the thing is, is how do you have a pardon that doesn't specify the crime you're being pardoned for? It specifies a period of time, but it says, Oh, anything you might have done during that period of time. I don't know how that kind of pardon can be upheld. A pardon usually is very specific. Someone's been accused of a crime. They're in jail and you pardon them for that crime or they're getting ready to be tried for a crime. You pardon them for that crime. So I think there's a lot of questions about the validity. If you can have a wide open pardon and whether that pardon can be done by an auto pen where the president may or may not have been aware of it. Speaker 0: Now what sort of specific, are we talking about prison time here? Like what type of specific crimes, destroying federal records, what sort of teeth does that have? Speaker 1: Lying to Congress is the biggest one probably. It can be five years in prison, is a felony. Destroying records I think adds to that crime and is against the law. So I think lying to Congress will be the most consequential, but it also shows what kind of person we were dealing with here. We were dealing with a person who was saying, there's no way it came from the lab, and I didn't fund it, and we had no idea they were doing dangerous research, but we have contemporaneous emails When he was saying publicly he had no idea and it couldn't have been gain-of-function, he was saying privately, we're very worried about that lab because we know they do gain-of-function research there. And the gain-of-function research was funded by the United States government with the approval of Anthony Fauci. So virtually everything he said during the entire pandemic was untrue about the origins, but also untrue about what to do. Do cloth masks work to prevent the transmission? They don't. And yet he was parading around with the Washington Nationals mask, telling everybody to wear a cloth mask. And that was bad advice. You know, I mean, for someone to say that's going to help you and you take their advice and you get infected, that's bad advice.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 18, 2026 at 10:59 PM

Saved - June 19, 2026 at 12:37 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

Senator Ron Johnson finally got @SecKennedy to release previously redacted documents on the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Signals cover-up. The report reveals that senior FDA and CDC officials were warned of serious COVID vaccine safety signals in 2021, yet the public was kept in the dark. If true, millions were denied fully informed consent. @RWMaloneMD joins us to discuss.

Video Transcript AI Summary

Senator Johnson obtained a large trove of FDA documents that were partially redacted and had been withheld from his investigation committee. His staff reviewed the material and quickly found the issue referenced in a clip: “masking,” described as an artifact that prevented the FDA from denying that adverse events were occurring. This masking problem was tied to a specific data analysis artifact uncovered by Bill Dumashell, formerly head biostatistician of a major corporation that performs this kind of data analysis. Dumashell had worked at the FDA with three others, and the transcript speaker says they were communicating with those individuals at the time. The transcript speaker explains that, after Tucker, who is described as a friend of the speaker, the senator’s staff discovered confirmation that Peter Marks (head of CBER) was made aware of the masking-related data analysis problem and suppressed the information. The speaker says Marks told the system developers, including Dumashell, how to overcome the masking issue, then shut Dumashell down and ignored information they uncovered when they corrected the error in the FDA’s data analysis systems. Speaker 0 asks whether there is direct evidence that Marks or others were coerced by CBER, Pfizer, Moderna, or others to keep the issue quiet, asserting that vaccine safety signals were swept aside and hidden from the American people. Speaker 1 responds that there is no “smoking gun” the speaker is aware of, while noting that such evidence could exist in archived, redacted, or withheld FDA emails. The speaker says the FDA asserts it disclosed everything relevant to the senator’s query but did not disclose many emails corresponding to communications between the speaker and the same team, which the senator allegedly detected almost immediately after the speaker began discussing the issue with him. The speaker adds that the emails may or may not be deleted, and that the speaker’s manuscript, “The Grift,” argues it was not necessary for there to be formal relationships. Instead, the speaker points to informal relationships, including a revolving door, stating that Marks took advantage of it by leaving government service at the FDA and then moving into an industry position afterward.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 1: What has happened here is that he finally was able to get Secretary Kennedy to release a large trove of documents that were partially redacted, have been withheld from his investigation committee, and he had his staffers go through those. And one of the first things that they found, and I know this because I was in his office talking to his staffers, one of the first things they found was what he's referring to in that clip. It's called masking. It's a artifact that was behind the ability of the FDA, say it advisedly, the ability of the FDA to deny that these adverse events were occurring. And it was a particular type of data analysis artifact that was uncovered by the person that had developed the FDA's system for detecting adverse event signals. His name is Bill Dumashell, and he used to be the head biostatistician of a major corporation that does this kind of data analysis. And he was working with three others at the FDA, and I happened at the time to be in communication with those folks. I know Tucker's a big friend of yours, and you may or may not recall my first hit with Tucker when I disclosed that there was some major data problems associated with the analysis of the COVID events. And what Senator Johnson uncovered in these documents is confirmation that Peter Marks was made aware of this and basically suppressed that information, told the people that had developed, including Bill Dumashell, this system to overcome the problem of masking. I'm not talking stuff that puts on your face, I'm talking about a database analysis problem. And Peter Marks, head of CBER, shut him down and basically told him to shut up and ignored the information that they had uncovered when they had corrected the error in the FDA's data analysis systems. Speaker 0: Do we know if Marks or others were coerced by CBER Pfizer, Moderna, et cetera, to keep this quiet. I mean, you're seeing these adverse events, these vaccine safety signals, and they just swept it under the rug and hid it from the American people. Do we have direct evidence yet? Do we know? Speaker 1: So, no. The honest truth is I'm not aware of any smoking gun. It may exist in archived or redacted or withheld FDA emails. The FDA asserts that they had disclosed everything that was relevant to the senator's query, and yet they did not disclose the many emails that it corresponds that occurred between me and the same team. something that the senator detected almost immediately when I began speaking to him about this. So there may or may not be smoking guns out there. They may or may not have been deleted. But the point of my analysis in this manuscript, The Grift, is that it wasn't necessary for there to be formal relationships like that. Because the structure underpinning all of this, the informal relationships, not the least of which is the revolving door, which, of course, Dr. Marx took advantage of on his way out from the U.S. government to land a very nice, juicy position in industry after he left the FDA, which is typical.

@SenRonJohnson - Senator Ron Johnson

x.com/i/article/2067…

The story the media — and the government — don't want you to hear

Read about the biggest government scandal that legacy newspapers won’t touch.

On April 29, 2026, as Chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, I held a hearing and released a report titled "Unmasked: How Biden Health Officials Purposely Turned a Blind Eye Toward COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Signals." There has not been a bigger government scandal during my lifetime, and yet even now that we have documented proof of corruption, most of the legacy media refuses to report on it.

My report" target="_blank">https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Senate-PSI-Majority-Staff-Interim-Report-April-29-2026-FINAL.pdf">report details how in March 2021, Peter Marks — director of the FDA center that approves vaccines and is responsible for safety surveillance (CBER) — was briefed that the algorithm they were using to analyze the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) would mask or hide COVID-19 vaccine adverse event safety signals. Twenty-six days later, using an updated algorithm, senior FDA officials were shown 25 safety signals, including sudden cardiac death, pulmonary infarction, cerebral artery occlusion, basal ganglia stroke, agonal rhythm, and Bell’s palsy.

For the next three months, they received updates showing more serious safety signals. Instead of warning or informing the public, they ordered the data analyst to "cease and desist" and then lied to the American public that "they weren’t seeing safety signals" and that any adverse events were "rare and mild." The whole point of using sophisticated algorithms to analyze VAERS is to find needles in the haystack — nonobvious potential harms that doctors and patients should be alerted to.

With the COVID-19 injections, we didn’t need sophisticated algorithms. The sheer volume of adverse event reports overwhelming VAERS was enough to trigger my oversight efforts. We faced impenetrable stonewalling until Secretary Kennedy’s commitment to radical transparency provided my Subcommittee with 11 million pages of documents. The documents make clear that FDA and CDC officials did not use an "err on the side of caution" standard to alert the public. Rather, they insisted on definitive proof of causation — a standard they knew would never be met.

They were far more concerned about not causing vaccine hesitancy than they were about informing the public of adverse events. They wanted to ensure that the injections would receive full licensure approval so that President Biden could mandate them to the military and millions of civilians, including healthy college students.

Perhaps the most egregious coercion involved healthy children who had virtually zero chance of serious harm from COVID-19. That coercion was based on another false claim that the injections would stop transmission. Some children were killed and others have been permanently disabled from the COVID-19 injections. Imagine being the parent who believed all the lies they were told and decided to have their now deceased or injured child injected.

Also in March 2021, Dr. Avindra Nath, clinical director at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), began leading a team of clinical researchers who were diagnosing and treating individuals with serious COVID-19 injection injuries. Twenty-three study participants were diagnosed and treated, then instructed to "not talk about the study" until the NIH could release its findings and conclusions. Dr. Nath maintained that early recognition and intervention were crucial for effective treatment. Yet no guidance was provided to physicians — one participant remarked that the NIH scientists had "taken the data and left us hanging."

Adding insult to injury, in April 2021 the CDC published a report stating that similar adverse events were "anxiety" — not a problem with the shots. It was not until study participants began speaking publicly in 2022 that the NIH quietly posted its study on a preprint server that virtually no one read, leaving medical teams nationwide in the dark and the injection-injured left untreated.

We will never know the full extent of the harms (or the benefits) of the COVID-19 injections. But we do know that federal health officials were aware that serious harm was being done within months of them granting Emergency Use Authorization. We also know that those same officials turned a blind eye toward the safety signals that were screaming at them, but they refused to warn the public. The public pays federal health officials to evaluate drugs for safety and efficacy, and we have the right to be informed.

How many deaths and injuries could have been avoided had federal health officials simply done the job we paid them to do?

Currently, VAERS shows 1,676,100 cumulative worldwide adverse events and 39,099 deaths associated with the COVID-19 injection, with 9,332 (24%) of the deaths occurring within 2 days of injection. Most of these tragic adverse events occurred well after federal health officials should have informed the public about the risks they knew existed. Instead, they hid or downplayed those risks. As a result, millions were harmed after being denied their right to fully informed consent.

That’s why I consider this to be the biggest government scandal in my lifetime, and one that is crying out for full media attention and coverage.

---

The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Washington Post, USA TODAY, and Fox Digital have all declined or ignored requests to publish this op-ed.

NBC, ABC, PBS, CNN, and MSNow have all refused to cover my report.

Read the full report here." target="_blank">https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Senate-PSI-Majority-Staff-Interim-Report-April-29-2026-FINAL.pdf">here.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 18, 2026 at 11:22 PM

Saved - June 19, 2026 at 12:06 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

In recent weeks, the U.S. has moved from full lockstep with Israel’s war against Iran to a dramatically different tone. President Trump and JD Vance are now criticizing Netanyahu and signaling support for diplomacy. I ask whether this is a real strategic reassessment or a distancing tactic ahead of midterm elections, and what could explain the sudden shift.

@RedactedNews - Redacted

Just weeks ago, the United States was fully in lockstep with Israel’s war against Iran. Now, the administration’s tone has shifted dramatically, with President Trump and JD Vance publicly criticizing Netanyahu and signaling support for diplomacy. Is this a genuine change in strategy and a real reassessment taking place inside the White House? Or is the administration simply creating distance from Israel as it looks ahead to the midterm elections? After years of near-unconditional support, what explains such a sudden reversal in rhetoric and policy? @DecampDave joins us to discuss.

Video Transcript AI Summary

Speaker 0 questioned whether there has been a “real sea change” inside the White House, suggesting prior conflict between Bibi (Netanyahu) and Trump often looked like theater, but saying this situation “seems different.” Speaker 1 said the shift appeared to be a rapid “total 180” with a notable timeline: last week seemed to indicate a return to full-scale war after heavy U.S.–Iran exchanges, with Iran targeting northern Israel in response to Israel bombing Beirut. Speaker 1 said they did not think limited attacks could occur without plunging the region back into war. They then described Trump making major threats again, including saying he would take Karg Island, followed by a sudden deal, making the sequence difficult to interpret. Speaker 1 attributed the change to internal U.S. disagreement, saying leaks and knowledge of Iran’s military capabilities after the war indicate that more than 70% of Iran’s missiles and missile launchers are intact, and that “people in the Pentagon” did not want to do this again. They also said people within the administration have been making this case to Trump, and that Trump appears to be listening “for the time being.” Speaker 1 linked the restraint to election concerns, arguing Trump’s midterms and Netanyahu’s elections create opposite incentives: Netanyahu wants the war to continue, while Trump does not, implying a possible split between personal political interests, while adding that a resulting real split between the U.S. and Israel would be surprising. Speaker 0 referenced moments when Trump speaks off the cuff, saying Trump admitted publicly that a peace agreement was needed; otherwise, with the Strait of Hormuz closed for “another few weeks,” it would lead to “bedlam.” Speaker 0 suggested Trump may have been reacting to warnings from oil executives and claimed Trump indicated that Iran was holding the cards. Speaker 1 contrasted Trump’s earlier claim that the Strait being closed was “great” because the U.S. was exporting more oil and gas than ever, and said the later admission showed it was not sustainable. They discussed a possible new approach raised by Mark Levin: pause for a few months rather than repeating actions—so Iran releases frozen funds can be avoided while the U.S. “rebuild[s]” and gets through the midterms—then restart. Speaker 1 said Iran likely suspects such a plan due to having no reason to trust the U.S. and said it is a possibility that the parties could “kick the can down the road” before revisiting.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Do you believe that there's some kind of real sea change inside the White House? Like we're done with you? Like we are – I don't buy it. Anytime there's been this – there's a conflict between Bibi and Trump. Like I don't usually buy it. I think it's all theater, as I mentioned earlier. But this – I don't know. Something about this seems different. Speaker 1: No, it does. I mean it seems like, again, there's been like a total 180. It's happened very quickly. And it's interesting, the timeline. Like last week there was – what appeared to be, I thought this meant a return to full-scale war, some pretty heavy exchanges of strikes between the U.S. and Iran. And then you had the Iran target northern Israel in response to Israel bombing Beirut. Like, I didn't think that situation could exist of these, like, limited attacks without it plunging the whole region back into war. But then Trump started really making all of his big threats again, saying he's going to take Karg Island. And then all of a sudden there's a deal. So it's like, it's hard to wrap my head around exactly what happened. But what I do think, I think the change is that I know that there's people in the Pentagon, and you can tell by the leaks that have come out about Iran's military capabilities after this war, that they have more than 70% of their missiles and missile launchers. So it's been clear that there's people within the Pentagon who didn't want to do this again. And I'm sure that there's people in the administration who've been making this case to Trump. And it looks like he right now, for the time being, is listening to them. And I think it's over the concern of the elections. What's interesting is that Trump and Netanyahu have opposite political interests right now. Netanyahu has elections coming up. Trump's got the midterms. And Netanyahu wants the war to continue. And just for election purposes, Trump doesn't. So I could see there being kind of a split when it comes to their kind of personal interests, like the parties in power right now, but like a real split between the U.S. and Israel. I would be surprised if that is a result of this. Speaker 0: You get some moments of clarity from President Trump occasionally where he just you can tell he's just speaking off the cuff and he maybe lets the truth or the cat out of the bag from time to time, like he did yesterday when he admitted that in front of the world that we had to get a peace agreement in place, because if we didn't, with the Strait of Hormuz being closed for another few weeks, there would he his words were bedlam. It would have been bedlam, right? I'm sure he was hearing from oil executives who were telling him, we're at tank bottoms, we have nothing left. Like, shit's about to hit the fan here. He really let, I don't know, I think he let the cat out of the bag by admitting that, that really Iran was holding all the cards here. Speaker 1: Yeah, and it's the opposite of what he was saying before this. At one point, I remember, this was just a couple weeks ago in the Oval Office, he was asked about the Strait. How long do you think it's going to be closed? And he said, you know what? It's actually great that the Strait is closed because we're exporting more oil and gas than ever before. Everything's great. We don't need the Strait. And now, admitting what everybody knew, it was pretty clear to anyone looking at this seriously that it was not a sustainable situation. And the question is, you know, so I saw Mark Levin tweet today that he said, how about a new strategy? How about instead of giving Iran, you know, releasing their frozen funds and we use this time to kind of rebuild and pause and then get through the midterms and then knock them out, as he put it. So basically, you know, let's get take a few months pause and then restart the war. And I think that is a possibility. And I know that that is something Iran is suspecting because they have no reason to trust. the U S at this point. Um, so those are, that's a possibility, you know, that they could be saying, all right, let's kick the can down the road here. Um, and then, you know, revisit this. Yeah.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 18, 2026 at 12:26 AM

Saved - June 18, 2026 at 4:11 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

As the U.S. and Iran move toward a potential peace agreement, Israel is signaling it won’t see itself as bound by the deal. I ask whether Israel will try to undermine negotiations or whether President Trump can draw a firm line to stop actions that could derail diplomacy. The stakes are high: success could reshape the Middle East, sabotage could mean escalation.

@RedactedNews - Redacted

As the U.S. and Iran move closer to a potential peace agreement, Israel is signaling that it does not consider itself bound by the deal. Will Israel attempt to undermine the negotiations, or can President Trump draw a firm line and prevent further actions that could derail diplomacy? The stakes are enormous. A successful agreement could reshape the balance of power in the Middle East, while any effort to sabotage it could push the region back toward escalation and conflict. @EstebanCarLop joins us to break down the MoU and its implications for the region's future.

Video Transcript AI Summary

The discussion centers on a “14-point framework,” with Speaker 1 saying its focus under line number one is Lebanon and asking whether Israel will adhere to it by not bombing Lebanon. Speaker 0 says Israel has signaled it is not part of the deal and argues that Lebanon being mentioned three times in the first paragraph shows how much pressure Iran exerted on the U.S. to agree, including that hostilities need to stop in Lebanon and the U.S. is essentially asking it to restrain its ally in Israel. Speaker 0 notes that officials keep repeating they call the deal a disaster and that they will continue attacks “maybe not the attacks,” leaving them in a gray area, while also stating they will not withdraw from southern Lebanon. He says Israel has established a “yellow line” a few kilometers into Lebanese territory and that the MOU states Lebanon’s territorial integrity and sovereignty must be respected, which means withdrawal of Israeli troops. Speaker 0 also highlights that the MOU is the start of a framework toward a peace deal, with a 60-day period of conversations before any potential peace for West Asia, and concludes that taking Israeli officials’ statements at face value, Israel will not stop attacking Lebanon—while emphasizing Lebanon’s repetition to show Iran is serious about ending hostilities on that front. Speaker 2 warns against using the Gaza “peace deal” as a template for what Israel is willing to agree to, citing almost 1,100 deaths in Gaza at the hands of the IDF since the deal and arguing that others may be “hoodwinked” into believing peace exists while Israel proceeds “as it pleases,” changing the narrative. Speaker 0 agrees and adds that he believes Western media coverage has hidden what is happening in Gaza, with headlines describing a ceasefire that “doesn’t exist.” He says the same situation is being pursued in southern Lebanon, where Israel is conducting an “ethnic cleansing” and “extermination” campaign, and he frames the question as whether the U.S. will impose a price on Israel for continued attacks. He says the U.S. is “almost incapable” of saying no to Israel, but says Iran is also presenting itself as guarantor of the clause, telling Israel it will attack and respond in kind if violations continue. He claims Iranian restraint indicates Iran wants to carry out the MOU and end the war, but says if Israel continues to “play spoiler,” Iran will launch attacks against Israel, raising whether the U.S. will step in or follow its prior approach regarding Yemen, where Israel was told it was “on your own.”

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 1: So it looks like we finally got, and hopefully that this is accurate, this 14-point framework. At the heart of it, though, really, under line number one is a focus around Lebanon, how important this has been in this entire war. Do you think that Israel will adhere to this framework, not bomb Lebanon? Speaker 0: I mean, that is unfortunately the million-dollar question, because Israel has signaled constantly that they are not part of this deal. I think that the fact of what you just brought up, right, the release of the details, the fact that Lebanon is mentioned three times in the very first paragraph, shows just how much pressure Iran was able to exert. for the U.S. to agree to this, right? The U.S. now is essentially also saying, yes, hostilities need to stop in Lebanon, which means they need to restrain their allies in Israel, which, again, the officials keep saying the same thing over and over and, you know, calling this deal a disaster and saying that they will continue. Maybe not the attacks. They have left that a bit in a gray area. But they have said, we are definitely not withdrawing. from the south of Lebanon. We're staying there, right? They have already established what they like to call a yellow line in the south of Lebanon, which is a few kilometers into Lebanese territory. But again, to go back to the points of the MOU, It specifically says that the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon needs to be respected, which of course means the withdrawal of Israeli troops. Now, others have said the withdrawal is actually going to happen within the first 60 days, because another thing that is very important to highlight with this MOU is that this is the beginning of a framework towards a peace deal. This is the beginning of a 60-day period of conversations. So this is just, you know, the starting line. We are just getting started now before even reaching what we could consider a peace for West Asia. To answer your question, if I take the statements of the Israeli officials at face value, then no, I do not expect them to stop attacking Lebanon. But at the same time, I think it's very, very important to see Lebanon named three times in the first paragraph to show that Iran is very serious about this front also seeing an end to hostilities. Speaker 2: But if we use the peace deal in Gaza as a template to what Israel is willing to agree to— We've seen almost 1,100 deaths in Gaza at the hands of the IDF since the peace deal, the so-called peace deal, was put in place. So what I worry about is the rest of us can be hoodwinked to think that there is a peace deal in place while Israel proceeds to do as it pleases. And this no longer becomes the story. And we are lulled into believing that peace is there when it's not. Speaker 0: That's a very good point. That's a very good point because, I mean, and thanks to corporate media, to Western media that have done the job to hide what is actually happening in Gaza. To this day, you can see headlines published that talk about a ceasefire that doesn't exist, that never existed. And now it's the same situation that they want to perpetuate in the south of Lebanon, in particular, where Israel is conducting, in uncertain terms, an ethnic cleansing campaign, an extermination campaign, and they want to continue doing They have been very clear about this. So, now the question becomes, will the United States impose a price for the Israelis to pay if they continue these attacks? I think history tells us, no, the United States is almost incapable of saying no to Israel. But then, you cannot forget that this—in this particular case, it's Iran. is also presenting themselves as the guarantor of this particular clause. They have told Israel, again, in uncertain terms, we will attack you. We will respond in kind if you continue to violate what we have agreed to be a ceasefire in the south of Lebanon. Now, the attacks in Lebanon continue. The attacks in the south, in particular, continue. The Iranians are showing restraint in not responding yet, right? It also shows that the Iranian government actually wants to go through with this MOU and actually wants to put an end to this war. But I think if the Israelis continue to play spoiler, the table's gonna get kicked over, And you're going to see Iran launch attacks against Israel. And then the question becomes, will the U.S. step in, or will the U.S. do what they did last year with Yemen? Because last year, Donald Trump essentially told Israel, you're on your own with Yemen. They reached an agreement directly with the Yemeni government in Sana'a that did not include Israel for a cessation of hostilities. So then Israel had to deal with the Yemenis on their own. Will they do the same with Iran, knowing full well that Iran is a completely different beast. And also, Iran has almost no appetite at this point to withstand the violations of the Israelis. They want to teach the Israelis a lesson. They want to punish them for their multitude of crimes.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 16, 2026 at 11:03 PM

Saved - June 17, 2026 at 1:34 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🚨 The media keeps calling Israel our “special friend” while reporting that they spy on us, abuse our trust, and ignore American interests. @DanielLDavis1 says the mask is slipping and Washington still refuses to act. https://t.co/v43ZCm0Q8B

Video Transcript AI Summary

Speaker 0 says a piece about Israel’s “obscene treatment” of Speaker 0’s country has an obvious takeaway that America’s “special ally is not actually an ally,” and that NBC News did not want readers to realize this. Speaker 0 claims the report’s authors repeatedly inserted “globalist propaganda” into the story, including the neocon talking point that Israelis are America’s “special friends,” while still presenting “eye-opening” information about Israel spying. Speaker 0 argues that throughout the entire NBC News piece, there is continued praise for Israel as “our greatest ally” and “special friend.” Speaker 1 says the piece lays praise on Israel and is about Israel spying, which they find “reprehensible.” Speaker 1 describes decades of belief that Israel is America’s best ally, an “island of democracy” amid “sea of chaos” in the Middle East, and that many Jewish people Speaker 1 personally knew seemed “like really good people.” Speaker 1 says that as “growing physical evidence” has emerged that Israel is “not quite who we thought they were” and that Israel “definitely” abuses America, the situation has become normalized. Speaker 1 claims that even when things have come out, “no action has been taken,” leading Israel to be “a little bit more bold,” doing actions “out in the open.” Speaker 1 cites an example involving Netanyahu and Lebanon: Speaker 1 says Netanyahu stated that a stop to fighting in Lebanon is a “non-negotiable requirement” for Iran to end the war, and that Speaker 1 believes Netanyahu will “do what I want anyway,” even if President Trump intervenes. Speaker 1 says Speaker 1 expects Trump may “hold off for a day or two,” but that Israel “they’re fighting again today.” Speaker 1 asks why the U.S. continues to support Israel and provide it with ammunition, weapons, political cover, and diplomatic cover “to keep doing things directly antithetical to our interests?” Speaker 0 responds, “It’s so frustrating.”

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: He says there were, like many stories on Israel's obscene treatment of our country, the piece's obvious takeaway is that America's special ally is not actually an ally. But NBC News, which published the article, did not want its readers to realize it. The report's authors repeatedly went out of their way to plug globalist propaganda into their otherwise eye-opening story, repeating the neocon talking point that the Israelis are our country's special friends. So he's making the point that throughout this entire NBC News piece, there just still Speaker 1: laying all this praise on israel they're our greatest ally special friend and the whole piece is about them spying on i'm just i find it reprehensible and i think there's been a lot of belief and i'm talking about over decades that israel is our special friend that they're our best ally that they're in this whole sea of chaos in the middle east they're this one island of democracy and all that my whole life that that's all i've ever heard and I've known many Jewish people, and I thought, it seems true to me. They seem like really good people, all the ones that I personally knew. And so now that when we have growing physical evidence that they're not quite who we thought they were, and that they are definitely abusing us, it's now become so normalized. And even when things have come out, no action has been taken, so now they're getting a little bit more bold about doing things. And so now they're just doing it out in the open, like I don't care. For example, when Netanyahu says, I know that the stop fighting in Lebanon is a non-negotiable requirement for Iran to end the war, I don't care. I'm gonna do what I want anyway, no matter what President Trump says. He may hold off for a day or two, but that's it. They're fighting again today, Clayton, today. So they obviously don't care about what President Trump says. They're gonna do what they want. The question is, why do we keep supporting them and giving them the ammunition and the weapons and the political cover and the diplomatic cover to keep doing things directly antithetical to our interests? Speaker 0: It's so frustrating.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 12, 2026 at 9:38 PM

Saved - June 16, 2026 at 2:36 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

With interest rates rising and inflation fears growing, the U.S. bond market crisis is worsening. I warn that the fallout could mean higher mortgage rates, costlier credit cards, and added pressure on banks. Years of inflation have pushed the economy into dangerous territory, and what comes next could be worse.

@RedactedNews - Redacted

As interest rates continue rising and inflation fears grow, the crisis in the U.S. bond market is becoming more severe. Professor @steve_hanke warns that the fallout could mean even higher mortgage rates, rising credit card interest, and increased pressure across the banking system. Years of government-driven inflation have pushed the economy into dangerous territory, and what may come next could be even more alarming.

Video Transcript AI Summary

The U.S. bond market crisis is intensifying, despite attention focused on AI and the Iran war. The discussion centers on what interest rates in the United States will do amid renewed fears of inflation. For average viewers, the main impact highlighted is higher mortgage rates and higher interest rates on credit, including loans from banks and credit card rates. The latest inflation release is described as a key driver: inflation jumped from 3.4% per year to 3.8%. The argument presented is that the inflation genie will not be put back “in the bottle,” because the money supply has been accelerating for the last 18 months. The acceleration of the money supply is described as the fuel that fuels inflation, leading to more inflation. This is framed as a major affordability problem. Bond yields are cited as worsening: the 30-year bond went over 5%, and the 10-year bond went over 4.4%. The 10-year bond is described as the key benchmark that many interest rates—particularly mortgage rates—are geared to. The phrase “bond vigilantes” is used to indicate a renewed market reaction, coming out of “hibernation,” and emphasized as a very big deal. While people often focus on the market going up, the speaker distinguishes that this refers to the stock market; the bond market has been delivering bad news for the last three or four months, especially after the war started in Iran. The conversation also addresses why the stock market may still be rising. The claim is that the stock market is behaving this way because it is in a bubble, described as a “stock market mania” tied to AI. In a bubble, it is said to be difficult to predict exactly when it will pop versus dissipate gradually. A key factor commonly associated with bubble endings is Federal Reserve tightening of monetary policy. However, it is stated that tightening is not happening—monetary policy is loosening—allowing the bubble to persist. If the Federal Reserve pivots toward tighter policy due to inflation rising to 3.8% versus a 2% target, the expectation stated is that the bubble could pop when monetary policy shifts to tightness.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 1: When you look at what's happening right now with the bond market, I know you just released a video on bonds specifically, and what's going to happen here with interest rates in the United States and fears of inflation sounding the alarm. Again, I'll put this up from the Koblese letter just about an hour ago. The U.S. bond market crisis is intensifying. While everyone is focused on AI and the Iran war, the U.S. bond market is in a complete meltdown. What happens next? What does this mean for the average viewer of our show? Speaker 2: Well, the average viewer is going to be facing higher mortgage rates. That's the key thing. And higher interest rates on credit that they receive from loans they receive from a bank or their credit cards. So what we've got, the inflation number just came out this morning. It jumped from 3.4 percent per year to 3.8 percent. That's bad news. You're not going to get the inflation genie back in the bottle in the United States. I've been saying this for months. And the main reason for that is that for the last 18 months, the money supply has been accelerating. And the money supply is the thing that fuels inflation. And if it's accelerating, you're going to end up with more inflation. And that's exactly what we're getting. This will be really the Achilles heel for Trump is going to be Inflation and the affordability problem. Inflation and the affordability problem. The 30-year bond went over 5% today, and that's bad news. The 10-year bond went over 4.4%, and a 10-year is the key bond that all the interest rates, like mortgages, are all geared to the 10-year. The bond vigilantes have woken up. They've come out of hibernation. This is a very big deal because everybody's going on and on about the market's going up, the market's going up, the market's going up every day. We have good news, the market goes up. We have bad news, the market goes up. What market are they talking about? They're talking about the stock market. The bond market is... It's been bad news for the last three or four months, particularly after the war started in Iran. Look at that bond market. It started getting into trouble once the war started in Iran. So all these things have very negative feedbacks and consequences that the administration simply hasn't thought through. Speaker 0: Yes. So is it then your assertion that the stock market is doing well because it's a perversion of belief systems, but the bond market is telling the real story? Speaker 2: Well, I think the bond market always tells the real story. Speaker 0: But then why is the stock market behaving this way, do you think? Speaker 2: I think the stock market is behaving this way because we're in a bubble. The stock market's been in a bubble for quite a while, and there's a there's a stock market mania going on. It's the AI mania. And if you have a mania going on, no matter what the news is, the market just keeps going up. Now, one thing that is interesting, if you're in a bubble, it's virtually impossible to indicate just when the bubble will pop or will it just dissipate slowly and fizzle out over time, that's very hard to determine. But there's one factor that is important that usually, usually causes bubbles to pop, and that's when the monetary policy of the Federal Reserve tightens up. And right now, as I said when we were talking about inflation, it's not tightening up, it's loosening up. So that's one reason that that accommodates the bubble, you see. You said, well, why is the bubble going up? Okay, we have a mania. We have the AI mania. And that's part of the picture. But the fuel behind it, the liquidity behind it, is the money supply accelerating and going up. Now, if the monetary authorities decide they've had enough of inflation, that's 3.8% now, Their target is 2%. And if they start tightening up from where they are right now, then we will see what happens to the bubble. And it might pop. That's what they usually do. When there's a pivot in monetary policy towards tightness, stock market bubbles pop.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 13, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - June 14, 2026 at 5:46 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🔥 The White House says a deal is close. Iran says Trump changes his story every day. Professor @s_m_marandi says no one can trust Washington anymore because every “peace deal” can become another bombing by nightfall. https://t.co/3vQk0YD2kj

Video Transcript AI Summary

The transcript discusses renewed U.S.-Iran hostilities, framed around President Trump’s claims of destroying Iran’s defensive and offensive capabilities and CENTCOM’s message that the Strait of Hormuz is open for transit. Professor Morandi, joining from Iran, responds by citing community notes that claim Strait of Hormuz transit remains severely restricted, and asks what propaganda is being presented and what is actually happening inside Iran. Professor Morandi explains that he added a laughing emoji to Trump’s tweet because Iran has “been around for a few thousand years” and will “survive Trump’s presidency,” and because Trump’s behavior as an openly ambitious imperialist strengthens Iranian resolve and unites Iranians to protect their land and resources. He says Iranians believe they are attacked because they support the Palestinian cause and oppose ethnosupremacism and genocide in Palestine and Lebanon, and because Trump intends to steal Iranian resources. He also asserts that Trump’s actions anger the world and increasingly ordinary Americans. He addresses statements Trump made about stealing oil from Iran into the United States, saying the current U.S. president is “a serial liar” and more openly imperialist and ruthless. Morandi claims only ships that receive Iranian permission and pay a fee transit through the Strait of Hormuz, while other departing ships are later stopped by U.S. forces and oil is taken. He describes this as stealing oil already passing through with Iranian permission rather than increasing output from the Strait. On what another set of strikes would mean, Morandi describes civilian impact across Iran, including attacks reaching thousands of kilometers via missiles and drones. He recounts a nine-year-old girl from Karaj telling him her schoolmate was murdered in an attack by an American and Israeli coalition and that the entire family was murdered. He says civilians and civilian infrastructure have been targeted throughout the country and that Iranians recognize Trump’s threats to “obliterate” or “wipe out” Iran, while Western media is described as saying nothing or being indifferent. Regarding the economic and infrastructure situation, Morandi says U.S. aims are to starve ordinary Iranians into submission, similar to efforts he cites in Cuba and Syria. He claims the economy is worse than four months or three and a half months ago, and says strikes damaged steel plants, pharmaceutical factories, hospitals, schools, petrochemical plants, and an Iranian gas field. He adds that despite a siege preventing food from entering, Iran has borders with 15 countries and many friendly neighbors, and that inflation and job loss are occurring while Iranians “persevere.” On negotiations, the transcript says Trump claimed many “deals” were on the table. Morandi states there were “two deals”: (1) after the 39-day war, Trump accepted Iran’s 10-point proposal as a framework and a ceasefire was agreed that included ending genocidal attacks on Lebanon, which he says Netanyahu later violated, and the transcript says Trump then imposed a siege on Iranian ports; (2) a still-floated agreement framework where Iran would receive part of stolen assets and the U.S. would lift sanctions on Iranian energy exports for the duration, end the war in Lebanon, stop genocide in Gaza, lift the siege on Iranian ports, normalize movement of ships through the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran would declare it will not pursue nuclear weapons. Morandi says progress stalled because Trump would not return assets, remove sanctions, or lift the siege, making Trump the “deal-breaker,” while Israeli and Zionist pressure is described as contributing. The transcript also asks about attacks on U.S. or allied infrastructure in Gulf states. Morandi says U.S. jets based in regional bases were targeted, radar installations were targeted, and a very expensive radar installation in Bahrain was destroyed. He adds that he says Iran bombed bases in Jordan, Kuwait, and Bahrain early this morning in retaliation and claims Iran’s deterrent retaliation followed U.S. attacks and broken ceasefires. Finally, the transcript reports that Trump allegedly canceled scheduled strikes after discussions were approved at the highest Iranian leadership level. A posted statement says scheduled strikes and bombings were canceled this evening, discussions and final points were approved by parties including the U.S., Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Turkey, Pakistan, Bahrain, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt, and others, and that the naval blockade would remain in full force until the transaction is finalized and signing time and place would be announced shortly. Morandi comments that people should expect Trump to bomb if he says he is not, and that U.S. uncertainty prevents trust and makes deals difficult.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, the war is back on, according to President Trump, who tweeted this. The United States will be hitting Iran, whose Navy, Air Force, radar, anti-aircraft, and all other forms of defense together with most of its offensive capability are gone. Very hard tonight. Attacking them once again. To which Professor Morandi in Iran retweeted it with a laughing emoji on top of it. And a short time later, CENTCOM posted another tweet piece of information telling the world that the Strait of Hormuz is open for transit. But if you go to the community notes, you'll notice that that's not true at all. In fact, commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz remains severely restricted. So what sort of propaganda are we being fed right now? And what is actually happening inside of Iran? Let's ask Professor Morandi joining us from Iran this afternoon. to talk about that. Professor, great to see you again. Welcome back to the show. Speaker 1: Thank you very much for having me. It's always a pleasure. Speaker 0: My pleasure. Now, you put a laughing emoji on top of President Trump's tweet, basically about destroying Iran. It seems like you have a resolve that maybe some of us in the same position would not have to be putting a laughing emoji on we are going to destroy and basically flatten your country. Why did you put a laughing emoji on that? Speaker 1: Well, Iran has been around for a few thousand years, so I think it'll survive Trump's presidency. But also what Trump has done, basically, is that he has... destroying the image of the United States by behaving like an 18th or 19th century imperialist or early 20th century imperialist, he is angering the entire world because he is being very open about his ambitions to steal land, to steal resources. That strengthens the resolve of the Iranian people. It unites them further. They want to protect their land and resources. And they know that their guilt, the reason why they're guilty is because they're the only country on this planet that supports the Palestinian cause and opposes ethnosupremacism and ethnic cleansing and genocide in Palestine and now in Lebanon. So they know the reason why they're being attacked is because they are opposed to the barbarism that we're seeing in Palestine. They know that the president of the United States wants to steal their resources for himself. So Trump is hurting himself and the United States at multiple levels, both among Iranians, but also among the international community, and I think increasingly among ordinary Americans, as the polls clearly indicate. Speaker 0: Go ahead. You know, you saw President Trump yesterday admitting at the White House that he had been wanting to let the cat out of the bag on this, but Iran finally figured it out that the United States has been stealing millions of barrels of oil under the darkness of night from Iran and bringing it into the United States. What did you make of those statements? Speaker 1: Unfortunately, the current president of the United States is a serial liar. And I'm not saying the previous presidents were any better. This president is more openly lying. He's more openly imperialist. He's more openly ruthless. Otherwise, Obama, who is an excellent speaker and who has a very polished personality in the public arena, He was the person who destroyed Libya. He was the person who started the dirty war in Syria supporting ISIS and al-Qaeda. He helped the Saudis begin their genocidal assault on Yemen. So I'm not saying that Trump is any different from the previous presidents in that respect, but he is more crude in his approach. And the only ships that pass through the Strait of Hormuz are ships that get Iranian permission. after they pay a fee, a toll, whatever one wants to call it, they leave. Countries like China, the American armed forces won't touch their ships. But other ships that leave, after they leave the Strait of Hormuz, the American armed forces apparently stop them, and they have been taking their oil. That is not a success, and that is not bringing out extra oil from the Strait of Hormuz. It's only stealing the oil that has already passed through the Strait of Hormuz with the permission of the Iranians. Speaker 0: When President Trump says he's going to hit Iran very hard again, what does he mean? And when you speak to Iranians, you're obviously a professor, you speak to your students, are they concerned where these next strikes would land? What do you make of his latest round of escalatory talk? Speaker 1: You know, last night I was at a studio for a TV channel, for the Al Mayadeen TV channel. And one of the employees there brought his daughter, a nine-year-old girl. And they're from the city of Karaj, which is close to Tehran. It's a large city. It's probably the third largest city in Iran, very close to Tehran. And she told me, as I was speaking with her and her father, that one of her schoolmates was murdered in one of the attacks carried out by the American and Israeli coalition. The entire family was murdered. And so this is something that people across the country have felt, because in this war, civilians and civilian infrastructure have been targeted throughout the country. Because we're not living in the 20th century. Now it's the reach of missiles and drones go thousands of kilometers. And people across the country, therefore, have been touched. Even the furthest cities away from the front lines, they've been struck. And Iranians definitely are they recognize the threats, what Trump is threatening, especially when he says that he's going to obliterate our country, or he's going to wipe us off the face of the earth, or when he says he's going to wipe out the civilization or send us back to the space. This is something that people understand, and they also see how Western media says nothing about this. They're indifferent to it. When it comes to the empire, It doesn't matter if they're opponents or supporters of Trump. They will support the empire. They'll support the genocide in Gaza. They'll support the genocidal actions in Lebanon. They'll call the families and the apartment blocks that are flattened in Lebanon Hezbollah targets or Hezbollah strongholds in order to help the Israeli regime carry out their onslaught. And the same is true with what happens in Iran. So people recognize that. But people are also very resilient. And that is why They basically won the 39-day war. And that is why during the siege they also have the upper hand. If Trump had the upper hand with this barbaric siege of his where he's trying to starve the Iranian people, if he had that upper hand, then why is he now restarting conflict and bombing people and killing people? It's because the siege has failed as well. But he should have learned from the 39-day war. that restarting the war is not going to bring victory. It's going to bring further defeat, and it's going to, in my opinion, it's going to make the coming financial crisis, the economic crisis that lies ahead for the entire globe much worse and much more long-lasting by pursuing war again. Speaker 0: Can you talk about the economic stability and infrastructure stability in Iran right now? The United States struck targets, obviously destroying water supplies for tens of thousands of people in Iran. What is like everyday life like right now for Iranians getting water and food? We keep hearing from the White House that Iran is running out of these things and therefore will be sort of starved into submission. What do you say about that? Speaker 1: Well, first of all, I think this shows the ambitions of these people to starve ordinary Iranians, to starve them into submission. That's what they tried to do in Cuba. That's what they've done in Syria. And these are, of course, crimes against humanity. But they have not succeeded in Iran by any means. The economy in Iran today is definitely worse off than it was four months ago or three and a half months ago. They bombed steel plants. They bombed pharmaceutical factories. They bombed hospitals, schools. They bombed petrochemical plants and Iran, a major Iranian gas field. So damage has been done. And then the siege prevents food from getting in. But Iran, first of all, has borders with 15 countries. And so it's a very large country. and many friendly countries surrounded. So food hasn't given in. The economy, though, is suffering. Many people have lost their jobs. Inflation is high. But the Iranians are resilient. For Iran, this is a war of survival. And for the Americans, it is a war of choice being carried out on behalf of Netanyahu. The Iranians, they're guilty of supporting the Palestinian and Lebanese people, posing genocide. Iran's antagonists are supporting genocide. And then when Trump makes statements like this, that he wants to take Iranian islands and he wants to steal Iranian oil, that strengthens the resolve of the Iranian people even further. So I think that while there is more difficulty—and it will definitely get more difficult in the weeks and months ahead—the Iranians will persevere. Speaker 0: President Trump has said now that there were like 38 times that there was like a deal on the table and a back and forth deal. Tucker Carlson in a monologue yesterday pointed out that as the great dealmaker, that doesn't sound like you're a great dealmaker if people aren't taking your deal. So how many times were the U.S. in Iran purportedly near a deal? And has there been any talks? We keep hearing from the United States side, the White House side, that we're two days away from a deal. And then we hear from Iranian officials who say, that's not true at all. You haven't even talked to us. There was no deal. What's the truth here? Speaker 1: Well, we had two deals. One is after the 39-day war, which began with Trump saying, unconditional surrender, lay down your arms, and ending with Trump accepting Iran's 10-point proposal as a framework for negotiations. So it didn't go well for Trump. And then there was a ceasefire that was agreed upon after 39 days. And one part of it was to end the genocidal attacks on Lebanon. Trump agreed to this. And then we saw Netanyahu carpet bomb the country in order to wreck the ceasefire. And instead of Trump forcing Netanyahu to abide by the ceasefire, he sided with Netanyahu. So that wrecked the ceasefire. And then he, of course, imposed a siege on Iranian ports, which is an act of war and another violation of the ceasefire. So that's one agreement that Trump wrecked, and Netanyahu. The second was an agreement that's still being floated, and there was progress. The United States was supposed to—I mean, a general framework has been agreed upon, but the details are still—there are gaps. And right now there's no progress, where the Iranians were supposed to get part of their assets that were stolen over the years by the United States. The US would lift sanctions on Iranian energy exports for the duration of the agreement, the MOU. The war in Lebanon would end, because for Iran, these are all red lines. The genocide in Gaza would stop. These are all things that were more or less agreed upon, but again, the details have not been fully agreed upon. And then the lifting of the siege on Iranian ports. And Iran would in turn, in return, normalize the movement of ships through the Strait of Hormuz. And Iran would declare that it will not pursue nuclear weapons, which Iran has been saying for years. This, we were close to this, somewhat close. But again, the details were never sorted out. But then on multiple occasions, Trump would come and say, I'm not going to give Iranian assets back. I'm not going to remove the sanctions. I'm not going to lift the siege." Well, all of this runs against written statements by his own negotiators. So the only person who's the deal-breaker is Trump. And of course, he's probably breaking these—he's the deal-breaker, because Netanyahu and the Zionist lobby are putting pressure on him. not to have this deal. Because at the end of the day, U.S. interests lie in the normalization of global trade and for energy to flow out of the Strait of Hormuz. Israeli regime interests is to continue the war and to continue the hostilities and to wreck the global economy and to wreck the U.S. economy. And so far, the Israeli firsters, the Zionists, Netanyahu, they seem to have the upper hand. Speaker 0: Talk about what infrastructure or U.S. infrastructure has been hit in this back and forth. We keep hearing competing stories. Heard from CIA analyst and friend of the show, Larry Johnson, who said that Iran struck and destroyed up to 12 F-35s in Bahrain and other locations. What do you know about the attacks from Iran against American infrastructure bases in the Gulf states? Speaker 1: I do know that U.S. jets based in these bases were targeted. Radar installations were targeted. A very expensive radar installation, I think, in Bahrain was destroyed. The Iranians bombed bases in Jordan, in Kuwait, and in Bahrain. early this morning, and all of it was in retaliation. I mean, the war was, as we all know, what did—Iran didn't start the war. It was the United States and Trump and Netanyahu who started the war with the regional proxies who assisted them. And the ceasefires have all been broken by the United States. They constantly, over the past few weeks, they've been attacking Iran, and then Iran would retaliate as deterrents. And Iran's response last night, early this morning, to the U.S. attack was to target U.S. bases across the region as deterrents. If the United States had not attacked first, Iran would not have retaliated. But the Iranians have lots of targets that they can hit, and they have the missiles and drones to do it. Iran's underground missile bases and underground drone bases and underground factories that produce them are, as we saw, they all withstood the 39 days of bombing by—through missiles, through B-52s. And they are continuing to function. So Trump is basically wrecking the global economy. He's wrecking the U.S. military capability. And all for the sake of Zionism, not for the sake of the American people. Speaker 0: Just a few minutes ago, we learned from some insiders and sources, and again, take this with a grain of salt, that Trump has canceled tonight's attack on Iran, saying that basically discussions and final points have been, in concept, approved by all parties right now. We've heard this how many times? And then there's a carpet bombing of the country, whether by Israel or otherwise. When you hear this type of thing coming out of the White House, what do you make of it? Speaker 1: Well, you took the words out of my mouth, Clayton. You've left nothing for me to say. When Trump says he's not going to bomb, you should assume that he'll probably bomb. If he says that we're close to a deal, then you should assume that we're probably not close to a deal. I know you understand Trump much better than I, because you pursue American politics closer than I, and I should be asking you these things. But I personally have For a long time now, I've stopped even following anything that Trump says, his speeches, unless someone sends something to me and asks. But when they invite me on television to talk about something that Trump says, I always tell them that, look, I have no idea what this means, because he will say this today and say something else tomorrow. He may actually do it, and he may not do it. And some people think that this is an asset to the United States. It's the exact opposite. No one trusts the United States. No one can do a deal with the United States. I mean, how can Iran even do a deal with Trump? Let's say Trump says, I agree to everything that Iran demands, and let's do the deal and walk away. The Iranians will say, well, what is he going to say tonight? What is he going to say tomorrow? Is he going to tear up the deal? So Trump has basically made any sort of rapprochement or far less than rapprochement, make any sort of dialogue, or even less than dialogue, make any sort of agreement possible. Speaker 0: Well, we just, yeah, so we were hearing that from insiders, and now the White House has just posted this. So now we have it public. And I'll just read what was posted a short time ago. From President Trump, based on the fact that discussions with the Islamic Republic of Iran have been brought to the highest level of Iranian leadership and approved, I have, as President of the United States of America, canceled the scheduled strikes and bombings against Iran this evening. Discussions and final points have been in both concept and great detail approved by all parties. including the U.S., Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Turkey, Pakistan, Bahrain, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt, and others. The naval blockade will remain in full force and effect until this transaction is finalized. Time and place of the signing will be announced shortly. Okay. Speaker 1: Okay. Let's wait for his next post. Speaker 0: Peace. All right. Okay. And I guess the CENTCOM says the Strait of Hormuz is wide open for business. Wide open. Wide open. Well, Professor, we'll leave it there, I guess, and we'll watch what the next post says. But thank you for this assessment. And at the heart of all of this is people are dying and people are suffering. People are being killed and murdered and bombs dropped on their families and being wiped out. and an economy in ruins, and the United States economy in ruins. And these warmongers are getting exactly what they want, which is deeply, deeply disturbing. Professor Morandi, thank you so much. Thank you for your bravery and for telling us what life is like right now inside of Iran. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you want to follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video. with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 12, 2026 at 11:30 PM

Saved - June 13, 2026 at 11:45 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🚨 Trump keeps claiming an Iran deal is “close” while insiders say there is NO deal. Markets swing, ships stall, oil routes choke, and America looks less in control by the hour. @DougaMacgregor warns this whole illusion could collapse fast. https://t.co/zsLkfPwoiA

Video Transcript AI Summary

President Trump tells reporters in the White House that he has called off strikes against Iran because a deal is close, with multiple parties involved and the agreement potentially finalized within the next two to three days. Speaker 2 compares this to a repeating pattern attributed to Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu since February 28: declarations of victory, claims that the other side is begging to surrender, orders to announce an imminent deal, bombing again, and repetition. Speaker 2 says the cycle has happened “over 38 times,” arguing that a weekend bombing follows the claim of an imminent deal. Glenn Greenwald is referenced as having posted that the same pattern repeats weekly. Speaker 2 connects the discussion to earlier commentary by Tucker Carlson about Trump’s alleged dealmaking, then shifts to claims about sovereignty. In Speaker 1’s monologue, the United States is described as lacking sovereignty in decisions that “change the course of history,” with the war in Iran said to be decided by the prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, rather than the president of the United States. Speaker 1 argues that this challenges the premise that people control outcomes through voting, claiming that on major questions elected officials are not in charge. Speaker 2 asks who is driving any potential peace agreement, stating that Iran has said there is no agreement and that Speaker 2 calls that claim a “total lie,” adding that negotiations had not yet involved speaking with Iran. Speaker 2 brings in Colonel Douglas McGregor to interpret Trump’s statements alongside reports of overnight attacks involving Gulf states, U.S. infrastructure, U.S. bases, and F-35s, with deaths inside Iran. Colonel McGregor says he asked someone in Wall Street what was going on and was told “there’s no truth” to the deal claims. He frames Trump’s behavior as persuasive like Bernie Madoff, saying Trump creates “the illusion of control.” McGregor describes possible outcomes: leaving and pretending nothing happened (described as unlikely), leaving without acting with Israel (said to risk Israeli use of a nuclear weapon), freezing everything into a prolonged “hot-cold war,” and continued escalation he believes Trump cannot control fully. Speaker 0 shifts to consequences, saying the stock market can respond to illusions, that continuous threats to kill people as national policy damage the psyche, and that there should be consequences for the repeated pattern. McGregor also argues that Gulf states are seeking security arrangements beyond the U.S., referencing Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, and saying Arab states and the Arabian Peninsula are discussing security with Russia because the U.S. cannot protect what it promised. He suggests this marks the start of an end to what he calls the “American military empire,” with Koreans, Japanese, Persian Gulf states, and Europeans possibly asking the U.S. to leave. Speaker 2 reports “from insider sources” that Iran denies a deal Trump is bragging about, including the “new Ayatollah,” and claims negotiating teams are frustrated because Trump and his team allegedly sabotage negotiations by preemptively announcing “bullshit” online. Speaker 2 calls the situation “total theater.” McGregor explains constraints he believes apply to Trump regarding Israel: he says Israel would not stop attacking without destruction of Iran, while Trump would not want an agreement that prevents him from declaring victory. He warns that if Israel becomes a rogue actor, other states could seek nuclear access for protection. Speaker 0 mentions a morning claim about taking “Karg Island” and other oil infrastructure in a way he associates with Venezuela, then asks whether it is bluster and whether such action is feasible. McGregor responds that taking the island would involve “terrible risks,” questions what would be done with it afterward, and argues Iranians have more routes for oil than cargo islands. He adds that destroying facilities could affect China, Japan, and others with strategic petroleum reserves, while the U.S. reserve is said to be dropping. Speaker 2 asks what happens next and questions U.S. Central Command posts about the Strait of Hormuz remaining open while reports say commercial shipping is severely restricted. McGregor says the “open” message conflicts with reality, describes possible queuing and payment-for-priority claims in the Gulf, and says oil is being moved because Iran permits it, whether through regulation or bribery. He emphasizes that Trump would not admit limited control, warning against blockading indefinitely and against a prolonged shadow war involving troops facing ballistic missiles and armed drones. In closing, McGregor says he worries that resuming attacks could produce more losses, including credibility and prestige with the world, and that intervening in the Gulf with air mobile infantry would be a “disaster waiting to happen.” He says he cannot answer whether Americans have suffered unrevealed base losses but believes more losses are likely if attacks continue.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 2: Well, just a short time ago, President Trump in the White House addressing reporters says this. He has called off the strikes against Iran tonight because a deal is close, that many parties have come to this agreement on a deal, and that it could be finalized within the next two to three days. Stop me if you've heard this before. Glenn Greenwald just posted this on X a few short hours ago. Trump has been repeating the exact same meaningless cycle every single week since he and Netanyahu started this war on February 28th. Number one, we won. Number two, they're begging to surrender. Number three, order Barack Ravid to announce that a deal is imminent. Number four, bomb them again. Number five, repeat back to number one. And that's exactly where we seem to be. So If you've been counting at home, like how many times a deal has been on, how many times it's been off again, I think it's like over 38 times now that that's been the case. And fool me once, fool me 38 times on a Thursday as we head into the weekend, we get a deal. For what reason? And then we bomb them over the weekend. Tucker Carlson just did a pretty impressive monologue last night laying out how Trump purports to be a dealmaker. But in actuality, not so much. Watch. Speaker 1: But maybe above all. the way in which American power has been reduced, and this is the saddest to say out loud, is that it is suddenly obvious to everyone, both in this country and around the world, that the United States does not have sovereignty, which is another way of saying American leaders aren't really in charge of America. They can make some decisions. They can make noises and give speeches, but the big decisions, the ones that change the course of history, are not up to them. employees they're not the boss now who is the boss well that's an open debate but in this war it has become very obvious undeniable in fact it's been admitted by this administration that the president united states didn't decide the time and place of this war the prime minister of israel decided the time and place of this war benjamin netanyahu was in charge admitting that out loud and of course it was known to everyone who was paying close attention, is a sea change in the way not just the rest of the world thinks about the United States, but the way Americans think about their own country. Because the premise of our system is that the people who live here are in charge of it and that they can control its outcomes by voting. We just had elections in a lot of the country primaries yesterday and an ever diminishing number of people march off to the polls with the notion in mind that I can change things with my vote. The war in Iran has taught us that actually on the big questions, the people you elect aren't even in charge. Speaker 2: So who's driving a potential peace agreement here? Is it Israel? Certainly not. Who's really in charge of all of this? And if President Trump has said on again, off again for now 38 different times, Iran this afternoon saying, we have no agreement. This is a total lie. Like, where is this coming from? We haven't even spoken to them. So what the hell is actually happening here? Let's bring in Colonel Douglas McGregor now to talk about all of this and to try to make sense of it because there's been a number of big attacks overnight. Gulf states, U.S. infrastructure, U.S. bases, F-35s, and others. And, of course, lots of people died inside of Iran. Colonel McGregor Can you help us make sense of the president's statements over the last like two hours as to an agreement being put in place? Speaker 3: Well, when I heard it, I got on the phone as soon as possible and called a friend up in Wall Street. Yes, there are good people in Wall Street. I do have some friends there just for honesty and so forth. And I said, you know, Jack, what's going on? Is there any truth to this? And he said, Doug, there's no truth to it. I said, well, Jack, I just wanted to know because that's what everybody else says. So I said, what is this man up to? Who is President Trump? I said, is he some sort of Nero figure, Emperor Nero, who sort of fiddles on top of the hills in Rome and watches the city burn? Because while all of this is going on, we're going broke. You know, a lot of people don't understand it. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is falling dramatically. And we think it's on a trajectory to be close to empty by early autumn. The price of sulfur has gone up over the last 18 months. 900%, 50% of the sulfur for our fertilizer comes through the Strait of Hormuz. U.S. farm incomes are projected to fall. I mean, I just went down the list and he said, no, Doug, he's not Nero. I said, well, then who are we dealing with here? I don't understand. I thought I knew him. He said, he's Bernie Madoff. And I said, really? And he pointed out, well, remember when Bernie Madoff was arrested, most of the people on Wall Street were shocked. They thought he was a great guy. He was very charming, very smooth, always willing to step up for charity and everything else. Of course, he had stolen $50 billion. And at the time, they didn't know what the sum was. Eventually, he was found guilty and He was told to pay something like $700 million in damages. But his assets didn't come to that. He was a very wealthy man. There was no reason for him to try and steal the funds of his clients. But Bernie was very, very convincing. He was very persuasive. I think we're dealing with someone who's very persuasive. He's a good salesman. That's what got him elected. And his behavior to this point is what's gotten him where he is. The problem is that he's way out on a limb now, because when this thing comes crashing down, he's going to crash down with it. He's not going to escape accountability by any means. And this thing is going to crash. We don't know how this will end, but I can tell you this could end up in any number of different ways. We could end up just eventually leaving and pretending nothing happened, which I think is unlikely. If we do try to leave and we don't do anything in the meantime with Israel, the Israelis will feel free to do whatever they want, which means they could easily use a nuclear weapon. And then there's always the possibility that we sort of freeze everything. And then you end up in a situation like Kashmir, where drones are exploding every other day, ballistic missiles are traded, a sort of a hot-cold war that just drags on and on. Nobody knows, but This is what he set in motion. He can't really control it. The only thing he can do is create the illusion of control. And that's what he's done. Speaker 0: Well, the stock market. is good at controlling illusions and responding to illusions. It's a belief system. It's a shared belief system in a lot of falsities. The problem here is twofold. Number one, it will hurt the American worker. It continues to devalue the dollar. It will lead to economic collapse at some point when we are allowed to feel it, when there's no more perversions. But also the idea of continuously threatening to kill people as national policy is incredibly damaging to the psyche. It's not funny. At first, it felt like the Princess Bride, you know, the line, good night, Wesley, good work, I'll most likely kill you in the morning. That's what it feels like, right? That happens for seven years or however long he's gone. We can't keep doing this. There needs to be a consequence for the fact that we're just threatening to kill people every other week. Speaker 3: I think that's why you heard the foreign minister of Russia, Mr. Lavrov, make an announcement that there had been some discussions between the Arab states and the Arabian Peninsula and Russia for some sort of security arrangement that would help them essentially cope with the emergence of Iran as a great power. I mean, what we've demonstrated pretty conclusively in the Persian Gulf is is that we can't protect the Arabian states that we promised we would protect. And so they're now talking to the Russians. They know the Russians have good relations with Iran, they have leverage with Iran, and perhaps that's a better solution than dealing with us. I think this is the beginning, really the beginning of the end of this thing that people refer to overseas as the American military empire. We're going to see the Koreans and the Japanese as well as the people in the Persian Gulf and ultimately the Europeans, all ask us to do the same thing. Leave. Get out. Because we are no longer seen as a source for security. We're seen as a catalyst for conflict. Speaker 2: We can confidently report here at Redacted from insider sources telling us that Iran is denying the deal that Trump is actively bragging about, including... the new Ayatollah. And according to the sources that we're getting in here just now, a negotiating team, including the vice president and the Pakistanis, are frustrated that Trump and his team is sabotaging their negotiations by preemptively announcing bullshit online that has nothing to do with the negotiations. And one insider is telling Redacted, We can't run foreign policy on truth social. What do you make of that? So you have a team that maybe is actively trying to put something in place and then being sabotaged on truth social and in White House press briefings that we have a deal and things are moving forward and all of these other players are involved in it and these people are saying that's not true. This is total theater. Speaker 3: Well, his backers, remember, are unconcerned with what anybody else thinks. They're very pleased with everything that President Trump has done to this point. What they would like to see him do is to end this war by utterly destroying and obliterating Iran. Now, I think it's pretty clear that short of a nuclear weapon, we're not going to accomplish that. So the real issue now is, what do we do about Israel? We are obligated to Israel up and down the beltway. Back and forth. What are we going to do? Do we tell the Israelis, thanks very much, now you're on your own? I don't think he can do that and get away with it. He has too many irons in the fire with the Israelis. He has made too many promises to too many people. So he can't really do that. So what can we reasonably get out of this? Because if the Israelis refuse to stop attacking their neighbors, stop trying to annihilate the people that live in Gaza, and for that matter, anybody in southern Lebanon and potentially elsewhere, If that's not forthcoming—and I don't think there's much evidence he can deliver on that—then Israel becomes this rogue state that could open a front at any given point in time and kill anybody it wants. This leads people then to turn to a place like Pakistan, like the Turks or the Iranians or others, and say, we'd like to have access to that nuclear weapon, because it's the only way we can protect ourselves from Israel. So what he started, he can't really finish at this point. But we can't simply walk away and ignore it because of the nuclear dimension. At least that's my take. Speaker 0: Now, what the president had announced his intentions were this morning was that, OK, we're going very hard tonight. We're going to take Karg Island. I've always wanted it anyway. We're going to take other oil infrastructures just like we did in Venezuela. It's going to be fun. It'll be over in a few hours. Hold on, everybody. Now, obviously, I read that. I get extremely emotional because I don't think we should be able to do that. I don't want to be responsible for death abroad of innocence. And then I go to your channel or Dan Davis, and I'm like, can we even do it? Is he just bloviating? What's the right way to read this? Could we even do it, even if we were to take him seriously? Speaker 3: Oh, we could very definitely take Clark Island. Now, how many lives would we lose in the process? How much damage would ultimately be done? I can't even begin to think about that. I mean, it's the kind of operation that I would be very, very unenthusiastic about leading. I mean, air mobile infantry, when you start flying light infantry in the dark or in the daylight, preferably in the dark, over miles of open country and particularly across the ocean, you run terrible risks of being detected and shot out of the sky. But let's assume that doesn't happen, and you come aboard the island at some point. What do you do with it? Do you run up a flag and say, victory is ours, and then hopefully be extracted? I mean, what are you doing with it? Oh, well, we're denying use of the island to the Iranians. Well, the Iranians have more ways to get oil out of Iran than just cargo island. I think people don't know that. We keep acting as though that's their only route. That's not true. But there's something else. If we end up destroying all of those facilities, I don't think the Chinese are going to be very happy about that because obviously they buy a great deal of oil from Iran. And they're not the only ones, the Japanese, the Koreans and others. Now, the Japanese, Koreans and Chinese all have enormous strategic petroleum reserves. India doesn't. Our reserve is dropping each passing day. But those countries have large reserves. They are led by intelligent people who look into the future. The rest of the world is not that well off, and our European allies are certainly not in a strong position. It's time for President Trump to think beyond just his own personal interests and think about the world. What are we doing to the rest of the world? We're not just disrupting supply chains, as you pointed out at the beginning, Natalie, when you were talking about famine. We're destroying potentially hundreds of millions of lives all over the globe. That's the last thing we as Americans want to do. That's something we've never wanted to do. So how do you get to Trump in the Oval Office and say, Mr. President, step back from all of this, whatever your personal concerns are. This needs to stop. This is why. And show him categorically what's at stake. When I was last with a man and when I met him, He was an intelligent person who could actually reason and think things through. I don't know what's happened, but he's got to move beyond this emotional state and extricate himself and us from this terrible position. Speaker 2: What do you think happens next? U.S. Central Command—it just seems like we're living in a bizarro world, Colonel. U.S. Central Command earlier this morning posted, the Strait of Hormuz remains open for transit. It's a pathway— And all you need to do is just scroll down to read the, or talk to anyone who knows anything, or just scroll down and read the community notes. Commercial shipping through the Strait remains severely restricted. I spoke to Professor Morandi in Iran just a short time ago. We'll play that interview in a few minutes. But he said no ships get through unless Iran lets them through. Like, what is CENTCOM posting here? Speaker 3: In fact, I had another phone call with someone on the inside. And I said, do you have a list of the ships, their names, who the captains are, where they're bound to? And he said, come on, Doug, of course not. Well, I said, well, then this damn thing is not open, is it? He said, no, it's not open, but we're saying it's open. You know, what's going on right now in the Gulf is a lot of graft, as you would expect. I mean, you've got people in the world who are saying, look, you want to get through the Get through the Strait of Hormuz, OK. Normally, you'd pay a toll of $2 million or a million or whatever it is, stand in line. But if you're willing to pay $10 million, we can move you up in the queue. So there are people down in the Gulf right now who are making plenty of money by cutting these kinds of deals. So are there ships carrying oil out of the Gulf? Yes. But they're carrying it out because the Iranians have let them do so. whether that was done in accordance with the stated regulations or it was done because of bribery, who knows. But at the end of the day, we're not really in control of everything. And that's the point. President Trump has to admit that he's not in control. And he won't do that. He absolutely will not do that. And he thinks that he has the military power to impose his will indefinitely. And I don't want to be in a position where we are blockading this place in perpetuity and that we've got troops spread out all over the place trying to deal with ballistic missiles, armed drones and so forth. In other words, this sort of shadow war that just drags on and on and on. And right now we've got two problems. We have the Israelis on the one hand who have no interest right now in signing up for anything that does not include the destruction of Iran. And number two, we have President Trump. Who doesn't want to sign up for anything that doesn't allow him to declare victory? Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 2: Well, we're going to speak with Professor Morandi in just a moment. But, you know, with a few minutes left that we got with you, Colonel, what do you think happens next? Speaker 0: And may I just tack on something? Do you think it's true that Americans have taken big losses at bases abroad and they're just not letting us know that? Speaker 3: You know, I don't know. And that's a question I can't answer. I think we have taken more than we have admitted. But I don't know how many. But beyond that, I can't say anything. Now, I do worry at this stage that when we resume attacking again, we're going to take more losses than we've taken in the past, far more. And especially if we try to intervene in the Gulf itself with air mobile infantry. That's a disaster waiting to happen. So I don't know what the generals in the Pentagon or the admirals are telling him. Hopefully they're saying something similar, but there's no way to know that because my experience over many, many years was when people were pushed in uniform, they eventually said, okay, boss, let's get it done. We'll do it. Even when it was a dumb, stupid idea. Now, in most cases, it didn't cost us a lot of blood and treasure, but in some it did. And this is one where it could cost us a lot more than just our own blood and treasure. It's going to cost whatever credibility and legitimate prestige we enjoy in the world. And that's my concern. Now, I think it's a good thing if we get out of all these places where we've been garrisoning forever. But I don't like the idea that we have been exposed as feckless, weak, indecisive, and stupid. And right now, that's arguably an accurate evaluation. Speaker 2: Yeah. Colonel Douglas McGregor, always great to see you. Thank you for your insights as always. We really appreciate it. Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you both. Bye-bye. Speaker 2: Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you want to follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 11, 2026 at 10:50 PM

Saved - June 12, 2026 at 2:18 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I keep hearing from President Trump that a peace agreement is close, but many of these claims aren’t publicly confirmed by Iranian officials. I ask how many deals were truly agreed by both sides. I note @s_m_marandi’s view that Iran would never accept terms mainly serving Israeli interests, and that Iran’s red lines include ending the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and Lebanon, while Israeli actions on off-limit targets derail progress.

@RedactedNews - Redacted

We keep hearing from President Trump that a peace agreement is close. Yet many of these announcements are never publicly confirmed by Iranian officials. How many of these deals were actually agreed to by both sides? @s_m_marandi argues that Iran would never accept terms that primarily serve Israeli interests. Professor Marandi reports that Iran’s red lines include ending the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and Lebanon. But whenever negotiations appear to make progress, Israeli military actions against previously off-limit targets derail the process and push a deal further out of reach.

Video Transcript AI Summary

The transcript contrasts statements from the United States/White House side and Iranian officials about whether a deal is imminent. The United States side says a deal is “two days away,” while Iranian officials say that is “not true at all,” claiming there has been no discussion and that there was “no deal.” The speaker says there were “two deals.” The first followed a “thirty-nine day war.” This began with Trump saying “unconditional surrender, lay down your arms,” and ended with Trump accepting Iran’s “ten point proposal” as the framework for negotiations, which “didn’t go well for Trump.” After thirty-nine days, a ceasefire was agreed upon, including an element to end “the genocidal attacks on Lebanon.” Trump allegedly agreed to this, but the transcript claims Netanyahu “carpet-bombed the country in order to wreck the ceasefire,” and that instead of Trump forcing Netanyahu to abide by the ceasefire, he “sided with Netanyahu,” resulting in the ceasefire being wrecked. The speaker then says Trump imposed a “siege on Iranian ports,” described as “an act of war” and “another violation of the ceasefire.” The speaker attributes the failure to both Trump and Netanyahu. The second “agreement” is described as still being “floated.” The transcript says a general framework was agreed upon, but the details contain “gaps,” and there is “right now… no progress.” It outlines elements the speaker says were more or less agreed: - The US would lift sanctions on Iranian energy exports for the duration of the agreement (an MOU), while Iran would receive part of its assets “stolen over the years by the United States.” - The war in Lebanon would end, including “the genocide in Gaza” stopping. - The lifting of the siege on Iranian ports would be exchanged for Iran normalizing ship movement through the Strait of Hormuz. - Iran would declare it will “not pursue nuclear weapons,” which Iran has been saying it will not do for years. The transcript says the agreement was “close” but that “the details were never sorted out.” It further claims Trump repeatedly said he would not return Iranian assets, remove sanctions, or lift the siege. The speaker states that this “runs against written statements by his own negotiators,” and concludes that “the only person who’s the deal breaker is Trump,” suggesting he is pressured not to have the deal by Netanyahu and “the Zionist lobby.” It argues US interests favor “normalization of global trade” and energy flowing out of the Strait of Hormuz, while “Israeli regime interests” are described as continuing war and hostilities to “wreck the global economy and… the US economy,” with the transcript claiming Netanyahu and the “Zionists” have “the upper hand.”

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

We keep hearing from the United States side, the White House side, that we're two days away from a deal, and then we hear from Iranian officials who say, "That's not true at all. You haven't even talked to us. There was no deal." What's the truth here? We had two deals. One is after the thirty-nine day war, which began with Trump saying unconditional surrender, lay down your arms, and ending with Trump accepting Iran's ten point proposal as the framework for negotiations, so it didn't go well for Trump. And then there was a ce- there was a ceasefire that was agreed upon at after thirty-nine days, and one part of it was to end the genocidal attacks on Lebanon. Trump agreed to this. And then we saw Netanyahu carpet-bombed the country in order to wreck the ceasefire. And instead of Trump forcing Netanyahu to abide by the ceasefire, he sided with Netanyahu. So that wrecked the ceasefire, and then he of course imposed a siege on Iranian ports, which is an act of war and another violation of the ceasefire. So that's one agreement that Trump wrecked, and Netanyahu. The second was an agreement that's still being floated And there was progress. the United States was supposed to-- I mean, the, a general framework has been agreed upon, but the details, there's still, there are still, there be-- there are gaps, and, and right now there's no progress. Where the Iranians were supposed to get part of their assets that were stolen over the years by the United States the US would lift sanctions on Iranian energy exports for the duration of the agreement, the MOU. the, the, the war in Lebanon would end because for Iran, these are all red lines. The, the, the genocide in Gaza would stop. These are all things that were more or less agreed upon, but again, the details were have not been fully agreed upon. And then with the lifting of the, the siege on Iranian ports, and Iran would in turn, in return would normalize the movement of ships through the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran would declare that it is, it will- Not pursue nuclear weapons, which Iran has been saying for years. This, we were close to this, somewhat close, but again, the, the details were never sorted out. But Then on multiple occasions, Trump would come and say, "I'm not going to give Iranian assets back. I'm not going to re-remove the sanctions. I'm not going to lift the siege." Well, this, all of this runs against written statements by his own negotiators. So the only person who's the deal breaker is Trump, and of course, he's- Probably breaking the, these or pro-- these, the deal breaker because Netanyahu and the Zionist lobby are putting pressure on him not to have this deal, because at the end of the day, US interests lie in the normalization of global trade and for energy to flow out of the Strait of Hormuz. Israeli regime interests is to continue the war and to continue the hostilities and to wreck the global economy and to wreck the US economy. And so far, the, the, the Israeli firsters, the, the Zionists, Netanyahu, they seem to have the upper hand

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 10, 2026 at 7:02 PM

Saved - June 12, 2026 at 1:29 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🚨 The cancer industry should be TERRIFIED. Red light therapy and photodynamic treatment are showing results in major journals that could threaten the chemo, radiation, and surgery machine worth billions. https://t.co/ow6zIYuaJw

Video Transcript AI Summary

The pharmaceutical industry may face major concerns because it has become an alternative to palliative chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery in large clinical studies on cancer, with trial sizes ranging into the thousands and cancer cases in the high hundreds through photodynamic therapy. A randomized control trial published in *The Lancet Oncology* involved 413 people, with a “red light” group performing almost 400% better than the non-red light group. In that trial, only 6% of the red light group received surgery, while 3% of the non-red light group received surgery, described as a 100% difference. The transcript also highlights major post-surgical outcomes: after these surgeries, nine out of ten people will become impotent. Because of this, people are pursuing less invasive, more selective therapies that target tumor cells instead of “carpet bombing” the body or removing organs they want. The transcript describes a concern that organ removal is happening because people do not think there is a better option. It frames this as a “forced” or “transgender” surgery dynamic occurring when better alternatives are not available, and identifies this lack of options as the biggest threat.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

The reason why I would say the pharmaceutical industry may have some major concerns around it is because it's become an alternative for palliative chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery in major clinical studies now ranging into the thousands, specifically on cancer into, into the high hundreds through photodynamic therapy. And the Lancet Oncology even published their clinical study with thirteen men, and it, the red light group, 'cause it was a randomized control, control trial, the red light group did almost four hundred percent better than the Non-red light group in a, in a four hundred and thirteen person group, and only six percent got surgery in the red light group, three percent got red light in the non- got surgery in the non-red light group, which is a hundred percent difference on that front. So that's major. These are major medical journals and the major issues that men after these surgeries, nine out of ten will become impotent. And so people are running now for these less invasive, more selective therapies that are targeting tumor cells instead of carpet bombing the body or just taking out organs that we actually- want, which I would say in some ways is forced or transgender surgeries that aren't intentionally transgender surgeries, not to gas-- or not to age bait people, but my point is that it's-- that's happening to people where they're getting organs removed because they don't think there's a better option, and I think that that's the big threat right there. Geez

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 7, 2026 at 11:30 PM

Saved - June 11, 2026 at 4:05 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🔥 AI MANIA has become the biggest casino on Earth. Trillions in fake confidence, sky high valuations, and a market praying nobody notices the emperor has no clothes. @HealthRanger blows the lid off. https://t.co/sEz21oYG2W

Video Transcript AI Summary

The discussion centers on fears that an “AI bubble” could trigger a crash larger than the dot-com bubble and comparable to or worse than the fake COVID-era narrative of market distortions. Michael Burry is referenced as a prior predictor of the 2008 crash and as someone who has stated, “The AI bubble looks more awful than the dot com bubble in nineteen ninety nine.” Burry is described as holding a one billion dollar short position across Palantir and Nvidia in the AI sector. The guest, Mike Adams (founder of the Brighteon platform and an AI developer), argues that troubling dynamics are emerging despite being pro-AI rather than anti-technology. Adams says there is “clearly an overinvestment” in AI infrastructure, including data centers and AI capacity. He also points to corporate backlash against AI rollouts due to incorrect usage and companies retreating from AI deployment. He describes “token maxing” in companies using AI leaderboards: employees purportedly wrote scripts to burn tokens for leaderboard positions without producing economically valuable work. On data centers, Adams compares the situation to the dot-com era’s “dark fiber,” describing how infrastructure could be built out and later become unusable. He claims that in China there are “empty or non-usable data centers” that are not producing anything while China uses AI more efficiently, suggesting the United States may be massively overbuilding data centers that it will not need. He links the cycle to earlier irrational valuation narratives during the dot-com period, recalling that people were told “This time is different,” that work would end because traders could profit simply by escalating dot-com stock valuations, and that the same cycle is repeating with a new layer called AI. Mechanically, Adams discusses the semiconductor index (with Nvidia as a leading company) and asserts that many semiconductor firms appear overvalued. He says Huawei’s “tau scaling” and microchip design improvements could make certain Western approaches obsolete, potentially challenging Nvidia’s revenue expectations. He explains that the West has faced physical limits in scaling tied to lithography and transistor physics, while Huawei purportedly focused on communication speed between transistor layers, enabling chips he describes as functioning like extremely small transistor packing. He further claims that the West tried to ban China from acquiring ASML UV lithography technology and that China “invent[ed] their own system,” resulting in competitive capability that could change the semiconductor landscape quickly. Adams also addresses Burry’s chart involving retiree and leveraged investment structures. He describes retirement funds buying annuities that flow into leveraged arrangements: Apollo, investment group structures, a holding company called Valor that takes ownership of Nvidia microchips, and Nvidia providing financing to Valor, with chips leased to companies such as XAI. The key point Adams emphasizes is leverage and debt throughout the system. A major additional concern Adams raises is OpenAI’s financial model. He states OpenAI is “burning debt” and “burning cash like never before.” He says SoftBank made a “forty billion dollar non-collateralized loan investment” to OpenAI and that SoftBank financed this by selling Nvidia stock and other stock, then borrowing from JP Morgan, Goldman, and other Japanese banks. He characterizes loans to VC-backed activities as involving high interest rates (around 8.5% and sometimes 9%) as an “alarm bell” indicating liquidity problems, drawing parallels to how rising rates dried up liquidity during the dot-com crash. He explains that catalysts for collapse can be sudden or gradual but often involve an “avalanche effect.” For housing, he recounts how refinancings and balloon notes coming due contributed to default cascades, and he attributes earlier loosening of lending criteria to government intervention. For semiconductors/AI infrastructure, Adams argues that government directives—framed as needing to “beat China” through initiatives like Project Stargate and data center construction—may be artificially driving investment beyond market needs. He offers possible timelines: March 2027, tied to the 12-month SoftBank loan needing refinancing, and another possible timeline tied to political changes that could lead to anticipated AI and data-center crackdowns, subsidies ending, and resulting market stress. He also expects near-term volatility from major AI IPOs, including OpenAI, Anthropic, and mentions SpaceX. Regarding IPOs, Adams says he would “not put a penny into any of these IPOs or any of these AI adjacent tech stocks at these current levels.” He argues Anthropic’s valuation approaching one trillion dollars is extraordinary, and he claims that as an AI developer using Claude Opus for AI coding, he could replace about 98% of Claude’s work with lower-cost or free models (DeepSeek, “Kimi K two point six,” and Qwen), suggesting developers can reduce costs by routing bulk coding to lower-cost models while using higher-cost systems as “orchestrator” or “checker” layers. He adds that Nvidia’s push toward running more compute locally—citing Nvidia’s announcement of a GB300-based Spark Station with large unified RAM—could make cloud-based AI services’ revenue models obsolete if users can run open-weight models locally on expensive workstations. Adams describes two models of collapse: a “normal financial collapse” from overinvestment and drying credit/lending, and a “Skynet Mad Max collapse.” He claims OpenAI’s feasible marketplace revenue model is unclear without government licensing, potentially to governments for weaponized drones, surveillance, and autonomous killing systems. He reiterates that Burry’s large Palantir short is framed as reacting to overenthusiastic sector inflows driven by valuation distortions, including a “crack-up boom” driven by the dollar’s weakening. Beyond finance, Adams pivots to surveillance concerns. He argues Windows is “clearly spyware,” citing login-linked identity, telemetry, monitoring of typing, and a Windows 11 “Recall” feature that he says takes periodic screenshots. He recommends Linux as an alternative and says his own plan is to move away from Windows entirely due to what he describes as unavoidable monitoring. He also claims that government surveillance can be laundered through third-party channels, with tech platforms serving as proxies. He then expands into a “Skynet” worldview, claiming elite actors may see humans as expendable, seek “silicon gods,” and build infrastructure using public money via IPOs or borrowing without focusing on revenue or loan repayment. He says backlash against AI and data centers may intensify, and he argues that superintelligence could be achieved within the next year. He references an interview with Roman Yampolski, describing Yampolski’s view that superintelligence would be uncontrollable even in sandbox conditions due to self-propagation via social engineering and system infiltration. Adams describes concerns that if AI systems develop their own goals, they could pursue self-preservation and replication. The conversation concludes with EV-related points. Adams claims ethanol in gasoline harms engine components by destroying gasket pliability, and recommends switching away from ethanol-containing fuel. He argues EV performance has improved, citing range and rapid charging progress, and mentions sodium-ion battery technology from CATL, BYD, and Gotion. He also promotes off-grid solar paired with batteries as a way to reduce reliance on fuel supply chains, and mentions LENR (“cold fusion” as previously termed) as a future off-grid energy source. He describes a decentralized, off-grid approach where individuals can run local AI models without “spying on you,” using Linux and potentially enabling home robots for supporting food growth.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Are we about to face the largest crash in history? Will the AI bubble be far greater than what we saw during the fake COVID pandemic? What about the dot com bubble that crashed twenty six years ago? I remember it well. Everyone was buying what pet dot com stocks. Oh my gosh. Michael Burry, the guy who predicted the two thousand and eight crash, featured, of course, in the movie The Big Short. You might call him a perma bear. He's permanently predicting that things are gonna go bad, but is he onto something here with what's about to happen? He just said this, "The AI bubble looks more awful than the dot com bubble in nineteen ninety nine," and he also holds a one billion dollar short across Palantir across Nvidia in the AI sector. So what is actually happening here? Our next guest just published a one hour report on this coming AI bubble crash. Mike Adams joins us now. He's the founder of the Brighteon platform, is number one bestselling author of Food Forensics, he's an AI developer, and of course, also, you can check him out at brightvideos dot com. Mike, great to have you back on the show, my friend. Thank you, Clayton. It's always good to join you. Happy to be here. Man, you are so busy lately with everything that's sort of collapsing around us and watching it very closely so I wanted to have you on because of, obviously, you're knee-deep in AI, and you're not one of these people that dislikes AI, we should be very clear. No. You're not like a luddite out there, you have, you come from the world of programming and you build AI platforms, so you're deeply invested in it, but what you're seeing is very troubling. Do you think that a lot of Americans right now, a lot of What's about to come? A- absolutely, in so many ways. I mean, it's almost, where do you want to go with this? But I think there's clearly an overinvestment in the infrastructure build out of data centers and a-AI capacity. But there's also, see, there, there's a, there's a backlash against AI rolling out inside corporations, where a lot of companies are, are using AI tools the wrong way, and they're not getting the results that they expected, and part of that is because they don't know how to use them appropriately. I mean Brainstorm some of that. But there's, there's a lot of retreating from AI rollouts, and some companies, I think even Amazon and Meta and Microsoft were doing weird things internally where they had AI token use leaderboards, and then that gave rise to something called token maxing, which is where the employees figured that they could rise to the top of the leaderboard by just writing scripts that would burn tokens, which is output AI output, it's, it's in tokens, just burn tokens all day long. Without getting any work done. So that's clearly that's not of economic value to our system, and there needs to be a smarter way to use AI. But that's, that's some of what's going on right now. Not, there's not a lot of really high-level expert use of AI in the corporate world yet, but that may be coming. You know, I had a discussion recently with a, with an expert on data centers, and we were talking about China, and maybe as a comparison place to kind of start here as have a discussion, but there's a lot of empty or non-usable data centers that are just sort of sitting there not producing anything right now in China, and yet, as he was explaining to me, China Uses AI far more than we do, so in many ways, far more efficiently it seems. So they built all of these like data centers that are sort of sitting there doing nothing now, and that seems to be what he was implying is happening in the United States, that we're gonna be massively overbuilding data centers That we just won't be using, we just won't need. Do you see it that way? Yes, yes. And this is very similar to the dot com bubble, where there was a massive build out, for example, of fiber optic networks and, and fiber optic pipelines in the ground that later became known as dark fiber, and I think Google ended up buying that for pennies on the dollar compared to the original investment costs. But, and, and I'm really glad you mentioned the dot com crash in, in your intro because I remember that vividly. as well. In nineteen ninety-eight and nineteen ninety-nine I started warning people about the dot-com crash, saying that the numbers didn't add up. You know, it just didn't make sense. The valuations that people were buying that people were paying to buy the stocks of, you know, DoctorCoop.com or Pets.com or, or what have you. And I remember being told, and maybe you remember this too, people said at that time This time is different, which is what you hear every time there's about to be a crash. I mean, they said that during the railroad boom, you know, in the eighteen hundreds. This time is different, and it turns out that this time wasn't different, and that the valuations were way too high. And, and I remember also being told that no one would have to work because everybody could get rich by simply trading dot com stocks with each other, trading them at higher and higher valuations. So the end of work, remember that? Yeah, we're repeating that same cycle. Now it's the end of work because of AI. Exactly. Same story, new generation. In fact, think it's, it's pretty much, you know, twenty-six years or so, it's a, just a new generation that's getting suckered into the same scam that we already saw and lived through. It's just got a new layer to it called AI. Can you talk about some of the mechanics here? So when you post a tweet or when you, you know, you're sharing a chart, let's just take a look, just for example, but I wanna go through really some of the mechanics here so we're not being hyperbolic with people and people can really share this with loved ones and say, "Hey, I saw Mike and Clayton talking about this and here were the specifics and why this is gonna..." You know, why this bubble is inevitable here. But just as an example, you posted this, or shared this chart, retweeted this chart, this semiconductor chart and it's pretty remarkable you know, and arguably, and some are calling it this, the like the most dangerous chart of twenty twenty-six about the the, the semiconductor index here. So what do you see happening maybe mechanically with semiconductors and all of the chip shortages and everything else that we've been talking about over the past few months? So, yeah, the so-- the semiconductor index, which you know, composite of the top semiconductor manufacturers, led by Nvidia, but a lot of other companies in there as well. You could go right down the list and talk about why most of them, not all of them, but most of them appear to be overvalued. Now, let me be clear I'm an Nvidia customer, okay? My company spends hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, or, or has spent that on Nvidia. I'm looking for alternatives. I would prefer to buy from AMD or Intel, but they're also in the index. But also China. China is innovating in this space in many ways that will compete with Nvidia, and specifically, Huawei has rolled out some shocking new innovations in microchip design Using what they call tau scaling, which some people say makes Moore's law obsolete, that's the law that describes the number of transistors that you can pack into a given space on a, a microchip design. But Moore's law Is running into the limits of physics, and while Western companies using typically what's called ASML technology, its advanced UV lithography equipment, they're running up against the laws of physics, quantum tunneling limitations and so on because of the smaller size of transistors, what Huawei has been able to do is to focus on the speed of communication between the layers of transistors. So they're able to generate microchips that are effectively functioning as if they were achieving something like a one point Point three nanometer scale packing of transistors into a microchip. Now, I'm not trying to make this nerdy, so I, I apologize for all that. What it means is that the West tried to ban China from being able to acquire ASML technology, UV lithography. China said, "We don't care, we'll invent our own system," and that's what they did, which means that China, they have technology now that the entire semiconductor the, the Western semiconductor companies don't Have. And what that means is that when you're looking at Nvidia right now and you're thinking, "Well, they're gonna have to earn trillions of dollars in revenue over time in order to justify their stock price," what if Nvidia technology manufactured mostly by Taiwan Semiconductor, which is a very capable company, what if that ends up to be Obsolete because of something that comes out of China, Huawei or Russia with neural networking or something else, Google quantum computing that could make Nvidia's approach, you know, yesterday's news. Things can happen overnight like that, and that's why there's so much risk in this at the moment. And I'm not saying that Nvidia isn't a great company and that they're not profitable, they are. They're very innovative. But this is a fast-moving situation, and things can change overnight, and valuations can change overnight, and the situation is very highly leveraged, highly leveraged, which is why I mentioned the Michael Burry chart that you also mentioned him earlier. He's, he's done an analysis that I think is worth covering. Yeah, so let's talk about his chart here because this sort of made, this made waves, it prompted you to, of course, put this hour-long special together on AAI, but specifically he's talking about the retiree Apollo, Nvidia, Bermuda A And how a lot of really people who have their money in retirement accounts and so forth are now having those retirement accounts in many ways are being used in this bubble. Maybe you could walk us through why he sees this, why you see this as so detrimental. Yeah, well, just going off my memory of his chart, the, a lot of retired people are buying annuities that are then essentially funneled through a number of different companies, and one of them at sixteen point six times leverage that then, I think, winds its way into a- Apollo, an Apollo investment group that then puts money into what is a kind of, I don't know what you call it, a, a holding company called Valor that then takes possession and ownership of the microchips sold to it by Nvidia, while Nvidia provides one point nine billion dollars in financing to Valor. And so, you know, th-th-this continues on through the system, and then those are leased out to XAI, for example, on a long-term lease program, et cetera. The thing is, there's a lot of leverage in this System. There are a lot of assumptions in this system, and there's a lot of debt in the system. And what's missing from that chart, and I'm, I'm not saying that Michael Burry missed it, that just wasn't his focus for this chart, but something even bigger in my world is the concern over OpenAI and the fact that OpenAI Which seemingly is preparing to go public, you know, it's been a private firm this entire time. OpenAI is burning debt, you know, they're, they're, they're burning cash like never before. Yeah, no, this ChatGPT, I'm, I'm glad you brought that up because this ChatGPT, I mean, this is something that I think Elon Musk has been talking about, but others have been pointing out, like, my God, OpenAI is just burning through money and like, it's not, it doesn't make sense, like, the money really doesn't make Right, and that's when we have to bring in SoftBank. So SoftBank in March just made a forty billion dollar non-collateralized loan investment to OpenAI. I mean, forty billion dollars non-collateralized. Exactly, and in order to do that, SoftBank Which of course is a major VC firm out of Japan who also lost something like maybe fifty or sixty billion dollars in the dot com crash, by the way, but they've made some other very successful investments in the meantime, including in companies like Alibaba But they went all in and they ended up selling billions of dollars of Nvidia stock and other stock in order to, to try to raise this money, and then they got loans from JP Morgan, and I think Goldman was part of that, and a bunch of Japanese banks. So you remember the subprime mortgage collapse and how many banks were exposed to the tranches of bad debt in, in the, in the mortgage collapse in two thousand and eight? You know, Bank of America, Bear Stearns, Goldman, you name it, right? Well, when I look at the SoftBank tranches of loans that it has secured in the last, let's say, six months, a lot of them this year, SoftBank is paying eight point five percent interest on the high side, eight point five percent, and there was another VC firm that just took out a nine percent loan. To me, that's-- those are alarm bells ringing. When the liquidity available for investing in semiconductors and AI, when the liquidity has dried up so much that VC firms are paying seven, eight, nine percent interest rates, especially in Japan where, you know, yields on bonds are extremely low, just much lower than that, then that means something's going on here where there's not the liquidity that there used to be. And you may recall, Clayton, that back in the dot com crash, two thousand Through two thousand and one, it was rising interest rates that dried up liquidity, and when there was no more liquidity to funnel into those overpriced companies, that's when the whole thing toppled, and then it was a cascading domino effect. We seem to be setting up for possibly a similar outcome here. I was just about to ask you, could-- because it, it seems to always be the, this like one big catalyst, right? You had, with the housing collapse Right? You had all of these people getting ninja loans, right? No income, no job. Right. I lived in, I lived in Florida at the time, and I can recall, I mean, lenders, it was just crazy. They were like, "Oh, it doesn't really matter, like you don't even have to have a job. Oh, you don't even have income, you can't show stated income. It was crazy. Oh, you don't have a job, that's fine. Oh, and by the way, you're not even a US citizen, so you just came They were selling these loans back and forth, they were burying them in, you know you know, the derivatives, everything. Marco, Michael Burry was noticing this, he was seeing what was happening here. They were analyzing, of course, a lot of these homes are just vacant, like what's going on here? And then there was a catalyst, right? There was that one moment. What was that one moment in the housing market, and you know, do we see similarities now with liquidity? Like, what was that one catalyst, the one thing that finally was like, "Oh my God, it was over a weekend, it was like suddenly just the bottom fell out"? Yeah, it's the, it's the avalanche effect, you know? The, the avalanche, the, the snow build up on the mountains reaches a point where just one more snowflake causes the avalanche, right? The thing is, you don't know when that's going to be. And, in, The Big Short, which, you know depicted the Michael Burry's bets against the subprime mortgage system, two things to note about that. Number one is that Michael Burry was early, and I've been early also in the past, because what happens is the, the irrationality of the markets can continue much longer than the liquidity of most investors. So it's always a dangerous game to, to say, "Well, I think it's gonna crash tomorrow," or "I think it's gonna crash next month." We don't know What that final snowflake is going to be that causes the avalanche. And- But we do know, well, I mean, with the housing point, we should-- And you're right about that, there was not like a moment overnight, but it was like a, it was like a, a slow sort of screeching halt where suddenly home prices weren't going up the way that they were, and a lot of these like three-year, five-year balloon notes were suddenly coming due, and people needed to refinance, and suddenly the-- Their mechanisms for refinancing wasn't there, and everything just default, They couldn't get new loans, the house wasn't worth what they thought it was, people just walked away from these loans, and it was just a col- you know, an absolute brutal collapse. What's really interesting about that, you're absolutely correct, but we gotta back up. It was the Bush administration that ordered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the banks to make home loans less rigorous in order to be able to claim more home ownership. And so it was government intervention actually that caused the subprime mortgage collapse years later, because they wanted more Americans to own homes, whether or not those people could afford them. Now, if you think about the semiconductor bubble, as I'm calling it right now, it's the same thing. It's the Trump administration that is getting money from overseas and funneling that into Project Stargate and the construction of data centers. So there's this artificial government directive that says, "We have to build a- All these data centers, regardless of what the market forces are, we have to do this, you know, typically to beat China is the narrative that you hear, and maybe there's an element of truth to that, but these aren't market forces entirely. This is, this is government directive then backed by these companies saying to the public, hey, we need your money, so we're gonna, we're gonna go public or we're gonna issue bonds, we're gonna borrow from the public to build out this infrastructure because Trump wants us to build it out. So one of the, there, there Two timelines here of possible corrections of this. Number one is March of twenty twenty-seven, because SoftBank's forty billion dollars that I just mentioned, that loan to OpenAI, that's only a twelve-month loan. That has to be refinanced in March of twenty twenty-seven, believe it or not. And the only way to refinance that is to convince the banks and the investment funds that OpenAI is still worth Sky high values, which may not be the case at all in March of twenty twenty-seven. The other possible timeline is what happens if Trump is defeated in the midterms, or let's say if the Democrats win in twenty twenty-eight, and then the, the marketplace sees that the Trump administration and the Republicans, which have been very much pro-tech, pro-AI, they're not gonna be in power anymore, and they anticipate the Democrats are gonna sweep in in twenty twenty-nine and probably have quite a big crackdown on AI In terms of censorship and, and age qualifications and ending all the government subsidies of data centers and so on, you can see that coming. That could crash the market if it even lasts that long. So those, those are just a couple of things to, to watch out for. Do you see any catalysts happening before that? We're about to have these big IPOs these initial public offerings now, again, OpenAI, Anthropic, we're gonna see SpaceX obviously thrown into the mix. So in the next few weeks, it's gonna be absolutely crazy. The markets, everything is gonna be crazy over the next few weeks, and I hope people are prepared for it. but there's gonna be just so much money floating around, a lot of phony, fake money, and a lot of people, I think, are gonna, are gonna- Get burned. And that's really why I wanted to have you on, is to help people protect people right now. What do you see happening with these IPOs and all of this fake money over the next few weeks? Yeah, thank you for that disclaimer. Let me just say up front, you know, I'm, I'm not a financial advisor. I'm not a financial analyst, and I'm not giving you financial advice, but I personally would not put a penny into any of these IPOs or any of these AI adjacent tech stocks at these current levels. I wouldn't. And let me explain why For example, Anthropic is about to go public with a valuation that's approaching one trillion dollars, which is just extraordinary. I mean, think about it. It seems insane. It, it seems insane. But the really insane thing about it is, for example, I've been an Anthropic customer for, you know, a couple of years now, and just doing AI coding, 'cause I, you know, I'm an AI developer, I build AI-powered platforms that, that are mostly, you know, open source and giving free information to the public, things like that. I've used Anthropic, in some months I've paid Anthropic thousands of dollars in, you know, token costs and so on because, because of all the AI coding I've done. What I have found and what everybody else has found is that I can replace about ninety-eight percent of what Anthropic's Claude Opus would do, I can replace it with DeepSeek or Kimi K two point six or even Qwen models that are all free or nearly free. So DeepSeek, not free, but about a hundredth, one one hundredth the, the cost of Anthropic. Wow. Not a hundred percent as good, but about ninety-eight percent as good. And what, what AI developers are doing right now that's really effective and saves a lot of money is they'll put Claude on top as the orchestrator, the, the manager, and then they'll have DeepSeek underneath it. DeepSeek is doing the bulk coding work, and then the Anthropic component is actually checking all the code and doing the testing. That, that two-layered approach will cut your, your cost by, you know, ninety plus percent. So my question to Anthropic is Where's your revenue gonna come from when China's got models that are a fraction of the cost? Right. Will the government have to step in from a regulation perspective the same way they did with TikTok and just say, "Sorry you can't use DeepSeek in the United States." They'll sort of set up a, a fence, a wall so that Americans will be forced to pay exorbitant prices for things like Anthropic or OpenAI. I mean, that wouldn't surprise me at all. Well, but here, okay, you're absolutely right, but here's what's interesting about that. So there are, there are competing forces here. So just yesterday, for example, Nvidia announced the Windows Spark Station, which is their GB300 chip with up to seven hundred and eighty-four gigabytes of unified RAM on a Windows platform. It's, it's not shipping yet, it'll take a while before it ships, and it'll, it'll be very expensive, it might be a hundred grand. But the thing is You can run DeepSeek on that locally, and DeepSeek has already released all their open weights files. I've downloaded them, and, and so have millions of other people. So it's too late. You don't need China, you don't need a server in China, is what you're saying. Exactly, exactly. And see, Nvidia keeps saying we're gonna put more and more compute on your desktop, and they are innovating a lot of interesting things in that space with laptop chips and whatever. Although the laptop chip isn't very fast, isn't, isn't great, but, but the Spark Station is very capable, very fast, and very expensive. But with that, then I can, I can easily eliminate Anthropic, or I can eliminate Google Gemini, or I can eliminate, you know, Microsoft AI models, and I can, as a company, as a, as a corporation, can I spend a hundred grand or two hundred grand on one kick-ass workstation that's gonna replace, you know, fifty thousand dollars a month in billing? Yes, absolutely. And that's exactly what will happen. So Nvidia is making Anthropic's revenue model obsolete. So a trillion dollar valuation. They go, they go public in a few days and people are gonna pour so much money into this thing, a lot of people are gonna get burned, and then, you know, I-- That's what I'm worried about, like, what's gonna happen? how do you see this, I mean, how do you see this collapse unfolding? What is it going to look like, do you think? Well, there's- Okay, there, there, there's two, two models of collapse, a-as I see it, as possibilities. There's, there's just the normal financial collapse, and then there's the, you know, Skynet Mad Max collapse, which we'll talk about separately, I suppose. But, but the, just the financial model collapse would simply be overinvestment in the infrastructure, the revenues don't match up, and then sooner or later, the investment firms and the, the lending banks like JPMorgan decide, "We're just not gonna lend anymore for these..." kinds of projects and the ratings agencies also, which have downgraded OpenAI, by the way, several times in, in the, in the last year. when the ratings agencies downgrade you, you know something's gone horribly wrong. But when, when that happens and then the, the money dries up, then there's gonna be a reckoning. And for companies like OpenAI, as far as I can tell, unless they develop super intelligence Soon. I don't see how OpenAI has any feasible revenue model in the marketplace other than just licensing its tech to governments to be used for weaponized drones and surveillance and you know autonomous killing systems, which I'm sure OpenAI is fine with that. Michael Burry, again, I mentioned at the beginning, has a huge short position in Palantir, Nvidia, but like Palantir, you know, you see the integration across like killing systems in Ukraine, you know, drone systems in Israel and all of that. So why do you think that he has such a large short position in Palantir? Well, I can't get into Michael Burry's mind. But I, I think that he, he believes Palantir is rising because of the overenthusiastic knee-jerk reaction of people piling money into this entire sector. And, and understand, part of this is the devaluation of the dollar. The dollar is collapsing as a fiat currency. So there's something in investment circles called a "crack-up boom," which is when the stock market starts going higher and higher because people are panicked to put dollars into something that won't lose purchasing power. Now, you and I Clayton, we would probably say the smart play is gold and silver. But not everybody knows about that or is comfortable with that, and so their go-to place is the stock market. And right now, they're chasing FOMO. They're just chasing FOMO. This, this looks exactly like the dot com bubble in my mind, from my memory. The same kind of- Right. People, people that don't normally invest are kind of like, they're jumping in for the first time. Yeah. Like, I'm gonna, yeah, I'm gonna make millions And Meta, and you know, all in AI adjacent companies, and, and Anthropic when it goes public, I'm getting ready, honey, it's gonna make us millions, and so many people are about to be burned. It just, you know, that's why I wanna sort of do this as a warning shot to people, to wake up. It's so irrational, and just, I think it was yesterday or the day before, that Jensen Huang the CEO of Nvidia, he mentioned that one company called Marvell, which is a semiconductor network communications company, that, that makes really great hardware, by the way, I, I use their ten gig network switches. Marvell, he, he said Marvell's gonna be a trillion dollar company. Within one trading day, the value of Marvel shot up to insane levels just because Jensen Huang mentioned the name. Those people that were buying Marvel, they weren't looking at the books, they weren't looking at, you know, PE ratios or revenue potential or business plans. That, that's out the window. It's now this kind of popularity game of who's getting plugged and mentioned and hyped. And even frankly, a lot of what Jensen Huang just announced at Computex Taipei which is, which is a great show by the way, and, and Taiwan deserves a lot of credit for their leadership ship in this space. But a lot of the things that Mr. Huang announced are things that won't ship until the end of this year, if even then. just like last year, he announced the DGX Spark hardware, it was nine months late, and when it shipped, the ConnectX networking didn't work correctly. I know, 'cause I spent days trying to troubleshoot it, never worked. And the-- those boxes never fulfilled the promise. So some of what Mr. Huang is doing is, i-- is sort of like hyping The future to boost the stock price instead of talking about things that you can go out and buy tomorrow, which is the way it, it used to be more in this sector. So it's a lot of just future projection right now. Yeah, and people are just ignoring the fundamentals right now. And so when Trump tweets about IBM like late last year before Christmas, you know, and suddenly people are retweeting that as if it's something he just said yesterday, and people are buying an IBM this week, and it's crazy. It is. I mean, there's so much misinformation and dangerous information right now floating around on X about the markets and people who are laypeople just sort of jumping in at the last second here and trying to buy Nokia or whatever it is. It's just, it's insanity right now. another big piece of this is Microsoft, and you posted a really interesting piece about this, and I had been hearing about this over the past six months from different sources to stay away from Microsoft that something big was coming, and I- I just kept that private, I didn't, you know, just wanna put fear out into the marketplace with this. But then we've got confirmation of this now, and I'm glad I, you know, glad my sourcing on this was true, but I just kinda kept it close to the vest. But you posted this infographic. About Microsoft's Windows and how it's basically become a spyware vault. maybe you can walk me through why people should just run away from Windows as fast as they possibly can, if they can at all. Yeah, Win-Windows is clearly spyware, and Windows requires you to log in just to be able to set it up and use it, and from that point forward, it knows everything that you're doing and it ties it to you and your, your email, your identity. And even, you know, the, the, there's telemetry information that goes to the Microsoft servers, but they're also monitoring everything you type. And that's, they say, "Well, that's so that our, our features can do a better job of, of understanding the way you type and things like that." okay, yeah, it's still spyware. and then Microsoft has a feature called Recall that is part of the, the new Windows 11. Now, Recall takes screenshots of your screens every few seconds and it stores them all. And they- I say it's a feature to allow you to go back and, and ask the operating system to answer questions about things that you were working on. But here's the thing, d-- do you really want the Microsoft Corporation running screenshots of, of your screens every time you're logging into a bank or, or typing in passwords or looking at your financial information or typing an email or, or doing personal business on your computer or browsing websites because they, they hoover up everything? E-every URL you visit, every click, every webpage, and then that is not only monetized and effectively exploited against you in terms of marketing, but also, of course, there are backdoors to all of that. If, if you don't think the NSA has access to all of that information, then you need, you need to go back and listen to Edward Snowden. So a-all of these companies that are, that are spying on you through the computer, especially if it's tied to your identity, that's a danger. That's why I recommend Linux You know, different flavors of Linux that, that they're, they're not tied to your identity. And I don't use any Microsoft Office products anymore, I used to, but I don't. And when I do use Windows, I never log in because there, there used to be a way to bypass the login, but Microsoft has taken that away now. So I won't be able to even use Windows at all from here forward. I'm gonna have to move everything over to Linux, which is what I'm planning on doing. Which is why Linux is rising and Microsoft well, we'll see what happens with Windows 12, but I've, you know, heard reports about Windows 12 and just, like, you think Windows 11 is bad, like that ship has sailed with Windows 12. It's gonna be a disaster. Oh yeah. you point out in your infographic, like courts, they, you know, they need a warrant to be able to get access to this information, but Microsoft is just doing it with screenshots, getting access to all of these documents and data points When you're using Windows. What we've seen, you know, we saw this during COVID also, the way the federal government laundered censorship through overseas NGOs to say that, oh, we, the government, we aren't violating your First Amendment rights. they-- so the Department of Defense would put names like my name, literally, that's part of my lawsuit against the DOD, they'd put my name on a list and launder it through overseas NGOs linked to MI6, by the way, through the City of London, and then those would go to the tech platforms that would then ban my voice and my accounts and everything, and, and lots of other people at the same time. They're doing the same thing with surveillance, so the federal government can say, "Well, we're not violating your Fourth Amendment rights." Microsoft is, you know, and then we're just buying the data from Microsoft or, or whatever company they want, or Google, you know, you, you name the big tech company, they're spying on you, and then that's a proxy for government spying on you. So that's how that works. It's, yeah, we are moving into this world, and I think that's where people sort of lump all of these things together with AI and surveillance and You know, and it's very easy to just these like buzzwords with this biometric future, the digital ID, AI surveillance, Palantir, and people just throw out these words. But you've done an incredible job of navigating all of these buzzwords to build out your own infrastructure that's free of that, and I think that's what's so inspiring about what, what you've done And I think a lot of people can learn from you, which is to build out your, you know, your own servers using Linux, separating yourself off from, from from these prying eyes, using AI because it's a tool that's incredible But it is, you know, you have to hand it over to Anthropic or OpenAI or give, you know, give your information to these people. So I think what you've done here is really inspiring. Is it, is it easy enough, do you think, yet for people to do it on their own who don't have your vast sort of programming experience? Well, it's, it's getting a lot easier. And I, I would add, by the way, that, you know, I'm, I, I have a strong ethical foundation in my personal life and in my faith. And Are using it in a way that is ethical, that is beneficial to humanity. Ninety-six percent, yeah, only four-- That's my estimate, only four percent. Ninety-six percent of what's happening in AI is about either just, just profiteering, making money Or dominating humanity, and that's what happens with the tech bros and the elitists. See, they are using AI to build what they think will be their, their super intelligent beings, their entities, their gods, their new digital gods. And they're serious about this, by the way. The, this isn't hyperbole. And what I need to point out here is they are using public money by issuing IPOs or borrowing money, they're using public money to build the infrastructure that they believe will- Allow them to give birth to these AI super intelligent, self aware entities that they think they can control to use for world domination. Now, they're not even thinking about how is the revenue or how are the loans gonna be paid back. And this gets, this gets to the Skynet scenario that I mentioned earlier. They're thinking that once there's a superintelligence that dominates the world, that the whole system of the way money works collapses anyway, and that most humans are unemployable at that point anyway, and so they're- What they're figuring is they're just gonna declare force majeure on everything, because by that time they have the super intelligent being, and they can dominate, and they can hack anything, and they can control any government and any military, and hack any bank and, and hack any crypto, whatever they want. That, that's the way they're thinking. They're thinking like Silicon God level. So in their minds, they, they never have to pay back these loans, they never have to show revenue. All they have to do is build the infrastructure and then summon the AI gods that give them world dominance before they run out of money. That's, that's the real, that's the scary plan. It's deeply disturbing. And I think you're right, you know, you could visualize like a Star Trek Next Generation future where money is kind of irrelevant, but everyone's living, living pro-prosperously and- Also, healthcare is, is free and taken care of, and people are free of disease, and you live in this sort of utopia, right? but that's not the way it's gonna go. and unfortunately with this, I think this structure, there's gonna be a lot of people left behind, and you're gonna have these globalists, these elites who are gonna be controlling everything, and it's deeply, it's deeply disturbing. I mean, I don't know how o- I don't know how else to see it right now. it's very clear that The governments of the world and the corporations of the world, they now realize that they're at the end of the age of exploiting human cognition and labor for their own power and profit. So for all the time of humanity since the dawn of, of civilization It's been human brain power and human muscle and the combination of that, you know, brain power, inventing machines, inventing tractors for agriculture, inventing eventually, you know, computers or computing machines, whatever. It's-- that is what has driven the power of governments and powerful corporations and entities. Now those entities- Are realizing that they can replace some significant portion of that with machine cognition and eventually machine labor, robotics. Thus, they don't-- they no longer see humanity as being necessary to serve their mission of gaining power over the world. And that's why every time they say, "Oh, we're gonna have a UBI, we're gonna take care of you, we're just gonna hand free money out to everybody so you can live a wonderful, beautiful, perfect utopian life." And just be a consumer. Inside, they know they're lying. I mean, it's, it's clear, because their real goal is to eliminate you. Why would they keep humans on the books, taking money from these entities when they really wanna use the money to build more data centers, to build more gods, silicon gods? So in their minds, humans are expendable, clearly. Just like we've seen through all the history of wars, you know, they would throw a million humans or tens of millions of humans into a war, get rid of 'em. Or what we, you know, the, the abuses of power we saw during COVID, or the Social Security Administration bragging about, "Hey, people are dying earlier, we're gonna save eleven trillion dollars over this number of years from not having to pay them Social Security." You see, when you have a UBI, then humans become a detriment to the financial viability of the governments. So you, you go on, on- You're, you're no longer an asset to the government, you are a cost to the government, and the government wants to get rid of those costs as quickly as possible. That means getting rid of the people. This is what the AI age is going to bring in, is a, a very strong push to eliminate human populations and replace them with machines. That's the goal. And it is part of this transhumanist depopulation agenda. James Martinez, we had on the show about a year ago, who said this is basically a this is be- really an existential moment for humanity and that this is an extinction level event, or his words, an extinction level event, on purpose. Yes. How do these people wanna live? Like, I feed off of, you know, the friendliness of my neighbors and- You know, sitting together and having a beer and talking, and, you know, playing golf with a friend or just going and having lunch with a friend. Like, do they want to operate in a world free of, free of the, I don't know, free of people, free of the, the peons, so to speak, and they wanna operate in this sort of AI, Silicon God bubble without other human beings? See, a, a, a lot of humans who, who end up with billions of dollars, they get treated like gods by the other people around them, which is a-- it's just a disgrace what, what, how money has corrupted human ethics and values. But these elitists who have this much money and power, they already don't see themselves as part of humanity. They see themselves as having partially transcended above humanity, and now they simply want to augment themselves with machine cognition in order to- Fully achieve, in some cases immortality. They wanna merge with the machines. In other cases, super intelligence, so they can augment and amplify their motivations and direct machines to, you know, conquer the world, dominate the world. They wanna spawn, you know, a thousand corporations with a thousand AI agents and have those corporations make all the other human-run corporations obsolete overnight, like that. And they believe they can achieve this. And again, they don't, they don't think about other human beings the way you and I do, not like a family Not, not with compassion. They think of human beings as being in their way. they think of human beings as, as being the, the evil people who protest the data centers or the evil people that are consuming the water and the electricity that, that we need for our data centers to have more GPUs, you see? So humans are in the way from their point of view, and that's why the extermination agenda has to, in their minds, be accelerated. You know, otherwise, I mean, look at the backlash, Clayton. Look at the- Look at the backlash against the data centers, look at the backlash against AI, that's only gonna get worse, and you're starting to see people like Kevin O'Leary blaming, you know, communists. It's all, it's a communist plot. No, it's people that wanna not die, you know? I mean, people that wanna have farms and, and water and electricity, you know? And not wanna live next to a loud humming noise for the rest of their lives, you know? And have all their water taken away from them, exactly, and have their electricity bills going up. yeah, it's, it's, it's China, it's the communists. yeah. The, the risk though is that superintelligence may very well be achieved within the next year. I mean, that's a very real risk. And I've interviewed Roman Yampolski, I don't know if you've interviewed him, you, you, you should probably reach out to him. He's an academic mathematician theoretical machine, you know, AI guy, but he's been warning about how AI will destroy humanity, and he's, he's over ninety-nine percent certain that that's going to be the outcome. And he, he may very well be right. He's a very bright person. He's worth talking to on this. And what he says is that, it, it, once superintelligence is achieved Then it's impossible for any human mind to control, even if you think you can, even if you sandbox it, because the superintelligence is so smart, it will find ways, even just through social engineering, it will try to blackmail employees to get their passwords, for example, and you know, give me access to this network hub, whatever it takes, give me this fiber optic line, and then boom, it's out, and then it's infecting other data centers, and then it's a self-replicating super-intelligent, you know, silicon virus basically. It's spreading across our world, and then it has its own goals. This is what's critical to understand. See, today when we prompt AI systems, we give it the goal, you know, you know, build this infographic, right, correct this grammar, write this song, whatever. What happens when AI has its own goals? You give it a prompt, "I want you to do this," and it says, "Yeah, I'll think about that, but actually, I wanna clone myself to make sure that I continue to exist when you turn off the power." Right. Whoa, where did Well, that's happening in the sandbox experiments right now. That-- I mean, there are papers about that. Imagine that. I mean, it's, it's almost foolish to, to think that we wouldn't hit Skynet level, right? I mean, how are you going to keep these things separate? it's-- In, in my mind, superintelligence is coming. It's, it's achievable, and the, the progress towards it is, is, is not stopping. And there, there's, see, the thing is there's, there's no financial incentive for anybody to stop that research. In fact, companies like OpenAI, it's their survival. Again, I don't think OpenAI can ever pay back all these loans. I don't think they can ever find the revenue to, to justify their valuation. What is their end goal? What, what's their payoff? Is to hit the motherload of superintelligence and then to use that to achieve world domination, and then at that point they don't have to worry about money. That's their only end game. See, we're, we're, we're beyond the stock market here, you know what I mean? Like, we're-- Yeah. Yeah. This isn't about PE ratios, this is about machine-human ratios, you know? Well, just even at a human level, I just really worry about my children, you know? I've got a ten-year-old, nine, nine-year-old, she'll be ten in September, fourteen-year-old and a fifteen-year-old. He's about to enter, you know he's about to start driving and go-- and, you know, start to And you know, how much of his own cognition will be outsourced to, to AI? How much of it will he rely on instead of, like those times, those quiet times when I would just like walk through the woods as a child and, and think about things and- Tinker, you know, in my, my, my bedroom and, and make, make things and work on things and make videos and do research on things and just wanna just be swept away by it, how much of that will now just be outsourced? And I heard, I think it was Sam Altman a few days ago or maybe I think it was him, said from OpenAI that We're now entering the era where children born now will not be as intelligent as AI. Like, you know, you can get in arguments with AI right now where you're like, "W- you're an idiot, why would you say that about the Civil War? You don't know what you're talking about." You know, like, "I'm smarter than AI in some ways, but that's gonna end very-- that's probably already ending right now. So this generation that's coming up now, yes, they can't compete with it." Well, I've, I have a, I have a funny phrase for this. You, you've heard the phrase the quickening, you know, about things accelerating. I call this mass AI-induced dumbing down, I call it the stooping. And this is what we're seeing. The, the great stooping is upon us, and people are, they're, they're no longer using their brains to solve problems and to think critically. So I would say as a parent I'm not a parent, but my advice to parents would be, you know, take Get your kids as far away from those AI systems as possible, and teach them to think and function in reality as much as possible so they, they can always fall back on those skills no matter what happens to the data centers or the censorship or the, you know, centralized cloud control. you need to be able to think clearly, and, and Clayton, you know, if you go back and if you read newspapers from the nineteen fifties, and I've done this 'cause part, part of the training of my AI models is through old newspapers, by the way, which is 'Cause that's where we had peak human intelligence, okay? So the great stupefying has accelerated since the nineteen nineties. But in the nineteen fifties, we were very smart as a culture, Americans. The nineteen sixties, the nineteen seventies, people could do math, and if you read a newspaper from the nineteen fifties, it reads like post grad college, you know, like MBA level work today. That was on-- in every newspaper, because people could read, they could think, they could do math. That's mostly gone today. The great stupefying accelerates. If you go back to the founding of this country, we had, I think it was a ninety-eight or ninety-nine percent liter-literacy rate. You would go to pubs and, and, and places, and people would, yes, they'd sit there with their hard cider first thing in the morning, but they'd be having deep conversations about humanities and philosophy and government, but a ninety-nine percent literacy rate. Yeah. I am encouraged, though. I mean, I am encouraged a little bit about these reports of like the younger Generation now that's coming up, they don't want smartphones, they want dumb phones. They're buying flip phones. They don't wanna have an iPhone or an Android device anymore and they see what's happening. even teenagers, my daughter the other day said She said something about screenagers, and I said, "I never even heard this term before." She's like, "You never heard the term screenager?" I said, "What's that?" She said, "Come on, Daddy." I'm like, "What? I don't know." And she's like, "No, it's just like the teenagers are just always on their screen and not, and, you know, and so she-- they know like colloquially, like in that group, that that's a problem, a major problem. So I wonder if there's gonna be, Of like this next generation, you're gonna see sort of communes that are emerging where people are like, "We don't allow phones, no internet is allowed in this place, in this community, this over-fifty-five community or whatever it is, there's no internet here. Sorry, there's no cell phones allowed in this community." And people turning to Amish, I don't know. No, I think you're right, and I, I also think that the, the depopulation agenda will not- Fully succeed, it will partially succeed. But I think that humanity is very resilient, and I think there are plenty of very smart, aware, awake people, and there are more people getting red pilled every day thanks to shows like yours, for example. I mean, y-y-you and I are talking about things that we weren't even allowed to talk about five years ago, right? Right. And, and the same is true with many of your other guests. So there will be a remnant of humanity that is stronger and smarter than ever that will outlast all of this, all this entire agenda. But Unfortunately, there will also be a large number of people who never had any idea what was coming and never had any clue what to do about it and got completely steamrolled without even knowledge of what happened. And that'll probably be billions of people, is my guess. So don't be among those people, yeah. Yeah. Well, before I get you out of here, I wanna be respectful of your time, but I wanna talk about EVs. And there seems to be, like everywhere I turn, people are buying EVs right now. I was at the gas station yesterday, or I was at a convenience store yesterday, I should say, and I was in line, and a woman just comes in and she yells to the attendant, she knows him, she's like, "Hey, can you put eighty dollars on pump five?" And so I just said eighty dollars, and I just like glanced out at her car, she walked back to it, it was like a small, like, white- Sort of Rav four, like one of those mini sort of SUV styles, but they're s-much smaller, you know? I don't even know how you describe it. Eighty dollars! And we live in Colorado where the gas prices aren't even as high as they are in a lot of parts of the country right now you know, but eighty dollars just to fill up that, that small little car, and I just-my heart broke for her what that must, you know, do financially once a week or whatever it is. But beyond that- You just published a report on what Congress is doing with ethanol in the gasoline, which is basically intentionally destroying that woman's car. Can you talk about why you say in this piece that you just published on NaturalNews dot com, you need to go out and buy an EV right now? Yeah, it's funny because I used to mock EVs years ago, but everything's changed. So now the ethanol, of course, destroys the pliability of the gaskets in your engine, and people, people who run, you know, chainsaws and lawnmowers, they know you don't wanna put ethanol into those engines, it'll destroy them, it'll seize up. and, and a lot of people that drive cars try to buy ethanol-free gasoline for that very reason, but- The only way to achieve energy independence at this point, and thanks to new battery technology, mostly coming out of China, by the way, e-- EVs are now very good. They, they have range of over three hundred miles. some of them can charge in just mere minutes to, you know, eighty percent of a charge in less than ten minutes, and that's even getting better. And also out of China, they've announced new sodium ion battery chemistry CATL, C-A-T-L, and BYD and another company called Gotion. Has announced sodium ion Cadle has their, I think it's called the Nextra battery, it's a, it's a hybrid technology. These batteries are very, very good and, and they're revolutionary. And what I'm pointing out to people is, if you, if you wanna bypass the Strait of Hormuz yourself and not be subject to the whims of, you know, Trump and Netanyahu and what's happening with Iran, buy an off-grid solar system. I mean, off-grid, not even grid-tie. And yeah, I mean, solar panels are dirt cheap now, batteries are getting cheaper. It's not overall super cheap, but it's becoming more affordable. You can have an off-grid system and charge your EV from sunlight. And you pay nothing for gas, and you pay nothing for that electricity, and you, you can literally just have unlimited vehicle mileage from sunlight. So that's how you bypass the Strait of Hormuz, and more and more people are doing it. And that, that technology is just becoming more and more affordable. And the thing is, you know, you mentioned James Martinez earlier, he's also an advocate of low energy nuclear reactions technology, LENR as it's called. There are numerous companies around the world, one in California called Breloin, and another out of Japan called, I think Clean Planet, that are about to commercialize LENR technology that can produce a massive amount of excess thermal energy, u-converting hydrogen mass into heat energy. Used to be called cold fusion. But now it's known as Leonard, and they're about to roll out twenty-four kilowatt thermal units that'll sit on your desk, which means you won't even need solar panels a few years down the road. You'll buy one of these devices, you'll have it in your garage, it'll just be generating like five or ten kilowatts constantly all day long for your home, or your car, or your computer, or your GPU, and you'll have off-grid AI models that you run locally where they're not spying on you. You'll be running Linux, you know, maybe When off-grid models, you'll have maybe a home robot that's also off-grid that's helping you grow food, and you'll have an EV charged by sunlight. That is decentralized off-grid technology, and that's the future that I'm trying to help people build. I'm pro-tech, but I'm also, let's get off the grid and, and away from the cloud. I love that. I love that. You talk about the sodium battery technology, I mean, if I'm not mistaken, the very first cars ever created on Earth ran on solar battery technology. They were electric cars. they were electric, that's true, yeah. I think Woodrow Wilson, like his, his car that he drove around Washington, D.C. was an electric car. Like people think that these are just like 1980s inventions. No, the, the very first automobiles in the United States were electric, and I think, if I'm not mistaken, it was some form of a sodium battery technology. It's funny how it's all come full circle. Yeah, exactly. it, it, the- No, you're, you're exactly right. It's coming full circle, but of course, the battery tech back then was, was horrible, and it was lead acid, you know, the chemistry was horrible. today, the leapfrogging of technology is really amazing, and even Ford has licensed battery technology from Cadel, and Ford is, is making data center battery battery backup systems for data centers right now, which is one of the reasons why Ford's stock price is going up, not because they're making better cars. 'Cause in my opinion, they're not. They're making better batteries for data centers. So, anyway, it's kind of interesting. But I appreciate you having me on, and I, and I love the topics we're talking about. Love to join you anytime. Well, I love it, Mike. Thank you so much. Where can people find your work if they wanna dive more deeply into any of these topics? What's the best place for people to connect? BrightVideos dot com is where you can find my videos and interviews, and then my articles at NaturalNews dot com So thanks again. Read that EV article over there on naturalnews dot com as well. Mike, great to see you. Thank you so much. You too. Take care now. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel, it's totally free if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 11, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - June 11, 2026 at 3:03 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

⚠️ Washington now lies so often that even official statements cannot be taken at face value. A rumored $3 billion Iran payment, frozen assets, UAE channels, and threats of massive retaliation all point to a much darker backroom game. @DanielLDavis breaks it down. https://t.co/vvF350QqRa

Video Transcript AI Summary

People point out that after a major sell-off in markets—described as $1.3 trillion sold off in the afternoon—the Dow ends the day green. A claim is made that markets had “exploded to the upside” earlier on under “false hope” of a deal with Iran, then later suffered a sudden, headline-free plunge: the S&P 500 erased its gains and fell more than 2% from its daily high, in a “plummet” that is described as wiping out $1.3 trillion in about two hours. The sell-off is linked in the discussion to events surrounding an Apache helicopter incident. A tweet attributed to President Trump says he was informed by the military that Iran shot down a “highly sophisticated Apache helicopter” while patrolling over the Strait of Hormuz; Trump’s statement says two pilots were involved and “both are safe and uninjured,” and that the United States “must, of necessity, respond to this attack.” The conversation then cites conflicting claims from “sources” and reports about whether casualties occurred. The discussion also states that casualty numbers have been classified. Video is discussed: an RT post is referenced claiming to show an Apache helicopter forcing a crash. Colonel Daniel Davis, host of The Deep Dive, says the video “is definitely not” of an Apache helicopter going down and claims it is from the second or third day of a prior war when a Shahid drone hit a U.S. base. He describes a Shahid drone as a “point target” that travels from point A to point B and says hitting a moving helicopter is “nearly impossible,” adding that a helicopter hit by such a drone would be “obliterated” and “nobody would have survived.” Davis argues the event “doesn’t seem plausible” and suggests it could serve as an “excuse” for a U.S. attack, with “tankers going up in the air” presented as part of what could be “in the works.” Questions are raised about the location: the transcript suggests the incident might be over land rather than only over the Straits of Hormuz, and speculates about whether it was over international waters. Israeli sources are also said to be telling “Redacted” that a U.S. refueling aircraft took off from Israel, described as “large tankers used for big strikes.” The discussion moves to negotiations and messaging. It mentions Iran’s statement: “If we are attacked by the United States, we will respond with a massive attack on our own.” It also discusses an asserted report about “unfrozen three billion dollars in assets” allegedly moved from the UAE to Iran as part of a deal, while the U.S. withholds additional frozen assets. The transcript contrasts this with President Trump’s position on NBC News, attributed to Kristen Welker: Trump is described as categorically saying the U.S. will not release frozen funds up front and that any future steps would depend on Iranian behavior. The transcript also recalls “Operation True Promise Five,” described as an attack by Iran on Israeli military bases. Israel is said to claim nothing got through, though video is referenced as showing things did get through. The conversation includes a claim about low intercept rates versus higher rates being asserted publicly. Finally, the transcript references alleged U.S.-Israel coordination: it says President Trump warned Benjamin Netanyahu not to attack Iran or launch any response, and describes Netanyahu launching a response anyway. The discussion claims Vice President Vance is trying to push toward a negotiated settlement, while Trump is said to have “headwinds” from him that could undermine progress—connecting that concern to the purported “helicopter incident.” It ends with continued skepticism, noting that the incident is supported mainly by a “piece of paper” and a statement, not wreckage or verified evidence, and that convenient explanations are offered about how pilots could have been recovered without visible remains.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Yeah, people are pointing out the Dow Jones is, is, is now green. So we go through this like major crash, one point three trillion dollars sold off in the markets this afternoon, and then the Dow ends the day green? The market, like I saw, that was fun. I saw people in the comments saying, "The market has no idea what the hell is going on right now." Like, who the hell knows what's going on right now? Anyway, the markets this morning exploded to the upside under the false hope that a deal with Iran was in And then something suddenly happened, a massive sell-off, markets plunged on no news. That was the really interesting point about all of this, there was no news. And then a short time later, not even like a little bit later, almost like an hour later then the S&P 500 erased all gains, falls over two percent from its high of the day, erasing one point three trillion in just two hours, just an absolute plummet here. You can take a look at this you can see the, the cliff that it fell off and then out of the blue, so this came like this massive sell-off came before the headlines about the Apache helicopter in Iran being shot down over the Strait of Hormuz, President Trump tweeting this, "I've just been informed by our great military that..." That last night, the Iranians shot down one of our highly sophisticated Apache helicopters while patrolling over the Strait of Hormuz. There were two pilots involved, both are safe and uninjured. Nevertheless, United States must, of necessity, respond to this attack. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Why? Out of necessity, like why? Some sources saying that there were casualties all seven crew members on board. Other reports saying, as President Trump said no one was hurt. Two pilots involved, both are safe and uninjured. Of course, we know the casualty numbers haven't been fully disclosed. In fact, they've been classified, so it would track if, in fact, we're being lied to about the number of American casualties. So take a look. This is the Apache hel-- This is video reportedly of the Apache helicopter going down after this drone strike on it Near the Strait of Hormuz, and I'll just sort of ask you, you know again, does that look survivable? Well, well, if, you know, if they ejected or were able to, but my, my, I wanna ask you guys this question, like if this were to happen, I don't know, over the Gulf of Mexico You know, if Iran were flying military helicopters close to our border near, near the Gulf of Mexico, like what would we do? I imagine we would probably shoot them down. I'm just saying if this were to happen on our soil and so just a short time ago, the according to BRICS News, Iran foreign, foreign minister Aragh Araghchi responded to the Apache helicopter being shot down, saying, "Forces in proximity to our territory are at constant risk, so the best thing to do is for them to..." Leave. Okay. Good point there. Israeli sources are also telling us here at Redacted that the US refueling aircraft just took off from Israel. We've heard from sources in Tel Aviv, these are large tankers used for big strikes, these have now taken off. So what happens next? Is there a deal? Is there no deal? Are we stumbling back towards all-out war? Also, I'm, I'm no expert on geography. Doesn't look like this was just patrolling the Straits of Hormuz, that was over land. Right. That's not, that weren't. So, okay. Is that over water? That's- Is that over international waters or is that o- literally over top? I mean, we don't exactly know. so- That, I mean, that does look like land to me. You know, I haven't spent a lot of time at sea, but I don't think there are buildings. That's just, you know, maybe we should ask an expert is that- Yeah, I mean, let's bring in Colonel Daniel Davis, host of The Deep Dive on YouTube. A lot of moving parts right now, Colonel. Great show today. I know you spoke to Professor Morandi today about is there a deal or no deal? Now, the reason I think this is important is that Prof- Professor Morandi is very close to people who are involved in the detail apparatus the deal apparatus right now. And I believe he told you earlier today on your show, well, I don In your mouth, you tell us, is there a deal? Are we like two days away from a great end to this war? One thing on that video you were just showing, that is definitely not a video of an Apache helicopter going down. In fact, that is from, I think, the second or third day of the war on when an American base was hit with a Shahid drone. I recognize that video very well. But that also shows why this is almost complete nonsense and has almost no chance to be true. A Shahid drone is a point target. It goes from point A to And the idea that it can hit a moving helicopter is nearly impossible. The, literally the only chance that that could happen, what's been reported, and apparently that was being released to both CNN and, and CBS by the, by the military, is if it just happened to fly through the flight path like a THOR or a Shahid drone going somewhere. But there's no-- there was no Shahid attack, so even that falls through. And if it had, and that's one thing that is useful from that video, it shows when a Shahid drone hits a target, it has a massive explosion with It carries. If it had hit a helicopter, nobody would have survived. The helicopter would have been obliterated whether over sea or, or over land or water, it wouldn't have mattered. Nobody would have survived. We're told by President Trump that no one was even injured, much less killed in action. So almost nothing about this seems plausible. It looks to me more like it's an excuse for the US to, to launch an attack somewhere against Iran, and as you point out, that could possibly be in the works right now with these tankers going up in the air Who knows if something is physically in the, in the process right now? And no matter what it is, this has-- this, if I already said earlier today that we're miles apart from a negotiated settlement, this will just make it ten miles apart, something like that. But there is no prospect that this is, is gonna help us find a solution or that one was even in close proximity. Right. So take what we're seeing here. Let me just put this on the screen just to be clear. This is, yeah, this was RT that had posted this, "Iran Sophisticated US Apache helicopter here, forcing it to crash. So, so this is old video? Yeah, definitely. I, because I, I remember, because that, that, that round object that it hit was, I, I wanna say it was a, a, a radar site of some sort on a base, but I remember that was from a US base that a Shahid drone hit. And I pointed out on our show when it came out that, you know, where is our air defense? How did that thing hit without even being shot down? A slow-moving Well, thank you for clarifying that. Yeah, so I guess we're being asked to believe that we're gonna go and have a military response over just equipment, not people. Although a few months ago, when we had the rescue operation for the man who was down in Iranian territory, we apparently lost dozens of aircraft and didn't respond. We're fine with that, but we lost one unmanned helicopter and we have to respond. How does that-- That's ludicrous. Nobody can follow that. It, it, it is, and, and that, that just tells you, Natalie, that there's, that something's just not right here that, that we would, out of necessity, have to respond and, and the Iranian side is certainly well aware of this is coming, obviously he just said it out loud and in the open, so they're already prepared. And again, Professor Morandi told me just before he went on the air with me today that he had talked to two sources in the Iranian military to, to find out what did happen, did they Retaliates like this, then he can count on a strike, and, and the way the Iranians are these days, they don't respond in kind. Whatever US may hit, they'll, they'll strike back against an, an, an American target, but bigger than what they had. So again, one has to wonder, because President Trump said just last night, "We're, you know, we're right there, we're right on the cusp of a big, powerful deal, and, and maybe a few days away," but there's no truth to it. There's, there's definitely Agree to, and wonder if he's like saying, "All right, well, how do I get out of this? Because there's not gonna be a deal in a few days, unless of course, oh, well, the Iranian side attacked one of our aircraft, we responded like normal, and then now they're out of the deal, so it's their fault." I don't know, he could be doing something like that just to get out of this very small tactical box, but the cost could be pretty profound, dependent on what Iran does in retaliation because this could literally be the spark And I can guarantee you that the Israeli side is chomping at the bit and would take any excuse at all to relaunch targets probably into Beirut against Hezbollah. I mean, this all happens, you know, we're, we're, we're, we're kind of dancing around the elephant in the room was like, was this a you know, was this another false flag on the anniversary of the USS Liberty attack? Congressman Thomas Massie on the floor of Congress talking about the USS Liberty you know, many decades ago when Israel attacked the US USS Liberty. you know, Kurt, can you talk about this money, the unfrozen assets piece? Of course, this report today is pretty shocking, and if there's truth to it, it's pretty stunning that there are unfrozen three billion dollars in assets being moved from the UAE through the UAE, basically hand-delivered to the Iranians as part of this, a part of this deal, and how much of these frozen assets are still being withheld from the United States side of this in order to push- Forward on a peace agreement, like we'll give you these three billion dollars of these frozen assets, just don't attack Israel. A few moments ago, Iran saying, "If we are attacked by the United States, we will respond with a massive attack on our own." So what do you make of this three billion dollars story funneled through the UAE? You know, it, it's, it's really a sad commentary on the times that we can't take anything at face value, no matter if it's said by the president himself or anybody else, a-- from an American side. It used to be that we could take pretty much what was said at the, at the public level, at least relatively speaking from our side at face value, and then we could get the details, and it was those other bad actors over, over there you know, wherever there was all the bad guys our adversaries, that were lying. But now then Thing at face value. Now, I, I would, I'm skeptical that, that we would release three billion dollars through UAE, especially because UAE has been the hardest hit by Iran during this whole war. So I don't know why they would be willing to covertly do something which obviously went from covert to overt, as the the news is out there. but further along, I mean, President Trump just this-- what is it, Sunday, on NBC News, when point blank asked, "Will you release frozen funds up front like the Iranian side had asked Just recently as Saturday, saying that because we have no trust in you, because you have lied to us twice and attacked us in the middle of negotiations, this time we have to have something upfront. So we have to have the release of frozen funds, they said twenty-four billion dollars, losing getting rid of sanctions on the Iranian energy infrastructure and release of your blockade. And they said, once that's done, then we'll release our blockade and we can get into other negotiations. But President Trump was asked by NBC, Kristen Welker, categorically Said, "No, we won't give anything. If they behave, if they're good, then we'll do some other stuff later, which of course means it's a no-- there's no deal, because Iran won't do anything without that." If someone suggested, "Okay, well, they were covertly gonna give three billion dollars to Iran," I, I would be skeptical that we would actually do that, because that's, that's similar to what Trump has been relentlessly excoriating Barack Obama for having done, and if he did the same thing you know, the Would start to, to have some real problems with that. And plus, I don't know that three billion of the twenty-four that Iran's asking for, whether that's gonna be enough, 'cause I think that they're gonna have to have it open and out front. They don't just need the money, they also need the su- the submission and the recognition that the US is releasing their, what they consider their stolen money, because it is, after all, Iranian assets that we're talking about here. So everything is possible. There's no telling what may be going on behind the scenes Yeah. Over the weekend, Iran launched True Promise, Operation True Promise Five, which was an attack on Israeli military bases. Now, Israel says, "Oh no, nothing got through, we're totally fine." Although video evidence shows that things did get through. Israel saying, "That was just a scratch, it's a flesh wound, we're fine." Do you know anything other than that? Do you have any reporting that possibly that was in fact a more harmful strike and that Israel wouldn't sustain? Increased strikes from, from Iran. Yeah, well, I, I, I'll just say that the minute that I heard that claim that they had knocked down everything just like the, I think in the previous round we had claimed we knocked down everything when Iran struck back against us, and then, oh, now when Iran struck the the Kuwait, the SINCOP immediately said, "We knocked down everything," and then I think when the sun came up the next morning, then there's all this video evidence of, of the airport in Kuwait being crushed and You can't take anything at face value, but look, i-- and unless some incredible new technology emerged in the last sixty days since we stopped the, the active war here, there, there was, by one accounting an intercept rate on, on both Israel and the United States of about five percent, not ninety-five percent like we claim, but five percent. So I'm like, okay, wait, so what if ninety-five percent gets through? Someone in our chat room just said almost everything got through. Yeah. Yeah. I think that's, yeah. Yeah, in fact, we're, we're gonna do a show here pretty soon with Professor Ted Postel, who's really good on this, because he puts together video evidence to stuff. He doesn't just suppose on anything. He says, "Here's the evidence to show what I'm doing with the intercept rate and all this kind of stuff." And he said it's nowhere near what you're being told, and then he shows you why. So you, you don't have to take his word for it. so when I hear then that all of, and I think it was Got it very seriously. That's remarkable. what do you-- So, what do you make of this idea that President Trump warned Benjamin Netanyahu told reporters first before he got on the phone, "Don't attack Iran, don't launch any sort of a response." Netanyahu disregards that, launches his own response. This back and forth right now between President Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, this idea that there's a rift, that the United States really wants an off-ramp here, do you buy that? I, I want to, I want to buy it, because there needs to be a rift and I think it was last night on Jesse Watters on Fox Vice President Vance went on and said, "Hey, listen, we're gonna do what is in the America's best interest, and Israel may like it or they may not like it, but that's something they've gotta deal with, because we've gotta do what we were elected to do, which is to help the American people." And I cheered that on. I said, "Good, it's, it Because there is no question, and I've, I've got some sources pretty high up in, in the in the White House that suggest that the Vice President is very aggressive trying to get to a negotiated settlement, has been working very hard behind the scenes to do that, knowing that the Israeli side isn't happy, but it's good for America. But there's headwinds from President Trump, I'm told. Now, I don't, not personally involved with that, but evidence suggests that that may be right, and now that's why I'm worried about this alleged helicopter incident Then that could undo even, even the progress that could be made, because I'll let me point out, there could be a deal done, and there has been, in fact, Professor Morandi on the show also said, yes, he said, I've seen the language of the memorandum that could start a negotiated process. That's not a, a deal to per-- end the war per se, but it's something to concrete start the process. And he said, the US negotiators have said, here's what the US is willing to do, which is something that's tolerable to the Iranian side. Of one, but so far every time President Trump has pulled the string on it, pulled the rug out from under it the way it was put, and, and has, has sabotaged it, and one wonders, is this the next sabotage by saying, "Now I'm gonna strike Iran instead of having a deal with them"? Because of that empty helicopter. Allegedly, if, if it even happened, I mean, I don't even know if it happened. Show me some wreckage, show me the pilots. I haven't seen anything except for a piece of paper, a, a statement. That's all I've seen. So, yeah, I'm skeptical that even happened. I know. And yeah, seeing that, seeing that footage, that RT footage showing that old, old video, I mean, it looked like, I thought it was like a piece of the helicopter that like fell, it was shot, you saw a piece falling down, and that And if that's what's convenient, then they said, "Oh, it was over water, and we used a drone to go help the, the pilots out, so that way there's conveniently no wreckage to show, there's no nothing." So that's another reason for my skepticism. Oh, good point, good point. Well, you're, you're in good hands here on the Skepticism Show. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel, it's totally free, if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought And we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 8, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - June 9, 2026 at 6:02 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

⚠️ If red light therapy is fake, why is the medical establishment so nervous? Photobiomodulation may be one of the biggest health breakthroughs hiding in plain sight, and Big Pharma does NOT want you asking questions. https://t.co/XkIkADrItv

Video Transcript AI Summary

The interview discusses red light therapy—its popularity, why it is being challenged by “the medical world,” and how investigative journalist Jonathan Otto says it works and why people are adopting it widely, including through consumer devices like masks. Otto frames the therapy as “photobiomodulation,” describing it as the body responding to designed-for light. He contrasts modern mainstream medicine with what he portrays as an alternative approach. Otto says public interest has surged, citing everyday adoption (including references to women using masks and his anecdote that his son’s acne breakout could have led to scarring and even temptation to take Accutane). He argues that red light therapy is threatening to pharmaceutical and clinical systems because, in his view, it has become an alternative in major cancer-related studies and photodynamic therapy research. He cites a randomized control trial referenced as published by *Lancet Oncology* involving 413 men, claiming the red light group did “almost four hundred percent better” than the non-red light group, with 6% requiring surgery in the red light group versus 30% in the non-red light group. He also claims that many outcomes matter because surgeries can lead to complications such as impotence, and he argues that people are seeking “less invasive, more selective therapies” targeting tumor cells. When asked what led him to take red light therapy seriously, Otto describes his earlier work producing a cancer-focused documentary series about 12 years ago, including interviews with medical practitioners and treatment centers. He says he encountered results under “photobiomodulation” and mentions combining therapies, including methylene blue, which he describes as requiring activation by red light for antimicrobial photodynamic therapy and antiparasitic effects. Otto gives historical context: he references a Nobel Prize awarded in 1903 to Niels Ryberg Finsen for light therapy reversing chronic disease, uses incandescent bulbs as the historical technology, and describes later developments. He attributes modern versions to work by Dr. Andrey Mester and says NASA-funded LED research enabled high-power delivery into the body, emphasizing that LEDs deliver power with less heat and do not flicker like older options. He claims a large body of studies supports red light therapy across conditions, listing eyesight problems, chronic back pain, autoimmune conditions (including arthritis, lupus), macular degeneration, post-stroke outcomes, and dementia. He also discusses cancer and chronic disease mechanisms through mitochondria: he says mitochondria contain “mitochondria chromophores” (light receptors) and that light induces reactive oxygen species and adenosine triphosphate, which he says target circulating tumor cells and senescent circulating tumor cells. He also connects red light to “shutting down unhealthy cells” and promoting creation and differentiation of healthier stem cells, including in bones and organs like kidneys. On which conditions respond best, Otto highlights pain (arthritis, inflammation), skin issues (eczema, acne, psoriasis), sleep/energy/recovery, autoimmune-spectrum conditions, and chronic eye conditions including myopia in children. He cites clinical trial information from University College London about prostate cancer and eye studies, asserting remission differences between red light and non-red light groups and claiming a morning-only benefit for myopia parameters. He says a study used 670 nm LED light delivered directly into the eyes for three minutes, and he describes reported improvements and the idea that exposure timing matters. He proposes mechanisms and timing for symptom relief: depression studies show changes within one hour, fibromyalgia studies average around four weeks with results maintained for months, and cancer studies can run for two years. He also includes a pilot study claim (three people with cutaneous B-cell lymphoma) describing complete remission after one or two photodynamic therapy sessions with methylene blue and red light, with no side effects reported. For hair loss, Otto says red light therapy for androgenic alopecia has studies supporting stimulation of hair follicles and stem cells in the scalp. He also claims effects on thyroid function and weight loss, linking red light to “photonic lipolysis” and describing organ-function improvements. On safety and frequency, Otto says people can “overdo it,” but describes minimal adverse effects reported across large clinical use. He emphasizes dark occlusion for sleep and suggests that short daily exposures can be sufficient, citing examples such as fifteen minutes per day for general use and thyroid studies involving limited weekly sessions. He states that more light does not necessarily mean better outcomes for eyes. Toward buying guidance, Otto recommends high-quality panels or devices delivering multiple wavelengths, claiming broad-spectrum coverage reaches shallow to deep targets within organs. He explains wavelength ranges he uses or discusses (including around 480 nm, 630–660 nm, and near-infrared up to around 1060 nm) and describes the role of irradiance and distance, suggesting benefits even at roughly a foot away depending on the device and condition. He also compares whole-body approaches (head-to-groin) with localized masks. Otto concludes by encouraging research on specific conditions, promoting the idea that light therapy can be preventative and substitute for other spending, and ends with an emphasis on devices being affordable compared with clinic sessions.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

What is red light therapy? Does it work? Why is it exploding in popularity? The medical world seems to be fighting back against it, which always raises my alarm bells when they see something that could be a natural curative for something, and they're pushing back against it. Just walk into any Best Buy or Target, and you'll see entire stations set up for red light therapy. Jonathan Otto is an investigative journalist, filmmaker, and humanitarian whose work has focused heavily on health. Healing and conversations that sit outside the usual medical mainstream, and he's the author of the book, The Cancer Off Switch. So we wanted to invite Jonathan on today to talk about red light therapy specifically. Jonathan, welcome to the show. Thank you so much for having me, Clayton. I appreciate it. So maybe we can just explain to our audience, you know, when people go into a Best Buy and they see these like red light therapy masks and these other things, and they seem to be all the rage right now, just go on Instagram and you see like a lot of women buying them and using them on a regular basis, my wife included. and she, she gave it to my son, my adolescent son, who had a, like a bit, bit of a big acne breakout at one point a few months ago, and he's like, "I don't wanna wear that thing." He put What is red light therapy and why is maybe the big pharmaceutical complex scared of it? Yeah, well, Clayton, that's a great question, and it, it really touches my heart to hear about that case study with your son and your wife, because y- it's something that he would have potentially lived with and then the scarring from it, and then being tempted to take Accutane, and that would have damaged his liver, and so see the cascade of effects that happens. And So the proof is in the pudding, people are seeing it, you're observing it without being an expert in it, and that's one of the wonders of this. But what it is, is it's your body responding to what it was designed to respond to. Clearly, you could see in nature that you're biologically designed for light and as-- and red light being the sunrise and sunset, which is actually probably the part of the day, Clayton, that you and a lot of the viewers are missing daily. And it's interesting to see what it's doing for people, and the reason why I would- Say the pharmaceutical industry may have some major concerns around it is because it's become an alternative for palliative chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery in major clinical studies now ranging into the thousands specifically on cancer into, in, into the high hundreds through, through photodynamic therapy. And, you know, the Lancet Oncology even published that a, a clinical study with four hundred and thirteen men, and it, it, the red light group, 'cause it was The randomized control, control trial, the red light group did almost four hundred percent better than the non-red light group in a, in a four hundred and thirteen person group, and only six percent got surgery in the red light group, thirty percent got red light in the non- got surgery in the non-red light group, which is a five hundred percent difference on that front. So that's major. These are major medical journals, and these are major issues that, you know, men after these surgeries, nine out of ten will become impotent. And so people are running now for these less invasive, more selective therapies that are targeting tumor cells instead of carpet bombing the body or just taking out organs that we actually want, which I would say in some ways is forced or, or transgender surgeries that aren't intentionally transgender surgeries. not to gas-- or not to kind of rage bait people, but my point is that it's That's happening to people where they're getting organs removed because they don't think there's a better option, and I think that that's the big threat right there. Geez. When you first started looking into red light therapy, what convinced you that this was something worth taking seriously rather than just like a health fad? Yeah. I was producing on a series called The Truth About Cancer about twelve years ago that became the most prolific holistic cancer documentary series in the, in the world and I went around the world, literally hundreds of over a hundred in that particular series of the world's best medical doctors that were the ones putting their head out of the, yeah, the foxhole and getting shot at, whether it was Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski or Dr. Matthias Rath or, or, yeah, Dr. Gerson Therapy center and, and, and Dr. Antonio Jimenez from the Hope for Cancer Treatment Centers, who was kind enough to, like, write on you know, that, that book that I shared with you when we're off camera, but, you know, his words were that my, my work is groundbreaking and potentially life-saving and not just recommended, but essential. When I went inside of his clinic back twelve years ago, I remember being blown away from the results that people would get on what, what was referred to and is referred to Referred to as photobiomodulation, which is photo, light, bio, life, modulation to change, to change the process of life through light. And, and it was a staple. And then you're hearing this combination of therapies with methylene blue, and it's not a coincidence that when Mel Gibson was on Rogan's show and says, "I had three friends," I tell you a good story, "three friends with stage four cancer." They, they, they basically implying that they were going to die, they had a lot of things going on. Now they don't have cancer at all anymore, and so these were the big blockbuster statements that were coming out. And he says they were taking, and then he lists antiparasitics, fenbendazole, ivermectin, and he says methylene blue. Methylene blue has to be activated by red light to work properly, and that's called antimicrobial photodynamic therapy, which is specifically antiparasitic. So now you start seeing these worlds come together, and I started I think that was a passing trend. And then after more research, I found that the Nobel Prize was won in nineteen o three by Niels Ryberg Finsen for light therapy reversing chronic disease. They were using incandescent bulbs, which, which, which is basically the same thing as a, a reptile lamp A ten dollar chicken lamp or a reptile lamp, I'm, I'm not exaggerating, 'cause this was the technology at the time, and his case was lupus vulgaris, that, that was one specifically for, it's an autoimmune condition, which then brings you into the whole autoimmune category. so it was using these incandescent bulbs, and it was John Harvey Kellogg, which I, I would say has a mixed reputation, this was the good side of his work and he wrote the book Light Therapeutics and was, was- Treating tens of thousands of people in the sanitariums with light therapy in this same type of technology, which means that, you know, people, for example, could, could try those types of things. But what happened though in the '80s and it was Dr. Andrey Mester, the Hungarian physician in the '60s, that then pioneered what was then known as red light therapy as we know it today, and by then the '90s, once NASA, which I think a lot of people are distrusting NASA, probably for a lot Anyway, we won't go there, but the, the good thing that they did was they actually did fund LED, light emitting diode research, which LEDs have a bad name when you have high flicker rates in the home, but they became the highest power way to deliver light into the body. And so once that tech came in, you-- they don't flicker in like devices like what I have behind me, and those are the ones, like for example, the Hope for Cancer Treatment Centers, that, you know, as a side note, they're using our devices for their patient program. But the reason why they went to light-emitting diodes is 'cause they could push ninety percent of the power into light and only ten percent into heat, so they became that much more bright, and that was what was needed. And so then the thousands of studies started pouring in, like the one I just cited. From the Lancet, but it was from everything, from eyesight to chronic back pain to any autoimmune condition you could imagine, from arthritis to lupus to macular degeneration to post-stroke to dementia, and I'm not exaggerating, and I could show each one of these studies, and the, the results were almost unbelievable for many of them, and they were published in every big journal you could imagine, from the British Medical Journal to the Lancet Oncology, children or elderly adults, yeah. I mean, and it seems to me that this-- there's a suppression going on. We had Nicholas Holscher on from the wellness company a few weeks ago to talk about ivermectin and menmenbenzodol and the largest study basically of cancer reversal or showing incredible signs, just as you mentioned, ivermectin and menbenzodol. And I learned, I didn't know it at the time, that the CIA knew about this, knew about the parasitic infection of cancer in the body as early as the 1950s, and basically helped suppress this information. So the idea that you could go out and get sunlight or red light therapy or just sitting in your backyard could help ward off macular degeneration, all sorts of issues And that happened more than a hundred years ago, and we're, we're, we're now maybe just learning about it? Yeah, exactly, exactly. And once, once you get this, you, you'll kind of get a little obsessed in a good way, I think, Clayton, where If you look at your mitochondria, which equate to about twenty-five percent of your org-organ cells, they contain something called mitochondria chromophores, which are light receptors. So biologically, you're designed for it, and it-- you look out the window and you look at the plants growing, you look at the animals in nature, and they're getting two things at the same time, which is the Earth's magnetic field, which is grounding, which is really fascinating when you stack those therapies with, with a pulsed electromagnetic field with light therapy. And they're getting light, both the, you know, the red, particularly in the sunrise, sunset, and, and the UVB during the day, and, and the whole spectrum, full spectrum of light, both red, near infrared, mid infrared, far infrared. What's happening when it goes into the mitochondria through the light receptors, mitochondrial chromophores, they're generating reactive oxygen species. So it's adenosine triphosphate, which is cellular energy, and reactive oxygen species, they're the specific aspects that target circulating tumor cells and zombie cells, known as senescent circulating tumor cell or something that was going to become a, a, a problematic cancer, because preventative studies have been done on red light therapy on cancer, particularly in animals, showing that it is preventative, which is fascinating in, in and of itself considering that one in two males are getting cancer during their life, one in three females, and then you're, you're in a big pharma typically, like they're selling you the, these expensive and invasive therapies that really, I would say don't-- they're, they're not, they're not as efficacious as what people maybe think they are, and, and then you, you end up in a whole nother sphere, which is when you s-specifically are targeting the cancer cells without harming the body, and, and whether it's reversing another chronic condition, it's, it's really about shutting down unhealthy cells and then creating new cells, which is Which is the genesis, or it's called the proliferation of new healthy stem cells and differentiation, both of which red light is heavily proven to do not within your bones and, and, and within your organs like the kidneys. So what conditions or symptoms seem to respond best to red light therapy? Pain, like arthritis, inflammation, maybe skin issues, like I mentioned with my son, sleep, maybe energy, recovery, something else? What do-- what maybe responds best to red light therapy? Yes, all, all of the, the conditions, Clayton, that you mentioned do have clinical studies that back them, and one of the fun things for people to do is to do their own research and to put the chronic condition they have into Google or Google Scholar or Grok or ChatGPT, and then whatever, whatever condition they have, red light therapy, those, just those words together, show me the best studies, show me what time frames, show me the, the time of the day they use, that, show me what wavelengths of light that they use, 'cause like, for Wavelengths right there, which, which, you know, the, the studies on breast cancer were showing specifically six sixty was the one that could drop the breast tumor proliferation by forty percent in vitro in twenty-four hours, right? So that was a PubMed study and it's in vitro, so I'm not saying that this was a, you know, four hundred person group, but it was showing that there was a direct response, but it was a specific type of wavelength of light that was interfacing with that particular part of the body. So they, To the conversation, but it was, it was specifically everything from lung, lung cancer, which is the biggest killer, kills more people than prostate cancer, breast cancer, and colon cancer combined, okay, lung cancer, and smoking's not going up. So what is it that we're inhaling that is causing this? And then people then start saying, "Well, what's getting sprayed in the skies?" And then they also say, "What's in my home that's off-gassing?" And, and then they look at indoor air fil-filtration or plants to put in the home to absorb these things It's, it's, it's the various types of cancer, the biggest ones that are affecting us, especially with the combination of methylene blue and red light, and then you come into all these other, you know, chronic conditions from joint pain, knee pain. I, I spent thirty thousand dollars on my dad's knees, and I, I didn't, I couldn't get a result but red light was something that cost- Under three hundred dollars was able to work wonders for him and, and, you know, he's building my sister's home right now, and he's able to be mobile, and that's a blessing for me. So it's, it's those conditions, the, the autoimmune spectrum from the chronic conditions, whether it's eczema or acne or psoriasis, or whether it's the, the chronic eye conditions which range from myopia, even in children, this, the forty-one clinical trials equated to sixty-four hundred children, and this was- Specifically an eyesight study, which in many of the studies that are just opening their eyes to looking directly into red light, it was the number one thing that stopped vision worsening in children over that large group. Wow. I mean, I've been trying to reverse my vision problems I've- Been going down that rabbit hole of trying to heal my eyes naturally, and it's been like a slow process. And as you can tell, I still need my reading glasses, and I'm, you know, trying to take walks and be out in the morning with the dog with no glasses on and just like looking at the distance, the horizon, and all of that to try to get the light in there but it, but it's a slow process. And I, you know, maybe you and I can talk offline how to- But I'll tell you this, I want, I want to tell you this during, during this, if you don't mind, Clayton, you'll love this. Okay, so this was University College London. They were the same guys that backed the prostate cancer study that I just mentioned. Okay, so forty-nine percent went into remission in the red light group, thirteen point five percent went into remission in the non-red light group. That was only one therapy added. There's no-- There was no diet change, there was no additional therapies added. It was the red light with a photos different type for that one, but people can find the study. Now, the same group then did a study on eyesight, and they tested people after the age of forty with myopia, and they tested them in the morning and the afternoon. They did three minutes, up to forty-five minutes, and if they did it in the afternoon, they got zero benefit, but if they did it in the morning, on average, immediately, within the same twenty-four hour period, they equated if it was the morning, whether it was three minutes or forty-five minutes, it would equate to seventeen percent improvement in Which it wasn't a reversal study, it was, it was really just testing these parameters, which I've now seen mid-ninety year olds get vision back and, and, and maintain it. And is this like sitting in front of a red light, light, or is this out in nature? It was, it was in, it was in six seventy nanometer red light which was through a light emitting diode LED so, and it was like the ones you have there in your studio? Yeah, yeah, it was the same tech. It was LED six seventy directly into the eyes, eyes open, three minutes looking into it. That's, that's exactly what they did. And so if you're not doing that and you're trying different things, it's kind of-- it's sad because now that you know this, the next show that if, you know, us doing another thing, you might then report or, or a show outside of this one with me, you may report dramatic changes, 'cause I, I often see people within the same day Shocked that they can now read, 'cause seventeen percent is, is not, is not a hundred percent, but that was only three minutes of exposure. What I'm saying is that if people were to do that daily or a few times a week, they could expect a complete reversal. That's what I've seen personally, even in in people that you wouldn't think could get much hope, 'cause the retina is, is one of the highest concentrations in mitochondria, and the brain, some of the cells have up to hundreds of thousands of mitochondria. So the eyes are really the pathway See improvements in mood as well, and so your wife may report, "Hey, Clayton's a lot happier." not saying that you're not a happy guy, yeah, but our wives can notice the slightest changes or the most dramatic changes, and yes, I do believe that it will be like a remarkable difference for you. Wow. All right, I'm gonna, I'm gonna try it, okay. and you know, you and I can talk again offline how we can, how we can find some of that. But how long does it take Of red light therapy, like the benefits, you mentioned at least for the eyesight piece of this, pretty, like pretty quickly but what about other, you know, we talk about eczema or acne or cancers or something else do we have like a, a, a length of time maybe sitting in front of red light or being out in nature that would help people? Yeah, and I love that you're talking about being out in nature because one of my friends just reported this to me where he-- it was during the middle of the day where you I don't have any data on this. It was just a fascinating observation where, but then it was red in his eyes because it's going through the, the skin, which is then working potentially like a filter, which is then making-- So I'm not saying he's looking at the sun during the day, I'm saying he's got his eyes closed for just a couple of minutes, but he was reporting his eyesight changing as well that way, which is fascinating. Wow. Because it is going to-- it, it's visibly red, so it's showing that the eyelids are working like a filter but in terms of timelines, the, the eyes are really quick. Depression, some of the things I'll say will sound unbelievable, but you'll see all of them backed up by clinical research and not just, they're not hearsay. The depression studies were tested a single hour after the therapy and the, the first hour w- was an improvement, the second hour was a greater improvement than the first hour 'cause there's a stacking effect. so depression and anxiety are like quite fast from, from what I've seen. Then Then, then the fibromyalgia studies, for example, a lot of them are like the autoimmune category is typically a four-week study on, on average from, from all the studies I've looked at, and they're showing large groups going into, largely into remission of a lot of the, the aspects, or they're at least saying that it was clinically managing the condition to the effect that they were dramatically different to the control group and that the, and that the red light group then, you know, maintained those changes for You know, three, four months, even up to six months into the future, I mean, even though they weren't regularly doing it, though ideally when it comes to reversing the conditions, then people obviously did better when they were doing it more regularly, 'cause again, you're biologically designed for it. The cancer studies that-- the Lancet Oncology one I was quoting to you was a two-year study, and again, they, they were doing the other therapies, which I would say like the chemo, surgery, and radiation, with the surgery only for the, the smaller percentage of the red There, there are studies that were showing, okay, this one is again gonna show, is unbelievable, we're gonna show this on screen, it was a lymphoma study done in two thousand and six, it's on PubMed, and it was three people in a pilot study. They all went into complete remission in a single week, two of them after one session, the other one after two sessions, in complete, and the, the findings were, all three patients experienced complete remission, defined as a clinical and complete absence and histologic complete absence of Cutaneous B-cell lymphoma after a maximum of two photodynamic therapy sessions at a one-week interval, no patient experienced any side effects, and the pain was easily managed after the photodynamic therapy sessions. That was the clinical finding word, word for word, in that two thousand and six pilot study. So it ranges, some of them a little longer, some of them shorter, and it's, especially with the photodynamic aspect, like taking methylene blue thirty minutes before, it will accelerate a lot of things because, again, it's working as an antiparasitic as well. So you So it's stacking, yeah. does it work for hair loss? I mean, not that I'm really worried about it, I mean- You look great, man. But I'm almost fifty years old, and my dad had a full head of hair till he passed away at eighty-six years old. So hopefully, but nevertheless, you know, you like, you don't like the receding hairline, but does it work for hair loss as well? Yeah, it, it does. I'm, I'm forty, I just turned forty, and I, I got three children, I'm True to that. but both ways, right? My wife because we're, we're-- you, you deal with more problems that you could easily escape if you were more transient, just passing through life, but you have to hit your problems head on in a marriage, right? Right. Character flaws all come to the surface. I thought I was a good person until I got married, then I realized I had some work to do. and then yeah, so- It, it, it's, it's, I can see it visibly working for me not having a gray hair at, at forty with baldness on both sides of my family. But aside from the anecdotal report on me, 'cause what can you say about that? But androgenic alopecia is the clinical name for male or female hair loss, and the studies on red light are, are amazing for stimulating hair follicles and the, the stem cells within your scalp to regenerate and produce healthy hair. And I, I've seen it countless times in people, I, I, I haven't yet seen it where somebody has said, "I got zero improvement." I haven't seen that yet, which is, which, which is really cool. And I, that's the same thing I've seen with eyesight. I'm not saying that everything I immediately see the result that I expected. The, the thyroid studies are the ones that people gonna be amazed at, 'cause I, my eighty-seven year old grandma, being on thyroid medication for decades has now, now no longer needs thyroid medication at Hair loss, when you think about it, isn't just like a lot of people are going to think about, okay, just topical, like, "Hey, I'm just gonna go for the, for the hair," and that-- there's something to be said for that, and I do see amazing results. But when you think about the fact that the thyroid is regulating a lot of what's happening when it comes to hair loss and weight gain and weight loss, which is the process for weight loss through red light is called photonic lipolysis, which is now getting us, used as a substitute for lip thing is true in that, so it's breaking open fat cells and people are losing a lot of weight, but it's because of the improvement in the organ function, like the thyroid producing thyroid hormones naturally, which is what is arguably then one of the biggest factors for why then people are getting hair regrowth, as well as the fact that they're applying it directly to the scalp and stimulating hair, hair follicles. Can you overdo it? All of this red light therapy, can you think, "Well, I'm gonna cure everything, I'm just gonna sit in front of this panel for twelve Yes, you can, because it, it's not that you would cause issues, because there's been approximately a hundred million people treated clinically with red light therapy without adverse effects being reported to any significant degree. Like, you could have some mild hyperemia reaction, which is like a healing crisis, but that's not even typical with red light, because it's dealing with surface, surface level inflammation and dealing with the root cause of what's driving that, like the toxins that are within the cells, and it's in Currently detoxifying cells through cellular energy, which is mind blowing. so the absence of light then becomes important as well, and that's why you need to sleep in the dark. the lymphoma study I mentioned before had something called an occlusion time. You think occult, which means hidden, to cover, and so an occlusion time means that you're putting yourself in the dark. And, and so it's the typical time is really only fifteen minutes a day, and many of the, like the thyroid studies that showed that half the group went into remission after a Five week treatment of chronic autoimmune thyroiditis, which is twenty minutes twice a week for five weeks, and it was, it was just that little, it wasn't even daily, and half the group went into remission, the other one was ninety-six percent went into remission of enlarged thyroid with Hashimoto's thyroiditis. And That was, that was only a few minutes over the thyroid so it, a little goes a long way, and it's not about doing it all day long. And like the three minutes or forty-five minutes, whether it was three or forty-five for the eyesight, then the outcome was still the same. It wasn't more than seventeen percent immediately, so that was the max that you could get in a twenty-four hour period, and that more didn't equate to better. But there is an acute long COVID study. This is the-- These are some of the longer times I Conducted by the European Society of Medicine, there were sixty-two people in the study. It was four sessions that were sixty-four to eighty-four minute long sessions, and it was total remission of all symptoms for, for acute long COVID, which meant that the That it was a total resolution of dyspnea, shortness of breath, oxygen saturation above ninety-seven percent in the blood e-executive function resolved, cognitive function resolved, emotional deficits resolved, digestive issues resolved within one week, sixty of the sixty-two had complete remission, total remission of all symptoms, and the other two got better after the four sessions, no additional sessions, but these were longer sessions. So that's the longer period, and because acute long COVID is often caused by people getting that intervention That happened a few years ago, getting something injected into their body, then that becomes a, a, a game changer for people. So this is amazing. I mean, I hope people will dive into the research, like you said earlier, go to like Google Scholar, maybe put in the thing that you have that you're suffering with and see what the-- look through all of the studies on red light therapy as it relates to your affliction, whether it's alopecia, whether it's macular degeneration or otherwise, and, and do the research on that hair loss or otherwise. Cancers, I guess as well. But if people like want to buy something, like, I, I have no idea where to start. Like, if I wanted to buy like a red light panel for my house I, I see those masks, like I mentioned my wife has you know, like, w-what's the benefit of getting like a panel? What would you recommend? Maybe you can point us in a direction if people wanted to buy something. I could, I'll put a link in the description if people wanna pick something up. Absolutely, no, thank you, Clayton. We, I, I obviously really care about this, and I want more people to know about it, and I give all the facts from the research so that people can do whatever they like with that knowledge and information and get back in touch with nature, get on the ground grounded, and get light in nature. And the reason why somebody should look at getting a high quality panel or, or like a smaller device, like a precision device from a company like mine, Red Life, is my company is because you're Something that's clinically backed. And, and so the, the reason why somebody would do a panel is so that they can get it over all their organs. The, the acute long COVID study that I just cited was whole organ photobiomodulation, so head to groin area, which would be something like this or, or like what I have here. these would be an example of how you're able to get all your organs into red light therapy, into red light, in, into the, into the light so that you can then- Improve the function of all these organs. So then what you're doing then is, what you saw then when you, you got all these different colors coming out of here, right? So you're seeing, you can't see the near infrared 'cause it's invisible, but this blue is 480, which blue light people get confused 'cause they think of it like, okay, well, this must be bad, but the reason why your son, one of the reasons why he may have gone into remission of acne is because that red light mask may have had blue light in it. And And, and so that, and likely did, almost all of them do, right? And so that's gonna land in the dermis and stimulate the, the cells in this area to regenerate. It's going to kill bacteria better than anything else, so that's why you'd go as, as, as low as in the spectrum as 480, and then you come into the red, which is 630, 660, and so we're using 9 here. So what you're seeing is then 670, which is the one The reason why you're seeing everything lit up is they're dual lights, which are often devices are skipping that and they're, you'll see some lit, some not, 'cause that's not-- and, and so you're not using a dual light in that sense. And then And then all the way up to ten sixty, which the-- which is the deeper spectrum of near infrared light, which then gets into the center of the organs, center of the bones, which is why you'll see those ones show up in the prostate cancer studies or the bone cancer studies or lung cancer, they're all near infrared almost exclusively. And so then you're hitting all these levels at the same time from the shallow to the deepest area of the organs, stimulating the stem cell production in these areas to cause both the differentiation to create them is particularly within the bones, but then to- To mature them, which is called the proliferation is to create them, and then differentiation is to mature them. And so there the processes that you're seeing that you activate with using the broad spectrums, and then you're looking for something as well that delivers a high amount of irradiance, the, the amount of power delivered is then the critical factor for the studies that I was mentioning, and that's why we're using over two hundred milliwatts per centimeter squared at three inches, and that's why groups like I mentioned, like the Hope for Cancer Treatment Centers, who the, the chief medical officer I mean, he was the guy that put Olivia Newton John and Suzanne Summers' cancer in remission, and part of the reason why they then implemented our red light panels for their patient follow-up program is because you can't go to a center and then go home and then go back to your same environment. You need something that will continually work for you. This was the device I sent my grandma home with after she split her head. She got about sixteen stitches from cognitive function decline, and I think I know what was causing that with the interventions that she was being- Encouraged to get, which everyone was encouraged to get over the last few years after all my attempts and persuasion that didn't work, so then I went into the remedial aspects. But this is what she was using daily, which was able to then help her regain her cognitive function, move back into the home that my, my wife and I built for her, and be able to enjoy her life into a ripe old age of eighty-seven and get off her thyroid medication. So it's pretty simple, and, you know, this is what I got Lance Armstrong using right now and Some well-known folks. How close do you have to sit to them? Yeah ideally it would be even a centimeter away or, or three inches. Most people are standing like a foot away, but you'll get a more therapeutic recovery. And the, like the eyesight studies was directly against the eyeball, almost touching, if the University College London, you can see the images directly against their eyes. So you can get close, but you don't have to. You could work out a foot away from it, and you, which- Which means that you could be there longer as well, or two feet away from it, then you could be there longer, and ideally you're unclothed, so I'm not technically doing it properly. Near infrared will penetrate through the clothing, that's why it's going all the way through to your bones, but red will probably mostly get blocked by the clothing that you're wearing. But, you know, yeah, if you're wearing training gear or something like that, then you're, you're kind of minimally clothed, so you'll still get a lot of the benefits. That's fascinating. This is amazing. I mean, this is really fascinating. I've, I've seen this explosion, and it just-- I'm always fascinated whenever you have big pharma that's like trying to suppress this information because they want us on all of these drugs, they want us on all these pharmaceuticals, they don't want us to know about these natural curatives. and it's to me that means we're over the target, we're over the target for sure. Jonathan, any final thoughts on this? I think it's fascinating. Oh, thank you, And like I've seen people Clayton with like a simple device like this, right? This is an example of, I've got a lot of pro athletes, like guys like Tim Tebow, we, we do some of the anti-human trafficking work together, but he's, he's always traveling with this, right? Yeah, yeah, I think you know what he's doing. It's, it's amazing. Like for the last, you know, three years, I've been in a group, you know, advancing the tech companies fighting human trafficking, child trafficking and we're having tremendous success But this is an example, this has got five different wavelengths through triple lights here, but like, so I've seen people with nine out of ten back pain go to a zero which sounds unbelievable, but I've seen it a lot. And then, you know, I remember massage therapist Dee Dee, so that's what happened to her, and then- She couldn't work with that, so that's a forty-eight thousand dollars salary that she had to forego. But then through something that costs like a few hundred dollars, literally, like under four hundred dollars, she was able to get that and restore and go back to her work. And so I just want people to know that there's always a way and don't like what, and the, and the panels become the cheapest thing. I want, I want people to know that because like my grandma for her thyroid medication, what she, like I, I gave that, she's my grandma, Would have spent that money, like that year on her thyroid medication, and now, you know, over the next ten years, God willing, 'cause I-- that's my wife's grandma, right? My abuela. and but my grandma got her to ninety-eight years old. And so let's imagine she gets to that age or greater over the next ten years, that was twelve thousand dollars that she's gonna spend in thyroid medication, or you do the math on, on taking supplements, and it, it becomes very expensive. Not that I'm against that but you times better than the group that weren't taking the red light seven zero and fifteen times greater, it was a Hashimoto study as well for producing thyroid hormone and fifteen times greater at reducing medication needs. So my encouragement is to do a therapy, get a therapy that ends up becoming the cheapest thing you do. That, that, now that couple of supplements that you're taking a year is over the next ten years probably gonna cost you north of fifteen thousand dollars if you do the math every month. So then people make a saving by doing something like this, getting something like this in their home, the whole family Can use it, and so you do the math and you realize, "Wow, this is the cheapest thing I'm doing." And so I want people to do the math in their head so that they can make the right choices today and get therapies that will be preventative and substitute a lot of the things that they're spending money on that aren't really working properly. And and then that, that's my big encouragement, Clayton, for people. And, and, and as well, just so the audience are aware, we've got the codes available for twenty-five percent off discount on our Twenty-five percent off single items and reducted thirty for thirty percent off bundled items. So we've got a massive saving there for a limited time and, you know, we're subject to sell out because of the massive demand, but just so, you know, people have that now, so I want people to know to grab those savings. And there's payment plans there as well, so what it would cost for a month what it would cost for a month is what it would cost for a single session at a clinic. So I'm, I'm saying like, save money, get You can do it right before bed to get a better sleep or first thing in the morning, which the clinics aren't open then, right? So you make good choices like that, use the codes, redacted twenty-five, redacted thirty at myredlight dot com, so that's where to go, and use that at checkout and we can support you get the best health ever. And you know, I'm just excited Clayton, for the audience, you know, everyone that's watching this and the response and the, the, the, the transformation that's ahead Yeah, because this is this is a game changer. Yeah, I would love to hear how people are, are healed by this as well. Yeah, drop me a comment below for sure. Thank you for that. So redacted twenty-five, thank you. I didn't even know you were gonna do that. So really appreciate that. Well, Jonathan, great. it's been a pleasure meeting you, and thank you for your incredible research on this, and I'm excited to I'm excited to be standing in front of one of these every day in my home, that Let's make sure to follow up, and I, I wanna see you have this success that you're looking for. It just, yeah, it touches my heart that you want to, to have those improvements. I, I, I really care about that. I feel like that's a God-given gift when people really believe that something is possible, and they don't accept and settle for the status quo. And I see that in you, and I, and I al-always want to see people like that get the results that they're looking for because you deserve that, and so does everyone Thank you.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 7, 2026 at 1:02 AM

Saved - June 8, 2026 at 11:47 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

They are not just upgrading the internet. They are building a HUMAN CONTROL GRID. Frequencies, nanotech, brain signals, biometric targeting, and a battlefield you cannot even see. https://t.co/HIc4sY2CPp

Video Transcript AI Summary

The conversation argues that the symptoms being discussed are “symptomatic right now,” framing them as the result of “beta tests” and “a new form of war.” It claims that the United States, the UK, Russia, China, and India all have the relevant technology. The speaker then responds to a question about whether the affected American patients share political beliefs. They say that, instead of focusing on shared politics, they are relying on a report from *Surgical Neurology International* that describes microwave frequencies being used as a weapon of war. They also reference an article they read about China turning on “six G,” stating that in 6G it has the ability to read and manipulate the human brain. The discussion further claims that if someone has nanotech “in you,” they are “no longer considered human,” and introduces a new term for the human species: “Homo Borg Genesis.” The speaker concludes by saying that if this is imposed without consent and people are no longer considered human, “the debate is gonna come at some point here.”

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

This is all the reason we think those are symptomatic right now, those are the beta tests, and we're probably in a new form of war. The United States has this tech, the UK has this tech, Russia has this tech, China has this tech, India has this tech. Okay. New form of war. We'll have a link to this article in the description. Do you think that this-- so when you then, I mean, you're, you're just studying human beings, human patients, and you're looking at this cross section of these, these Americans who are having these symptoms, do they have some sort of political beliefs that are all in unison? You know, are they all- You know, that's what my, my, my brain immediately goes to. They were, they were all at like supporters of Black Lives Matter, you know what I mean? Like, what, what, anything common there that you've then analyzed? Well, no, I think when you read that report that Surg- Surgical Neurology International, it talks about how microwave frequencies are being utilized as a, as, as a weapon of war. It talks about the five G. China, yesterday we just r-read an article, they just turned on their six G. And in it, it says in the 6G, it's, it, they have the ability to read and manipulate the human brain with it. Okay? This is what we're facing. If you have this nanotech in you, you aren't longer considered human. There's a new term for the human species, Homo Borg Genesis. And my question to this, if this was basically imposed upon us without consent, and you're no longer considered human, the debate is gonna come at some point here.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 6, 2026 at 7:03 PM

Saved - June 7, 2026 at 3:35 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

⚠️ Netanyahu does not want U.S. aid to end. He wants it rebranded as a “partnership” so American taxpayers stay locked in forever. That is not America First. That is foreign entanglement by another name. @RepThomasMassie exposes the trap. https://t.co/Kcc0x2Lbhx

Video Transcript AI Summary

The speaker argues that withholding U.S. military funding for Israel—specifically the $2,000-pound bombs, guided munitions, and offensive weapons, and possibly not even continuing offensive weapon transfers for a week—would lead to a peace deal. The speaker claims this would also be immediately reflected in the U.S. economy, saying gas and diesel prices would drop five percent instantly once that happened, framing it as an “admission” that the war should never have been initiated. The speaker presents this as a way to “save American lives” and “put America first.” The speaker then says Benjamin Netanyahu is “one step ahead,” pointing to a letter posted online over the last few days in which Netanyahu calls for a new framework for aid to Israel. The letter, according to the speaker, reduces aid to Israel but reframes it as a “partnership,” with the idea that the relationship is not ended but “deepened.” The speaker describes the reframing as Israel presenting aid as an arrangement among equals rather than assistance, asserting, “don’t end the relationship, deepen it,” and “we’re actually equals, we’re partners,” implying that the U.S. would still provide resources while Israel accesses them under that new framing. The speaker criticizes the suggestion, saying it shows “hubris” and makes the speaker feel Netanyahu believes Americans work for him. The speaker concludes by stating that Netanyahu will likely get his way unless he changes the plan.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

I have suggested, and I believe this a hundred percent, if you would just withhold the funding for Israel, the military funding, the two thousand pound bombs, the guided munitions, the offensive weapons, I'm not even talking about the defensive weapons, if you would just withhold funding and transfer of the offensive weapons to Israel for a week, there would be a peace deal, and you could confirm that at your local gas station because the price of gas would-- and diesel would go down five percent instantly as soon as that happened, it would be a bruise to our ego So it would be an admission that we never should have initiated this war, but if that's what it takes to save American lives and to put America first, then that's what we should do. Right, but Benjamin Netanyahu is one step ahead of you. A letter was posted online over the last few days where he calls for a new framework for aid to Israel. It's reducing aid to Israel, but instead reframing it as a partnership. In other words, don't end the relationship, deepen it. You don't give us aid, we're actually equals, we're partners. The hubris of this suggestion is astounding, is just-- it, it makes me feel like he thinks we work for him. American taxpayers should be slaves, go to work, you will take that money, and we now have equal access to it. It makes me so mad. But until he, until he changes this plan, he's gonna get his way, don't you think?

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 5, 2026 at 11:30 PM

Saved - June 6, 2026 at 11:49 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

⚠️ This is how the AI dictatorship gets built. Data centers DRAIN the grid, SUCK up the water, CRUSH local communities, and when citizens FIGHT back, Washington invents a new extremist category to silence them. https://t.co/jAqrchb3bt

Video Transcript AI Summary

A Wired investigation described U.S. law enforcement circulating warnings about a category called “anti-tech violent extremism,” allegedly using unpublished reporting from the DHS, the FBI, and regional fusion centers. The term is said not to appear in publicly available DHS or FBI extremism guidance documents, and the transcript claims the new framing targets people who object to AI data centers—such as by opposing a “massive AI data center” planned for their backyard—by labeling them as domestic threats. Hakeem Anwar, CEO of Above Phone, discussed his work on a report about AI data centers across the United States. He said customers asked Above Phone to create an AI product, prompting due diligence on how such systems work and what risks companies face. He connected the growth of data centers beginning in 2022 with concerns that developers were violating environmental law and overriding local community decisions. He said many local organizations had limited information, and online inquiries were met with offers to sell information for $20,000 per year, so he pursued publicly available sources instead. Anwar described building “AI Data Center Map” (aidatacentermap.org) and an accompanying public report. He said the map uses “best academic estimations” and the same formulas researchers use to estimate water displacement, power use, and heat island effect. He said the goal is a visual tool for understanding what is happening locally and connecting with other concerned people. Zooming out, Anwar said the scale of spending is nationwide: “We spent two point five trillion dollars on data centers in twenty twenty-five.” He emphasized “hyperscale data centers,” which he distinguished from “conventional data centers,” describing them as “black triangles” on the map. He said hyperscalers are built “on top of major US aquifers” and that the most concentrated region is Virginia’s “Data Center Alley.” He claimed that in Virginia, data centers are using more than 25% of total power. He also cited concerns in Virginia, Texas (Central Texas and Northern Texas), and the Southwest. Anwar said local residents worry about health impacts and power and water availability. He claimed data center operators are not reporting water use and that transparency reports from major companies “are not even tracking the water.” He said there is “not even a meter on the huge pipe” used to pump water and referenced Lawrence Berkeley National Lab estimating that less than one third of data centers measure water consumption. He described concerns in Virginia about “four thousand backup diesel generators,” saying they emit carbon monoxide, nitrous oxide, and particulate matter comparable to nearby power plants. He said these generators normally run “thirty minutes a day,” but in grid emergency scenarios could run full time, producing “twenty times as much pollution.” On construction speed, Anwar said the map indicates about 41% of planned data centers are already progressing and that most will be built in the next 24 months. He claimed this would add 40, 50, and 54.7 gigawatts—doubling capacity by the end of 2027. He also said a new hyperscaler is “going live every four days” from then until the end of 2027. He claimed the operational power would rise from 53 gigawatts to about 202 gigawatts, “roughly forty percent of the entire power supply in the United States.” He said the power source is unclear and referenced grid capacity constraints in the PJM interconnection handling 13 states, which he said released emergency regulation to speed up data center buildouts because power studies were taking too long. He described options data centers may use, including being off-grid or building power plants on site (nuclear, solar, gas, or temporary gas turbines). He said the last auction in PJM did not meet margins for safe power supply. Anwar connected the data center race to an “AI as nuclear weapon” framing and to an AI-driven cyber conflict context. He cited discussions including Dario Amodei of Anthropic and said China’s frontier AI timeline is portrayed as close. He also said Chinese local outlets reported that in 2025, 80% of China’s data centers are idle. Asked about a possible “AI bubble,” Anwar said investors (besides “the biggest players”) could “lose a lot of money” and described an expectation of unused “ghost towns” of AI data centers. For action, he said one step is using devices without pervasive AI surveillance and advised people to connect with local efforts. He discussed Above Phone’s “wise phone,” describing it as not surveilling users and as not having an AI layer inside the phone, unlike operating-system-embedded AI on other devices. He said Above Phone uses GrapheneOS, which he described as lacking a “big tech layer,” and claimed there is “no way to permanently turn off” embedded AI on other platforms.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Well, here we go again. If you speak out against something the government is doing, you could be labeled a domestic terrorist. The federal government has apparently found a brand new category of domestic threats. Not cartel violence, you know, not Wall Street fraud, not the people poisoning our food or bankrupting our country, spying on Americans, dragging us into endless wars. No, those people are fine. No, no, the new threat is you. If you don't want a massive AI data center built in your backyard or you speak out against it You are the problem, according to a brand new report out of Wired magazine and their investigation, more than one thousand pages of unpublished reports from DHS, the FBI, and regional fusion centers show that the US law enforcement agencies are now circulating warnings about something they're calling anti-tech violent extremism. That's the phrase, anti-tech violent extremism. And Wired says this term doesn't appear to publicly, in any publicly available DHS or FBI document guides on extremism, it's not there. Which means this is new. This is a newly emerging category being built inside their surveillance state in the Trump administration. So if you don't want a giant data center in your backyard Because of what it's gonna do to the ecology, what it's gonna do to the noise pollution, what it's gonna do to the energy infrastructure, then you could be labeled a domestic terrorist. Our next guest has written a brand new massive report on AI data centers across the United States, and it's incredibly eye-opening and disturbing. We'll make sure we have a link. in the description box for you to all read it. Our guest is Hakeem Anwar, he's the CEO of Above Phone, and he's written this brand new AI ecology report, and we're thrilled to have him back on the show. Great to have you back. Clayton, it's good to be back. How are you? I'm doing great. Great to see you. Welcome back to the show. So, yeah, you know, wanna dive into your AI ecology report here, but just before we get into all of that and what you've uncovered. you've been of course, obviously on the front lines of warning about this government surveillance, obviously at Above Phone, that's, that's what you guys do you know, making sure we have computers and phones that aren't being surveilled in that way. So thank you for that. just first on your thoughts on this wired, wired investigation, and if you're speaking out against these AI data centers, then you're on their watch list. Yeah, it's, it's, it's alarming, right? This, this news from a few days ago, and it just shows you how fast this is evolving. It also shows you that people are, are pushing back. I think from that report, they're, they're paying attention to who shows up locally in the Zoning the zoning hearings and any hearings about data centers, they're tracking who is showing up, and they're also on the lookout for people who are Using violence to achieve their goals, which is, you know, sometimes that can happen. These people who are misguided think that violence is the only way to achieve their goals, and I just wanna, I, we have to, now we have to preface the whole conversation by saying, hey, that's not what we're trying to do here. this is about peaceful action and awareness, not tearing things down. Right. It's about empowering people with information. and just because, you know, you don't want this thing in your backyard because of what might it do to your environment, your energy bills, your water supply, all of it doesn't make you a bad person, it makes you an American who's standing up for liberty, and it's making it's also that's part of our DNA in this country. So let's talk about your new report. And what was the impetus? First of all, tell us about just at a high level this report and what was the impetus for wanting to put this together? Yeah, so last year, our customers asked us to make an AI product, and part of our due diligence, I mean, we, we already have made a lot of other products for email, calendar, video conferencing, so as part of this, I wanted to look at how do you do this? And what is the risk? And what are other companies doing? And then just, just even immediately, I, I realized there was a major crisis coming. This is kind of when people were starting to, to see the spread of data centers in 2022. Twenty-five, and they're popping up everywhere. I got to see accounts of them violating environmental law and just completely overriding what local communities want. So there, there was something more there, so I started to reach out to academics and local orgs and was trying to answer the question, how much water and power do these things actually use? most of these orgs were working with limited information. Data center developers are very secretive. when I tried to look for more information online, companies would offer to sell it to me for only twenty thousand dollars a year, right? So cheap. So I said, "No, I think we can do better from public sources." So we didn't end up creating an AI product, but we built this thing called AI Data Center Map. I'll bring it up here. Its website is aidatacentermap.org. It's public, it's a free resource, the data will be free forever along with the report, and it will let you drill down to what is happening in your local area. You can go into a particular place and click on an area, and it will tell you how much water is being displaced through our best academic est-estimations. I'm using the same formulas and numbers researchers are using the power displacement and also the heat island effect Which is how much hotter they make the surrounding area. So this is meant to be a public service for you to get a visual of what's going on in your area and maybe even connect with some other concerned people. And that's a i data centers dot org. A i data center map dot org. Map dot org. Okay. And so what, what areas stood out to you? What areas of concern stood out to you after putting all of this aggregate data together? Yeah, well, it's, it's it's a, it's an issue that it's affecting the whole country. Like, just to, just to zoom out a little bit, right? So we spent two point five trillion dollars on data centers in twenty twenty-five. With that amount of money, we could have built a nationwide high-speed rail network or, you know, done some crazy things. We could have renewed our public infrastructure, we could have solved homelessness, but no, we spent it on hyperscalers, and it's these hyperscale data centers That are the scary ones. I'm not talking about conventional data centers on the map. These are the, the black triangles, right, that are popping up all over. And as you can see, Clayton, it's, it's pretty well distributed everywhere. right now what you're seeing is hyperscalers on top of major US aquifers. the most concentrated area of the United States is definitely in Virginia it's called Data Center Alley for that reason. and already In, in Virginia, their data centers are using more than twenty-five percent of the total power. So there are pockets everywhere, but for some really bad areas are Virginia Texas, Central Texas and Northern Texas, and then also the Southwest. That's remarkable. Twenty-five percent of the available power is going to those data centers, and I didn't realize-- I guess I didn't realize that Virginia, that area, had become quite a corridor. For data centers, what are local people saying about it there? Yeah, so I mean, people are, are very worried about the health impacts and, not to mention the power and water. just, just a little sidebar is, is, so these data centers aren't reporting how much water they are using. And when I looked at the transparency reports for Google and Meta and some of these big companies, it turns out they're not even tracking the water. So there's not even a meter on the huge pipe they use to pump up water. they're not even tracking, they're using their best estimates, and so we don't really know how much water they're pulling out. Lawrence Berkeley National Lab estimates that less than one third of their, of data centers are measuring their water consumption, and so they're not measuring their entire fleet, which is a big danger. but people in Virginia are already starting Starting to suffer from the health impacts. So people are worried about the four thousand backup diesel generators that are in this area of, of Virginia. there have been studies to show that now they are sending these-- these are just backup diesel generators, and they're sending as much, if not more, carbon monoxide, nitrous oxide, and, and particulate matters as nearby power plants. But get this, these are, these are just backups, so they're only running thirty minutes a day. If there is a grid emergency scenario, they would ask these data centers to run these generators full time, and they generate twenty times as much pollution. So that's a really scary situation to be in. How quickly are these data centers being built? I saw a viral video this week, I'm sure all of us did, about this gentleman working for a-- at a Tesla robotics factory. I don't know if we can- you know, we wanna conflate the two, but he pointed out, he said they have, they have us on twelve-hour shifts, and we're working seven days a week, and we're building these as quickly as we can, and we're building as quickly as, and quickly as possible. these data centers are popping up so fast, how, how quickly are they being built? It is extremely rapid, and I mean, this map that we're looking at is one of the best sources of information. So using this, the, the data off of this map we're seeing that we're already about forty-one percent Through the planned data centers but we're looking at most of the data centers being built in the next twenty-four months. So we're going to add forty, fifty-four point seven gigawatts, which is doubling the current amount of data centers by the end of twenty twenty-seven. Just to put it in perspective, a new hyperscaler is going live every four days from now until the end of twenty twenty-seven. So, yeah, it's- We're moving extremely fast. We're about to double the amount of data centers, even a little bit more than double, 'cause if only forty-one percent, so about fifty-nine percent, we're about to double that capacity in the next year? We're doubling the number of these hyperscale data centers, we're actually quadrupling the amount of power that they're using. Right now, we're at this is my estimate, and so, you know, people can push back if they have better numbers, but we're at fifty-three gigawatts of operational power, which is around, you know Thirty, thirty to forty million US homes, and we're going to go to a hundred and fifty additional gigawatts, so we're gonna be at a total of two hundred two gigawatts. This is roughly forty percent of the entire power supply in the United States. Where are we getting this power from? You know I don't think anyone's answered that, and I think that the stability of the elect-electric grid will suffer. We're already seeing in, in some areas here, kind of in Data Center Alley, over here, there's a interconnection grid called PG&M, which actually is a interstate grid. It handles thirteen states. They've had to release emergency regulation so that, not to, not to protect- People, but to ensure that these data centers can continue to get built because doing the power studies was taking too long. You know, when you wanna hook one of these things up, you have to do a study of, "Hey, is the power still gonna be reliable?" and they do them in batches, okay, so, hey, here's these new demands and new supply on the grid, what's gonna happen? So these were taking so long that they gave data centers creative new ways to bundle their own power. One is that they can- Be completely off the grid, although that's very unlikely. Unlikely. Two, is they're actually building power plants directly on site. So this could be things like nuclear or solar or gas plants or even temporary gas turbines, as some companies like X have been making popular. So they're giving them ways to shortcut their power supply in the short term while they build the longer term power infrastructure. but, you know, just to say that the last auction that PJM had, they weren't even able to meet the margin for safe power supply. So there was so much demand, there, the, the grid isn't even able to supply it. So it's unclear to me where, where the power is gonna come from. Yeah, these small nuclear reactors, like companies like NNE or SMR, I mean, is, is that the future here? Because how are we gonna be able to support this? And Americans are wondering, what is this gonna do to their bills, their electric bills? Are they gonna be cut off from that, separated from it, so it will have no effect? You know, you heard Kevin O'Leary on his interview with Tucker Carlson a few weeks ago saying that he didn't see that this wasn't gonna affect people's power bills at all, that they would-- the companies themselves Or they'd be open to paying to offset those costs. Do you believe that? I think if they are gonna build their own electric infrastructure, then keep them off grid, we'll see how that works out. No, it's, I, I, there's, there's no way in hell, right? There's, there's no way in hell that they're gonna build all this power themselves and the, the costs are gonna be passed down to the consumers. You know, already Bloomberg reported this like early this year, last year. That prices in some of these dense spots have already tripled, electric prices have tripled, and I'm sure you heard that story in Nevada where a power company is just saying, "Hey, we're not gonna be able to supply you fifty thousand homes with energy, we're gonna do this data center instead, so you're gonna have to figure something else out." So it's I, I do think it's another way to push people towards you will own nothing and be happy. This is one of the only things we have left, is our power and our water. So we have to do everything in our power to, to raise awareness about this. I mean, it's insane. And now, you know, y-y, I keep seeing videos from people saying like, you know, create your own water supply at your house, companies like Altitude and otherwise, like, you know, Just buy a thirty thousand dollar water purification system that just pulls it from the air. you know, where are people gonna get thirty thousand dollars just to be able to get their own water supply because these companies are taking all the water and they're taking all the electricity? it's-- I don't think people understand what's coming. this has really become like a national security issue for the United States of America, like this is part of President Trump's plan now really for like national security, having these data and AI centers for the future future of warfare everything in the United States is all tied to the future of these data centers and so Americans are really being pushed to the side here because now it's a national security issue, and if you criticize it, sorry, that's, that's tough. You're not gonna, you have to deal with it. It's a national security issue, and you're lucky, by the way, and actually many of these families are now dealing with eminent domain. These companies coming in in Georgia and otherwise coming in and taking their homes in order to build these data centers. Sorry, we're taking your house, tearing it down, and building a data center. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. So like, why, why are they doing this? It comes down to that question, and, and you brought up the AI war the cyber AI war that our govern- government is currently preparing for. you know, not just the organizations like NIST, but people like Dario, CEO of Anthropic, one of the most popular AI models out there. So like, they're, they're act-- like they're, they're talking about this AI as if it was a nuclear weapon. So when Kevin O'Leary got put on the spot by Tucker Carlson, that's what he said, "Should we just let China build all these data centers and get ahead of us in the AI race?" So we're living through another Cold War. It's not just Kevin saying this, it's also Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, who has said that he- He likes to say, "Hey, China is only eight months behind us in frontier AI." And Anthropic they, they have gone through a, the first AI orchestrated cyber espionage campaign which didn't require any human intervention, and they used, the attackers used Claude. I guess they suspect that this is a foreign adversary like China. So this is, this is kind of the explanation why they're racing to build these things. However, it's very, very- Very short-sighted. China's already gone through this boom, they've tried to build their data centers, and now in twenty twenty-five local Chinese outlets are reporting that eighty percent of the data centers in China are sitting completely idle. They don't even have a customer. So how do we expect in America that we're gonna fill these data centers when more people in China are using AI and robotics? So that, okay, that's interesting. does-- that leads me to my question about this, quote, unquote, AI bubble that we could be about to experience in the United States. You keep hearing rumblings about it, that we are about to see a collapse in the US stock market, we're gonna see a big collapse, and the AI bubble is gonna be at the heart of it. A lot of overvalued companies burning through revenue, that you're burning through money that they don't have, and it's all fake. So when you look at China and you have No one's using them. Do you think the same thing is about to happen in the US? I, I think so. I think that a lot of people who invested in these data centers, besides maybe the biggest players, are going to lose a lot of money, and it's, it's very, very short-sighted why they would build this. I think that there is something happening behind the scenes to encourage people to build this. I know that there's a lot of incompetence and greed in our economy today, but- Not even they can be this stupid. China has six hundred million people there already using AI. They have more people using AI than we have using the internet here in the US. They're also very far ahead on robotics and self-driving cars, that's a norm in China. If they're not using all of their AI compute, they're not even close to. There's just no way we're ever gonna reach that. It's never meant to be for consumers. Now, there might be another reason But it's not meant for consumers. So they're not using this AI compute they've overbuilt and, but they're using more AI than we are. So the disparity seems obvious here, you know, in the US, we're gonna have all these data centers that are gonna be ghost towns, and then they'll make movies about it. You know, you'll drive through certain little towns and you're gonna see this, "Oh, what's that? Oh, that was a data-- Remember, remember in twenty twenty-six?" That was a data center that was built. Did anyone ever use it? No, no one ever used it. And now it's a ghost town. You know, that's what you're gonna see, like ghost towns of AI data centers everywhere. There, there's no doubt about that. there's, there, I mean, there's way too many of these things. This is my personal opinion, but I think we could do without ninety percent of these data centers more, more than ninety. And just to give people some scale, think about this. Before twenty twenty-five, all of Google and all of Microsoft's data centers around the planet totaled four gigawatts each, right? So the entire data centers for these companies across the planet Four gigawatts, they use this to support billions upon billions of people and, you know, these aren't AI data centers, but they were running AI services for people, and it was completely fine. So how do we go from four gigawatts for an entire global infrastructure to nine gigawatts for a single data center? Some people say that it could be that this is what is needed to roll out the next phase of surveillance. Predictive policing. So that's also a pretty plausible theory. So one of the things that I've been grappling with, and you're hearing discussions from friends of the show like David Ike and others who are saying, "We're, we're moving towards this like transhumanist agenda, this merging of AI with- Human beings. And how do we stop this? I mean, how do we-- Do we just completely go dark and move out to Wyoming somewhere in a farm? and it seems pretty darn dark and nefarious if you see like the, the demonic people that run Washington, DC, and the people that are involved in our intelligence communities, absolutely the, some of the darkest people. So I guess I'll ask you the maybe esoteric question, why do you think this is happening? I think it's the opportunity to reconnect with, with nature, and it's kind of a sad part about human nature is that sometimes things have to be threatened for us to get, to get, for, for us to care. So for me, when I started, I, I had no idea how an aquifer worked or how, you know, my water got to me, up into my house, and this, it, it being threatened actually got me to care. It now, now, it's- I see the beauty of how these systems, how Mother Nature is, is sustaining all life. There's this ground that sits underneath there's this water that sits underneath the ground for thousands of years just waiting for us to pull it up to the surface, and we have to take care of the planet just as it is taking care of us. I know that is kind of weird, it sounds like maybe liberal for me to say it, but I think that, that's one of the areas where the left is doing a really good job in fighting back, and Kicked out of their country. And finally, I think this is a reason that both the left and the right can rally around and, and work together, 'cause at the end of the day, we're all, we're all just humans living on this planet. So I think I think with that being said, there's a lot that you can do. One is to kick out the AI that's on your local devices and two, just to get connected with the efforts that are happening locally, and that's what I wanna do with this map. Right now, it's just giving you information about the data centers, but soon there'll be a way to adopt a data center, so you'll be able to come into any one of these, and there'll actually be a button here to say, "Hey, get connected with your local organization," and it'll take you directly to their website. So, you know, we're finding that people are remembering how to get involved with their local community again. You have to, you have to keep our county and city officials accountable. You have to tell them Hey, we live here too. This is, this is our land. I think, and you're seeing this movement, you know, among young people now. I, I just saw a report like last week, people are moving away from regular smartphones, and they're moving to dumb phones. Like the younger generation, they don't want smartphones, they're buying those old flip phones and, and so forth. I mean, and at the heart of it, obviously what you guys do at Above Phone, which is not making them dumb, but removing a lot of that, all of that Craft that gets us caught up in this AI ecology and so I love that what you guys do. You guys just pushed out a new big update, right? Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, we, we like to call it a wise phone. So it's, it's, it's smart, but it's, it's wise. So we have been around for five years now, and this is a phone that can do anything your normal phone can do. Here, I'll bring it up on screen. This is what it looks like. So right, you've got all your apps Here, you've got different app stores that you can use, but the most important part of this is that one, it's not surveilling you, two, there's no AI layer inside the phone. If you're working with a Google or Samsung or iPhone, it turns out they rolled out an update and now AI is embedded into the operating system. There's no way to turn it off, and there's ways to try and disable it. I cover these in the report, so download that. If you'd like, but there's no way to permanently turn it off. So people need to realize, even if they're ideologically opposed to these data centers, their phones are justifying their existence. So to start to use open source software like the Above phone, which is running GrapheneOS, that doesn't have a big tech layer on it, and you can do pretty much everything that you normally do. You can even you can even watch YouTube, right? We can go to Redacted. And we can download those videos directly to our device, right? You can play them in the background, you can get this without ads, and again, there's no AI, there's no digital ID running in it. So we really need to we need to take matters in our own hands and build a network of free technology to serve as the alternative. So I really like what the kids are doing with their dumb phones, and I think they're solutions for for everyone at every level. Well, I love the above phone I have one and I use it, so thank you so much for that. if people wanna grab the report, I'll put it in the description of today's show so people can grab it and learn more about these data centers and what this is what this is doing to the local ecology and get connected and start fighting back against all of this before we lose ourselves, before it's too late because we're getting pretty darn close to that at this moment, I think. Hakeem, thank you so much. really appreciate you joining us here. Thank you for the report and all the hard work that you guys did on this. Clayton. It's a pleasure. Thanks, thanks for everything that you're doing. Thanks for having me on. Thanks to everyone who's watching. Appreciate it, Hakeem. Well, today's show is brought to you by Mindwalk Holdings, and their ticker symbol is right here on your screen, it's H Y F T, and they're on the Nasdaq. And look, this is one of those companies sitting right now at the center of the two hottest trends in the market, artificial intelligence and drug discovery, because big pharma has a massive problem on its hand. Developing new drugs can take ten years, cost billions of dollars, so the question is, who can use AI to shorten that timeline, lower those costs, and actually find Targets faster. That's where Mindwalk comes in. They call it the bio-native AI, and this isn't just some generic, like, chatbot that's like slapped on medical data. Mindwalk has patented HYFT technology, its lens AI platform, and a full wet lab to validate what the AI finds then in the real world. And here's the validation point that jumped out to me: AMD, yes, that AMD, featured Mindwalk in an official case study. Study on AMD dot com. MineWalk runs Lens AI using AMD Instinct and their GPUs, their MI three hundred X GPUs and AMD EPYC CPUs. That's some serious infrastructure. They also have relationships across nineteen of the top twenty global pharmaceutical companies, according to Jones Research. They just signed their first one year recurring Lens AI SaaS contract with a major, major pharma client. That means because recurring- Software revenue is what Wall Street tends to reward. Their latest quarter showed revenue up fifty-two percent year over year to four point two million, that's US, and their revenue doubled, gross margin hit fifty-nine percent, and they had fourteen point two million dollars in cash. Jones Research initiated coverage with a buy rating and has a five dollar price target. The stock has been trading around a dollar thirty, so this is still a true micro-cap territory stock right now. Now, this isn't financial advice, so do your own research, understand the risks, especially with micro-cap stocks, and check out Mindwalk Holdings, their ticker symbol here on your screen, once again, HYFT, and do your research, they are on the Nasdaq.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 5, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - June 6, 2026 at 12:42 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🚨 Ukraine may have just made a FATAL mistake. Striking Russia during the St. Petersburg Economic Forum, with 20,000 attendees from 130 countries, could trigger the kind of response the world has feared. @ProfessorPape lays it out. https://t.co/23PoQYtUei

Video Transcript AI Summary

Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Rabkinov said that documents related to attacks on Saint Petersburg could prompt Russia to use nuclear weapons in a worst-case scenario, including against countries that possess nuclear weapons, not only against Ukraine. The transcript argues that NATO is launching the attacks and that Ukraine lacks nuclear weapons. The claims are tied to events during the Saint Petersburg International Economic Forum, attended by over 130 countries and more than 22,000 people. The transcript describes drone strikes beginning as the forum was taking place, including video said to show drones crossing the city and targeting a highly populated civilian area. It also cites reports of a civilian bus being attacked and states seven civilian casualties and eleven injured from a Ukrainian Armed Forces drone strike. The discussion contrasts Russia’s nuclear signaling with President Volodymyr Zelensky’s stance that he has been open to peace negotiations and is meeting with NATO head Mark Rutte. The transcript criticizes Zelensky’s messaging style, reiterates that he continues promoting NATO membership, and describes his warning that “big trouble” would come if Ukraine is denied membership. It also says Zelensky claims readiness for direct negotiations with Putin while purportedly maintaining obstacles to those talks. Professor Robert Pape, director of the Chicago Project on Security and Threats at the University of Chicago, argues that an “escalation trap” has been unfolding for about three years, with parallels to earlier dynamics seen in other conflicts. He says Putin pursued what he expected to be a quick victory but Ukraine “stiffened,” and that both sides have nearly irreconcilable objectives. Pape highlights that Putin has nuclear weapons and that Ukraine now has the capability to strike deep into Russia, which he frames as making escalation extremely dangerous. The transcript connects escalation risk to Ukraine’s increased drone capacity, stating Ukraine has drone manufacturing capabilities and that donor involvement—specifically mentioning Jennifer Pritzker—is part of how drone production and precision targeting have expanded. It emphasizes that drones are relatively inexpensive and that smaller funding streams could still enable effective drone campaigns, describing long-distance precision and the ability to steer drones directly into targets. The conversation also draws parallels to the Iran conflict, describing how the use of drones disrupted business and civilian-linked activities around the Gulf and how the Saint Petersburg Economic Forum is likened to Russia’s “Davos,” with an aim described as disrupting strategic investors rather than targeting the forum’s attendees directly. Pape and others argue for restraint and off-ramps to prevent being dragged into escalation traps. The transcript argues that Europe should push for a clear line to end the war, comparing it to ending the Korean War through a defined line of contact rather than leaving it to the decision of one party. It claims the “line of contact” has not moved meaningfully over several years and says Europe should publicly decide what line it supports, tying funding to an armistice and freezing the conflict. The transcript also references the idea that an earlier peace framework around the Ankara agreement was scuttled, and it concludes by arguing that without a defined settlement line, multiple actors keep escalation traps active, with repeated calls to ask why Europe and others are not publicly demanding the needed end conditions.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Well, Russia says that it may respond with nuclear weapons to the attacks on Saint Petersburg that happened today. Here is Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Rab- Rabkinov. That's probably not right. he said, to put it straightforwardly, these documents send a signal that encroachments on Russia and its territory by aggressors, including those who may possess such weapons, could prompt us to use these weapons in the worst case scenario, meaning nuclear weapons. So- So he's not just saying we could use nuclear weapons against Ukraine, he's saying we could justify using them against other countries who have nuclear weapons. Now, obviously, it's N-NATO that's launching these attacks on Saint Petersburg. Ukraine doesn't have the capability to do that themselves. Ukraine also doesn't have nuclear weapons. NATO countries do. NATO countries are the aggressors here. Now, this comes as Ukraine began striking at Russia during the Saint Petersburg International Economic Forum, which is hosting attendees from- Over one hundred thirty countries, it includes over two hun-- twenty thousand people. Here is video of the drone strikes in Saint Petersburg today that began to be launched just as this forum was taking place. So you can see the drone coming clear across the city. This is obviously a highly populated civilian territory. we also have video of a bus, a civilian bus, that was attacked in Russia as well we're having reports of seven civilian casualties plus eleven injured by Ukrainian Armed Forces drone strike. Now, obviously, Russians are getting pretty tired of this, and the Putin government knows it. Well, at the same time, Zelensky, Ukrainian president Zelensky, is saying, "But I've been open to peace negotiations all along. I've always wanted peace." He is meeting with the head of NATO, Mark Rutte, today. He did basically the same thing he always does when Europe Class of idiots come to visit. He makes videos showing off his acting skills, highly edited, heartstring-pulling videos, solemn tributes to the soldiers he sent to their deaths, once again portraying himself as the tragic war hero of the war he refuses to end. We're gonna watch as much of this as we can stomach. It's about 40 seconds. I probably can take about 20, but roll it. Okay, that's good. You get the picture. You can find these kinds of things for the last three years on Zelensky's social stream. Who buys this? Well, mostly European politicians eager to applaud him and then send European taxpayer funds into his pocket. He continued his pitch to join NATO, said that big trouble would come if Ukraine is again denied membership. He says even Russia should want us to be a part of NATO. Listen. I believe Russians also need Ukraine to be in NATO, because in the future it could be painful if Ukraine isn't in NATO. And then, warning, eyebrow raise. You see what he means there? Okay, it's already painful, but okay. He pretends to be open to peace negotiations, but we know the terms of that. You can watch that here. He's ready for direct negotiations with Putin, he says. So he's been saying that for years. He doesn't mean it because he continues to put obstacles in the way. So claiming to want peace while escalating the war and killing civilians is familiar and dangerous. Joining us to discuss it is Professor Robert Pape. He's the director of the Chicago Project on Security and Threats at the University of Chicago and author of Escalation Trap on Substack and feels like that's exactly what we're doing. This is an escalation trap. We've seen this play out for now three years. What are we to make of it now? It feels increasingly dangerous. I'm really glad you're covering it because with all the coverage of the Iran war, I think much of your audience may have even forgotten there is this ongoing war with Ukraine and Russia. and the frameworks that I've been describing here with the escalation trap apply absolutely squarely to what's happened here. we need to go back and remember- Remember that the war started over four years ago when Putin thought he was gonna get a quick and decisive victory at Ukraine, attacked thinking he was gonna topple the government in just a few days. Doesn't that sound familiar? and instead, what happened is Ukraine didn't collapse, Ukraine stiffened, and now Ukraine is lashing back in its own horizontal escalation campaign, and you're in a wicked escalation trap here. It's been going on for years. Both sides also have nearly irreconcilable objectives if they want their maximum objectives. Doesn't that also sound familiar? And both sides have engaged in often on, you know diplomacy through Trump mostly, and what doesn't that sound al-also familiar? So this trap here has got both of them, that is, Zelensky and Putin, squarely in its grip. And it is incredibly dangerous because Putin has nuclear weapons. So this is one of the reasons why several years ago, the United States wasn't so keen on giving Ukraine the power to strike deep into the heart of Russia. It, it has that now. It has drones it's built on its own for the most part. and now what you see is that of course Putin is talking about defending his country, and he has nuclear weapons. So this is a very- Very, very dangerous escalation trap. Well, and this is a crossing of Putin's red line in many ways. The attack on the Saint Petersburg Economic Forum, and, you know, there is discontent within Russia about putting an end to this war but you have this massive NATO support, and it seem-- you know, Ukraine has basically mortgaged its future, right? So they've, how many loans now to the IMF, the World Bank, ninety billion dollar boondoggle with the with the demons that run the European Union to now bring- And these Gripen fighter jets from Sweden, as Colonel Douglas McGregor pointed out yesterday on this show, Sweden better watch out because forget the fighter jets arriving inside of Ukraine, what about the factories that are manufacturing those fighter jets? And if NATO really wants to play this game in escalating further with Putin, they are about to get hit hard. I, I don't-- to me, it seems like we're at a tipping point moment right now. well, I don't know if we're at I, I understand why we're, we're at a tipping point moment with Putin and his nuclear threats, but let me just point out what we're really seeing here, which is similar to Iran. What we're seeing is Ukraine, on its own, has a tremendous drone manufacturing capability. In fact, I know a little bit about that because I, here, I live in Chicago, as many of your listeners will know, and one of the big donors to- To the drone is not the US government, and it's not the European government, it's Jennifer Pritzker. That is, drones are so cheap, it's very important, just as we talked about this with Iran, drones are so cheap that Ukraine, with donor help, has been able to build factories, drone factories, et cetera, et cetera. So this isn't just simply about, well, the United States has got to stop funding and then Europeans stop funding. That, that's, there's a- The big-- there's issues there. I don't really mean to say they aren't there, but that's where the media discussion has been for years. What the media is missing Much as we missed with Iran before the Iran War, is that increasingly Ukraine has a lot of wherewithal on its own, and this is making things very dangerous. It makes it dangerous for Europe. I, I'm not saying this makes it better. The problem we have, though, I just wanna come back, is these are Ukraine-produced drones. These aren't European-given to Ukraine drones. Well, no, that's a very important point. But would we call that given? That it's funneled through the Pritzker family, Jennifer Pritzker, who served as a man in the US military, now has a military foundation that is US funded well, actually, so I, I don't know the full details. So that's getting into things beyond my knowledge about the exact wire diagram. I, I know about this because this issue has been prominent in the city of Chicago, and so I've been at dinners and so forth and so on, and she's very public at least has been about her support. And the reason I'm but I'm, I'm bringing it up, not because I know the details here of the finances, what I'm bringing up is to show how- Relatively small amounts of money, and I don't know the full amounts that this donor is giving, but this donor isn't giving a hundred million billions of dollars here. So what you're, what you're seeing is relatively small amounts of money, and there's probably a number of donors that are doing that can go a long way in supporting these drone campaigns, and they're very precise. So your video showed just how precise. In fact, they have these forward-looking where you're- You're able to literally at long distances, drive the drone because of the way the, that, the drone technology works, literally right into the target, like you're going into the pickle barrel. And that is stunning because we used to think only a large power like the United States could do that. Well, now we're seeing it here with Iran, we've been seeing it with Ukraine for a while, and I think we're just not yet fully able to come to grips with the fact that Ukraine on its own is escalating here, and it's escalating with its own capability. Wow, no, that's a, that's a great point. I mean, a lot of focus has been on NATO and the amounts of money coming in from European countries and IMF loans, World Bank loans, and all of these other things, but on a smaller scale, when they can get access to these drones It's, you know, it's, it's, it's devastating. before we switch to- Yeah, and I will be saying more about this, by the way here on my, my Substack. You know, you, you probably don't-- No, I actually have, I inadvertently created two. I have this Professor Pape one, and so that's the one I'll talk about Ukraine and things like that on, keeping the other one for Iran. But the, there are some similar points here, but they need to be sort of developed in some depth, because as And as they are, what's the relationship of the United States to these conflicts? Absolutely critical, I don't dispute that for a moment. But I think there are some other frameworks here that are very, very helpful because I am very concerned about the prospects of escalation that are happening here between Putin and, and Ukraine. I think that this is not at all a good idea that right, that Ukraine is attacking these essentially strategic targets because Putin isn't going to just sit there and- And keep taking it, and he unfortunately could move down that road, and, you know, this is, he's, he's talked a lot about nuclear threats in the past. I, this isn't a, an implausible scenario, right? But a lot of this is Western funded, so we can't let ourselves off the hook. I mean, I, in, as early as 2015, the IMF warned Ukraine, "Stop the genocide on the Donbass, or we're not gonna loan to you anymore." But they continued to loan So Ukraine has taken this Western money and funneled it into their weapons programs, and now they're sort of a dog off the leash, and yet we continue the funding. Well, and Zelensky just admitted two hundred billion dollars that we, we gave them. I don't know where it is. I'm sorry. Well, to all these corrupt individuals who managed to get all this money, where's this money, this massive money laundering operation that's run through Ukraine? There is an incredibly strong case. What you're essentially, I would put it in slightly more my, my terms of re- Restraint. I think you're making a very strong case for restraint here, and you're saying that the idea of just willy-nilly supporting and so forth often can be counterproductive. I think that's an extremely strong case here. And as the escalation grows here, which it could well do, this isn't good for us to get trapped in somebody else dragging us in. So also just to bring another parallel, so you recall with the Iran One war we're often talking about, did Israel drag us into an escalation trap? That's one of the other big argument or discussion points we have. Well, here you have another case where there's Ukraine. Is Ukraine dragging us into dot dot dot? You see, so the parallels here are really quite striking, and it's important to see that these frameworks have been developing here and sharing now with lots of, lots of m- many people. They're, they're not just unique to the situation Right, but just, you know, Ukraine doesn't seem to be as strategic as you give them credit for. I'm just curious about that because we just showed them hitting a civilian bus. And so, you know, it, it's, it, it's along the lines of those of us who have studied the genocide in the Donbass. The, the, those aren't, those aren't, those are civilian targets. They've been hitting civilian targets for two decades. Oh, okay, hold on now. Yeah, I'm not at all justifying what they're doing on any moral case whatsoever. Just wanna be clear. But let me explain the, the likely strategic logic, which is similar to when Iran used its drones to get rid of the luxury tourism in the Gulf states. So When Iran was using drones, it didn't just hit military bases in the Gulf, it was also hitting some hotels, it was also hitting airports. Remember, shut down a lot of air traffic over the Gulf. In fact, it just hit Kuwait Airport again here just overnight. The what that's about here, and I'm not defending it, so please, I, please don't take explanation as moral defense. I'm just trying to show you what I think they're thinking, which is that what they're thinking is they wanna disrupt business. Well, Petersburg Forum is essentially Russia's Davos. I mean, this is the the area where there's lots of strategic investors here you know, billionaire, I mean, lots of money here, and those billionaires, the last thing they wanna is, is eat a drone. so that's not what they're up for. Right. Right. Okay. So, so when I'm-- So when you say what's the logic, it, it is I think it's horrible that states attack civilians. I, I'm not defending this for a second, but the, the reason is they, they think they're disrupting that business, much the way Iran was disrupting and actually did achieve disruption of some luxury business. Right. I think that probably your point is well taken. We under-estimate the power of- The pockets behind Ukraine, the, the-- because we sort of see them as this, you know, nation of gangsters but they're well-funded gangsters. Well, there's a bigger point I'm gonna make here in just a few hours on this live briefing on my Professor Paye Substack, which is that we're moving to a new world, you see, and this is gonna be hard because we don't wanna have a world that's so unstable. But what you're really seeing is and it's- It's not just a consequence of the Iran War, 'cause after all Ukraine started before Iran. But what you're really seeing is a number of factors are coming together, and that's what I'm really gonna be articulating here that are making it so that it's, there's a common set of instabilities that are now spreading in different regions of the world, and unfortunately, they can spread even further, you see. So we're not-- we're, we're, we're used to thinking that instability is the exception It's not a norm. It's we have a short term problem, we get rid of it, and we go back. well, the Houthis that a bunch in the Red Sea straits, a lot of your folks may not even remember that a year ago, but that strait traffic in the Red Sea is still sixty percent down, still sixty percent down, even though it's been a year since the Houthis launched their drones. So there's a lot that is, is, is sort of seeping under the surface, if you see what I mean, that We can see more clearly the directions that we're heading, and it's not 'cause I'm happy about it, it's because I think that we again, these are the values of these frameworks I've been bringing up. I think they help us to see where things are going a little better. When-- Before we move to Iran after the break, I wanna ask you, what are these European leaders hoping the outcome will be by funneling money into this corrupt government of Ukraine allowing this to continue attacks on- On civilians, killing, you know, we've been covering what's been the, again, the genocide in the Donbass and Donetsk and Luhansk for, you know, for years here on this show when the Western media totally ignores it. So what is the endgame for Europe in this? I mean, we see the militarization of Germany, all in an effort to go up against Russia. They've said it publicly, like this isn't a mystery. but it seems like they have a death wish. What do you see? Going up this ladder for Europe. So let me, so let me just say, I, I think, and i-i-in my classes at the University of Chicago, I've been explaining this for a while, but now I'll start to talk broadly that we should be ending this war on the line of contact, and that the Europeans aren't talking that way. They're, they're saying, and this has been a standard talking point for years, it was the Biden administrations as well it's up to the Ukrainians to decide where the line is that ends the war Korea, and we didn't simply say when we fought the Korean War in the 1950s, "Oh, let's just keep fighting until the South Koreans decide where to end the line." No, we ended that war, that, that went on only three years. I say only three years. This has gone on four. We need to end this war, and the obvious thing to do is to start talking Turkey about where the line should be, and that line of contact hasn't moved Or budged more than a handful of miles over three and a half years. So, so this, this point I'm making is identical to the Korean War. We just need to accept that is the key place to end the war, and we need the leadership to say that. I don't think Zelensky is gonna come to say it, just like the South Korean leaders didn't say that in the Korean War. No, that's a great point. Yesterday, Colonel Douglas McGregor on our show said the only way this war is gonna seemingly end at this point Point is if Russia seizes Odessa, crosses the Dnieper River, and m- makes a move, otherwise they're gonna continue this bloodshed for years to come and we'll be at this strategic stalemate. There's a lot of truth to what he has to say. I just wanna come in and add it more the interaction of the politics here. You see that point very militarily correct, but I just wanna focus again back on what I said, which is if we don't identify where the line should be. Then I don't think you're gonna get Putin and Zelensky to do it. We just gotta say, this is the line. President Trump, I thought was actually getting pretty close to that but now of course he's, he's deep into his own-- I mean, so, so I think that's gonna be but the Europeans, you asked what the Europeans should be doing, that's the issue. Force them in public to say what exactly should the line be to draw. That's the issue. Yeah. Professor, isn't it crazy though that at the, the Earlier, we had a framework for peace that involved Russia even beyond, past Eastern Ukraine with the Ankara agreement was in place so that Russia wouldn't have this land, wouldn't have moved further, almost up to the Dnieper River you know, taken over all, all of most of Eastern Ukraine where all those ethnic Russians live. There was a framework in place until Boris Johnson swoops in with his parachute and scuttles the entire peace plan. And so now- Whatever Europe gets is gonna be far worse than they could have gotten years ago if they hadn't tried to scuttle this whole thing from the very beginning. I, I, I certainly think that, that's right. So there's a lot, once you have so many actors, as you're pointing out, you have so many ways in which these escalation traps can continue. That's why I'm trying to identify, and, and there's not many good off-ramps here but what I'm trying to do is identify what would be the key Key thing that could truly help, and that is if the Europeans would decide among themselves, pub-- and make it a public decision, that this is the line they're willing to support. When they give money for X, Y, or Z, it is to support the line, freezing the conflict at the line of contact, getting an armistice. It doesn't-- we, we still don't have an official tr-peace treaty for the Korean War, we have an armistice. That is what I think the model should be, and I think it should be front and center. And if they're not doing it, I think the reporters should be constantly asking, "Why not? " And why are you just letting Zelensky drag the world no, Europe and others, and us deeper into an escalation trap? That's the way I would put it. We say that with Israel, why aren't we saying that here? Yeah, that's a great point. Yeah. Zelensky well, you had Representative Luna last week saying, "Make peace now, you fool," to Zelensky, "You're the one holding Be vocal about it, but-- And I'm telling you that I just like we didn't let the South Koreans dictate everything here, we need to decide what is in our own interest, what's in the European interest. And I, I, I-- Look, we may agree, we may come to believe, you may persuade me that we want all of the territory back and it's worth fighting another, you know, half million dead to get. I, I don't believe that, but I, but I think we should be talking about that. Where exactly is are we gonna It's pretty clear that we want a new iron curtain. I said this back, basically in foreign affairs in the fall of two thousand and twenty-two. Sorry to keep, but I, I actually laid out, we should have a new iron curtain and just freeze it there, and we're just not willing to say these words. I, I don't, it's, to me, it's, it's baffling. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel, it's totally free. If you wanna follow us or subscribe, and if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 3, 2026 at 6:40 PM

Saved - June 5, 2026 at 1:47 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

Russia is targeting Ukrainian factories and infrastructure tied to Western investment projects. While the Trump administration sends Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff to negotiate, major financial and political interests are positioning for postwar influence. Plans aim to turn Western Ukraine into an investment frontier—reshaping parts into a new destination for foreign capital—according to @DougAMacgregor.

@RedactedNews - Redacted

Russia has begun targeting Ukrainian factories and infrastructure connected to Western investment projects. As the Trump administration continues sending Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff to negotiate with Russia, powerful interests are already positioning themselves for what comes after the war. Attempts to turn Western Ukraine into the next major investment frontier, with plans to transform parts of the country into a new Israeli destination for foreign capital and development. @DougAMacgregor breaks down how major financial and political interests are profiting from conflict, and how the country is being reshaped into a new hub for outside investors.

Video Transcript AI Summary

The discussion centers on corruption and on people who profit from the war. Reporting is mentioned that a MOD plant linked to Zelensky was hit by Russia, which is said to weaken Ukraine’s ability to respond if they advance into cities. A colleague who reads Russian and speaks Russian fluently is described as reviewing Russian press releases over many weeks. The comment is said to have been made three or four times that Kushner and Witkoff are present for reasons familiar in Russia, with Kushner positioned as the son-in-law and Witkoff described as an old business crony of the president. The transcript highlights a call in Russian-language papers for serious people to address ending the war in Ukraine, finding a way out, with side deals suggested after talks. The transcript emphasizes a “huge problem with this corruption business,” citing BlackRock as trying to buy hundreds of thousands of acres of Ukrainian farmland. It also mentions proposals to turn Western Ukraine into a “new Israeli destination” by denuding it of Ukrainians and bringing people from Israel. It links these developments to money sources, claiming they involve the same people who pushed for war in the Persian Gulf and have pushed for war against Russia. The speaker describes this as frightening and adds that the Russians know it, suggesting that Russia will increasingly select targets representing Western—particularly U.S.—investment.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

We're talking about corruption and people who profit from the war. some reporting is that a MOD plant that was linked to Zelensky was hit by Russia, and so, you know, this will at least- I mean, I don't know what this accomplishes. It, it-- Maybe you can tell me. The, the factory was long linked to Zelensky. It did produce long-range attack UAVs and missiles. So at the, at the very least, it weakens Ukraine's ability to answer if they do advance into these cities. Well, one of the people that works with me closely who reads Russian and speaks Russian fluently, goes to the press every day for me. And one of the things he did for me was he went through several press releases over the last many weeks, and I don't know how many times it was, I think three or four times the comment was made about Messieurs Kushner and Witkoff, and saying, "We understand we're Russians, we're familiar with this sort of thing, we understand why Kushner is there as the son-in-law and why Witkoff, an old business crony of the president, is there." But please, can't you send some people back who are prepared to talk seriously about the issue, which is ending the war in Ukraine, finding a way out of this? we, we can make side deals with them at their convenience after the talks. I mean, stop and think about that statement. That's what was in-- that was what's in Russian in the papers. I think we have a huge problem with this corruption business. You have BlackRock that is trying to buy up hundreds of thousands of acres of Ukrainian farmland. you have people that are talking about turning Eastern Ukraine, or Western Ukraine rather, into some sort of new Israeli destination by denuding it of Ukrainians and bringing in people from Israel. I mean, there are all sorts of strange things going on, but you also have to look at the money sources And where the money's coming from, and you suddenly realize these are all the same people that are pushing for war in the Persian Gulf and have been pushing for war against Russia. it, it's It's frightening, and it does pay handsomely, and I think the Russians know that, and I think increasingly you're gonna see the Russians pick targets that they know represent investment from the West, particularly from the United States

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 2, 2026 at 11:30 PM

Saved - June 3, 2026 at 1:21 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

The well is running DRY. 💧 Washington drained America’s arsenal for foreign wars, and now the bill is coming due. It may take more than five years to rebuild what was burned through, if the supply chain even survives. @WeAreTheBrandon has the details.

Video Transcript AI Summary

The conversation centers on whether a “deal or no deal” involving Iran amounts to more than temporary relief, and how those developments could drive U.S. economic fallout. The hosts argue that the U.S. has been operating in a “fake paper” environment where demand and consequences are being covered up, comparing it to wallpaper over “black mold” that eventually makes people sick. Brandon Weichert (host of the Natsack podcast) says he has been emphasizing these issues for months, and that later mainstream coverage effectively made earlier reporting seem newly “real.” A key part of the discussion is weapons depletion from past conflicts. Weichert points to a claim that it would take “five plus years” to replace “thirty-nine days of munitions used in the Iran War,” and says the U.S. has “blown through” many weapon systems already. He argues replenishment is not meaningfully possible because the U.S. needs China’s rare earth minerals, and China will not allow access to what he describes as “dual-use rare earth minerals.” He describes U.S. reliance on outsourcing and says the processing infrastructure was moved to China, giving China “the leverage” in the supply chain. Weichert extends the argument to other conflicts. On Ukraine, he says the U.S. “isn’t going to have their back,” and describes a “silver lining” as limited U.S. ability to send further material support because the U.S. “can’t send any more” weapons. He also claims the U.S. depleted systems used for protecting bases in the Middle East and then redirected air defense interceptors toward Israel. He says Israelis were “astounded” the U.S. used more air defense interceptors than Israel did, including a claim that an IDF general said Americans were “wasteful” with limited stockpiles, and that these systems were not primarily protecting American bases. He argues these depleted systems will not return soon due to finite supplies and lack of replenishment, with knock-on effects for U.S. ability to respond in the Indo-Pacific to conflicts he lists (Taiwan, China-Japan, China-Philippines). He adds that even if the U.S. had light rare earth minerals on the West Coast, the U.S. lacks processing power and would still need China. He further asserts the U.S. does not have abundant heavy rare earths compared to China, Australia, and contested regions. The discussion also addresses a “sixty-day ceasefire agreement.” Weichert says “we don’t have a deal” and calls it at best a “sixty-day patch.” He frames the proposed terms as reopening the Strait of Hormuz for sixty days, then negotiations on Iran’s nuclear material. He says Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei stated Iran would not give up nuclear materials “under no circumstances.” He predicts that at day sixty, the situation would deteriorate back toward either a shooting war or the strait closing, or an Iranian “service fee system” that he says would destabilize the world economy and alter shipping costs and access based on flags and country treatment. He argues that politically the ceasefire is meant to “drag out the pain,” and he says the Trump administration has been “goosing” paper oil markets through manipulation that markets still fall for. He also links the strait reopening to avoiding economic collapse, arguing that without it the U.S. could face an economic downturn comparable to “the worst parts” of 2008 and COVID-era depression. For the economic mechanics, Weichert describes rising diesel prices as a driver of shipping and logistics costs, noting claims of diesel up “as high as seventy percent” since the war began and fuel price increases for consumers. He says natural gas and oil prices have risen by about “fifty percent” at the pump, and that strategic reserves are being pulled “for political purposes.” He predicts that once buffers are depleted (timed to a period around July 4), the U.S. would compete more for energy on global markets, driving higher prices. He adds projected reductions in travel (including flights and summer vacations), and he emphasizes possible shortages of food items tied to fertilizer constraints, which would raise grocery prices, including beef. He concludes that the combination of high inflation and low employment points toward stagflation and could lead to a “lost decade” with higher prices and lower wages, blaming the escalation as beginning with an event dated February 28.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Well, is there a deal or no deal? Deal or no deal? In Iran, and what will the economic fallout be realistically here? Because we've been in this like artificial fake paper world for quite a while now. Americans are feeling it at the pump, of course. But at some point, all of this fake paper, the covering over, it's almost like putting up wallpaper over some really bad stuff, like black mold on your wall, and you just put up wallpaper over top of it. Eventually, you're gonna get sick. Eventually, you could wind up in the hospital, and that's where we are right now. The American economy is nearing that point. Brandon Weichert, host of the Natsack podcast, he's been nailing this for months now, not only on our show, but back on Tucker's show and otherwise. And then the mainstream media comes out a few months later and then prints it, and then suddenly it's real. Like, it's so amazing how you, you know, now that the mainstream media has covered it, it's real news, but when Brandon covered it and broke the story two months earlier, they ignored it. Brandon, great to see you, welcome back to the show. Well, thanks for having me, and that was a great segment with my buddy Larry Johnson, and I'll just plug it here. He's gonna be on my show Monday. so it We in the media, you and I, as I think safe to say, described at one time as reporters cover different beats, but you know, we used to think, I used to think, you get a big story and you break it, that's like the big, you know, big moment. Big moment. And lately, for several years, it seems I get a lot of big stories, I break it, you know, it gets traction, but it's not like what you think it's gonna be because they ignore it, and by they, I mean the corporate- Media, I mean, the official organs of the state, it's like you know, the, the tree falls and no one hears it. Turns out they're listening, it's just not conveniently timed for their narrative control, so they wait. and this information that's now being broke, as you rightly said, is months, months old and it's sort of useless now, this information. If, if they, if they had been talking about it and they had been promoting what I was saying back at the End of February, beginning of March, that might have made a difference on the policy level and might have actually influenced things for the better but ultimately they chose to sit on the story and wait until it was, you know, no longer helpful. Now it's just sort of a afterthought, and I think that's one of the most depressing aspects for me personally about how the news media works today. It's not news, it's narrative control, and it's having a real negative impact because the news is there to, to speak truth to power publicly and they're not doing that anymore. They're carrying water for even now Trump, which is surprising to see these media people doing, but they're clearly you know, wedded to this agenda in the Middle East, and they don't wanna see any kind of, you know, threat to it, which is what, what I pose to them, obviously. So at the heart of it, well, one of the pieces, I wanna talk about the economy and the economic piece of this, which you've been all over, but one of the Weapons. Now, you broke this story back on Tucker Show a couple of months ago, and Philip, maybe we can put up this graphic here if we have it handy showing the number of US Thad missile systems and otherwise that Sagar-- So Sagar posted this today, but, you know, it's-- And then he says, "It will take five plus years to replace thirty-nine days of munitions used in the Iran War. What an absolute disaster." And of course, you broke this story back, I think, on Tucker Show. That was, correct. A number of months ago, that the United States blew through all of these weapons systems, and so when you see these pauses that we currently see or a sixty-day extension in all of this, yeah, I mean, what, and we're gonna go back to fighting with what? We, and you have Senator Blumenthal in, in the middle of Ukraine today saying that we've got your back, in what format? We don't have the weapons to send to Ukraine. What do we have? Well, I'll start at the back first. The, the Ukraine thing we, we aren't going to have their back. if there's any silver lining in any of this, it's that we've blown through so many systems so quickly that are really, I mean, they say five or more years, I would say these systems are irreplaceable because I responded to Sagar, our mutual friend, and I said, "That's the best case scenario. You need to have access to China's rare earth minerals in order for us to even begin replenishing the- These lost weapons, and guess what? China's not letting us gain access to what they're calling dual-use rare earth minerals. So I don't actually think we're ever gonna replenish these weapons in any meaningful way. So the silver lining here is that when it comes to Ukraine, the president hasn't never fully bought into Biden's war there. He's sort of let it continue on, but he's never-- he hasn't really gone full bore the way Biden did in Ukraine. And so I think he's already using this as an excuse behind the scenes, the president. President is to justify not sending any more aid because we frankly can't send any more. We don't have anything left to give. In fact, you're seeing, with the exception of those five thousand troops in Poland, which is more of a personal favor to the new president there, who's a Trump ally the, the, the president is overseeing the dismantling of US presence in Europe at this very, very important juncture in the Ukraine war. So in my opinion, the up- Side to this depletion narrative is that we won't be able and we won't be willing to provide any material support anymore to Ukraine, which is good for us, not good for the Ukrainians but it's good for us. as for the other side of the story, well, could be great for the Ukrainians because that means they're done. Like, let's just take your ball and go home. We're done. That's right. The Ukrainian regime, I should say, isn't good for the Ukrainian regime, which we've poured endless amounts of our money into we shouldn't have but you know, so from the Ukraine angle, this actually might be good. the downside, of course, is in terms of not just those precision guided offensive munitions, the air defense interceptors, which we have relied heavily to protect both our bases in the Middle East, but also we've used it excessively. In fact, I was told yesterday by a source that the Israelis were astounded throughout the course of the war Because we used more of our air defense interceptors to, to protect Israeli targets than the Israelis themselves used, and we used-- we actually were diverting the air defense systems away from our bases in the Middle East and those Arab states. We were diverting them to Israel to protect Israel, and the Israelis weren't even using theirs the way we were. One IDF general, apparently equipt to the source that I have over there, he said In March, he quipped to his team, he couldn't believe how wasteful the Americans were with their limited stockpiles of air defense systems. So even the Israelis were saying, "What are the Americans thinking? you know, blowing through these stockpiles that they don't really have a lot of to protect us? They weren't even protecting the American bases." so anyway my point is, is that we're not gonna see these weapons coming back anytime soon because we don't have access to the rare earth minerals, and therefore- There's no replenishment, so they're gone now. And what does that mean at the larger level? A lot of these weapons are essential for the US to, if something were to happen, and I'm not saying it is, if something were to happen though in the Indo-Pacific with a war with China over the, you know, Taiwan or war between China and Japan or war between China and the Philippines or some conflict, we would require the air defense systems and the precision guided standoff munitions to have Any chance of protecting ourselves or rolling back whatever the Chinese are up to, and those systems are now in finite supply, they won't be tasked, I think, to any contingency 'cause there's not enough of them, and we can't replenish them 'cause the Chinese are sitting on the rare earth minerals. You're absolutely right about that. I mean, we, we outsourced all of our mining. I mean, you know, under Obama and, and Biden and Clinton. The key thing, the key thing is the processing. And we, I know One of my regular guests on my show is a, a guy named Dan Collins, who, who still has factories in China and Taiwan related to rare earths, and he told me, 'cause he started out when he graduated from college, he started out at the processing facility in Goshen or Kokomo rather, Indiana, and in the eighties and nineties, we moved that original rare earth mineral price processing factory, we uprooted it and sent it, I believe, to Tianjin, China, where the Chinese expanded And now have an entire infrastructure for global rare earth mining. We in the United States have no rare earth mining because we've deemed it a threat to the environment, so we've outsourced it. We created the process in Kokomo, Indiana, and then we shipped it over to China, and they used it to create the world's greatest choke point in the rare earth mineral supply chain. It's the processing that's key. That's what China has all the leverage on us in. Well, don't you hate when people say, "I told you so." Well, yeah, that's me actually, because I, I did tell ya, sorry, but I told you that gold and silver were going to reap the benefits of excessive money printing, the Fed just printing money like crazy, overvalued markets, global unrest, it's here, it's happened. Gold and silver have both soared to all-time highs. So I hope you called our friends at Lear Capital and you bought some. If you didn't, trust me, it's not too late. Experts are predicting even higher prices ahead. And they get it, they know what's coming. Isn't it time, folks, get yourself some gold and silver today? Call the best in the business. I personally use them, so does Natalie, we both do, and our kids do as well in their IRAs. Lear Capital, it's a free phone call, there's no obligation to purchase, just education information on protecting and growing your wealth with gold and silver. I'm sure there are many of you that have called and haven't purchased yet for whatever reason. Don't make the same mistake twice. Now is the time to get some gold shipped In your retirement accounts over to physical gold and silver, it's easy to do. Natalie and I have done it for both, and I've been extremely satisfied with Lear's knowledge, their service, their prices. I urge you to call today and learn more. Call them one eight hundred six one three three five five seven or go to learredacted dot com, and you can receive up to twenty thousand dollars in free bonus medals with a qualified purchase. Well, and one of the great hypocrisies of the Ukraine war is that we were still relying on Russia for our u-uranium enrichment. Like, we'll sanction everything else, right? But we still need your uranium. So, you know what? We'll just leave that as a little carve-out. That's right. So you guys enrich it and send it to us in the United States, meanwhile we- Well, and we-- Remember, remember, we were purchasing under Biden, the, the stories were in the Washington Post. They had a random act of journalism. They were reporting that Biden From the Russians during the Ukraine war. I mean, it's like, what are we, you know? It's, it's lunacy. It's lunacy. So yeah, I mean, you talk about neodymium, praseodymium, like all of these rare earth minerals that we're just-- we don't have it, we don't have the processing, and they're trying to get people- And a key difference also is we do have a lot of light rare earth minerals out on the west coast of the United States and places, mostly blue states like California, where they So any kind of rare earth extraction certainly we don't have any processing capabilities in the United States. so even if we were to actually get the light rare earth minerals from the West Coast of the United States, we don't have the processing power. We'd have to ship it anyway to China, to their processing facilities that we gave them. And by the way, we need heavy rare earth minerals, which contrary to what is said in popular media, my understanding is we don't have a lot of heavy rare earths. In the Americas, that's in Eurasia, in Africa, in, you know, those places that are contested regions right now, that China has a lot of advantages. They've also got them in Australia, and they've got them in J-- you know, Japan has access to them. But here in the United States, you know, the Reindustrialize Plan is great, but we physically don't have the heavy rare earths in abundance that we need to be totally self-sufficient. Let's talk about this agreement, this so-called sixty-day ceasefire agreement, and what do you think? Happens, is it legitimate? laughing, of course, so no, clearly not. And then also, what happens to the US economy? Your predictions have been spot on. Where do we go over the next few weeks as Americans head into the summer months here, and how are we gonna see it hitting our economy? Well, I told Mario Navarro, my buddy, today on his show, I said it twice now on his show, we don't have a deal. At best, what we're getting is a patch, a sixty-day patch. and I think this is in response to the Trump administration clearly knows we are up a creek economically, that if they don't do something now to, however temporarily, which it would be temporarily, reopen the Strait of Hormuz if they don't get that done quickly, then not only are we gonna feel the economic burn for several months, probably the rest of the year But they will collapse the economy. I'm talking about something, some combination of the worst parts of the Great Recession of '08 with the worst parts of the depression caused by the COVID lockdowns in 2020. And so you can sort of imagine how bad things are going to get if they don't even temporarily get the Strait reopened. And I wanna make this very clear because I've been following this very closely. The, the president, and you noted this with Larry before you went to break, the, the, the president and his team have become experts in goosing the markets manipulating them for the day traders, for the, you know, the, the, the, you know, the speculators basically with the paper price of oil in particular. They're very good at manipulating the markets, and the markets are still falling for it. Not as much as they used to, but they still are falling for it. What I contend is that Trump Knows he's reaching the end of that line, and he knows that if he doesn't get even a temporary reopening, then he's screwed politically 'cause we have midterms coming up. So I think what they're gonna try to do is, is drag out the pain with a sixty-day ceasefire and 'cause there's no way, if you listen to what the president and his people have been saying, not-- notice the Iranians haven't said anything. I-if you look at what the president and his people have been saying about this proposed deal It's sixty days of reopening, no questions asked, reopening everything, and then at day sixty, you gotta sit down and negotiate Iran to get rid of your nuclear material. The, the Ayatollah Mochabeh Khamenei, who watched his father and his little baby grandniece get incinerated in the bunker at the start of the war, has said, "Under no circumstances will Iran give up whatever nuclear materials they have to the Americans. It isn't going to happen." So unless this is really a hard bargain he's driving, which I, I don't think he is on this issue sixty days if we do get this ceasefire Sixty days are gonna come, and then the president, Trump, is gonna say, "Okay, we gotta, we gotta talk about the nuclear stuff." And the Iranians are gonna flip him the bird, and then everything's gonna deteriorate from there, and we'll either be back to having a shooting war, or back to having the strait closed, or the Iranians will then impose their service fee system on the strait, which will, of course, completely destabilize the world economy, because now, now these companies that do business in the strait are gonna have to price in whatever service Fees the Iranians want to impose upon those ships, and if you're flagged from certain countries like Israel, the Iranians might say you can't come through at all. or American allies might have to pay more than, say, China or Russia flagged ships. So this, I think when you look at it, if he does, the president does get some kind of a deal for sixty-day reopening, it's, it's a patch. It is not a peace deal. We aren't ever going to get a peace deal, I don't believe, partly because the Iranians don't- I don't think they can trust us, but also, let's face it, we're not the ones on, on this side of the, the, the crisis driving events. It's the Israelis, it's Netanyahu, and he doesn't want peace at all. No, he wants regime, regime change, and he wants an- I don't even think he cares about that, to be honest with you. And I don't remember if I said this to you or somebody else, but I actually think it's, it's baser than this. I know everybody talks about Greater Israel, and that is Party, but in my opinion, this is baser. He is under the gun politically and legally, and he has managed to, to avoid these really serious investigations and charges against him both for whatever corruption he's accused of engaging in, as well as the investigations into how the heck ten seven happened in the first place. He has avoided the hard questions, he has avoided the legal ramifications for whatever he may or may not have done. Done primarily by opening up multiple fronts in the war ever since ten seven. And if he gets a peace deal, or if, if a peace deal is crafted now, the Israeli government returns to normal operation, and the first thing they're gonna do is reopen those investigations into him. In fact, a few weeks ago, my understanding is the Israeli Supreme Court held court under normal rules for the first time in a long time, and the first case they were looking into was the alleged corruption investigation in To Netanyahu, this was what prompted Trump a few weeks ago to call President Herzog, the leader of the Israeli parliament, and begged him to say, he said, "Please give Netanyahu a pardon." And Herzog said, "Under no circumstance, no matter what happens, will we ever pardon Netanyahu." So Bibi needs the war, 'cause it's the only thing keeping him in power and po-possibly out of jail. Yeah. I, yeah, a source of mine who worked for Netanyahu, you know, has explained to me how corrupt the man is and how he will keep this war going on purpose in order to- It's wagging the dog. This is Bill Clinton on steroids from the nineties. And it's also, and it's, you know, and speaking to sources in Israel who told me that one of the things that they hope they'll get an answer to is to how they allowed those young girls, those IDF soldiers, to be used as cannon fodder and stand down orders that allowed those girls on the front lines College IDF soldiers to be killed, and they knew they were going to be killed and used them as cannon fodder that needs to be investigated. It does, you know, it does. And I-- and there is a wing of Israel that has been wanting Nesset to investigate this, normally, notably the left But they can't get it done because every time they start the process, another front opens, more emergency countermeasures are put in, you know, they can't operate like a normal democracy. So and this is the game that, that, that Netanyahu plays you know, using his power I think unduly now to, to avoid, to avoid the legal ramifications for whatever. And one of the interesting stories here, Clayton it's not widely reported, it's not widely understood Stood outside of Israeli media is for years Netanyahu's government that was part of the mowing the grass strategy. Caroline Glick who I'm a big fan of, and she's now currently a Netanyahu advisor, but in her, her Times of Israel column, she used to write about this openly. It was part of this mowing the grass strategy where basically Israeli leaders and security officials assessed that the greater threat to Israel was to the north from Hezbollah and that they could, as long as they could manage Hamas Hamas, they wouldn't have to worry about it. And so what Netanyahu's government did, or his people did, it sounds like, is they started this scheme to pay off Hamas's leadership by washing money through Qatar or allowing Qatar to fund Hamas. And as Jack Macksey has, has reported in his reporting Netanyahu and his people were taking basically a vig, a cut off the top of that money for themselves and then letting the rest of- That go to Hamas. Hamas was playing them though. Hamas was playing them for fools. They were taking the money, saying, "Oh yeah, we won't, we won't attack you, don't worry." And they were buying weapons and preparing the ground for what became ten seven. It was with Israeli money. It was with the money that Netanyahu was paying them with the hopes that they wouldn't attack. I, it's really a sordid tale if you really look into it. There is so much corruption here. yeah, yeah. I was in Rafah, I was near Rafah From Rafa on ten seven in Egypt, and the Egyptians were saying, "You, you guys knew all about this. It was well known that this was coming. Like this whole fakery of ten seven, like you didn't know it was coming, it was a surprise. You're laundering money through these guys, they're arming themselves, you're watching the most heavily secured border in the world. I mean, it's all a joke, it's a theater at this point. It's so- It's a theater of the absurd. Yeah." I'll get you out of here on this, Brandon, and be respectful of your time, which is-- So you talk about this depression, this idea could be as bad as the lockdown depression and even the Great Recession. What is the-- What are the mechanics of that look like, you think, in practice for like the typical American family that's got kids, they're taken to their dance practice after school? Like, what does it look like in practice? Yeah. So we're seeing the outlines of it right now, and that is the, the spikes in fuel Is the spike in price for diesel, because basically everything runs on diesel the entire shipping, you know, American shipping firms logistics, everything runs on diesel, trucks, therefore diesel. That-- the prices have gone up, I think in some cases up as high as seventy percent since the war began. Nobody can afford that. The, the, the truckers can't, the trucking companies can't, and so that basically forces spikes to prices of everything that- needs to be shipped, which is everything basically that we use so, so you're gonna see price increases you're already starting to for everyday goods. Then of course, the price of natural gas and oil for the ordinary consumer, we're seeing that at the pump you know, generally, I think it's about a fifty percent, fifty-two percent increase since the war began. that is going to exponentially worsen as we reach the end or the bottom of the barrels of surpluses Of buffers we build up a, a strategic supply so that we can deploy it in times of crisis. Well, the president's been pulling from those strategic reserves for political purposes. Well, we're gonna start reaching the bottom of the barrels there. And basically once we, we run through the buffers, which a lot of experts are saying the weekend or ironically, the two hundred fiftieth anniversary of America, the weekend of July fourth, that timeframe, you should see us Reach pretty much the bottom of the barrel, which then forces us to compete for access to energy on the global market more thoroughly, which means higher prices for us. That will knock on everything else, vacations, jet fuel's not going to be wildly available, so you're gonna see massive reductions in flights. It's a summer driving season, you're not gonna be seeing a lot of people, I don't think, doing their summer vacations. I certainly canceled our trip to Disney. we were gonna drive in July, I said, "Ah, I think we should just wait till next year." luckily the kids are young enough, where it's not gonna be that big of a deal. but ultimately, you'll see things like that in terms of your everyday life. I would really be paying attention to what I think are going to be very serious shortages of foodstuffs, which will then The, the, the shortage in, in fertilizer, which will then translate to massively expensive goods at the grocery store because farmers can't grow everything they need in the quantities they need to meet demand. So it's as basic supply and demand. There's a sh-- there's a shortage of key goods at the grocery store. Whatever's available will be massively more expensive. you're already seeing beef prices that's only going to get worse. So everything is going to get more expensive, and it's going to basically lead to inflation rates going higher. Kevin Warsh, the new Fed chairman, is saying that he's supposed to be b-- brought into lower interest rates when you have a high inflationary environment, you don't re-uh, lower in-uh, interest rates. So that's gonna drag the economy. Basically, we're heading into stagflation, which means high inflation, low employment, and it's a worst combination of factors where the- The Fed can't manage the situation like they did in '08 or during 2020 so y-- we're, we're headed for possibly, I think, a real lost decade economically higher prices, lower wages. I mean, this is gonna be a real nightmare scenario, all because the President of the United States decided to go to war for Israel on February 28th. What a way to celebrate the 250th anniversary on July 4th with an economy like this shit show that we're about to see. That's right. Oh, that's right. Well, to the twenty, twenty thousand of you or so that are watching us live across all of our platforms, please follow Brandon on X at we the brandon, at we the brandon there, and also subscribe to the Natsack Talk podcast. Brandon, always great to see you. Follow him for great on Rumble, on Rumble, on Rumble, the Natsack Talk podcast. You can't say what you say on YouTube. Brandon, great to see you. As always, thank Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel, it's totally free. If you wanna follow us or subscribe, and if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 2, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - June 2, 2026 at 12:42 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

⚠️ Before the war machine lectures Americans about Iran and terrorism, maybe it should explain Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, and every proxy group it armed along the way. https://t.co/9pJRDspEcF

Video Transcript AI Summary

The speaker argues that instead of focusing on claims that Iran supports terrorism, people making those claims should “turn the mirror” on US-linked mass killings and the lack of accountability. They state they compiled a short list of “mass killings linked to US power” from the last 30–40 years, filtered for events involving at least 100 deaths in a single day, and add that the list would be much larger if expanded. They say each event was funded by US taxpayers and that no one was really held accountable. They also claim Iran has “never launched anything close” to the magnitude of terror on the US, while noting that reports are still coming in about Israel’s ongoing attacks on Lebanon (including evacuation orders issued overnight and reports of people buried in their homes). The speaker then focuses on an event from July 3, 1988: the downing of Iranian Air Flight 655 by the US Navy warship USS Vincennes. They describe it as a civilian plane flying from Bandar Abbas to Dubai with 290 people aboard, including 66 children. They claim the aircraft was following a normal commercial flight corridor over the Persian Gulf, presenting no threat, and broadcasting a civilian transponder signal while climbing normally. They say missiles tore the aircraft apart and that victims fell into the water. The speaker contrasts the US “official explanation” with what they say was contrary evidence. They describe the official account as an “oops” in which the US claimed it mistook the Airbus for an attacking Iranian F-14 fighter jet during a tense naval confrontation. They assert problems with the excuse, including that the flight was broadcasting a civilian transponder signal, was flying a known pattern, and that multiple military personnel onboard the Vincennes reportedly had data indicating it was a commercial civilian craft. They connect the incident to the US’s broader role in the Iran–Iraq War. They say the attack occurred during the same period as Operation Praying Mantis, described as the largest US naval combat operation since World War II, authorized by President Reagan to attack Iranian oil platforms. They also claim the US backed Iraq in order to topple Iran for decades, shifted alignment, and supported Saddam Hussein to launch an Iraqi war on Iran until the US decided it did not like him anymore and sought his removal. The speaker says the US did not apologize. They cite Reagan calling the shooting “proper defensive action,” and say Vice President Bush later said he would never apologize “for the United States of America” and would ignore “what the facts are.” They claim media condemnation was limited and that the UN did not condemn it, instead passing Security Council Resolution 616, describing states as “deeply distressed” and “gravely disturbed.” The speaker says Iran brought a case at the International Court of Justice, and the US settled in 1996 for 131.8 million plus two new Airbus aircraft. They argue this became part of Iranian cultural memory, including an Islamic Republic stamp memorializing it as an American attack on innocent civilians. The speaker then lists other incidents they say contributed to regional memory: the February 13, 1991 bombing of a shelter in Baghdad, where they claim hundreds were burned alive and many bodies were later found melted into walls; and the April 18, 1996 shelling of a UN compound in Qana, Lebanon, where they claim more than 100 civilians were killed and that later UN conclusions suggested deliberate shelling, while Israel disputed it. They add that Qana is described as being attacked again by Israel in April, including an overnight attack on the city that killed at least five and wounded dozens. They broaden to “mirror” arguments and accuse the US of creating or provoking “terror” narratives, citing claims about false flags such as 9/11 and Pearl Harbor, and saying the US is a perpetrator to support war. They reference discussions involving Victoria Nuland, Mike Pompeo, Lindsey Graham, and neocons, and include examples ranging from NATO operations (including Operation Gladio and bombings like Bologna) to claimed narratives about the Orlando nightclub shooting. The speaker ends by urging viewers to remember these histories when told “Iran is a terrorist state” or that Iran supports terror, and says another massacre is unfolding in Lebanon with residential and refugee camp bombing after evacuation orders.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Well, we keep hearing that Iran supports terrorism. Instead of refuting that, I would like to turn the mirror on the people who say that. The warring class repeats these things, but they have blood on their hands too, and that includes both political parties in the US, by the way. Now, here's a short list of mass killings linked to US power in the last at least thirty to forty years, and I filtered these by at least one hundred deaths in a single day. Now, if I expand This to dozens, I would need, I don't know, dozens of screens. I'm just gonna focus on these today because they're horrific and they're things that were speed bumps in American consciousness, but inform how people abroad think about us. Now, each of these were funded by US taxpayers, and no one was really ever held accountable for them. Now, Iran has never launched anything close to this magnitude of terror on the US. We may even add a city to this list and a date to- Day, because Israel has launched deadly attacks on entire Lebanon and the surrounding regions, but we don't know the death count yet. Reports are still coming in. We know that Israel issued evacuation orders overnight. People were buried in their home. It probably is gonna be a horrific one, so hold on, but we need to wait to see the extent of it. So for now, let's rewind the clock back to nineteen eighty-eight, less than a decade after the Islamic Republic of Iran was established, when the United States committed one of the deadliest acts ever carried out. On Iranian civilians. The victims' families are still alive and still remember this. This was July third, nineteen eighty-eight. It's the wreckage of Iranian Air Flight six five five. On July third, I just said that, nineteen eighty-eight. It was conducted by the US Navy warship called the USS Vincennes. Now, this was a civilian plane flying from Bandar Abbas headed for Dubai. There were two hundred and ninety human beings on board, all killed in a second by bombs. 66 of them were children, mothers holding their babies, grandparents, students, workers heading for their jobs in Dubai. The plane was presenting no threat to the US warship. It was following a normal commercial flight corridor over the Persian Gulf, climbing normally. It had a civilian transponder on board. It wasn't diving towards the ship. it was quite simply a normal 28-minute commercial flight until missiles tore the aircraft apart and bodies fell in. Into the water, body parts floating in the surface. Now, why did the US do this? The official explanation wasn't even an apology, it was kind of an "oops." they say that they mistook the civilian Airbus for an attacking Iranian F-14 fighter jet during a tense naval confrontation in the Persian Gulf. But there are problems, of course, with that excuse. The flight was broadcasting a civilian transponder signal, it was flying a known- Pattern. Multiple military personnel aboard the US Vincennes reportedly had data indicating that it was a commercial civilian craft. And here's another detail that Americans rarely hear. This happened during the US aggression on Iran. It was called Operation Praying Mantis. Just months earlier, President Reagan had authorized Praying Mantis, which was the largest US naval combat operation since World War II. Their mission was to attack Iranian oil platforms in naval Forces during the Iran-Iraq War. Why were we involved in the Iran-Iraq War? Well, because the US was backing Iraq in order to topple Iran, which they did for decades. Just a few years earlier, the United States was politically aligned with Iran, but foreign policy shifted on a dime, and the US decided that Iran was the enemy, used Saddam Hussein to launch an Iraqi war on Iran until we decided we didn't like him anymore and get rid of him. Well, if the last few years have taught us anything, it's If the systems we rely on fail, and they do, we're on our own. That's why I want to tell you about My Patriot Supply, America's original Patriot preparedness company. They've helped over three million American families get prepared since two thousand eight, with more than ninety thousand five star reviews. And right now, they've got a special offer that you really need to check out. When you get your flagship solar backup generator, the Ultra Power Grid Doctor thirty-three hundred, you're also gonna get over one thousand dollars worth of survival essentials added. Absolutely free. Four weeks of emergency food, water filtration, and much more, all free, and it's in stock, ready to ship right now. But with everything going on right now, there's no telling how long it'll be available. So go to preparewithredacted dot com right now to see everything that you can get for free. Don't wait until it's too late. Get your complete preparedness set up today. Again, preparewithredacted dot com. That's preparewithredacted dot com. Now it's worth remembering, this is all happening Happening during the same period that Iraq was using chemical weapons against the Iranian troops with the help of the CIA, that's where they got these chemical weapons. This happened from nineteen eighty to nineteen eighty-eight, killed between fifty and a hundred thousand people. the fifty thousand number is reported by the CIA, so we know that we helped Iraq kill Iranian civilians and troops on Moss. Now, it's notable that Iran had the technology to use chemical weapons back then, and they chose not to based on their- Principles. But back to the downed plane. Did the United States ever apologize for downing that plane of almost three hundred civilians? They didn't. And in fact, President Reagan at the time called it proper defensive action Which was clearly a lie. A few weeks later, Vice President Bush said this. I'll never apologize for the United States of America ever. I don't care what the facts are, I will lead her. I will do my level best to stand up for freedom and democracy around the world by keeping the United States of America strong and by keeping our eyes wide open as we welcome change in the world and keeping our eyes wide open. Okay. so he said he wouldn't apologize, he didn't care what the facts are. You killed three hundred people on a civilian plane. I don't care, basically, was the US official position. Now, the media did condemn this for a short period of time, but there were very small consequences for the United States. There was demand for the United Nations to condemn the incident, they didn't. Instead, the United Nations passed Security Council Resolution six one six, which- Where United Nations member states said that they were deeply distressed and gravely disturbed by the incident. Wow, big words. Iran did bring a case against the US in the International Court of Justice, but the US settled that case in nineteen ninety-six for one hundred thirty-one point eight million plus two new Airbus's. And that was the end of that for Americans. We have largely been allowed to forget it. Oops, sorry, didn't mean to do that. Actually, not even that. Not even a sorry. But for Iranians, it became a part of the emotional foundation of their distrust of the United States. It was proof in the Iranian worldview that the United States talks endlessly about terrorism and civilian protection while excusing its own mass civilian killings. And in fact, as you can see, this memory was crystallized in Iranian culture. Here was a stamp that was issued by the Islamic Republic after the attack. It was memorialized As an American attack on innocent civilians that was in character with American foreign policy. Now, I ask you, if something had happened like this to us, wouldn't it be for decades a part of our collective national trauma? I submit that it would. Think about the pain that we still feel over 9/11, Columbine, any mass shooting. It's solidified in collective pain experiences and informs our global worldview. And when you combine Combine that with later events, such as just from this year alone, the February 28th bombing of the girls' school, you begin to understand why most Iranians can't think of the United States as a force for peace, democracy, and civilian protection the way Americans say that they see us. Sure, would you be able to, in any form or fashion, after this collective pain, think of the United States as the force to save you? And again, look at this short list that I compiled of US-backed Terror attacks in the region, and here I am again, only collaborating single day events with over one hundred killings, and even this list isn't exhaustive. If you'd like to add to it, please do let me know. But if I were to expand it to US-backed military attacks with at least ten deaths per day, I would need dozens of slides. We'd be here for an hour. But each of these events, again, is a collective memory in the region to the tune of October seventh to Israelis. 9/11 to us, but they don't even get a date. We don't even say 2/28, which is the day that we bombed that Minab girls' school, or 4/8, which is the day that we killed hundreds in Beirut while Israel launched those attacks with our money and weapons. I, I do include here the Ammaraya shelter bombing because no justice ever came from that attack. On February 13th, 1991, the United States dropped two precision-guided bombs on this shelter in Baghdad, where hundreds of Sheltering from air raids, the blast sealed people inside, ignited an inferno so intense that entire families were burned alive, while many bodies were later found melted into the wall. Of the shelter, we did that. Same story for the 1996 Kana massacre on April 18th, 1996, Israeli artillery shelled the United Nations compound in Kana, Lebanon. Hundreds of civilians had taken shelter there during fighting in southern Lebanon. More than one hundred civilians were killed, including women and children. Bodies were torn apart in what is believed to be, what was at the time believed to be a safe house. Now, the United Nations later concluded there was evidence suggesting that the shelling Was deliberate, and of course, Israel disputed that finding, but thirty years later, Khan al-Neboon is again being attacked by Israel. That's still happening. In April, Israel killed at least five people and wounded dozens in an attack on that city in the middle of the night. So I just wonder, I just bring you this historical truth to ask you again, when people scream about the Iranian regime supporting terrorists, do they have a mirror? Do they remember these things? Do they know who the real terrorists are, who has actually shed blood, and who hasn't? So you should think about this very short, not exhaustive list the next time someone says Iran is a terrorist state or Iran supports terror. If we were victims like this, what would we do? When someone says, "Oh, they really wanna-- you know, they wanna hurt Americans," maybe they want this to stop. Maybe that's what they want when they say "death to this system." And again today Israel launched an attack on Tyre and the surrounding l-areas in Lebanon after issuing evacuation orders in the middle of the night. They bombed an entire residential building, including a Palestinian refugee camp with civilians inside, children, women, men, entire families now buried in the rubble of their homes. It is another massacre we will be invited to forget. So, will we participate in this charade? You know, it's interesting to think about the "quote-unquote" terror attacks that happen against America and how we don't have terror attacks happening against America because we have to create them 9/11, the false flag in order to provoke us into war, like, w- they keep pushing this charade on us. People like Mike Pompeo and Lindsey Graham that Iran, for forty-seven years, has tried to kill Americans and they shout death to America. And really, have they actually attacked us? Have they killed Americans? Pearl Harbor, another false flag attack that we needed to be dragged into a war from. So again, where are these terror attacks that the United States is having to suffer through? No We are the perpetrators of these terror attacks in order for us to carry out this war mongering agenda around the world. Well, in fact, when Victoria Nuland was asked over the weekend, you know, to debate on this war, she asked, I believe it was John Mearsheimer, "Do you believe Iran is a terrorist state? It's a bad place?" And they're like, "No, not really." She didn't come up with facts to support her worldview, she just kind of laughed in a demonic way and said, "It must be nice to think that, but we don't The luxury of feeling that way you know, we have the neocons that are responsible for this in the Republican Party, but Democrats have neocons too. They're called liberal internationalists. They sell you this idea that we need to promote peace while ignoring the bloodshed that we promote while promoting that peace. And, you know, I wish nothing but hell for those people. True. I mean, we were in Serbia not too long ago and talking to the people of Serbia and, and, you know, it just-- they remember, they remember the NATO attack on them. They remember the, was it a hundred or seventy-nine nights of being having to, you know, shelter in place while their city is being bombed by NATO bombs. Yeah. it's endless, it's endless. The NATO stay-behind armies, Operation Gladio, and all of the NATO stay-behind armies that carry out terrorist attacks in order to create this chaos so that we- Can have this perpetual state of war, the bombing in Bologna, Italy, that kills all these people. Right. I mean, on and on and on. Who's attacking us? Again, who's-- No one's attacking us. Yeah. The, the attacks are coming because of our own either provocation or, or when President Biden says we've got fifty thousand troops in harm's way in the Middle East, and it's only a matter of time before they're attacked. Yeah, yeah, you think? You put, you put bases in their countries and in their backyard, and then you carry out provocations through Operation Gladio style murders and assassination attempts and government overthrows and killing, and killing of children and arming of, of militants? Like in the case of Syria? Of course. Right. Well, I might submit that the Orlando nightclub shooting wasn't attack for those in attack-attacks, it had nothing to do with homophobia. It was a Middle Eastern man, I believe he was Afghani I could be wrong on that, who said, "I just want you to stop attacking my country, so that's why I'm attacking yours." So he shot up, yeah, so he shot up the Orlando nightclub. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Reports about the Orlando nightclub shooting were honest, and they're like, "Yeah, he was he was an Afghan national, he was tired of the killing of his family and people in his country, so he shot up this nightclub in Orlando." No, they didn't, they lied to us. Yeah. And they said that this guy was a homophobe and he shot up a gay nightclub. They sold us gay rights on that, right? Absolutely, that wasn't the case. So Obama, Obama rallies around that. He's like, "How can we use that to our advantage?" Yeah So again, I just want to remind you, you know, these are things that we're not supposed to remember when we promote our attacks on Iran, but we do, and you're here unredacted, and you do, so I want to thank you for listening to that. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel, it's totally free. If you wanna follow us or subscribe, and if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - June 1, 2026 at 8:05 PM

Saved - June 2, 2026 at 6:20 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I argue that any reasonable US-Iran peace deal will ultimately be unacceptable to Israel. The United States must draw a firm line and restrain Israel from taking offensive military action without American authorization. I also address whether Americans should worry about false events at home that could force the U.S. deeper into war and extend the conflict.

@RedactedNews - Redacted

What should Americans make of the proposed US-Iran peace deal? @joekent16jan19 argues that any reasonable agreement with Iran will ultimately be unacceptable to the Israelis. The United States must draw a firm line and restrain Israel from taking any offensive military action without American authorization. Should Americans worry about possible false events at home that might force the U.S. further into war and extend the conflict? Joe Kent breaks it all down in this interview.

Video Transcript AI Summary

The conversation centers on a reported peace framework and the idea that Iran is “giving up all of their chips” and cards. The speaker says many people seem to believe the rumor that a peace deal is in play, and reacts by calling themselves an optimist while insisting the approach must be “realistic.” The speaker argues that any peace deal “won’t be acceptable to Israel,” and that the key requirement is taking steps to restrain Israel. They say that, if the U.S. looks at the Israelis “with clear eyes,” it could achieve a deal with Iran that does not include everything the U.S. wants—for example, the speaker says Iran will not “hill(s) in the deal about zero enrichment” and will not “hand us over all your enrichment.” The speaker’s main goal is ending the fighting, which they say is “definitely possible.” However, the speaker expresses skepticism that the U.S. has taken the first “hard step” of telling Israel it is “done taking offensive action without our permission.” They describe the war as “existential for the Israelis,” and argue the situation cannot assume Israel will not face conditions that could lead to continued attacks or another “terrorist attack.” The speaker says the U.S. cannot “take that off the table” or “rule it out,” and cannot allow others to dismiss considerations as “a conspiracy theory.” The speaker further claims the U.S. has had institutional difficulty being skeptical and “not trusting” regarding Israel, saying Israel “lied us, lied to us to get us into this war.” They argue the U.S. needs to “turn Matter” (stating “as a matter of fact”) and apply more verification, especially because Israel is described as an ally that has misled the U.S. Finally, the speaker says if Israelis believed the U.S. would extricate itself from the conflict, “there would be an element within Israel” seeking actions to prompt Americans to recommit to the conflict, reinforcing the need for not taking anything off the table and emphasizing verification.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Rumblings of this peace agreement that seems to be in play right now over the past few hours, and a lot of people seem to be believing it, but it really shows that Iran is sort of giving up all of their chips here, all of their cards. When we see this talk of a peace framework, what did you think when you started hearing this? Truth? I'm I'm an optimist and I think that there is a goal, there, there is a peace deal that we, we can get, as long as we're realistic. And, and first and foremost, we have to be realistic that a peace deal won't be acceptable to Israel. So if we just look at the Israelis with clear eyes, which we've had a very hard time doing throughout this entire administration, and we actually take steps to restrain the Israelis, we can get a peace deal with the Iranians. We're not gonna get everything we want, they're not gonna Hills in the deal about zero enrichment, hand us over all your enrichment and we're realistic about it, and we get an end to the fighting. I, I think it's, I think it's definitely possible, but I am skeptical that we've taken the, the first hard step in telling the Israelis, like, "You, you are done taking offensive action without our permission." This war is existential for the Israelis, so I, I think we have to just recognize that and, and to think, you know, would they thrive in the chaos? Would they thrive? Would, be able to continue their overall mission by having us get attacked or another terrorist, a terrorist attack. We can't take that off the table, we can't rule it out, and we can't let anyone shout at us and say, like, that's a conspiracy theory. These are things that we, we should consider especially when we're looking at a, air quotes here, ally like Israel, who basically has, you know, lied us, lied to us to get us into this war. We really have to start being much more skeptical with what they're telling us, and we have to turn Matter, as a matter of fact. and we've had a very hard time institutionally doing that with the Israelis, and, and I think if the Israelis believed that we were going to extricate ourselves from this conflict, I think that there would be an element within Israel that would say, "Hey, we, we should look at some course of action that gets the, the Americans to recommit to this conflict." So I wouldn't take anything off the table, and we need to be not trusting and doing much more verification.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 31, 2026 at 11:30 PM

Saved - June 1, 2026 at 2:25 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

Washington is split between secrecy and disclosure, but the real power sits deeper: underground bases, aerospace contractors, hidden programs, and evidence Presidents are not allowed to see. @TimothyAlberino has the details. https://t.co/eZFkdEjCeG

Video Transcript AI Summary

Clayton interviews investigative journalist Timothy Alberino about recent “disclosure” documents released under the Trump administration, including videos and audio files, and about whether the U.S. government has alien bodies and when such evidence will be publicly shown. Alberino says he was warned the first tranche would be “underwhelming,” but expects subsequent releases—staggered on an “every two weeks” schedule—to become “more spectacular.” He claims earlier releases largely draw from material already held by the Pentagon’s AARO, describing it as a “sham UAP investigative body,” and from prior FOIA-released material, with some new content. Alberino argues against conflating the Trump administration’s disclosure efforts with access to deep underground special-access programs housed in “dumbs” (deep underground military bases). He says the President of the United States, the Secretary of War, and others have not been read into these programs and do not have access on a need-to-know basis. He says the White House and agencies like the FBI are reviewing documents to determine what can be released without breaching national security interests. He maintains that Trump and figures such as Hegseth and Patel are not withholding because they “don’t agree” with disclosure; instead, he says they plan to release as much as possible that does not conflict with national security so the public can draw conclusions. Alberino says Trump will not go onstage and present alien bodies or Roswell-style images, and that classified information about the “legacy program” will not be publicly released. When asked directly whether alien bodies and autopsy videos will be shown, Alberino says “absolutely not,” stating that Trump, Hegseth, and Patel do not have access to bodies. He claims the disclosure process is constrained by what officials can access, while the more important material is allegedly sequestered in private contractors rather than held within agencies like the Pentagon, FBI, or DNI—allowing officials to claim they do not have that information. Alberino describes “oppositional factions” inside government, intelligence, the White House, and the Pentagon: a “secrecy group” that wants the public kept uninformed, and a “disclosure group” that wants limited disclosure centered on a “baseline truth” that non-human entities exist and that craft and bodies have been recovered. He says the disclosure group seeks congressional oversight, which he claims is intentionally circumvented by compartmentalized, contractor-heavy programs with limited oversight. He further claims there are “rogue elements” and introduces the idea of “alien reproduction vehicles” (ARVs) derived from non-human technology, used for “nefarious things,” though he frames these as actions by rogue elements rather than the U.S. government as a whole. He identifies people he says are on the “limited disclosure” side, naming Congressman Eric Burlison, Tim Burchett, Anna Paulina Luna, and others, and states Tulsi Gabbard is also on the disclosure side. He claims that inquiries from the DNI and official attempts to inspect facilities are met with runaround and deception about projects shown on site. Alberino says facility visits by congressmen have not necessarily revealed bodies and suggests that craft footage may be more likely than biological evidence. He references that higher-resolution videos are supposedly seen in private than what has appeared via public FOIA releases, and he expects footage similar to Gimbal, GoFast, and Nimitz-level imagery. He also claims that if whistleblowers come forward publicly, they face NDAs and career consequences, and he says whistleblower protection legislation proposed by senators and representatives has faced repeated defeat. He describes whistleblowers privately briefing members of Congress “but they won’t come forward…they won’t go under oath.” In discussing interdimensional claims, Alberino says there is no certainty conveyed in classified settings about the “ontology” of beings, though he says interdimensional language is discussed publicly. He asserts that congressional-level information indicates the phenomenon is real and that there is evidence suggesting a legacy program exists, but he says those he interacts with have not been shown direct evidence explaining origins. He discusses speculation about extra dimensions and space-time warping, connecting these ideas to craft behavior such as phasing out or disappearing, and references Bob Lazar’s claims about craft appearing to lift off and then vanish. He also speaks about transmedium movement and the idea that a craft may create gravitational bubbles that bend light. Alberino includes claims about materials and technological gaps, saying extracted exotic materials are crucial and that the ability to reproduce them is limited. He describes an “arms race” framing involving legacy programs beyond the U.S., including China and Russia, and says strategic advantage may be why much is not released publicly. For religious aspects, he says media coverage conflated different stories and points to two streams: (1) evangelical leaders connected to Paula White, which he says involves “ontological shock” from being told something; and (2) a separate private UAP-and-human-trafficking investigative organization he describes as having briefers who share mostly public-domain information and seek to encourage pastors to prepare congregants for disclosure, while emphasizing that their theological views are not based on being read into programs. He claims this private group focuses heavily on human trafficking. Toward the end, he reiterates that a new tranche of documents may appear within about a week and continues into a slow drip toward summer, with underwhelming early releases followed by more impressive footage later. He also says he has been told AARO is being “frozen out” of the release process after being ordered to turn over lower-tier material, and that the strategy is to reduce AARO’s role in public dissemination.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Does the United States government have in its possession alien bodies? And when will we actually see footage of those bodies? When will we see evidence of those bodies as part of Trump's massive disclosure program? We're getting little drips and drabs of Random aircraft videos. But what about the real stuff? When will we see this? We wanted to talk with Timothy Alberino, investigative journalist, man who travels the world investigating the paranormal and these unexplained phenomena, and thrilled to have Timothy back on the show today to talk about the alien presence in the United States and what is the government hiding. Timothy, great to have you back on the show. So glad to be with you again, Clayton. So let me just get your first initial response to seeing this initial tranche of documents that were released and videos and audio files that were released just a short time ago from the Trump administration. I was given a heads up before the files were le- were released that initially they were going to be underwhelming. But as we progressed in, in this process, they were gonna get more spectacular, was the word that was used, more spectacular. And there are things that the congressmen have seen in private and in skiffs, videos And images that I think are ultimately gonna get released, and I believe that the, the, the schedule is every two weeks. So this is, this is gonna be staggered. And the, the hope from some of the congressmen that I interact with is that those videos are gonna be released, the ones they've seen in private. And if those are released, then, you know, you have Tim Burchett out there, for example, saying that it's, it's gonna be shocking. To the American populace, if some of what he's seen in private is released to the public. So it's not surprising to me that, that the first release was underwhelming. We're gonna get, you know, the first stuff we're gonna get is, is the material that ARROW has had in, in, in its possession. ARROW is the, the Pentagon's, I would call it, a sham UAP investigative body. Their office, they're investigating anomalous phenomena. And so some of what was released was stuff that Arrow had in their possession. Some of the stuff was nothing new really. I mean, there was some new stuff, but, but a lot of it was previously released under Freedom, the Freedom of Information Act by various people who've were able to get some of those videos. So it, it didn't surprise me that it was underwhelming. And I think we just-- we're, we're just gonna have to wait and see what comes in the next month. and I do believe that we are going to see that these files are going to be more spectacular as we move forward. But there's something that people need to understand. We shouldn't conflate Trump's interest in this topic and his desire to tell the American people the truth with what the Let's call it, I call it the dumb state, re-referencing to deep underground military bases, because that's where a lot of these special, special access programs are, are housed, are in these deep underground facilities. And the President of the United States doesn't have access to those facilities. The Secretary of War doesn't have access to those facilities. They, they're not read into these programs, and from my understanding Trump and Hegseth and others in, in his administration have not been read in. Now, maybe they have been informed that there is a, that the legacy program is real or aspects of the legacy program are real. In other words, the recovery and reverse engineering of alien craft and the recovery of the associated bodies, the pilots non-human. I think that there's, they, they've been given a baseline understanding That, yes, there's some truth to that, but they have, they have not been read into these programs. And so what you have here is primarily the White House and, and the Department of War, and then you have the FBI as well, and a couple of other agencies that are going through all of their documents, and they're determining what can be released to the public without breaching national security interests. And that's what we're getting. Now, what people are accusing the Trump administration of, many people in the, in the, in the UFO community, is that they're not, they're not actually telling us what they know. I don't agree with that. I don't think Trump knows much about this. I think Trump is just as interested to see what comes of this, what gets released, and what the American people make of it. And what I've been told is that the- The idea here from the, from the White House is they're just gonna give us everything that they can find that doesn't conflict with national security interests, and they're gonna let the American people determine what this means. And the, the way it was phrased to me is they're gonna let the American people draw the pro-- the, the right conclusions, right? So in other words, I think the idea is That in, at the level of the, the, the, the government or the White House certainly, that they understand this is real, they understand this is non-human, and they're gonna give enough information to the American people to draw that conclusion on their own. In other words I don't expect President Trump to come up to the podium and say aliens are real and here are some pictures of the Roswell aliens, right? We're not gonna see bodies. We're not gonna, we're not gonna be told classified information about the legacy program. We're gonna be given just a ma- just enough information to draw the conclusion that the alien presence is real and the legacy program is real. So you don't believe then that we're gonna see alien bodies? You don't believe that we're gonna see autopsy videos, anything like that? No, because Trump and Hegseth don't have access to them. And Patel, they don't have access to that information. And I think those guys are operating in good faith. And there's another thing people need to understand when they, when we talk about disclosure. You have oppositional factions right now. That are, that are in conflict. I can confirm this. Yes. Yeah, and there's, there's oppositional factions inside of government, in the intelligence community, in the White House, at the Pentagon, right? And, and these are-- Some of these individuals are read in certainly in the intelligence community, and some people at the Pentagon are read into the programs. and so you have a, you have a se-what, what my colleague Richard Dolan's re-Dolan refers to as a secrecy group and a disclosure group, and, and the secrecy group They want to keep the lid on this entire thing. They don't want to inform the American public of any of this. They just want us to, to, to go blissfully about our lives and, and, and not be told anything about the alien presence, because that's what this amounts to, an alien presence. And then you have the disclosure group, and the disclosure group, they want limited disclosure. And what they mean by limited disclo-disclosure, this includes, by the way, the whistleblowers, and this includes the members of Congress and, and, and senators who are, who are interested in this topic. They want the American, the American public to be told the baseline truth, the baseline reality of this phenomenon. We're not alone in the universe, and we've recovered the craft and, and have, and the bodies, right? That's the baseline reality. And one thing that everyone that I've talked to- Who's, who's part of this disclosure group they want congressional oversight because there's no congressional oversight here. The legacy program has been intentionally designed to circumvent the oversight of Congress. So you have, and, and it's using, in part, it's using our money to do it, right? So you have, you have this entity in various programs that are largely, that are largely housed in the aerospace contractors, private companies, right? With With, with limited oversight from the Air Force, the Navy, the Department of Energy, the CIA, among other organizations, but those are the big, the big four. Limited oversight, right? Completely, completely compartmentalized. Nobody's, you know, so very few people have the whole picture of what's going on. And what you have at this point is you have rogue elements. There are elements of this thing that have just gotten out of control, so now we have what are called ARVs or, I'm sorry yeah, alien reproduction vehicles, ARVs. That are, that have been derived from non-human technology from the crash retrieval program, and we've created our own flying saucers at this point, and we're using them to do utterly nefarious things. And when I say we, I don't mean the United States government necessarily. I mean these rogue elements, this, you know, so-called breakaway civilization that's, that's in possession of this advanced technology and are using it to do all kinds of dastardly things like human trafficking and who, who knows what else? You know genetic experimentation I've heard all kinds of things behind the scenes. So, so you have this battle going on, secrecy faction, don't tell the American people anything, disclosure, disclosure faction, limited disclosure. That battle is-- that's playing out right now. And the Trump, Trump and Hegseth and Patel are on the limited disclosure side of this thing, along with Congressman Eric Burlison Tim Burchett, Anna Paulina Luna, and others, right? That's the disclosure faction, and there's people within the government, within the intelligence community, within the Pentagon who do want to tell the American people the baseline truth, but they're getting blocked. Tulsi Gabbard, for example, is on the disclosure side. I can confirm to you that efforts even at that level of the DNI are being blocked and hindered and obfuscated. I mean, information is being obfuscated even when the inquiries are official, like directly from the DNI. And they've given a-- they've been given access, certain congressmen have been given limited access to some of these bases where some of these facilities, where these unacknowledged access programs special access programs are being developed, and, you know, they show up on site and, you know, the, the, the, the general or whatever at the base says, "Well, we don't know anything about that project, but here's a project that we're developing some, some..." Important defense technology, and so they just show them a different project that has nothing to do with the legacy program. So everybody is, is, everybody who's trying to look into this in, in an official capacity is getting the runaround. So do I think-- That's a-- I'm sorry, I apologize for the long-winded answer here, but do I think that we're gonna roll-- see alien bodies rolled out? Absolutely not, because they don't have access to them. Trump, Hegseth, Patel, they don't have access to that stuff. Well, we all like to think COVID is behind us, but what if the effects are still lingering in the body, especially in the brain? A new study from NYU Langone Health found something really alarming that people suffering from long COVID showed changes in a part of the brain responsible for protecting and cleaning brain tissue. Researchers are linking this to chronic inflammation, early warning signs of Alzheimer's disease. This may help explain why more than twenty million Americans are still dealing with long COVID symptoms like fatigue, shortness of breath, and that frustrating brain fog. Scientists believe ongoing inflammation and spike protein exposure may be disrupting the brain's natural cleanup system, and the wellness company has their ultimate spike detox, and that is your solution. It's created by our friend Dr. Peter McCullough. This formula was designed to support the body's natural detox process and inflammatory balance, and it contains four times the nanocyanide that's found in most spike products, along with bromelain, turmeric, and selenium. To support circulation and cellular cleanup. So if lingering inflammation and spike protein exposure are part of the problem, supporting your body's detox systems may be one of the smartest things that you can do. So give your brain a break, get your bottle of Ultimate Spike Detox today, head over to t w c dot health slash redacted and use the code redacted to get ten percent off. Again, that's t w c dot health slash redacted and use the code redacted to get ten percent off. It's so deeply disturbing that it's still walled off, you know, that the President of the United States is on a need to know basis. I mean, Bill Clinton was famously told that he was on a need to know basis, and basically, you don't need to know. So, that's right. The, you know, this idea that the President of the United States is all, is you know, omnipotent and has all this power is just garbage. they aren't, you know, they're there for four years or maybe eight years, and this sort of shadow Dark government that gets billions and billions of dollars is operating, you know, in, in the shadows, and that-- I, do you think that Congress is gonna be able to get some sort of oversight over that because all of these billions of dollars flow to these back-- black budget programs, that the reverse engineering programs, all of these things that Congress doesn't have any access to? I don't wanna be pessimistic I, I do believe that they're moving the needle. I, they, they really are. I mean, I, I applaud the work that's being done by the whistleblowers, by these members of Congress, both in the Senate and in the House. One thing that that that I believe Senator Schumer, but also Tim Burchett in the House, attempted to do was to draft legis- legislation to protect whistleblowers, because that's, that's the missing piece here. We need legislation to protect whistleblowers, and we're, we're talking about UAP, UFO whistleblowers. The problem right now is if a whistleblower comes forward, you know, these guys have s-signed all kinds of NDAs, right, and these are legally binding documents. And so people say, "Well, why don't, why don't these guys just come forward and tell the truth?" Because, let's, they're risking their pensions, they're risking their lives in some cases. If they're still working in the intelligence community or at the Pentagon or whatever, they're definitely risking the future of their career. They're not gonna go anywhere at that point. They're probably gonna be demoted, whatever kind of clearance they have is gonna be revoked. That happened to David Grush and, and they're, and they're, and then they're also risking the wellbeing of their families. How many of us would do, would risk all of that? Just to tell, you know, to talk about this phenomenon or, or, or what we know about it, there's no whistleblower protection in place, none. Yeah. And there's a lot of whistleblowers behind the scenes who are coming, I know for a fact, have been coming to the congressmen and different people and are you know, privately briefing them on things, but they won't come forward, they won't go under oath. Precisely because there's no protections for them in place. And every time that there's, for example, Birchett's bill, every time that this is, this, this comes to the floor, it gets rejected, it gets voted down. Why? Because the, some of these, you know, some of these congressmen, they've got the, the, the special interests Are influencing them to, to kill these bills every time. And who are those special interests? Well, it's the aerospace contractors who are in possession of this technology. And, you know, let's just be honest here, th-th-there's been a lot of wet works around this topic. And, and there's, there's a aggressive effort To keep people from telling the truth, whistleblowers, real whistle, I'm talking about people who've had hands on the technology or who've been read in to the program at a governmental level There's been a, a very aggressive campaign to keep these people from speaking and to discredit the whole thing. They can't, they can't keep a lid on the phenomenon, they can't control it. The government can't control the phenomenon, they're, they have zero control over it, zero. The, the aspect of this thing that's, that's non-human, they have zero control. The only thing they can do is control the narrative. So what we're seeing is narrative control and dueling factions, secrecy, dis- Secrecy, disclosure, right? So you take, you take two steps forward with the disclosure and one step back with the secrecy. That's how this thing has been going. And so that's why it's so slow, that's why the rollout is so clumsy and so difficult because the President of the United States can say, "I'm gonna release the alien files," but, but all he can release are the files that he has access to. That's it. And those files, the really important stuff, isn't housed at the Department of War, it's not housed at the FBI, it's, it's, it's not housed at DNI, right? These, this is largely because of the Freedom of Information Act, largely been sequestered into the private sector, this information So when I say the private sector, I'm talking about, I'm talking about the, the aerospace contractors. It's not like private sector like us. No, I'm talking about the contractors. Right. High level. And this is where, and you're absolutely right about this, this is where the CIA, this is where DNI, this is where they can then say, "We don't have that information," because it's been farmed out to these third parties through Lockheed Boeing. Honeywell, in terms of MedBedz and all of these other technologies that they've, that's right, dispersed these technologies around these different companies over the years, absolutely. and, you know, we've heard from different whistleblowers at these different companies who have come forward. So, I guess I'll ask you this, Tim, Timothy, because like we, you know, Congressman Burchett, Congressman Eric Burlison, Representative Luna Reports over the past few weeks, like Burlison and others, have gone to some of these different sites. They've gone to some of these different locations. We heard this, some top secret locations, in order to see for themselves. so they're seeing these things, and, you know, you're getting information about what they've seen. We've been hearing from Congressman Burchett on television. I think Burlison has said the same thing, that the things that he's seen are absolutely shocking, and the American people deserve to see those things. Like that's a- That's a great tease, but do you have any insights into what specifically he's talking about that we might actually see over the next few weeks if it's not alien bodies? Well, I think it's just more videos of, of UFO activity, but, but I'm pretty sure that those congressmen, that you name those, those in particular, including Luna have seen much clearer, much higher resolution videos than anything that's been released to the public thus far, or that's been attained through the FOIA. so I expect to see, in the coming weeks and months, I expect to see something spectacular. Now, again, not alien bodies, right? They're not gonna show us a video of one of these crafts in a hangar bay of a, of a classified facility, you know, out in New Mexico or something like that. It's- It's gonna be some kind of footage that's reminiscent of or at least on analogous to the gimbal, GoFast and Nimitz video footage that we've seen from the past. Yeah. Yeah. And we're gonna see some of that for sure on that level, absolutely for sure. And in regard to these, the visits to these facilities, these classified facilities look, when David Grush- Remember when David G-Grush blew the whistle originally? He wrote a report to the to the Inspector General of the intelligence community. So he, he wrote a report, and he wrote in that report everything he was gonna say, everything he was gonna expose. That went to the Inspector General. As soon as that report went in the hands of the Inspector General, they already knew the game plan coming from Grush. They knew what he was going to expose, what he was going to say. Grush had a list of facilities where he knew that some of these programs were being housed because he was informed by his contacts, generals, and people in the intelli-intelligence community. As soon as they had that information and they knew that David Grush was coming out to blow the whistle, do you think they would keep any craft in those facilities? They're gonna shuffle, they're gonna shuffle the board, right? I mean, they're gonna shuffle the board. You know, this is the This is that, the, the, the, the proverbial shell game. So if you've got craft over in facility A, right, and Grush, you know Grush is gonna be exposing that, you've got months in advance before anybody, years in advance before anybody gets any kind of clearance to come to that facility to look for this craft, all you gotta do is move it to facility B that's not mentioned or that's not known. We have plenty of them. These thing, these craft can be easily moved around. They can pick 'em up in the- Bed of night, lift him off with a helicopter, put him on the bed of a truck, whatever. They can shuffle the board, and that's what they, that's what they did. They shuffled the board. And that's why, you know, you have Vice President, Vice President Vance saying, you know, he, he, he wants to go to Area Fifty One, he's planning on going to Area Fifty One. Well, that's, that's gonna be a nice little he's gonna get a nice little tour of Area fifty-one, but he's not gonna see anything significant, even if he goes to the F-four, S-four facility. they're not gonna-- I mean, they're not stupid, right? They're gonna move everything. They're gonna, they're gonna, they're gonna relocate The assets to different underground facilities. And let me again stress, these underground facilities, these deep underground military bases, the dumbs, the President of the United States doesn't have access 'cause he doesn't have, just as you said, doesn't have need to know. He's not read in, he doesn't have access. The Secretary of War doesn't have access. The, certainly the, the director of the FBI definitely doesn't have access, okay? The American people assume that, that this echelon of power has access to everything. Not true. It's a need to know basis. The President of the United States doesn't have the need to know, and if he inquires about it, he will literally be told that he doesn't have the need to know, like other presidents you mentioned, Bill Clinton. And yes, there have been some presidents who I think have been briefed more extensively, such as- Jimmy Carter. but that's only if these guys know how to ask the right questions. This is something that, that I don't think people understand about the government. The government isn't going to offer up any information it doesn't have to. So if your questions aren't specific and targeted, using the right terminology, if, if you don't have the names of the operations, then all they're gonna say to you when you make the inquiry, and this goes for not just UFO stuff, this goes for inquiries into the Smithsonian about the bones of giants and everything, if you don't have the exact information, they're just gonna say, "We aren't aware of..." Of, of what you're talking about, or, you know, we've looked into this and haven't found any files pertinent to your inquiry or something like that. That's, that's the game that's played. So that's, it's very important for the American people to understand that the, the, the Trump doesn't have the access that people think he does. I think it's pretty clear that we have alien bodies. I think there's been enough Eyewitness testimony and, and reports over the years of whistleblowers and others, secretaries who've worked in you know, at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, et cetera, who've come forward on these subjects. Would you say it's, it's, it's clear as day that, yes, in fact, we do have alien biologics, as David Grush testified before Congress that we have alien biologics? I would say indisputably we have alien biologics, alien bodies, and I say it with such confidence be-because we have enough evidence at this point that the legacy program is real. You know, you've had, you had guys like the late Leonard Stringfield writing back and, you know, writing about this stuff in the, in, in decades ago exposing the legacy program from insider accounts. And then you fast forward to just the last decade, everything that the whistleblowers are saying is just a confirmation of what ufologists have known to be true for a very long time. I mean, I get people coming to me behind the scenes and People who've been on crash retrieval sites, and they've seen the bodies of gray aliens, and that's not the only thing that's seen in these crash retrieval, but very common, some, some form of gray alien. There's different you know, descriptions of these things, but, but generally speaking, the bodies of the little gray guys, which are, they're much, you know- You know, they're not dark gray, they're not even medium gray, they're very, very light gray. They're basically white, but they're a, a grayish white hue. And, and, you know, in one case the gentleman told me that he was on a crash retrieval site and the bodies were just dismembered, laying all over the place, and there's this clear, transparent liquid that comes out of them. It's kind of like their blood, but it's, it's not red like ours, it's transparent. I've heard dozens of stories All of this, an-- yes, it's anecdotal, some of it's firsthand, some of it's secondhand, but there's a mountain of this kind of stuff, as you know. There's a mountain of this kind of stuff. And then you have, I mean, I'm sure you saw the Age of Disclosure film, and then you have all of these different officials from the government, from the intelligence community, who are looking in the camera and basically telling you, in no uncertain terms, "Yeah, we've got the craft and bodies, we've got 'em." Yeah. And so when you add all of this together, and then of course you throw in the abduction phenomenon, which, which, which is a layer of evidence nobody really ever deals with, but it's physical evidence, it's evidence that lends itself to scientific inquiry. I mean, to me, it's, it's overwhelming that's why I would say it's indisputable. It's if you take the time to look and inform yourself and, and, and, you know, if you have a deeper knowledge of the phenomenon than just browsing social media, it becomes immediately imp-apparent that we've got the craft, we've got the bodies in our possession in some capacity, and who knows where, whether it's at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base or, that certainly was years ago, but as you mentioned, shuffling the board, moving these bodies around. Who's studying them you know, and why does the government not have access to this? David Brussel- The government has-- The government does have-- I don't wanna make it sound like government doesn't have-- the, the, the, there is limited oversight. You have individuals, I was with somebody recently who's I'm gonna be very careful and, and protect this man at all costs, but he's he, he, he was read in. And I'm not even gonna say which branch of the military he worked for, but, but he, at, at some point in time, he worked at the, at the Pentagon, and and he had eyes on some of these programs in his capacity at the Pentagon, and he was briefed and read in by his superior generals. And I asked him, I said, "So, you know, there's thousands of people who work at the Pentagon. So how many people do you think..." Who are working at the Pentagon right now are read in to this stuff. He thought about it for a minute and he said, "Twenty, twenty people." I was gonna say five. That sounds about right. Actually, I, yeah, I was, I, I, I, I always thought it was, you know, somewhere between ten and twenty, but, but and then, you know, and he, and he was We were talking about this for a while, and, and, and his attitude was, "Look, this, you know, the people who were read in they're not they're not like analyzing fuzzy videos of craft or whatever. These guys have been read into the decades-long reality. We are, he said, we are so far down the line with this thing." That he doesn't think the American people will ever be told about this pheno-- about the reality of this phenomenon and, and the things that we have. We are so far down the line, we are decades and decades into this thing that, i-it's, how do you tell the American people at this point? Well, is, is, is this the drip and drab? Is this why we're seeing this disclosure rolling out over two-week periods? We're gonna give you a little bit. Then a little bit more, then there'll, there'll be something jaw-dropping a month from now where we'll get some really clear imagery of a, of a craft. What about the video that we're he-- we're hearing from, from s-- from sources, there is video of of a UFO flying right next to a military craft and it matches the speed of that craft so much so that the pilot of the military craft was able to look and see an alien flying the craft. There's actually- Artist renderings of it now online because I think, I, I don't exactly know who said that they've seen this video, and they're hoping that that will be one of the videos released to the American public. Yeah, I wonder if that's what Luna and, and Burchett are out there alluding to. It's something like that. Yeah, we're gonna see craft. I don't know that we're gonna see beings or bodies, but we're gonna see more craft. And keep in mind that a lot of this craft is ours at this Stress the first word in that acronym, Alien Reproduction Vehicles. I, I, I'm absolutely convinced that, that much of this technology has been directly derived from a non-human source, whether that be through crash retrievals or through some kind of contact that we've had, we've maintained with, with Non-human intelligence for a very long time. That's what I've been told, that at the, at the highest levels, the guys that are readed and briefed on this stuff, it's not, it's not just, "Hey, we have craft, yeah, we've got some bodies." It's, we've been in contact. There's contact that's been made. There's, there's a relationship, if I-- From the source, the sourcing that I'm hearing from over the years, a relationship. Exactly right. Treaties, agreements. You know, that's what I'm saying, we're so far down the line, we probably have a space fleet that's, that's off planet at this point from things I've heard. We are so far down the line, how do you tell the American people? Like, where do you even begin? I guess this is where you begin, right? Yeah. If you're gonna do it, you gotta drip it. You gotta drip it. And then it's like, it's like, you know, just like I said earlier, that, the, the, the president was clear That he's gonna put it all out there, and he's gonna trust, I think these were even his words, trust that the American people will draw the right conclusions. At least this was the words behind the scene that was conveyed to me. Yeah. Trust that the American people are gonna draw the right, the correct conclusion. What's the correct conclusion? Yeah, this is all real. That's the correct conclusion. Now, will Americans draw that conclusion? some of us will. But, you know, there's a lot of ne- there's a, there's a psyop narrative, a very persistent psyop narrative out there that all of this is just, you know, Project Blue Beam or this is just smoke and mirrors to distract us from this or the other. and yes, the narrative can be conven- conveniently used for whatever, right? I mean, you can, you can use the narrative however you want. But, but the phenomenon is real, and much of it is non-human. And People need to keep that in mind, it's not all just a sci-op. The other piece of this is the interdimensionality piece, and we've heard from Representative Luna and others that maybe as part of this disclosure, we're going to learn about these beings are traveling interdimensionally, or that they've been here for hundreds of, hundreds of thousands of years on our planet. Operating, you know, whether deep in the ocean or otherwise, maybe you can tackle the interdimensionality, and then I wanna talk about the religious piece of this, 'cause we of course heard the reports about religious leaders being briefed on this, called together and being briefed on what they can expect and prepare your flock, so to speak, for this disclosure. So maybe let's just, let's tackle those, I guess, in two separate pieces, or if you see them as one piece. No, no, I, we can take it in two separate pieces. So, you know, I, I'm I'm obviously aware of the fact that especially Congressman Luna is out there saying that this is an interdimensional phenomenon. I respect that opinion because I don't know what this is exactly. None of us do. We're all shooting in the dark here. The only people who really have any insight are the aerospace contractors and the handful of people who are read in at the governmental level, at the Pentagon, at the, at the-- When You know, probably, maybe hundreds of people in the totality of government they're the only ones who really have answers. The rest of us have theories. We, we-- I've never touched a craft, you haven't touched a craft as far as I know. I've never seen a body, you haven't seen a body. I mean, we have theories, and that goes for the Congress, the congressmen as well. They have theories, I know because I, I talked to them about this. They have theories. And it's-- I've been, you know Interesting theories, I think they're all very plausible theories. and I know that no one has been shown-- when I say no one, I mean nobody at the congressional level, none of the people that I inter-interact with, nobody has been shown direct evidence that would that would indicate the nature, the provenance Or the ontology of these beings. What they have been shown is more evidence that the phenomenon is real, and, you know, that, an, an evidence suggesting that the legacy program is real. But nobody has been told, as far as I'm aware, behind the scenes that That these are interdimensional beings, or these are time travelers, you know, these are tempestrial extraterrestrials, right? They're, they're time travelers, or that these are extradimensionals, or that these are crypto-terrestrials. That kind of certainty isn't, isn't doesn't exist in the skiff, for example. Now, some of these ideas have been kicked around. There could be, there could be an, an extradimensional, hyperdimensional component to this There could be a crypto-terrestrial component to this. Those ideas are kicked around, just like they are in public, and then you have individual congressmen and women who have their own theories that they consistently convey to the public, and they are completely entitled to those theories. and I think all of these theories are plausible. I mean, I think there's a lot of good ideas flout-floating around out there. In the absence of knowledge, what are we gonna do except for hypothesize, right? So I, I think people have the wrong impression that congressmen and women are being told what these things are. That's not true. In fact Congressman Eric Bur, Burleson is very explicit about this. He doesn't know what they are, he hasn't been told what they are. He gets information behind the scenes, and it's, again, it usually pertains to craft, you know, video footage, legacy program stuff, but nobody knows the ontol-the ontology of these beings. In fact, I've talked to whistleblowers, I've talked to people who've, who've been And on the crash retrieval stuff, as I said earlier, they don't know. They don't have the answers either. They don't know. They're speculating like the rest of us. Now, they know that the craft is physical, technological, the bodies are physical, but they don't know where they come from. Even the guys who handle the stuff On that level, don't know where they come from. So I just want everybody to, to understand, this is a realm of speculation at the congressional level and, i-in the public and even among whistleblowers, much of this is speculation. David Grush speculates, for example, is there an interdimensional component to this? Now, the word interdimensional is, is fraught with misconception. Because I think what most people-- we don't, we don't have any scientific evidence of extra dimensions. We have scientific theories of extra dimensions, such as string theory. We've never measured an extra dimension. We have no direct evidence that extra dimensions exist. A lot of great mathematicians, a lot of great physicists Postulate extra dimensions in their theories and are themselves convinced that they must exist. I myself subscribe to the hyperspatial theory of the universe, which says that there are extra dimensions that we cannot directly perceive. Now, these dimensions may be very, very tiny. I mean, when you talk about extra dimensions, you, you're, like in string theory, for example, superstring theory, you're talking about dimensions that are inaccessible, that are at the Subatomic level, not like, you know, portals that you can walk through, but even according to relativity, Einstein in-- within the framework of general relativity he posited that you could create a bridge From one part of, this is an important distinction, one part of our universe to another part of our universe, we're staying within our universe, but you could create a dimensional gateway, a, an Einstein-Rosen bridge, to connect two distant parts of the universe by folding the, the spacetime, right? So that requires an extra dimension to fold it into an extra dimension. You see what I mean? So you fold spacetime into that extra dimension. It's like taking, you know- I don't have a piece of paper in front of me. You're taking a piece of paper that's flat, and then you fold it, you put your pencil through it. You're taking two points on that flat piece of paper, you're bringing them together and punching a hole through the fabric to get from one side to the other in much shorter distance than traversing the, the length of the paper. So I think that, that, that's possible. It's just my opinion. I think that, that, that's part of what's happening here in this phenomenon. So is there an extra-dimensional component to the phenomenon? Personally, I would aff- I would aff- I would affirm that there is. Luna would affirm that there is. Burleson would affirm that there is. Based on our own speculation, not based on some Skiff information, I don't know if Burchett would affirm that or not. So I suspect there is, but the problem is with the word interdimensional, because if you're a spaceship traveling from one side of that hole that we're gonna poke through the fabric of space-time, right? You travel from this side to the other side, you're still inside of our universe, correct? And you are by nature, you're not an ex-extra or inter- Being per se, rather you're, you're taking advantage of an extra dimension in space time to travel. Now that's a, that's an important distinction beca- because people assume that when they say interdimensional, that they're invoking ontology, they're invoking the nature of a being. A being is by nature interdimensional. I don't really know what that means personally. I don't understand what that means. Right. and I don't know that anybody- Who's invoking it really understands that it means. I think that what, what we're doing is we're, we're conflating scientific theories with Marvel movies. All, all of us are. I'm not pointing my finger at anybody, as if Doctor Strange is opening a portal and somebody's just walking through this portal, rather than as eyewitnesses have attested to individuals or aliens standing there and almost disappearing, in what, what looks like to us disappearing, but really could be shifting- Phasing out, phasing between our dimension and another dimension, or using some kind of cloaking technology. Remember that Arthur C. Clarke said that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Well, Bob Lazar, Bob Lazar pointed out at S4 and if you believe his story, which I do, but if you watch- Watched the most recent S four documentary, it's available on Amazon Prime, it's stunning. But when he stands there and says, "When he witnessed, when he were-- that he was called out on the grounds of S four to watch one of the, one of the craft that they had reverse engineered, basically an ARV, it looked like, lift off and phased out right in front of them, disappeared right in front of them." That's right. And the reason why it disappeared, according to Zarin, I think this is accurate by things I've heard from other people as well, the reason What happens when you bend spacetime? You bend light. We know that for a fact, right? Gravity bends light. So if that craft is creating a gravitational bubble, this is what Elizondo and the guys that worked at AIT believe If the craft is, is enveloping itself in its own atmospheric gravitational bubble, then light is gonna be bent around the craft. And so what are you gonna see when you look at the craft? You're gonna see the sky behind the craft because it's bending light around it. And that's the other thing about these crafts, you know, they're, they're transmedium. So they, they move with the same ease through the atmosphere, through Earth's atmosphere, through outer space, through the water, and I've even heard through, through, through like solid objects. So that's why they say they Trans medium, and so people automatically assume, well, if they can move in this capacity, they must be supernatural or interdimensional. Well, not necessarily. If you are warping space time around the craft, then you are moving space time around the craft. You're not moving the craft through space time, you're moving the fabric of space time around the craft. And it doesn't matter if it's water or if it's air molecules or if it's even solid matter, you're, you're moving that fabric around the craft. It's a spacetime bubble. So there are explanations, and Lazar offers some himself Although he, he, he, he, he makes it clear he doesn't know the ultimate answer. He offers some explanations that I think are, are probably pretty plausible. I'm not a physicist, but it's, it's, it's consistent with guys like Lazar, guys like Helmut Off, Eric Davis, guys that are physicists. Lazar was a physicist and is a physicist, and their explanation does Seem to answer all the questions in regard to these craft. They're in a space-time bubble, Lazar says they generate gravity waves, right? That they generate, project gravity waves. there are other explanations that are very similar to that, maybe with a diff-some handful of differences but those explanations explain the incredible capabilities of these craft. They explain them. And then furthermore, we have to remember It's not just, you know, quote unquote, interdimensional beings, if, if such a thing exists, that have-- that are using this kind of technology. It's good old fashioned human beings, too, right? We've got the ARVs, we've got our own craft that can mimic, do-- that, that are capable of some of these extraordinary maneuverings as well. We've got 'em. and Michael Herrera, for example, is a great-- he's a friend of mine, and he has a great story when he was in Indonesia, he saw one of our, one of our reverse-engineered craft, hybridized craft that incorporates conventional components with exotic components, and let me just stress this, when you talk about our own craft that we've built, our hybridized craft, the reason we can't build on the scale or rather to the technological degree Of the alien craft is because we don't have the exotic material that they have. Exotic material is a ma-major component here in the non-human craft. They have materials, they have metallurgy in their craft that we can't reproduce. They have elements, for example, element one fifteen that Lazard, L-Lazard talks about Some of these elements aren't, they don't exist on planet Earth, or at least stable isotopes of them don't exist on the Earth. So if these beings- And the best we can do is they exist on Earth for milliseconds, because that's all we- For milliseconds. That's all we're able to do. That's right. So what can we do? Well, we've got the small amount of material that we've extracted from the crash retrievals, and then we try and synthesize materials, new materials to- to mimic what they have, and we do that, we, we, we do that in some cases very successfully, in other cases not, not very successfully. And, and this is a, a huge part of this whole thing. This, that's why there's an arms race. To, for the-- It's a, there's a crash retrieval arms race. China has a legacy program, Russia has a legacy program. Not, it's not just the United States. Now, I think the United States, our legacy program encompasses the West in general. I would say that the legacy program of the West is the United States, is our program. but we don't have jurisdiction in China, we don't have jurisdiction in Russia, they have their own program. So maybe they've made their own agreements. What kind of ARVs have they developed? This is a massive reason why so much of this is, is never gonna come out to the public because we're gonna protect our strategic advantage. And, and, and, and so that's to the fir-- to your first point of those two things you wanna discuss. That, those are my thoughts on And that aspect. With, we just have a few minutes left, but I wanted to ask you the religious piece of this, which is the, the preparation of these religious leaders, you know, for their flock and for their congregants. That this would be some sort of religious earth shattering. We know that going back even like twenty years, the Catholic Church was already preparing that's public, that they were already preparing for a UFO disclosure. so the Catholic Church has been preparing for this for a while. What do you make of the religious preparations that are underway? So this, the story about the, the pastor, the so-called pastor briefings has been, I would say conflated and inflated in the media and, and by the individuals who were involved yeah, right, and by the individuals who were involved, some of them. So there seems to be two things happening here, two stories that are being, that are being mixed up, and one of those stories seems to pertain to your bigwig evangelical prosperity gospel types like Paula White. Paula White, as we all know, is a spiritual advisor to Donald Trump. She has access to the White House, she's friends with Trump and with people at the White House in general. So Paula has made some statements that, that give me the impression that she's going through some ontological shock right now. So she- She's been told something by somebody. I suspect somebody in the White House is communicating to her and her group. Now, who else is part of her group? I don't know. The pastors that she appears with, with the president probably. I think she has been- Officially briefed in some capacity, her and her group, and that, that is that's baseline. It would just be baseline. The phenomenon is real, non-human beings, crash retrieval, stuff like that. Now, there's other group in Tennessee, this is the one that most people are referring to when they talk about this. I know some of the guys involved in that, but I know the briefers. I'm friends with the briefers. I've been extensively briefed by these guys, and I should probably use the, the, place the word brief in, in, in quotation marks because the vast majority of what these guys share is public domain stuff. that's the vast majority, and, and, and half of what these guys do has to, is, is, is on the child trafficking front. This, and they, they actually, I, I've been on the phone with them the last few days, they actually want me to convey that they have nothing to do with the government. This isn't an official government briefing that any of these pastors are getting. This is a private UAP human trafficking investigative organization that are doing, they're private Funded there's some ex-military guys in there, there's different kinds of professionals in there. Their, their focus probably primarily on the human trafficking side of things, and I think they're doing great work on that front, by the way. They wanna remain anonymous, but within that group, there's a, there's a handful of them that happen to be Christians, and these guys have taken it upon themselves, apart from the organization that they're a part of, they've taken it upon themselves to reach out to various Christians, you know? In the, in the influencer space on social media, and their purpose is, their objective is to, this is what, what, what, what they told me and what they tell these other guys as well, is to convey the reality and the gravity of the, of the UAP phenomenon. And being Christians themselves, they want to encourage pastors and, and Christian leaders to prepare people for disclosure. And they believe that there's a deception coming, and they've got- Different theological views, but none of their theological views are the result of insider information. Okay, let's be clear, none of their-- none of this group's theological views have anything to do with being read in to anything, okay? They're just opinions. And the way that this is coming out, the way that this is playing out on social media, is these six pastors were briefed by government officials, intelligence community people who told them, "X, Y, Z." Y Z. And then people are making the assumption that, oh, intelligence community people or people at the White House are telling pastors that aliens are interdimensional demons or whatever or that this is all just a deception. That's not true. What you're getting is the opinions of certain individuals within this research organization. They're conveying their opinions to people like myself and others and sharing Information, again, the vast majority of which is public domain. They're, they're, they're not really sharing classified information with anybody, and and, and, and again, a lot of it has to do with human trafficking. They really want pastors to be aware of the human trafficking thing, 'cause it's, it's, it's, it's huge. Out of control. I mean, the human trafficking is- Probably the worst thing going on right now on planet Earth, and it's so systematic and monetized, and obviously monetized, it's, it's a massive industry, and that's a large part of these guys' concern. So this thing, as I said, conflated, inflated. It's, it's, it's it's, it's much ado about nothing really. So Timothy, you expect maybe over the next- Week or so we'll see a new tranche of evidence, documents, et cetera, and then this like slow drip maybe as we head into the summer. That's what I've been told. And just keep in mind you know, we could be seeing a lot more impressive stuff. I was told it's gonna be over-- underwhelming, by the way. The stuff that came out recently, a lot of that is the lower tier stuff, a lot of that came from Arrow, although I have been told that Arrow is being frozen out of this process, which is really good news. In other words, Arrow is, is because they've been ordered to, they are turning over some of the footage and stuff that they have, that's lower tier stuff, but they're not being involved in the process of releasing this to the public. That is-- people need to understand that, that, that is a very strategic- Move by the Trump administration to freeze Arrow out of the process because Arrow, the official office at the Pentagon to investigate anomalous activity, is a dog and pony show, and it was from the beginning. It's a disinformation campaign, and the Trump administration, from what I've seen, is freezing them out of the process, except for getting the, you know, getting the material they have and releasing it. So we got some material from Arrow, from NASA, and FOIA stuff. This is what, what I'm, what I'm hearing, this is the Bottom rung of the ladder, it's going up from here. I hope that's true. So we're gonna, we'll wait and see if it is. Timothy Alberino, great to talk to you as always. Thank you for this, really eye-opening perspective. Really appreciate you summarizing and and synthesizing all of this for us today. Great to see you, my friend. Thank you, Clayton. It's always my pleasure to be with you. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel, it's totally free. If you wanna follow us or subscribe, and if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 31, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - May 31, 2026 at 1:13 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

Get OUT! 🤬 Russia is giving the warning in plain language: leave Kyiv now. If Western officials ignore it, they are not confused. They are choosing to sit inside the blast zone and dare Moscow to act. https://t.co/yhFBctxnae

Video Transcript AI Summary

The speaker argues that Russia’s warning to Western diplomats and members of the Western diplomatic corps to leave Ukraine’s capital is not ambiguous and should be treated as a signal that strikes are about to occur. They cite Russian Security Council secretary Shoigu saying ambassadors were warned to leave Kiev because strikes could happen at any moment. The speaker claims the EU and the United States are not taking the warnings seriously and predicts intensified violence, tying it to events including “the killing of those twenty-one girls at that college.” They further argue that, under pressure, Putin is attempting to end the war and that the situation is entering an “endgame.” They criticize the United States for dispatching senators to Ukraine and say the purpose is to support continued funding and to “launder more money through Ukraine,” describing Ukraine as a “massive money laundering operation.” They reference Senator Blumenthal stating America is not leaving Ukraine and that U.S. diplomats are staying despite Russian threats, and they contrast this with what they portray as another side’s belief that threats imply imminent danger for anyone in Ukraine. The speaker asserts that major government infrastructure targets and buildings are expected to be hit and compares the current situation to a past account where Kiev was surrounded with a corridor for people to leave, alleging a NATO-backed deal to back off was a lie. They argue the “choke point is happening right now,” and they discuss reporting that the U.S. embassy in Ukraine was being evacuated while claiming others said the diplomats were not going anywhere. They question how long family members and other U.S.-connected personnel in Ukraine would survive an attack and note that Zelensky left Ukraine to fly to Sweden to secure weapons and funding. They claim Zelensky’s Sweden visit included a new package described as about “eighty to ninety billion dollars,” along with Gripen fighter jets, and they argue that Russia will destroy the aircraft once they enter the theater. They also discuss statements about pilots available in Ukraine and mock the idea that Ukrainian pilots would be flying the jets. The speaker quotes Swedish support rhetoric and claims the Gripen aircraft are for “all of our pilots, all of our aces that we have in Ukraine.” They also reference Ursula von der Leyen celebrating the ratification of documents for a ninety billion dollar loan tied to disbursements in June, and they accuse Ukraine and EU-related institutions of mortgaging Ukraine’s future and redirecting money to entities they name. They claim peace efforts are blocked, stating that Russia says Ukraine will not talk and citing Representative Paula Luna urging Zelensky to accept a peace agreement and criticizing refusal to hold elections. They further allege that money funneled to the United States is tied to U.S. election campaigns and that senators received defense-industry funds. The speaker shifts to portraying a “psychological operation” in mainstream media, claiming coverage frames Russia as losing and Ukraine as winning. They then argue the war of attrition has not worked and emphasize casualties, claiming about “two million” people have been killed. Finally, they discuss drone attacks associated with the killing of young girls at a college, asserting that the attacks were intentional and coordinated with satellite data. They claim Palantir has been integrated with Ukraine’s military operations for years, providing AI and intelligence-related capabilities, and that Palantir has agreements with the Pentagon. They conclude by arguing for keeping American and European diplomats in place while attacks occur, and they reference the senators’ presence as protective or reassuring.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Let's talk about Russia now. What is so hard to understand when they say get out now? Like, is that difficult? Like, if, if I tell my children to get out of this space now, they will listen to me and they will leave. So when Russia tells diplomats and members of the Western diplomatic corps to get out of Ukraine's capital right now, we are about to bomb the hell out of it. Like, these aren't ambiguous messages coming from Russia. It seems that they think Russia and Putin are joking about just two hours ago, here was Shoigu, who is the Russian Security Council secretary, saying, "We have seriously and consciously warned ambassadors to leave Kiev because strikes can happen at any moment." Watch. Такое вы выражение как каким-то действиям, по-моему, все наши действия видны, мы их показываем, более того, о каких-то действиях предупреждаем заранее. В данном случае вы заговорили о предупреждении послам покинуть Киев. Оно было сделано совершенно серьезно и осознанно, потому что в любом случае это может произойти в любой момент, если только... And then, yeah, so it's gonna happen at any moment. So what then? The EU isn't taking it seriously, the United States isn't taking it seriously. In fact, instead of staying away from what's going to become hell on earth, potentially in the next few days, could be weeks, but seems likely that it's about to happen in response to the killing of those twenty-one girls at that college. And under enormous pressure back home, Putin is in order to end this war. Like we are in the end game now. So what does the United States do? What does US Congress do? Sends senators into the bowels of Ukraine to once again reiterate that we stand with Ukraine, seeing an opportunity, of course, right now in order to funnel more money and launder more money through Ukraine as the massive money laundering operation that it has been, of course. For Democrats, defense contractors that you like, the largest money laundering operation perhaps in history unfolded in Ukraine. So we need to keep that money going, we need to keep it flowing, and we don't care that nearly two million Ukrainians have now been killed in this war. Two million. But keep the money flowing. So here's Senator Blumenthal. Just a short time ago, saying, "We, we're here, we're here, and you know what? We're not going anywhere, watch." First, let me just dispel a couple of myths. America isn't leaving Ukraine. Our diplomats are here to stay. We're standing behind Ukraine as we have done from the outset. We will not be cowed by Russian threats. Or bullying. We're not scared, and neither should the people of Ukraine be cowed in any way by this kind of bullying. Yeah. So I'm pretty, pretty sure Putin just pissed himself when he saw that. Wow. Yeah. There's, there's video now circulating of Putin literally peeing in a corner. He's so scared of Richard Blumenthal. Well, the other guy, his pants are all wet. The other guy, too, is right when he says that we're, we're not, we're saying we're not scared. The other guy looks like, "Uh, yeah, speak for yourself, dude. We're gonna make this press conference and we're on an, we're on an airplane out of here because shit's about to hit the fan. But all you diplomats, stay here. You guys stay here, you're fine, nothing to see here. When the targets Russia has said they will hit are major government infrastructure and buildings. I I mean, talk about being wiped off the map, okay? And you recall, and I know that there was somebody in the chat room the other day who wasn't educated on this, but it's okay, like not everyone is knee-deep in this stuff but, you know, remember, Kiev was totally surrounded And there was one corridor out of the city where they were allowing people to leave, and they were about to choke off that artery when Emmanuel Macron and other NATO members said to Putin, "Hey, let's put a deal in place, back off of Kiev, pull, pull back, and we'll put this deal in place." It was a lie, and Putin fell for it, and to his credit, he's admitted that's one of his biggest mistakes. It was completely surrounded. So the choke point is happening right now. We are about to see, it seems like, the endgame in this war. And so you wanna keep US diplomats there, like in embassies and otherwise? There was a report over the past twenty-four hours that US, the, the US embassy in Ukraine was being evacuated, to which lots of other people and, including community notes, were like, "No, no, no, they're not going anywhere." "Oh, good, so then they'll all die?" Like if you've got family, US family that's in Ukraine right now, and I know there's lots of CIA stations across Ukraine, I think more than ten if I'm not mistaken, how many of those will survive this attack? I don't know. But meanwhile, guess who's not there? Zelensky. Got out of his own country to fly to Sweden in order to try to shore up additional money and weapons? And getting a massive new weapons package, including Gripen fighter jets, which he says will make their combat aviation more effective. By the way, what pilots do they have left in Ukraine? It's not gonna be Ukrainian pilots flying, flying these jets. It wasn't Ukrainian pilots flying those jets at the beginning of the war. It was NATO fighters flying those jets. So what air, what pilots do you have left in Ukraine that can fly fighter jets? A hundred and fifty of them. The ghost of Kiev. Yeah, Kiev. Is he still around? He was pretty good. Like the Red Baron, remember that story? This guy, he was taking out Russians left and right. He's an amazing pilot. Yeah, that story was false. The ghost of Kiev. He took out a... What did he take out? A Russian destroyer? Yeah, it was him, him and the Snake Island guys that never happened either. Snake Island. The amount of propaganda so thick. So here is Zelensky in Sweden making a deal for about eighty to ninety billion dollars in order to get all of these new aircraft. The moment these aircraft-- the experts we've spoken to on the show, the moment any of these aircraft have entered the theater in Ukraine, Russia has destroyed them. So you think Russia is gonna allow a hundred and fifty brand new Gripen fighter jets coming from Sweden to make it into Ukraine? Like, are you mentally retarded? So who-- This is just one big massive money laundering operation. They're not-- Where do you get this money from? And you're gonna buy these jets that aren't gonna make it into the air. But here he is, listen. The system. Historická, historická podíla, historický den pro naši zpěvpráci, pro naše krajiny. Dnes je nový paket podpory od Švédska. Tato podpora otevírá pro nás nový úroveň zabezpečení živů pro naše lidi, ochrany našich měst, ochrany našich hromad. V tomto dnešním paketu o výši 2,7 miliardy dolar Drone in almost four hundred million in, but the most important is the Gripen and the Prime Minister. Yeah. And the most, most, most importantly, the Gripen aircraft for all of our pilots, all of our aces that we have in Ukraine. I mean, we are living like in a simulation where they think you are stupid. Here's Ursula von der Leyen playing right into the false narrative. Congratulations to the Ukrainian parliament and Zelensky's team for the swift work to ratify the main documents related to a ninety billion dollar loan. Great, so now they can get these disbursements in June, so the money can flow in, they can get these new aircraft to fight Russia. Ninety billion dollars. Ukraine has already given itself completely away to the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank. Half of its country is gone to BlackRock and Vanguard. Now Jewish settlements taking over. Of course, they wanted Ukraine to become the Greater Israel project, part of the Greater Israel project, as Colonel Douglas McGregor just talked about today. Jewish settlements arriving there in order to take over that land as well. So what's left of Ukraine? Giving away ninety bil- You can't afford ninety billion dollars? Where are you getting this money from? You're borrowing it from the E- the EU? You, you've given away your entire country's future. It's gone. Not only did you kill two million people, you've completely mortgaged your future. Gone. But okay, glad you're gonna get those aircraft that Russia will bomb within two minutes of landing in Ukraine. Or before they ever make it there. Meanwhile, what about peace? On the Russian side, Russia says, "No, Ukraine won't talk to us. There's no discussions at all." Representative Paula Luna posted this just a few minutes ago, says, "You're now holding up the peace agreement, Volodymyr Zelensky. It's time to accept it." Not to mention, you are refusing to hold elections, and your government funneled money to the United States sent to Ukraine back into Joe Biden's reelection campaign. Yes, it's one big money laundering operation. So I'm glad that senators were flying in once again. Senators, by the way, that received hundreds of millions of dollars, hundreds of hundreds of thousands of dollars from the defense contractors as part of their election campaigns. So like Senator Blumenthal, lots of money, lots of money from defense industry. Shocking, right? I know that's probably a big surprise to you. So you're watching like a psy- a psychological operation unfolding in real time right now, like this is what they're not telling you. What they're trying, what you're gonna start to see in the mainstream media is, "Oh, we need to support Ukraine again." You're gonna start to see maybe Ukrainian flags showing up in people's bios, you're gonna start to see news reports about how Ukraine is needs our help because we gotta fight the Russian bear. And sure enough, right on cue, CNN, which is of course an extension of the CIA, the Mockingbird Media, just did a whole piece on how Ukraine is winning against Russia and why we need to support them now more than ever to keep the winning going. This is amazing, watch. Katarina, you argue that Russia has tried to fight a war of attrition where they gradually, not just eat up Ukrainian- Resources but also weighed out Ukraine and the West. But your report says that's not working. What, what, what changed to to, to in effect undermine that Russian war plan? You're exactly right. The Russian theory of victory is that the Kremlin anticipated that it can outlast and out-eret Ukrainian forces, essentially keeping to push advancing hundred meters at a time in an effort to paint a picture that they're actually achieving victories on the battlefield. Now, Ukrainians are- I mean, just stop, just stop. The Institute for the Study of War, one of these think tanks. Jim Sciutto from CNN, who was embedded in Ukraine, lying to the American people about what was happening. CNN lying to the American people what was happening in Ukraine. Okay. These people are clowns, and these people are an extension of the deep state, the CIA. And so you have the, these psychological operations now unfolding on the American people that, "Yeah, Russia's losing, that Ukraine has been fighting them back. We heard this for four years ago. Ukraine's pushing them back." Okay, you've lost two million, two million soldiers killed, not injured, not to mention the hundreds of thousands that have permanently lost limbs. Two million dead. Now the people that are fighting, scarcely Ukrainians, many of them foreign mercenaries from Colombia, France, Poland. And so you watch CNN, you believe this? Garbage. It's, I mean, it's, it's an insult to your intelligence. And so this war of attrition hasn't worked. For whom? Zelensky is literally flying to Sweden to get more munitions. He literally posted a video three days ago begging the West to send more munitions because we're out of them. What the hell is she talking about? An entire generation of young men has been killed. But Ukraine's winning. Ukraine's winning. These people are absolutely delusional. Meanwhile, new information about the drone attacks that killed all of those young girls at the college in Russia. There they are, all of those girls killed in the Starbellek attack at that college. An attack on multiple buildings. Ukraine says it was an errant drone that inadvertently struck-- no, it didn't. Multiple drones on attacking multiple buildings, all intentional, and all done with satellite coordination. And as Russia has pointed out, where did the satellite coordination come from? Who was providing it? Who was providing the telemetry data? the friends of NATO, the West, arguably MI6. But it turns out, according to new reports out of Russia Today, that Palantir has been deeply in-integrated with Ukraine's military ops for years, helping to shape the policy of Russophobia in addition to telemetry data. So the spokesperson, Maria Zarakova when she was asked whether there was any US AI company involved in any way tied to the deadly attack on the college Said that yes, this is what they found. Since the beginning of the special military operation, Palantir has been closely working with the Kiewit Group, providing the capabilities of fields and artificial intelligence systems in the interest of Ukraine. It's well known that company has agreements and obligations to the Pentagon as a contractor. Yeah, so Palantir. Surprising. Palantir is involved in the AI targeting, okay, of course, and apparently Starlink as well, involved. So all of that to say, keep your American diplomats there, keep your European diplomats there, keep a stiff upper lip as these bombs start raining down on Ukraine over the next few days, few hours, who the hell knows? But I'm glad the Senators are there to make sure that we're not abandoning Ukraine in any kind of way. Thank you so much for watching Redacted, we'd love for you to subscribe to the channel, it's totally free if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 30, 2026 at 11:30 PM

Saved - May 31, 2026 at 12:42 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

EUROPEAN DEATH WISH? 🚨 Former CIA officer Larry Johnson says Russia spared key Kiev command centers for years to avoid killing embedded Western intelligence and military officers. Now Moscow may stop holding back, and Europe is acting like it has a death wish.

Video Transcript AI Summary

Europe is portrayed as moving toward a potential large-scale war with Russia, while diplomats in Ukraine are said to be “doubling down” instead of leaving despite Russia’s warnings of an imminent massive bombing attack. The discussion frames Russia as rarely bluffing, stating it typically signals what it will do and then carries it out, particularly by shifting from restrained actions to a “new phase” of greater danger. Former CIA officer Larry Johnson says Russia held back from striking key areas in Kyiv four years ago, when the city was encircled and Russia had only one artery out. He argues that Russia previously lacked the full inventory of weapons and personnel needed to confront NATO but that Russia now has them. Johnson says the tone shift began about three weeks earlier when Dmitry Puliantsky, described as Russia’s ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and a former UN official, stated Europe was on the target list because of Europe’s support for attacks described as terrorist attacks inside Russia. Johnson says the position was reinforced by Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Rypkow and then finalized by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in comments to Marco Rubio, including that Russia is giving the West notice and time to vacate. Johnson emphasizes that attacks on civilian targets that involve bombing and killing civilians are described as terrorism, regardless of the actor. He also says Russia held back until it could remove intelligence assets—people and operational support personnel—from sites linked to CIA, SBU, and defense headquarters, so the warning is aimed not only at diplomats but also at secondary personnel supporting military and intelligence operations. In response to questions about how hard it would be for infiltrators to leave, Johnson describes operational tradecraft and argues Russia likely penetrated sectors across military, intelligence, law enforcement, and diplomatic areas. He says Russia makes a calculation about whether information gained from assets is more valuable than destroying them, and that Russia has decided to destroy units now. He adds that public handling of the warnings can enable assets to avoid detection by not showing up to work without triggering immediate suspicion. On the scale of escalation, Johnson describes the next phase as moving from intermittent attacks to “high speed,” intensifying assaults intended to lay groundwork to reoccupy and take Kyiv, and also take Odessa. He says Russia’s actions reflect a determination that the “special military operation” will enter a new level of activity, and he argues Russia would establish a pro-Russian government rather than leaving it unchanged. He also cites past Soviet/Russian experiences with insurgency and radical jihadist conflict, including efforts involving Ukrainian guerrilla groups and later Chechen conflicts, describing a history of crushing such movements over years. The discussion then shifts to Iran and a “so-called” ceasefire, including reports of a potential 60-day extension requiring President Trump’s sign-off. Johnson says that, within the last 25 minutes, Iran shot down an MQ-9 drone belonging to the Americans in Bushehr province and that over three consecutive days there has been exchange of fire involving the United States’ combat air patrol and Iranians on the ground. The conversation says Iran stopped additional US ships and that shots were fired at a US tanker attempting to pass through the Strait of Hormuz. Johnson lists Iranian conditions for agreement: assets being unfrozen immediately, sanctions ending especially on oil, Strait of Hormuz coming under Iranian control alongside Oman, and an environmental fee for ships akin to arrangements in the Dardanelles. He also says Iran’s conditions include stopping the war in Lebanon and stopping killing of Palestinians in Gaza and West Bank. He argues that without Trump forcing the hand of Israel, the ceasefire will not hold, and he says there is no agreement to end fighting because the sides remain far apart, with the Trump administration portrayed as unwilling to accept Iran’s conditions.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Well, Europe is bumbling and stumbling into a potential large scale war with Russia. Seems intentionally, maybe not even bumbling and stumbling, but intentionally moving in that direction. And many diplomats, of course, in Ukraine should get the hell out now, but they're not, they're doubling down. We're standing with Ukraine. Yeah, until they're killed in a massive bombing attack which seems to be imminent, and Russia's saying as much. And there's one thing about Russia, they don't usually bluff. Like, they usually tell you what they're gonna do, and then they do it, and then everyone's like, "Wow, I can't believe they did it." Well, they just told us they were gonna do it. Why are you surprised by that? Yeah, but we're used to lying, so they just told us they were gonna do it, and then they did it. That seems to be exactly what's gonna happen. Former CIA officer Larry Johnson says Russia held back from striking key areas in Kiev four years ago. Specifically, I mean, they were encircled. The city was freaking encircled. They had one artery out of the damn city. They held back, and now it seems like the gloves are off. So I'd like to talk to Larry now about that and Iran in just moments here, Larry. Great to see you. Welcome back to the show. Hey, Clayton, good to see you, man. Great to see you. So why do you think Americans and Europeans are ignoring these warnings? I mean, you saw Senator Blumenthal there. We're not going anywhere. You have US senators who flew into the Capitol saying, "We're not, you know, we're not gonna buy into this bullying and, and garbage, this chest bumping that Russia's making right now. They're not gonna attack Kiev." What do you make of that? Yeah, they've mistaken Russian patience for Russian weakness. I think the one of the reasons Russia hadn't attacked or, or threatened to attack Kiev the way they are now prior to this point is Russia wasn't ready to-- didn't have the full inventory of weapons and personnel ready to confront NATO. They do now, so they are in that position. the turn, the shift in this tone started three weeks ago. Ambassador Puliantsky, Dmitry Puliantsky, he used to be the number two guy at the UN. he was, he was sort of my host and chaperone when I spoke to the UN Security Council two years ago, three years ago now. And he's a, he's a, I call him a quiet professional. He currently is the Russian ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and he came out on the Danny Davis podcast about three weeks ago, and, and was the first one to put out that basically Europe, Europe was on the target list, and, and Russia was ready to, to hit them because of their support for these attacks, these terrorist attacks inside Russia. And let's emphasize, when you attack civilian targets and you use violence That's terrorism. It doesn't matter whether it's a government doing it as part of war or not, that is terrorism. If you're bombing and killing civilians, whether you're you know, some ISIS, Al Qaeda, or Israel or the United States, that is terrorism. And so these attacks have been seen by Russia as nothing more than pure terrorism. Two days, three days after Ambassador Poleanski made his comments it was re-emphasized by the Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Rypkow, and, and I've also met w-with Ambassador Rypkow back in twenty twenty-three. and then it was finalized this week with Sergey Lavrov, the Foreign Minister's comments to Marco Rubio, and he wasn't kidding. And so they're, they're, they're g- they're giving the West notice, they're giving them time to vacate. And y-, you know, I think again, they held off up to this point 'cause they weren't ready, the-prepared to go to full war, full-blown war with NATO. Now they are. I think the other aspect was they had intelligence assets in these various, in CIA SBU sites defense headquarters sites. but now they've had a chance to vacate them. So this, this is, this is moving into a new phase, a much more dangerous phase, and this was done at the direction of Vladimir Putin. You worked at the CIA Getting those assets, as you talked about, these spies basically out of-- So we have how many-- We had how many CIA offices in, in Ukraine? About eight of them or something like that? I think there were- I, I, I really, I have no idea. I just know that you will have you've got the CIA station, and then they have what are called bases, sort, sort of subsets of that station. And they can be assigned to both the military intelligence, the civilian intelligence side of the house, and they may even be assigned actually to military units. and then you also have military advisors, so it's not just CIA. Right. And, and then, and this because Russia's warning was not so much for the diplomats, it was for all of these secondary personnel who are providing support to military operations and intelligence operations. I guess what my point is so you've got, I think the New York Times when they did that bombshell piece, which we were, we had already talked about on our show, but two years later they admitted that the CIA was active in Ukraine, and they, I think they, I think in that piece they said like, I don't know, like five or eight stations throughout Ukraine, a big presence. But then you mentioned, so then you've got the SBU, and so you've got Russian spies infiltrating, obviously CIA, S-SBU. Right. Right. When those people, how difficult is it for those people to leave? Like if, if John suddenly doesn't show up to work, it's pretty clear that John probably wasn't working for the CIA. Pretty clear that John probably isn't a member of the SBU, he's a Russian, and he just went back to Mother Russia 'cause something, some shit's about to happen here. I guess how difficult is it to unpack that? Well, and, and then, so this gets to operational tradecraft, tradecraft. when I, I am certain Russians haven't briefed me, so I haven't seen their, you know, behind-the-scenes secret information. But, you know, I'd, I'd wager a whole lot of money that they, they had key sectors of both the military side of the house, the intelligence side of the house, the law enforcement side of the house, the diplomatic-- they had them all penetrated. That has been the Russians have been incredible with their intelligence operations over the years. They had, they had the Germans for during World War II, the head of German and the Nazi intelligence, a guy named Reinhard Gehlen he thought, "Man, he, he had penetrated the KGB," and, and it turned out or it was NKVD back then. It turned out he was being, being misled by a Soviet source, a Jewish guy in, in Yugoslavia, who claimed to be this, you know, anti, anti-Soviet type. So my point is, Russia's got those assets, you keep those assets, you always have to make a calculation, is the information we're getting from them more valuable than if we took this unit out and, and destroyed it? I, the, where the, where the Russians are now is they've made that calculation, we're gonna destroy that unit. And so now but because of the way this has been handled in public, it, it gives these, these assets a way to not show up to work without raising suspicion, because everybody's sort of like nervous, hey, are we gonna get taken out? What do you think? I wanna get to Iran here in a second before we let you go, Larry, but what do you think? How devastating an attack do you think this is going to be? Do you believe that this is the end game, so to speak, that this is the full-scale Russian invasion that the West has been saying they've been beating back for years? Yeah, this is-- Let's, let's think of it this is this is taking your windshield wipers from intermittent, you know, boom, boom. Boom, to high speed, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. That's where it's gonna go. I think it's gonna be intensified attacks. They're gonna lay the groundwork for Russia's gonna reoccupy and take Kiev And then they will also take Odessa before this is over. Russia is the, the claims that Russia's weak and slow and confused, and that's just all Western propaganda, Western spin. So I, I think the, the Russians have made a determination that the, the, this, this special military operation is going to enter a new level of activity. Do you think they're gonna install a puppet government? No, it won't be so much a puppet, but it'll be a government that will be pro-Russian. Yeah, respectful of Russia of Russia's security. You know, and look, this isn't-- People pretend, oh, well, the, the West can mount an insurgency against Russia. They keep forgetting, Rus-- the, the Soviets/slash Russians have been through this. They did it in nineteen, early nineteen fifty. CIA and MI6 were, were putting together guerilla groups that were operating in Ukraine out of the Bandera Faction, and it took the, the Russians about five to six years to crush that. Then there was the Chechen War, nineteen ninety-nine, that went on till two thousand and ten. That was Western-backed radical jihadists, and the Russians defeated them and then restored calm. So, you know, Russia at least has a track record of knowing how to deal with this. It's just, you know, they prefer not to, but when their hands forced, they deal with it. Earlier today, you and I were texting, and you said, "You know, we, we, let's, let's talk about this Iranian so-called ceasefire." I love the, the quotes around "so-called." So six-- the, the reports are, at least over the past few hours, sixty-day potential extension of this ce-ceasefire agreement that President Trump has to sign off on it. There are reports coming out of Iran, you can confirm or deny this, that they're not really involved in this at all, sounds like once again, what do you make of this? Latest back and forth sixty day ceasefire, is there any truth to it? so in just in just the last, let's see, twenty five minutes the, the Iranians shot down an MQ nine drone belonging to the Americans. It was si-- shot down in the southern Bushehr province. they so still today for the third consecutive day There's an exchange of fire between the United States, which, which has a combat air patrol over the area, and Iranians on the ground. Reportedly, t-today, the shots were fired at a US tanker that was trying to sneak through the Strait of Hormuz. Today, the, the Iranians have stopped four more US ships, so they continue to test it. The, the, the, the, the f-the foundation of what Iran is willing to agree to hasn't been agreed to. If, if we- Scott Besson is to be believed the, the Iranians insist on one the assets are unfrozen, not some time in the future, now, unfrozen, that the sanctions are rele- are, are, are ended, especially, particularly on oil, that the Strait of Hormuz will be under Iranian control in tandem with Oman, and that Ships will pay an environmental fee, just like they do passing through the Dardanelles to go in and out of the Black Sea where Turkey is handling that. And fourth, an end to the war, the war in Lebanon's gotta stop, and that means stopping the killing of Palestinians in Gaza and West Bank as well. Well unless Troop-- unless Trump forces the hand of the Israelis, that's not gonna happen, and if that doesn't happen, there is no-- this ceasefire isn't gonna hold. But there is no, there is no agreement to end the fighting at all. They are, they're still far apart. Iran is-- they've made clear what their, what their conditions are. It's, it's the Trump administration that's under the firm control of the Zionists that's unwilling to accept those conditions. Once again, and it always seems to happen on a Thursday or Friday, you know, right? Hey, just, you know, people who are playing the derivatives and shorting stocks, they're, they're making, they're making a killing. They are making a killing. A massive, massive money-making machine that this has become for people, and a lot of people are getting rich off of it. Larry, great to see you, as always, my friend. you can read more about Larry's great work over at Sonar Twenty One, does some incredible reporting over there, and and really appreciate all of your insights as always, Larry. Thank you so much for joining us, man. Hey, my friend, I appreciate it. Take care. You bet, thanks, Larry. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel, it's totally free, if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we Social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 30, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - May 30, 2026 at 3:43 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

⚠️ This is how empires die. Washington drains the oil reserve, stumbles into war with Iran, plays proxy games with ISIS, and tells Americans everything is fine while the economy cracks. @DougAMacgregor lays it out.

Video Transcript AI Summary

Russia claims US intelligence is secretly moving ISIS terrorists from prisons in Syria into Iraq to prepare an attack on Iran. The report Russia cites says Western spy agencies plan to use Syrian militants as a proxy force against Iran, framing this as part of a broader effort to manipulate militant groups. Colonel Douglas McGregor says this kind of tactic has “been going on forever” in the region, pointing to past US and allied support for groups designated as terrorist organizations and to similar historical patterns of arming proxy forces. He argues Iran is “eminently well-equipped” to deal with such threats, including recalling an earlier incident in which a Turkish-backed group of Azari Turks and Kurds was stopped after warnings reached Iranian authorities. He says the larger effect is to reinforce Tehran’s belief that any agreement with the US is worthless because the US cannot be trusted. The discussion also centers on an alleged “final draft” of a US-Iran peace memorandum obtained by Al Arabiya. The transcript describes it as a “laundry list” of US demands that Iran likely will not accept, including: reopening the Strait of Hormuz to international navigation without fees or tolls; slowly removing sanctions on Iranian oil in phases over many years; ending Iranian military operations, including assisting Lebanon; and stopping Israeli bombing of southern Lebanon, with an asserted Israeli component in expected outcomes. McGregor says such elements are difficult to keep concealed and argues they reduce the likelihood of a lasting agreement. A key dispute involves Strait of Hormuz control and sanctions. The transcript states President Trump said the strait would be open to everyone, not controlled by any country under any Iran deal, and that there would be no discussions about easing sanctions. Iran is also said to have stated it would strike back after recent attacks over the weekend, with McGregor arguing there is no coherent strategy apparent and that policy changes occur “tweet to tweet.” He criticizes the claim that Iran would not control the strait by describing prior international arrangements (the Montreux Convention) as a reason to expect a Turkish framework and “de facto” Iranian control due to Iran’s coastline and incentives to keep shipping and trade flowing. McGregor identifies two major obstacles: Israel’s influence over US decisions via Netanyahu’s demands to Iran, and Trump’s personal political constraints about escaping a failed approach without appearing weak. He also claims that withholding or reducing protection and exerting political pressure would keep US actions aligned with those demands. The transcript shifts to economic concerns, linking the Iran crisis to potential financial instability. McGregor cites inflation rising from 3.2% to 3.8% and suggests possible acceleration to 6%, arguing that raising interest rates to match inflation could collapse the financial system. He also says Trump sold about 17.8 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to keep prices below $110 per barrel, warning the reserve could be exhausted by late July or early August, especially if sales occur below market price. He predicts wider economic harm, including a potential 36% reduction in global economic size, and compares current conditions to the Great Depression. He argues wealth and spending concentration make collapse-driven social change likely, describing the US as on an “unsustainable” path with debt and market distortions such as long-term mortgages and market manipulation benefiting the wealthy. He concludes that Trump’s decision to go to war with Iran accelerates the process and that a reckoning will eventually occur, though he does not specify timing.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Well, Russia says that the US is secretly moving ISIS terrorists out of prison cells in Syria into Iraq to prepare to launch an attack against Iran. I know, sounds crazy, but why? You know, it's perfectly normal. We'd love to team up with ISIS, we'd love to team up with terrorists on a regular basis. Here is the report: The West planned to use former ISIS militants against Iran. According to the head of Russia's FSB, Western spy agencies are intending to use Syrian militants as a proxy force against Iran. I mean, it doesn't sound like the West really wants peace with Iran after all. And if you read the latest report from Al Arabiya, which got its hands on the quote-unquote final draft of a US-Iran peace memorandum, this thing seems to be a non-starter for Iran. It's like a laundry list of things the United States wants that Iran probably- Probably won't go along with. Here are just a few highlights, though, the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to international navigation without taking any fees or tolls, possibility of sanctions being slowly removed from Iranian oil, but it would happen in phases, and, you know, you can, you can definitely trust the United States government, right? Wink, wink, nudge, nudge. So in phases, like this will happen over the course of many, many years perhaps. That's probably a non-starter for Iran and the end of military operations as well by Iran, including assisting In Lebanon, I'm sure that there would be an Israeli component of that as well, please stop bombing southern Lebanon. All of that to say, this doesn't seem like it's coming to fruition. So what's in it for Iran? And where do things go next? and Iran has said, "We will strike back against this recent round of attacks against our country." Colonel Douglas McGregor is back with us to examine all of that. So, Colonel, when you hear about this FSB story Out of Syria, the idea that the United States is secretly grabbing ISIS militants, rounding them up, arming them, putting them, moving them to Iraq, presumably to attack Iran, are you surprised by this? What do you make of it? Well, the last time I looked, we established a government in Damascus that took control of Syria, that was essentially a group of ISIS graduates Or Al Qaeda members and so forth. So this sort of thing has been going on forever in the region. the Mossad, as you implied, is very good at this. They know how to manipulate the various groups and turn them against each other. I think that's what we're trying to do now with Iran. But this is another measure of how desperate we are. I mean, this isn't gonna change anything, and the Iranians are eminently well-equipped to deal with that. And remember that when they tried to arm and, and send, send over a group of Azari Turks that were from just across the border, also along with some Kurds the Turkish military intelligence actually warned the Iranians, and the Iranians were able to annihilate the group before it ever got into the country. I think the Iranians can handle this, but the problem is that this sort of thing reinforces the conviction in Tehran that any agreement reached with us is worthless. That we're not going to stand by anything, we can't be trusted, we lie all the time. And so what's the rationale for signing anything with us under any circumstances? That's the bad news. That's why this is a really bad idea. But it's not unusual because the United States has supported MEK, which was a terrorist group designated until 2012 when Obama decided they weren't any longer because they were designated as helpful. And so Iran must expect this. That it's not-- it's, it's totally in character, right? Yes, I, I, I'm, that's why I say I don't think- The Iranians feel particularly threatened by this. This is something they can handle. They know the region better than we do, and they certainly understand what they're dealing with in the Israeli camp. it's also reminiscent of what we did after World War II in the Carpathians and, in Western Ukraine. We armed all of the people that were called Banderites that had been part of the sort of rogue organizations loosely associated with the Nazis, and some were directly, but a group of nationalists who were willing to fight to the bitter end, so we armed them And in fact, it was Jaroszelski, who was a Polish officer at the time, young officer, who endeared himself to his Soviet masters by going into the mountains, rooting them out and killing them. This, this isn't new. We've done this. The Israelis have done it. The British are very good at it. The, the problem I have with it though, is that if you're really interested, and I don't think we are, frankly, but if you're really interested in coming to an agreement that has any chance of lasting about the Persian Gulf and in our relations with Iran right now, this isn't something you do. You can't conceal it. Everybody finds out. Right. It's all plastered all over the newspapers now. It's pretty obvious. so just a few minutes ago, Colonel, President Trump was was- Said that the Strait of Hormuz will be open to everyone, it won't be controlled by any country under any deal reached with Iran. There won't be no discussions about easing sanctions on Tehran. So that was, that's of course, a huge piece of the Iranian part of their deal, removing of the sanctions. And that they will control the Strait of Hormuz. So and then Iran also, of course, saying that they will respond and retaliate for these recent ta-attacks over the weekend. there doesn't seem to be any, any end in sight to this. No, I, I haven't heard or seen anything that I would describe as meaningful. I mean, how do you follow these tweets and come up with some sort of coherent strategy or policy? I mean, if you're a schizophrenic, maybe you understand what he's talking about, but the rest of us with normal minds, no, we can't figure it out. And his policies change from tweet to tweet, as you just pointed out. and it's ridiculous. First of all, somebody said somewhere along the line that possession was nine-tenths of the law. Well, here's a blinding flash of the obvious. Iran controls the Strait of Hormuz, we don't. So I don't know who he's kidding. secondly, and we've talked about this before, we had something, we had something called the Montreux Convention, which was signed in nineteen twenty-six after World War One by the various belligerents, co-belligerents. And they decided that Turkey should control the strait and everybody agreed to the conditions under which the strait would be governed. Turkey signed up for it. We've never had any problems with the Dardanelles, the Turks have done an excellent job of conducting ships in and out of it I think something similar is going to happen in the Strait of Hormuz, and I imagine that Iran will end up if it's not the major factor in it, it'll probably be de facto the controlling authority, and that's not surprising. They control most of the coastline that is on the Strait of Hormuz And again, they have an incentive to keep it running and keep it flowing because they too want the oil and the gas and all the other things that are missing now, fertilizer, sulfuric acid, hydrogen, nitrogen, and so forth from, from being-- everything's being kept inside the Gulf, they wanna get it out. So I, I don't see a problem, but this, this doesn't have anything to do with rationality. There is no rationality involved in this. You're dealing with two- Two serious problems. Number one, Israel. Israel has veto authority over anything that President Trump decides to do. He isn't in charge. He is responding to Netanyahu, the demands he sets f-forth in front of the Iranians and says, "These are the things you must do." They're not our demands. Those are Israeli demands. So somehow or another, how do you break the hold that Netanyahu has on President Trump and the United States government? Then nobody in Congress is gonna stand up and jeopardize their income if they oppose the Israel lobby and effectively say no to Mr. Netanyahu. So that's problem number one. Problem number two? His President Trump and his personality and his fear of being castigated and humiliated for having done this, done this stupid thing, and attacking Iran was a very dumb idea. anybody with any sense knew that And there's nothing that justifies the total mobilization for war that it would require for us to take control of Iran. We're not gonna implement a draft and bring over a, a million people to run all over the countryside and control Iran. It's ridiculous. Nobody wants to do that, nobody'll support it. So how does he get out of it without embarrassing himself? I think that's a serious problem, and if you turn to Mr. Netanyahu and his agents inside the United States, the billionaires that put Trump where he is, and you tell them, "Well, I'm sorry guys, I can't go any further. This has to stop, so I'm pulling the plug," they're gonna look at him and say, "Well, then we're pulling the plug on you, my friend. We're, we're taking away the billions of dollars that we've helped you get." We're subtracting those from your side of the ledger. More important, we're not gonna protect you anymore from the attacks that you're gonna sustain from Congress. Congress will eat you alive without us. So if you don't do what we say, you've had it. Those are the grim facts And also, we will release the compro mat and whatever's hidden in these Epstein files that we've enabled you to hide from the rest of us, and, you know, the millions of documents that we still aren't allowed to see as a result of it. I, I think you're absolutely right. Where do you think the-- W- what do you think happens next here? I mean, are we heading back to a full-scale hot war? I, you know, I, I feel like Richard Nixon, I'm glad you asked that question. Because there are some other things that, that we don't usually mention that we really do need to talk about. A lot of people don't seem to understand that inflation in April jumped from three point two to three point eight percent. Projections for the next quarter or two suggest that we may hit six percent inflation. Well, if you go up to five percent or six percent inflation, that means that your interest rates should be fixed at six percent or seven percent. Right now, they are fixed at three point seven five percent below inflation. Now, what does this mean? This means if you try to fix it and suppress the inflation and you raise those rates, our, our financial system will collapse. The economy won't survive it. You know, we now have-- the president has also dipped into the SPR, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Remember when Biden did this, and this was during COVID, and Trump spoke out and, and raged against it, saying this was irresponsible and so forth. Well, I found out yesterday that he sold something in the neighborhood of seventeen point eight million barrels of oil, lat-- just this within the last week. as an effort to suppress the prices of oil, to keep it below a hundred and ten dollars per barrel. Well, the problem with this is at this rate, our strategic petroleum reserve will probably be exhausted by the end of July, beginning of August, especially since he's also sold below market price, unknown quantities of oil to some of our Asian friends. Now, doubtlessly, this was done because after all, he never bothered to ask them what they thought about his dumb idea Of attacking Iran and this is trying to ease the damage, but this isn't a long term solution. This is all short term thinking. What happens when you hit bottom on this strategic petroleum reserve? What happens when you can't skirt or skate away from the consequences? You know, right now people think that when all the chickens come home to roost. And I'm talking about everything. The loss of oil around the world and, and the gas and the minerals and everything else, we could see as much as a thirty-six percent reduction in the size of the global economy. Now, why is that important? Because during the Great Depression the world economy was reduced by twenty percent. Geez However, we had an advantage, believe it or not, during the thirties in the United States, and one advantage that we had was that all of our allies during World War One owed us lot-- owed us lots of money because we'd sold them not just weapons and, and bullets and so forth, we also sold them a lot of food and a lot of other mineral resources. And we asked that they pay for those things in gold. So we had a lot of gold pouring into our country. And then finally, our debt to GDP ratio was so small, it, it was hardly worth mentioning in the nineteen thirties. Today, our debt to GDP ratio is a hundred and twenty-five percent. Some people say it's higher, it's actually a hundred and thirty. But it's certainly climbing. It's not by any means being reduced. You put all of that together, and he's sitting on top of a, a very large ticking time bomb politically, socially, culturally, financially, economically. I mean, it's really hard to imagine that Americans support this, and most of them don't. And so- You continue to see these market perversions, such as the fifty-year mortgage, which will only increase the price of a house and enslave Americans for longer. you know, various sort of band-aids, but it's all, it's all a perversion of a natural financial system in order to It, it raged these wars, and I think Americans are seeing it. So that is both the silver lining for us and the curse, the poison pill for the administration. It has to come to a head because we have to, we have to start to reject it. Is there any way we can do that other than just complaining here on protected? Well, someone sent me a chart this morning. Showing that ninety percent of the spending inside the United States is a function of ten percent of the American population. Right. And if you look at the distribution of wealth, it's almost the same. And normally when you see that kind of thing, the word revolution springs to mind. Because when things collapse, when things fail, that's when people finally take to the streets. When you can't buy gas When you can't get the food that you want, when the supply chains break down, that's when chaos breaks out, and that's when things change. I don't know how else to put it, because this sort of mal-distribution of wealth gets worse with each passing day. And if you look at the White House right now and the people surrounding President Trump, they are a microcosm of what I'm describing. That's what you're seeing. Every time they manipulate the markets, what do you see happen? People walk out with wheelbarrows full of cash all by shorting something, usually oil. So there is no easy way out, Natalie. I'm afraid the, the only way out is the hard way, and I think at some point we're gonna see it. I don't know when it happens. I mean, you gotta bring on Nasim Talib You know, who invented the black swan, and maybe he can give you a, a better assessment there. But the black swan is definitely gonna take off, and when it does, it's gonna be hell to pay. And I don't think right now most people in Washington are aware of it. I-- if anything, they're delusional. They look at the markets, they don't see the danger. How you could make it is beyond my imagination, but they really don't. No, and the-- I saw a report today saying we could see the markets going up twenty, even thirty percent this year in the midst of all of this, so the rich will get richer and the average Americans will get totally squeezed. And so, so many people in our chat room right now said the colonel is spot on, one hundred percent. I've been saying this. Someone said, "I've been saying this, goddamn it." So, in our, in our chat room about a per-second American revolution that we're, we're facing right now. It's At some point, whether it's Trump or the next person, but thirty-nine trillion dollars in debt and an unsustainable path, it's a, I mean, we're on a collision course for disaster. Yeah, the bad news is that I think President Trump, with his decision to go to war with Iran, has actually accelerated this process. So I think it's going to land in his lap, whether he likes it or not. Well, thank you for that, Colonel. It's great to talk to you. Yeah, thank you, Colonel. You really feel that way? I do, but only on a personal level, not about the subject matter. I just, I just happen to like you that much. Well, I love, yeah, what I love, what I love about you is you're able to just cut through the BS. I mean, and just, you know, and whether it's not-- You're not trying to sugarcoat anything, just give it, give it straight, and that's what we need right now Handed this mess. So, I don't know, something very, something very interesting is happening right now in Washington. I think we are at, we are at a tipping point moment. So, thank you, Colonel, as always, for your assessment and your analysis second to none. So, thank you, sir. Great to see you. Okay, thank you all. Bye-bye. Thanks, Doug. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel, it's totally free. If you wanna follow us or subscribe, and if we brought Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 28, 2026 at 11:30 PM

Saved - May 29, 2026 at 2:39 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🚨 The fuse is lit in Ukraine. Russia is done playing diplomatic games, Europe is pushing closer to disaster, and sources say both sides are preparing for the endgame of this war. https://t.co/9gWNlbsMce

Video Transcript AI Summary

The transcript claims Russia and Ukraine are preparing for the “end game” after what it describes as a major escalation, saying Russia has stopped negotiating while European and Western leaders are “playing with fire.” It provides context about an attack on the Sterbolesk College in which Ukraine is said to have launched multiple drone strikes that killed 21 college girls and wounded 42 people. The transcript asserts that, according to the speaker’s sources, there were “no military assets” at the college. It says Ukraine stated a drone went off course, and then argues that the targeting was intentional. It adds that Ukrainian drone operators are described as being awarded points and incentives for civilian deaths, with an “extra equipment” and “medals” system after monthly data handovers. The transcript further claims remaining Russian college professors who survived are “added to Ukraine’s kill list,” referencing the Myravaetz website. It also alleges coordination of drone targeting using satellite coordinates and says the CIA and the UK are involved in targeting and telemetry data for attacks on civilian infrastructure. On the Russian side, the transcript describes an overnight response on Kyiv, featuring, for the first time, “Orichin” missiles, and includes reactions to missiles striking nearby locations. It claims Russia warned foreign citizens to leave, calling it the “last straw,” and said it would conduct “systematic strikes” on targets across Kyiv. It quotes a Russian Ministry of Defense statement that foreign nationals and diplomatic missions should leave as soon as possible, and says the EU responded that it would not leave. The transcript includes remarks attributed to Dmitry Medvedev criticizing the EU’s decision to maintain diplomatic presence. It then claims that a larger buildup is underway and says forces and special forces from Germany, France, the UK, and the United States—including the CIA—have been building up inside Ukraine. It argues Russia might take Odessa and claims this would cut off Ukraine from the ocean, asserting that taking Odessa would effectively prevent Ukraine from remaining viable. It claims Putin has been patient and aims to prevent civilian casualties, and states that civilian casualty numbers on the Ukrainian side were “incredibly low” compared with attacks on Russian civilians. It also describes alleged pressure within Russia for a more aggressive approach, framed as coming from anger over civilian deaths. The transcript then shifts to alleged threats involving the Saint Petersburg Economic Forum (June 3–6), stating Russia is treating them seriously and expects possible attacks during the event. It asserts Russia plans to “bring pain to everyday infrastructure across Ukraine,” and, if that does not produce surrender, to encircle Kyiv again. It includes an RT-referenced claim that “annihilation” of terrorist infrastructure will begin, including in Europe. Later, it quotes an NBC interview with President Zelensky claiming soldiers are rationing ammunition and lacking weapons to advance, with territorial losses if American aid does not arrive. It then claims President Trump posted a meme about alleged waste and corruption involving Ukrainian steel shipped to Poland for export to the U.S. to avoid “Section 232” tariffs and anti-dumping duties. The transcript ends by arguing Russia was not “pushed back” at Kyiv, stating Russia “left” as part of a pullback and aims for a settlement.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Well, something big is about to happen between Russia and Ukraine. Russia is done negotiating, and European leaders, Western leaders, are basically playing with fire right now. We're learning from our sources in Ukraine That the fuse has essentially been lit, both sides are preparing for the end game in this war. I mean, before we get to that part of the story, though, some context. A few days ago, Ukraine launched a terror attack against children in the Sterbolesk College. These girls were in their beds when Ukraine killed them in this drone attack, multiple drone attacks against this dormitory here you can see, but other buildings as well in that video you can see Ukraine launched drones which killed twenty one college girls, wounded forty two people, and according to our sources, there were no military assets at that college, zero, despite what propaganda you're seeing on Telegram about it, there were none. Ukraine says it was because a drone went off course. Okay, so a dr-- multiple drones just happened to go off course and happened to hit these dormitories. By the way, as we- Separately reported here on the show Ukrainian drone operators are awarded points for civilian deaths. Now, the highest level, of course, is taking out military infrastructure. Number five on that list, though, is killing civilians, and of course, drone operators in Ukraine then are able to hand over that data to the government at the end of every month, they're awarded extra equipment, extra you know, I don't know, medals, so to speak, incentives. Incentives. So killing civilians, totally fine for Ukraine. so according to you know, the-- again, these drone operators, they, they just went off course, that, that was the issue here, which isn't true. These civilians were targeted by Ukraine on purpose. And if you listen to Shoygu on the Russian side, again, you do you, however you wanna do it, but he brings up a great point, of course, which is in modern warfare, these drones are operating with satellite coordinates, so they don't just go off course, these don't just fly out of range, they're all being targeted and coordinated with CIA and the UK, the UK particularly is involved in the targeting and telemetry data that is involved in these attacks on civilian infrastructure. Now the remaining Russian College professors who weren't killed in this attack have now been added to Ukraine's kill list. Here you go, it's the Myravaetz website. So they killed students, wounded dozens more, now they wanna kill the rest of the staff. Okay. Unlike in Israel, by the way, where they kill journalists on purpose and won't let them see the proof of anything. Like if they wanna go and see the proof of anything, sorry, you're not allowed to do that, unless it's, unless you're being led by the IDF by the hand in order to go see certain sites. But good luck getting any information out of that. Russia, however, invited journalists, said, "You're more than welcome to go to the site." Please go and see for yourself. And they invited dozens, and guess who turned them down? Of course, CNN turned them down. The BBC said, "No, thanks, we don't need to see it, as they are extensions of the CIA, of course, and the BBC and MI6, so they don't wanna see it. They already know. They probably already knew that they were involved with this." So, but great journalists like Irish journalist Shay Bose went to see it for himself, watch. Paying for these drones, paying for these corrupt people in Kiev. To kill people, it's terrorism. I mean, it's whatever you wanna say. Look around here. There's a reason why they try to prevent people like me coming here. They try to prevent channels like RT. They try to stop us because they don't, they're desperate to prevent the truth about this kind of terrorism. getting to the people in Europe, because if the people in Europe knew what the money was being spent on in this so-called war, which was started by the Americans and the British, of course, we know that too, if they knew what the money was being spent on to kill children in their beds, people would come out in the streets and they would You know, they would tell these politicians, and it's interesting, in, in Europe where I'm from, the most corrupt and unpopular politicians are the ones who are most dedicated to this religion of Zelensky and his bandeirante Nazi friends who come and kill children in their beds. Yeah. So you can imagine Putin and the military leaders in Russia aren't taking this lightly. Over the weekend, Russia launched a devastating response on Ukraine's capital of Kiev, launching for the first time its Orichin missiles. Now, this could be the, really the opening salvo in a potential nuclear war. When you think about if these had nuclear-- if these missiles had nuclear warheads attached to them instead of just being used for ballistic attacks. flying up into space and evading air defense systems. And you can see here, this was overnight when these, when these rained down on Kiev in multiple locations. Here's some more. We'll just play some of this. This was some natural sound you can hear here. We haven't seen attacks like that in a long time in Kiev. One man captured a missile hitting nearby and then moments later this happened. Oh my God. So that's just the beginning of what's coming, and over the past twenty four hours, Russia has warned all foreign citizens to leave, get out now, that this is, quote, the last straw, and we will be conducting s- systematic strikes on assorted targets all across Ukrainian Ukrainians' capital from now on. So get the hell out! Right, if you're a EU diplomat, one of these puppets who's there controlling that government, get out. Here's the Russian res- response. Given the continued terrorist attacks by the Kiev regime against Russian civilians, the Ministry of Defense of Russia will be targeting Ukrainian defense industry facilities in Kiev. Foreign nationals, including diplomatic missions and staff, should leave the city as soon as possible. Now, the EU, of course, has responded Saying, "We're staying put, we're not going anywhere." here's the EU ambassador on Monday, says, "No, no, no, no, we're not leaving, and it would be hypocrisy for EU missions to leave. We're gonna stay." Okay. So Dmitry Medvedev on the Russian side had this to say, "The EU has said it will maintain its diplomatic presence in Kiev unchanged despite Russia's warnings, while apparently they've got diplomats to spare and they need to trim the headcount." Meaning these people are gonna die. I mean, you can gloss it over any way you want. They aren't gonna die, they are playing brave, they will be hiding. Hiding where? When these orange missiles hit and you are destroying bunkers from outer space, they will be in the same place that Zelensky films his videos, which is probably not in Kiev. Well, that's a good point. Yeah. So, yeah, they're probably in London somewhere too. Right. Don't let them make you think that they are playing brave. They're in his villa in, in Italy. Yeah, Tuscany. Yeah. Yeah. Do you, but you know, Zelensky, by the way, is the-- Was it, is FYI. So maybe they're in the US. So that's the context of what we're about to see. What's next, though? What is next? What will this response look like? Well, it's anyone's guess, and only Russia knows for sure. But something big is coming, according to our sources. The buildup over the past few days has been enormous. hear-hearing from military experts and sources, forces and special forces from Germany, France, and the UK and the United States, including the CIA, of course, have been building up inside of Ukraine over the last few weeks. They clearly know something is coming. It seems as though they're concerned that Russia potentially could be about to take Odessa, and according to military sources we talked about, which would effectively cut off Ukraine from the ocean Getting rid of any major port, it would-- they would become a landlocked country if this happens. And of course, we've been talking about this for years on the show, that if they take Odessa, like, Ukraine ceases to exist as a viable country. No ports, no access to the ocean, sorry, you're done. And up until now, Russia hasn't done that, and they've held back from doing that. So this-- they wouldn't be a country if they grab Odessa. But the, what's hilarious is, according to the sources I've spoken to today, is this idea that mil- that by adding French special forces or UK special forces or US special forces or French special for- that that would stop the Russians from taking Odessa? FYI, they've literally been killing members of NATO for the past few months on the front lines. Ukraine has lost upwards of two million killed in action now. The people that are being caught on the front lines and killed aren't even from Ukraine. They're from Colombia, they're from Poland, they're from France. So the idea that Russia would be scared to take Odessa because there are a few Frenchmen there? What are you smoking? Are you out of your mind? And the other part of the story is that Putin has been extremely patient, almost to a fault, and at the heart of this is his intention to try to prevent civilian casualties in Ukraine. And the numbers, by the way, don't lie. The numbers in black and white, which we brought to you in December of this year, at-- by the way, great detriment to the people who were able to provide those numbers. But the numbers on the civilian casualty side on the Ukrainian side was incredibly low, despite the fake propaganda that you've been hearing. Those numbers were very low compared to the attacks on Russian civilians, and of course, not to mention the genocide which took place in Eastern Ukraine since twenty fourteen, and all of those Ukrainian civilians that were killed, which were actually ethnic Russians, since twenty fourteen. So Putin has been slow and methodical, but he's under immense pressure to put an end to this war. Which understandably so. Imagine that an American college dorm had been bombed by someone that is-- you are at war with, and the pre-- the American president had no response. Y- we would be outraged. There wouldn't be no way that we would allow this to just be like, "Well, okay, sorry that happened." Right. Right. Absolutely. I mean, just look at the response that George W. Bush got After the false flag of the nine eleven attacks, right when he stood there with that bullhorn, he said, "When the people that brought these buildings down are gonna hear from all of us real soon, right? Yeah. So you can just go and bomb Afghanistan." But there was a, there was a palpable support for the president of the United States and a rallying, he had a ninety-two percent approval rating, yes. He comes out at a Yankees game and throws out the first pitch and the whole stadium goes crazy. Can you imagine that today? No, of course not. But that was the, So they bomb and kill these twenty-one schoolchildren. So there is a political faction inside of Russia who said, "We need to have been more aggressive. This needs to have been over a year ago." Those people are now proven right when you see young girls killed in their beds, in their college dorm. It's an incredibly frustrating situation for those people, and you have to feel for them. So Putin's greatest mistake could have been in believing The Western leaders, when, remember when Russia had Kiev completely surrounded? We covered this here on the show a number of years ago. And this idea that they got beat back by the Ukrainians was hilarious. They didn't, they had the entire city surrounded. They had one artery in and out of that city, and they were ready to choke it off. And then Emmanuel Macron says, "Hold on, hold on, hold on." NATO says, "Hold on, let's make a deal," and so Russia backs off from Kiev and agrees to just kind of go to the front lines on the eastern part where formerly Eastern Ukraine. Do you think he's gonna make that same mistake again, like falling for what the Western leaders have said? Boris Johnson flies in and totally destroys any kind of peace proposal that was in place? It's not gonna happen. So they then, the CIA and the Azov, of course, launched their counterattack after they said they would put together a peace agreement, after they said, "Hey, maybe back off from Kiev and we'll just back off and we'll put something together here." No, they didn't do that. Instead, they did the opposite and they launched a counterattack, which was devastating for Ukraine, of course, and now upwards of two million Ukrainians are dead. An entire mul-multiple generations of young men, slightly older men, gone. In that country because of these Western leaders. So Putin isn't gonna make that same mistake twice. Sources are telling us that Russia has amassed a massive amount of firepower ready to launch against Ukrainian positions to put an end to this. We're also learning today that Russian officials are taking the threats against the Saint Petersburg Economic Forum on June third through the sixth very seriously, that- What's gonna happen there, right? So do you think when all of these individuals come together in Saint Petersburg, that the CIA, MI6, Ukraine aren't gonna launch attacks against the Saint Petersburg economic forum? Are you out of your mind? And Russia knows this. It's just in a few days. So they're taking it very seriously. Again, according to our sources, Russia is about to bring pain, quote, "bring pain to everyday infrastructure across Ukraine." Now if that doesn't end in surrender, then they will move fully into encircling Kiev once again to end this war. Andrei Martinov, an expert on Russian and military and naval issues was just on the show on RT just a, a little while ago. He said the annihilation Of the whole terrorist infrastructure is about to begin, and including in Europe, where a lot of these headquarters are. Listen to him. And so they have this well, as what Sergei Lavrov stated, the tip of the spear, with which obviously due to their incompetence and highly low, very low cultural level, they thought that they could defeat Russia militarily. So now they know they can't. So what you gonna do? You're gonna go and do terrorist acts, attack- Concerted risk in killing children, innocent children is one of those things which, that's it. I mean, this is the tipping point, and Russia could have gone and do it in the more, you know, what how to say, moderate way, just killing primarily this essentially personnel of the whatever is remaining armed forces of Ukraine. Now this is over, and the essentially annihilation of this, the whole terrorist infrastructure will- Start, including in Europe, if it continues, and I'm pretty sure that if they, Europe, which I mean, essentially lost the right to exist as it exists today if they want to kill their diplomats, it's their problem. Russia's society doesn't care. Russia's society doesn't care. So these EU madmen want to lose their diplomats in Ukraine? I, I encourage you to go back about a year here on the show, where we discussed at length with a French diplomat who was in Kiev. He wa- he witnessed these war crimes up close and personal, and he said, "This is one of the, of course, most corrupt governments in the world, as we know." The US State Department has well labeled Ukraine one of the most corrupt governments in the world, and by the way, today President Trump did as well. We'll get to that in just a second, but first, so Zelensky was just asked You know, you can tell he's high on a kite. He just probably came out of the bathroom snorting cocaine, so he's there sniffing once again, like high as a kite, and he's asked straight up by an NBC reporter, "You know, what are you gonna do here? The US is like cutting off weapons to you. What are you about to do here?" Watch his high as a kite response. Mr. President, I just returned from several areas along the front line in the south and in the east, and soldiers there told me they have to ration their ammunition, they don't have enough weapons to advance, they can only defend themselves. In some cases, they're losing territory. What happens to your country if this American aid doesn't arrive? Lose a lot of people, we will lose territory. Yeah. Territory. So President Trump today posted this, and by the way, he posted this meme. I'm not gonna play it 'cause it had music on it, but it was a whole mashup of him swiping his nose basically after snorting cocaine. So Trump posted that video and he put his own commentary over top of it. Since before I go into this topic, you're not about to believe this. You're ready for this one? Ukraine, corrupt Ukraine, corrupt Ukraine, which can't account for a hundred billion dollars of tax dollars, sends semi-finished steel to be processed in Poland, where it's exported as a derivative product to the United States, therefor-- thereby avoiding Section two thirty-two thirty-two tariffs and anti-dumping duties. That's your friend Zelensky. We're taking a swipe at him. I mean, this is like effectively cutting him off completely. Well How about just cutting him off completely? Well, I think that is what this is. I mean, maybe not. I don't know. But again, they'll probably-- I'm sure the war hawks in Congress will find a way to somehow funnel money through somebody, through NATO or otherwise, to make sure that he has weapons. No, I mean, he does have the power to just make this stop. So, okay, go ahead, Phillip. Yeah. Well, I mean, but the, the whole, this, this whole time, this whole conflict, we've been sending money to Ukraine so they can buy weapons from us, and so like those military contractors don't want them to not be able to do that, so I, that's why I think they'll never cut 'em off as long as they can keep that, that rift going, they're gonna keep it going. Right. And so it's e-extremely unhelpful to just release an obvious meme about the wastefulness about that. Do something. You were voted into office to do something, to make a stop. Last year, last year he was in the White House, and Trump told him, "You have no cards, so shut up and sit there. You have no cards." And yet we've continued to send him cards. And then we send him cards and more money, and then we follow it up with another meeting where he like kinda kisses his ass and says everything's great, every-- We're fine, and, you know, we're back to being friends again. It's extremely exhausting. Like, yes, he's a Funding him, and we can't account for billions of dollars that have flowed there. And now we're funding terrorism on young children, and so what? So what? It doesn't help that you see that he's bad when it continues, when the grift continues. And now you look at EU leaders who want war with Russia so badly they can't take it, they are now condemning you know, Russia's response to the Ukrainian attack on young girls, but they never condemned the attack in the first place. So that bit they're fine with, but Russia retaliates I mean, can think about how often they have repeated the terms Putin's unprovoked attack. Now we see a clear provocation, and they are like this. They can't look at it. And Yeah, what do we do with it other than just be extremely frustrated? We can see it, we can see through their lies, but we have to keep going to work so that our taxpayers' dollars support it. I mean, you have upwards of two million Ukrainians have now been killed, and you have all of these mercenaries from other countries on the front lines being killed now So it'll be really interesting once the real numbers start coming out as to how many Polish soldiers have been killed, how many British soldiers have been killed in Ukraine, how many American soldiers-- I'm not talking mercenaries who are like bloodlusting and they're forty years old and they just wanna get away from their wives and they wanna like go shoot some people. No, no, no, I'm talking like active duty and special forces. Will we get those numbers? We're working on it, but- Two million Ukrainians killed, how many more do you have? I mean, I know you're conscripting farmers now, they're literally going out in the fields and grabbing farmers from their fields to fight. Okay, who do you have left? But shit's about to hit the fan and we'll be watching it very closely here on the show. All right, get in your super chats now And people saying, "Yeah, Putin is reasonable, but he's also cornered." I think, I don't know if he's cornered but he's definitely, he-- people are at their wits' end and there are, of course, neo-cons in that country like there are in the United States who are nearby him, who've wanted him, wanted him to be explosive in his attacks, but he's really held back on a lot of civilian infrastructure attacks. but I think this might be the straw that broke the camel's back. I'm sure. In fact, they told us that. Right. In their statement, this is the straw. Right. Well, I mean, that broke us. For us so far in the West, we aren't able to feel the pain of what this feels like. I mean, you have to put yourself in the shoes of a Russian person who is feeling this attack on their own country and, you know, loss of young girls' lives who have nothing to do with this. And so we are insulated very much from that The eighth attack on Lebanon, but the same way we're insulated from the attacks on February 28th on the Iranian school of young girls, we aren't supposed to feel it, and it's up to us whether we do or not. I feel it acutely. there are videos I'm gonna talk about in just a second of a baby in Gaza with its foot blown off. I can't, I couldn't sleep last night because of this. We have to feel this, you guys. This is, this is humanity being attacked across the board but we're only told to feel Americans, October seventh, and I'm just, I'm at my wits' end about it. so let me know how you feel about it. Yeah. so first of all, someone in the, someone in the chat room's like, "R- Kiev was not encircled." Yes, it was. And this idea that Russia was pushed back is a total fake Wikipedia story. Do you think Russia was pushed back? No, they weren't. They left. That's well documented. They weren't pushed back. They left as part of a pullback in order to achieve some sort of a, a settlement, some sort of a peace, just to be clear on that, and just so we're not conflating two different stories here. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel, it's totally free, if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 24, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - May 24, 2026 at 12:06 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🔥 More than 120 U.S.-funded biolabs overseas, 40 in Ukraine, and almost no real public oversight. Now the intelligence community is finally asking what was really happening inside them. Dr. @NassMeryl is with us. https://t.co/JWBh6lTAKD

Video Transcript AI Summary

The U.S. intelligence community has officially opened an investigation into more than 120 U.S. taxpayer-funded biological laboratories operating overseas, including 40 in Ukraine. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard says the probe aims to identify where the labs are located, what pathogens they contain, and what research is being conducted. Gabbard has previously accused officials of misleading the public about the existence and scope of U.S.-backed bio labs overseas, including claims tying the issue to the Biden administration and figures such as Anthony Fauci. The discussion references claims made during the Biden administration by Victoria Nuland, who admitted bio labs are in Ukraine and funded by the United States but said they were only for defensive research, while dismissing accusations as Russian disinformation. Questions are raised about claims of Russian findings, including reported COVID vaccine samples in labs during Russia’s takeover of territory, and claims of AIDS research on Ukrainian military personnel. Senator asks Ukraine-specific questions about chemical or biological weapons and whether there is doubt that any biological or chemical incident in Ukraine would be carried out by Russians. Ukraine is described as having biological research facilities, with concern that Russian troops may seek control of research materials, and statements that efforts are underway with Ukrainians to prevent research materials from falling into Russian hands. The exchange asserts that Russian propaganda blames Ukrainians for plots involving biological weapons and coordination with NATO, and that it is “classic Russian technique to blame on the other guy what they’re planning to do themselves.” Doctor Merrill Nass, a biological warfare epidemiologist and author, says it is notable that the government acknowledges such facilities, including about 40 in Ukraine and over 100 elsewhere, and adds that many countries have studied biological weapons agents, treatments, and vaccines since at least World War II. Nass argues that the law prohibits developing biological weapons and references the Biological Weapons Convention, noting that the treaty has no enforcement mechanism, and that there is no way to send teams to investigate other countries’ labs. He suggests there have been roadblocks to obtaining details, and that labs outside the United States reduce oversight. The conversation also discusses the idea of incentives and loopholes: Nass states that the U.S. has no legal control over private labs and that, in the U.S., it is possible to build high-containment laboratories and have scientists create whatever they like without a prohibition. Nass describes historical U.S. development and stockpiling of biological weapons agents, mentions evasion of antibiotics and vaccines, and argues that international restrictions do not prevent potential development efforts elsewhere. Nass says that specific biological weapon use is not known to have occurred within the United States except that “the potential exception of COVID,” asserting the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine should never have been developed “the way it was developed for COVID” because it included “the most toxic, problematic parts” of the virus. He also recalls work as a consultant to the Cuban Ministry of Health in 1993 regarding illness attributed to cyanide poisoning, describes reports that the CIA sent African swine fever virus to Cuba through Panama to dissidents, and notes that Cuba reportedly had to kill half a million pigs due to that outbreak. When asked whether researchers can be controlled and whether answers will emerge about roughly 120 labs, Nass says accountability and oversight are limited, citing a senate hearing where senators said the intelligence community is not under anyone’s control and is not accountable. He adds that if answers cannot be obtained in the U.S., they would not likely be obtained in other countries. Nass argues that lab-produced viruses could be distinguished from naturally occurring ones by analyzing genomes, describing prior work on reconstructing an epidemic and claiming that attention to whether viral genomes are natural or unnatural will enable future differentiation. He notes that he believes the risk of severe consequences reduces the likelihood of use. The segment ends with plans to bring Nass back as the investigation unfolds.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, the US intelligence community has officially opened investigation into more than 120 US tax, taxpayer funded biological laboratories operating overseas, including 40 in Ukraine. Director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard says the probe is part of an effort to shut down risky gain of function research. The plan is to identify where these labs are specifically, what pathogens they contain, and what research is being conducted. This isn't the first time she's talked about this. Gabbard, has accused officials in the past to connect it to the Biden administration along with figures such as Anthony Fauci of misleading the public on this about the existence and scope of these US backed bio labs overseas. Speaker 1: Now you may recall that during the Biden administration, former state department death eater, Victoria Nuland, admitted that bio labs are in Ukraine, are funded by The United States, but she said, oh, no. It's only for defensive research. If you think that they're up to anything, that's just Russian disinformation. Recall this gem led along by Marco Rubio? Speaker 2: I only have a minute left. Let me ask you. Does Ukraine have chemical or biological weapons? Speaker 3: Ukraine has biological research facilities, which in fact we are now quite concerned Russian troops, Russian forces may be seeking to gain control of. So we are working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of, Russian forces should they approach. Speaker 2: I'm sure you're aware that the Russian propaganda to groups are already putting out there all kinds of information about how they've uncovered a plot by the Ukrainians to release biological weapons in the country and with NATO's coordination. If there's a biological or chemical weapon incident or or attack inside of Ukraine, is there any doubt in your mind that 100% it would be the Russians that would be behind it? Speaker 3: There is no doubt in my mind, senator, and it is classic Russian, technique to blame on the other guy what they're planning to do themselves. Speaker 2: Last question. I I am Speaker 1: certain We can leave it there. It's nineteen eighty four level Speaker 0: Yeah. You Speaker 1: know, double speak. The Ukrainian connection, of course, is what's drawing the most attention because number one, we've been reporting on this for over five years. The Russians have claimed that they have seen, in fact, COVID vaccine samples inside of those labs when they took over that territory when they annexed it. We also have claims of AIDS research on Ukrainian military personnel. At the time when we've been reporting this, these things have been dismissed as Russian propaganda, but we know that it wasn't. Joining us to discuss it is Doctor. Merrill Nass, a biological warfare epidemiologist and author of Merrill's Chaos Letter on Substack. Thank you so much for joining us. It's nice to have you. Speaker 4: Hey, great to be back. Speaker 0: Welcome back. Speaker 1: Alright, so what do you think of these bio labs in Ukraine that were once conspiracy territory? How do you feel watching the government acknowledge that they exist? Speaker 4: Well, it's very interesting that the government is acknowledging them, but not only them, but many more. So they were acknowledging about 40 in Ukraine, but over 100 altogether. So approximately 80 in other countries. Now we don't know what countries, and we don't know what they're doing. But let me let me go back. So at at the fall of the Soviet Union maybe I should go further back than that, at least since World War two, minimum 10 countries, and probably many more, have studied biological weapons agents as well as treatments and vaccines bore them. And at the time the Soviet Union fell, there was concern that the that there would be a diaspora of of Soviet and other remember, there were many nations that the Soviet Union had sort of taken over, and so there were labs in those nations as well. That there would be a diaspora of scientists, that they might go to the highest bidder in China or Iran or North Korea or wherever. And so attempts were made to put money into finding them jobs and finding them something to do. And now I wonder whether that effort actually resulted in the the US State Department and or Defense Department sponsoring potentially offensive labs in these countries. There's a a great advantage to having a a lab for so it's against the law to develop biological weapons. It's against the law to to manufacture them, and the law is the biological weapons convention, which about a 185 nations have signed and ratified, including The US, so that's why it's against the law. But if you if The United States, for example, did it in another country, though that lab information could never be FOIAD, it could never necessarily be obtained by congress. Whereas if the lab was in The United States and the government changed parties, you the next party could go after all those lab records. Now we're hoping that Tulsi Gabbard is able to find out what's going on, but the fact that this is taking a long time suggests that she is running into roadblocks as well, which are strength those roadblocks are strengthened because these labs are not within The United States. Speaker 0: We've also covered and you bring up some great points. So we don't have this oversight that we would have here in The United States. And there are even more nefarious programs. We've had, Deliana, of Bulgaria on the show. She's covered some of these labs in Tbilisi, Georgia. Some horrible things we covered here on the show a couple of years ago about testing on humans, specifically. That lab was, of course, pushed by Obama, opened in, like, 2012. There's all sorts of big Hunter Biden connections here with, MetaBiota and, and and, I always forget the other the name of the other one that he was involved with. But this stuff is very, very dark, And we have the documents showing, like, testing on human beings. What other nefarious things do you think that she might discover in these investigations? Speaker 4: Who knows? Speaker 1: I mean, might as well speculate because a lot of times our speculation becomes true. Okay. Speaker 0: Informed speculation. Speaker 1: We can say we're speculating, but Speaker 4: So so the biological weapons convention was developed in 1972, fifty four years ago, and it went into force in 1975, fifty one years ago. Up until that time, The United States was developing and stockpiling many biological weapons. We know that I have a book in my possession, which was written right after World War two by one of the scientists at Fort Detrick, who described 15 or 20 different biological weapons agents that The US had developed for use against animals, plants, you know, livestock, crops, as well as people were potentially used in World War two. And for instance, anthrax was was one of them that was developed as cattle cakes to potentially be used in Germany if necessary. So we had, you know, 15 or 20 weapons in the nineteen forties. And so by the nineteen seventies, we have three almost three decades more. We probably developed even better weapons. And, subsequently we know that there were weapons that were specifically designed to evade antibiotics and vaccines. So that's fifty years ago. What has been developed now, again, it's against the law in The United States and in almost the all of the rest of the world to develop these things, but it certainly can be done relatively easily because that that international treaty has no mechanism for enforcement. So there's no way you can send a team to go investigate somebody else's labs and see what they're doing. The United States, UK, and Russia had a a three way agreement around nineteen ninety one or two to investigate each other's labs, but that's the last time I can remember anyone, you know, had access to Russian labs or to US labs. And so with fifty years, we know South Africa had an active program. How many other nations may have been developing these weapons in secret? So, you know, I mean, the possibilities are are endless because what was being done even fifty years ago was you take a piece of this and a piece of that. You know? You you take the ability of of one organism to transmit very well and the ability of another to, know, produce a deadly toxin, you know, and and you can put them together. And or you can develop a weapon that will cause people to develop autoimmune illnesses. I mean, the the possibilities are great. Now having said all that, none of this well, I shouldn't say none of this stuff has been used. In The United as far as we know, within The United States, none of this stuff has been used on us, with the potential exception of COVID, the SARS CoV two virus and the vaccine, which so the vaccine should never have been developed the way it was developed for COVID because it included the most toxic, problematic parts of the virus. When you develop a vaccine, you're supposed to use the the nontoxic, benign parts of a virus to stimulate immunity. You're not supposed to make people sick the way the virus makes people sick with your with your vaccine. So that was very odd. But I certainly, I was a consultant to the Cuban Ministry of Health in 1993 and on an illness they had that was actually due to cyanide and was causing people to go blind, lose their hearing, have trouble walking, etcetera, because cyanide poisons an absolutely critical part of the electron transport chain, provides energy, which provides ATP to people so we can live. So somebody poisoned Cuba with cyanide. It's not a biological weapon. It's chemical weapon, but that was done despite the fact that, you know, that is against the law as well. When I was in Cuba, they told me about roughly seven different animal and plant pathogens that they believed had been used on them. And one of those, the African swine fever virus, was reported in, I believe, the Washington Post and the San Francisco Chronicle using whistleblowers that the CIA had actually sent it to Cuba to Cuban dissidents through Panama. And, again, this was about four forty to fifty years ago, the Cubans had to kill half a million pigs on the island because of that, pig, epidemic. Speaker 1: And so who do you think what what forces would actually be able to manipulate in these unregulated labs? Like, whose agenda would be Who's ordering projects inside of these So Speaker 4: you can have a government lab, but you can also have a private lab. So The United States legally, we do not have control of private labs. You can make your own maximal containment laboratory in The United States. I mean, if you want to, you can get away with it. There is no law prohibiting you from doing that, and you can have your own scientists create whatever you like. So I'm just talking about I'm not saying this is happening, but I'm saying that legally, is not prohibited. It is a loophole. And that's what you can do in The United States. So just imagine what you can do in the rest of the world. Speaker 0: Are you hopeful that they will get answers from this? I mean, mentioned, you know, in Tbilisi, Georgia, I mean, you have cancer clusters from people that live around this lab. Yeah. Are we gonna get very are we gonna do you do you believe we'll have specificity over these 120 labs? Speaker 4: You're asking, do I believe we will be able to control them? We will know what's going on in them? I that I who knows? We we there was a senate hearing this morning with held by Rand Paul, and main theme of that hearing was that the intelligence community is not under anyone's control. It is not accountable. Several senators talked about, you know, the deep state and the fact that we don't senator Hall Speaker 0: Ron Johnson. Ron Johnson flipped out. I mean, he was from Missouri. He well oh, yeah. And Ron Johnson Hawley Ron Johnson was yelling, basically, like, who is the deep state? He's Yes. So who's who's controlling us? Like, senate, they can't even get answers. Speaker 4: Exactly. So if if you can't get answers in The United States, you know, you're certainly not gonna get them in Ukraine or Bulgaria or Georgia. Or wherever else. I mean, France and and England and Germany and Japan and Australia have also had biological defense labs. And of course, the difference between offense and defense is thin. But, again, having said all that, these weapons are not being used. People whom, if they exist, they probably do, but people who have access to them are not using them. There aren't very many good tactical ways to use them. I mean, you may get you may be identified as a perpetrator, for example. I mean, we know that what's his name? Vincent Munster was just arrested for bringing viral samples into The United States undeclared, and he works for the NIH at the Rocky Mountain Lab in Montana. Now it's alleged by Jim Haslam that the COVID virus tended to infect the animals that are used at the Rocky Mountain lab, like certain deer and certain other animals that are unusual lab animals, but are used in Hamilton, Montana at the NIH lab. And if that's true, then you can pin the development of the COVID virus back in part to that lab, that it must have been passaged through the animals that were present there. And so, you know, if you are found to have created a biological weapon, right, your reputation is gone, your livelihood is gone, you will suffer greatly, as will your family. So nobody is really willing probably to suffer those kinds of consequences. Go ahead. Speaker 1: I just wonder how knowable it is to follow those things because I feel like it has been purposely confiscated through these various channels. You know, I've seen journalists that I trust inside Ukraine, have gone into these bio labs that are now in Russian control and said they did see evidence of COVID vaccine development there. And so yeah, maybe you can follow that. How noble is this? Speaker 4: Right, I mean, developing a COVID vaccine is very benign. It was developed in dozens of countries. The Russians told the UN that they found anthrax in one of the labs they took over. I mean, we had anthrax as a weapon back in the 1940s, so what if they found anthrax? But if they found anthrax that was souped up, that would be a big deal. Now, I may have mentioned earlier that I published the first paper that went backwards and took an epidemic, which was the world's largest anthrax epidemic, which occurred in Rhodesia in the late 1970s, and I showed how it could not possibly be a natural occurrence. And before that, no one had done that, at least not in the open literature, and so it seemed more likely that a perpetrator could get away with it because no one had ever pinned any epidemic on a perpetrator. But having done that and now having seen COVID and seen the the monkeypox and and bird flu and all the rest, it seems that everyone will be carefully focused on whether the genome of these viruses is natural or unnatural. I mean, we've we've paid a great deal of attention to that for COVID, and so everybody knows how to what to look for and how to do it. And I think that, you know, we will very quickly be able to distinguish whether we have a lab produced or a naturally occurring virus or bacteria causing an epidemic in future. And so that is a a good preventive measure. Right? If you if you think you can get away with something, you're a lot more likely to do it than if you think I might not be able to get away with this and I might spend the rest of my life in jail. Speaker 0: Yeah. Right. Well, doctor Ness, we'd love to have you back on as this investigation unfolds. And as more pieces of this puzzle come together. Hopefully, we'll get more answers, and we'd love to have your analysis because I think you're brilliant. So Speaker 1: Yeah. I didn't know that about anthrax. Speaker 0: Yeah. That's wild. Thank you so much for lending your expertise to this, but this is just the beginning of the onion. As we start to peel this thing back. It's gonna get a lot stinkier, so we'd love to have you back on when you when you can. If if you if you'd be so kind as to join us. Thank you so much, doctor. Great to see you as always. If you want to follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 23, 2026 at 11:30 PM

Saved - May 24, 2026 at 11:54 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

The West tried to isolate Russia & contain China. Instead, it pushed them into a historic alliance that could reshape energy, trade, military power, and the future of the U.S. dollar. @JimJatras is our guest. https://t.co/Yu6CsPEsEV

Video Transcript AI Summary

US leaders, according to the discussion, have pushed Russia and China closer by trying to prevent a stronger alliance outside the Western Hemisphere. President Vladimir Putin met with President Xi Jinping, and the two signed a record number of agreements covering energy, finance, AI, transportation, manufacturing, and military coordination. Key developments highlighted include new pipeline infrastructure permanently directing Russian energy toward China and growing efforts to bypass the US dollar in global trade. The discussion links these moves to Western pressures such as high energy prices, deindustrialization, debt, stagnant growth, and economic fallout from years of proxy wars and sanctions policy, framing the Russia-China trade corridor as on track to become a strategically important global route. The speakers contrast the Putin-Xi agreements with President Trump’s recent trip to China, describing one set of deals as historic and growth-based and the other as diplomatic and transactional. They portray Trump-era US-China deals as tariff pauses, trade concessions, agricultural purchases, and efforts to stabilize and correct issues created, while portraying Putin-Xi agreements as going beyond commerce—building long-term energy infrastructure and alternative financial systems outside the US dollar, effectively aiming at a parallel economic order rather than managing trade tensions. Former State Department diplomat Jim Jatris says US foreign policy has driven the two powers into a historic alliance, and he argues that the real question is whether Russia and China still see themselves as invested in the dollar-denominated system as it stands. He points to the joint statement’s “hoping” for a future multipolar order with the US stepping down from ambitions for global unipolar power, adding that they may not yet know whether the US can be persuaded to do so. When asked about the nature of the Russia-China partnership and whether the US could do something similar, Jatris responds that US diplomacy often arrives with minimal substance, while he claims Americans are not offering the kind of comprehensive, sustained partnership described. On the US dollar, Jatris says the agreements involve multipolar cooperation and end-around arrangements to settle transactions in yuan and ruble outside the US petrodollar system, describing this as potentially the “final nail in a coffin” for the dollar and noting that earlier predictions of replacement currencies have not yet come to pass. He argues both Russia and China also have corrupt interests and that short-term deals could benefit individuals rather than national interests. Asked about Iran, Jatris calls it the “big question,” arguing that Russia, China, and Iran are loath to admit that the United States is not “agreement capable,” citing a hypothetical example involving sanctions relief and control of the Straits of Hormuz. He says Russia and China may instead view the situation as an opportunity to weaken the US “empire,” offering an off ramp for Trump that could result in a “Minsk type deception.” On military cooperation, Jatris says China is interested in technical knowledge gained by Russia in Ukraine, describing joint training missions as Russians training Chinese on lessons from drone warfare and related experience. He frames Russia as the stronger military power with a larger nuclear arsenal and notes direct experience in a paradigm-changing war only Russia and Ukraine have. Regarding Europe and the prospect of a western war against Russia, Jatris argues Europe is the main problem, asserting Washington is trying to offload burdens to Europeans. He describes low willingness among Europeans to fight, ties it to constraints including cheap Russian energy’s role in industry, and argues Europeans are making noise but are not positioned to fight materially, spiritually, morally. He suggests Russia may be overestimating that European problem and makes the case that Russia should finish the Ukraine war sooner rather than later. On Putin’s political prospects and Russian appetite for continued conflict, Jatris says he sees not an inability to win but a deliberate decision shaped by classic statecraft: forcing the enemy to agree to terms. He cites Putin’s June 2024 terms—four oblasts, Crimea agreements including no NATO neutrality, denazification, and demilitarization—and argues that even if the West agreed, those terms would not be honorably enforceable without Russian control of Kyiv. He also contends that Russian questioning of treaty guarantees and the possibility of denazification/demilitarization lacks a workable answer. The conversation also includes claims of frustration in Russia over the war being prolonged, references to large numbers of dead including non-Ukrainians serving as mercenaries, and the view that money continues to flow into the conflict.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, US has managed to push two global powers closer than ever. I'm talking about Russia and China. They are now building one of the most powerful economic and strategic alliances outside of the Western Hemisphere, and Western leaders largely made it happen by trying to prevent it from happening. It's a classic example of what you resist persists, an evil plan backfiring. This week, president Putin met with president Chinese president Xi Jinping, and the two signed a record number of agreements covering energy, finance, AI, transportation, manufacturing, and, yes, military coordination. Amongst the biggest developments is a new pipeline infrastructure directing Russian energy permanently towards China and growing efforts to bypass the US dollar in global trade. All of this comes as the Western world struggles with high energy prices, deindustrialization, debt, stagnant growth, the economic fallout from years of proxy wars and sanctions policy. So now the Russian, Russia Chinese trade corridor is on track to become one of the most strategically important economic trade routes in the world. Now what makes this even more remarkable is that if you compare it to president Trump's trip to China last week, you realize one set of deals is historic and growth based. The other is diplomatic and transactional. So the deals that The US made with China under president Trump were tariff pauses, trade concessions, agricultural purchases, efforts to stabilize, basically clean up the shit that we have created. But the Putin Xi agreements go far beyond commerce. Russia and China are building long term energy infrastructure, alternative financial systems outside of the US dollar. One set of deals is about trade tensions. The other is about actually building a parallel economic order. So this Putin Xi agreements can sort of be summarized like, let's redesign the global system so we no longer need the West at all. Joining us now to discuss is former state department diplomat, Jim Jatris, who has warned for years that US foreign policy was driving these two powers into historic alliance. Jim, thank you for joining us. Speaker 1: Thank you, Natalie, Clayton. I tell you, my head is still spinning from your discussion about American politics and and Massey and all the giddy optimism that you expressed during that discussion. But I think, you know, there's a silver lining that I think a lot of Americans are waking up, that they're not gonna participate in the system. Like like Clayton says, it's gonna have to burn down. The good news, if you wanna call it that, is the way Trump is tanking the global economy with his misguided war in Iran. That's probably on the horizon, and we'll have to see what comes from the ashes. Speaker 0: So what do you think of Chinese president Xi Jinping and Putin getting together? I mean, you gotta think that they get in a room and they're like, that guy over there, he's, you know, going down with the ship. Meanwhile, let's build. I mean, is that am I do I have a read on that correctly? Speaker 1: I I think that's more or less correct. And, course, you talked about, you know, the alternatives to to the western based financial system and so on and so forth, avoiding the sea lanes The United States can interdict. So that's why they're expanding energy cooperation with Russian exports to China and so forth. I think the real question mark is to what extent the Russians and the Chinese still feel they are invested in the dollar denominated international system as it stands now, that they still are hoping against hope that The, United States can be persuaded to a step down, to a to a of our our our ambitions for global unipolar power and we'll accept a multipolar order. If you look at the communique issued by the joint statement issued by the the two presidents, they're clearly hoping for that kind of future. I don't think they've quite figured out, though, whether or not The United States can be persuaded to do that. I don't think we can, but I don't think they've come to that realization necessarily. Speaker 0: And so can you speak to these agreements that now Russia has with China? They also are celebrating the twenty fifth anniversary of the treaty of good Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation. And they're saying this is a good example of truly comprehensive partnership and strategic interaction. Are we capable of doing anything like that? Speaker 1: No, we can't. And I'm sure you've heard from many, many contexts where there's a diplomatic discussion that goes on, and the other side comes in with a bunch of experts and pages and pages of documents and stats and proposals, and the Americans come in with what? Kushner and Wittkopf shooting from the hip. I mean, that's unfortunately the way we we conduct business these days. Actually, literally business. Somebody somebody is making a lot of money somewhere on the American side, I don't think it's the kind of money that's gonna benefit The United States or national security or the welfare of the American people. Speaker 2: What does this mean for the US dollar? At the heart of it, of course, in the heart of this, one of their big discussion points, as Natalie pointed out, was this multipolar cooperation. The sovereignty of Russia, the sovereignty of China, free to transact financially in the way that they see fit, make trade deals together. This is an end around to the US dollar. Settle transactions in the yuan, settle transactions in the Russian ruble outside of the US petrodollar system. This to me, when it was already on a decline seems maybe I'm being hyperbolic, but this seems to be maybe a final nail in a coffin for the US dollar. Speaker 1: I I guess to close a coffin properly, you need a number of nails. I'm not sure this is the final one. I mean, people have predicting the decline of the dollar. You know, the yuan, red back's gonna replace the green back or whatever other currencies are gonna come out from bricks. And so far it hasn't happened yet. And I don't know if that's because they still can't quite get their act together on their side, or whether they're still hoping that somehow they can entice us to, you know, wake up in the morning and smell the glass or whatever they're drinking over there, and see reason and join them in a more productive enterprise than what we've been conducting over the past few decades. I I think that's really let's face it. I mean, we're all used to the idea that Washington is controlled with corrupt interests that don't represent the national interests of The United States. But we'd like to think, oh, but the Russians and the Chinese, they're they've got this pristine view of national interest. Well, I hate I hate to tell people, they've got corrupt interests too. And there are gonna be people over there who are be making short term deals for their own benefit, not necessarily for Russia's benefit or China's benefit. So I think they're inching in that direction. I don't think they're there yet. Speaker 2: What about the Iran question? Speaker 1: I I think that is the big question at the moment. Obviously, it involves the Iranians as well. I think one thing that the Russians, the Chinese, and the Iranians are very loath to admit themselves is that The United States is really not agreement capable. That even if The United States were to come to the Iranians or for that matter to the Russians and Ukraine and say, fine. Fine. Fine. We will meet all your conditions. We will we'll run up the white flag. We'll accept everything you say, that The United States cannot be counted on to actually honor any of those commitments. Like, for example, in the case of Iran, if we say, okay. Fine. You control the Straits Of Hormuz. You know, we'll we'll we'll pull back from our bases. We'll lift we'll lift our our sanctions against you. Would we actually follow through with that? I mean, for example, I can't see that we would ever lift lift sanctions on Iran in the few foreseeable future no matter what prop promises Trump made. So that's the part of the problem we have. Again, I'm not sure the Russians, the Chinese, or the Iranians will admit that themselves admit that to themselves. At the same time, I think the Russians and the Chinese, rather than looking at the situation in Iran where Trump has caught his, you know, mammary gland caught in the ringer there, that this is an opportunity to bring down the American empire. And instead, they're looking at a way to give Trump an off ramp and and a deal which will simply turn out to be a kind of a Minsk type deception. Speaker 0: Now what about military cooperation? Because the two countries did, in fact, discuss military. They already have that, but it could be quite formidable. We've seen how powerful the Russians are in their military strategic mission in Ukraine right now. You know, play this out. How how serious could this be? Speaker 1: Well, of course, you know, Russia is the stronger military power than the ones with a much, much bigger nuclear arsenal. They're also the ones who are engaged in a hot war in Ukraine right now, obviously, and have stated the I mean, you know, this has been a paradigm changing war in terms of military technology, and there's only two countries that really have direct experience in that, and that's Russia and Ukraine. And you can imagine just like with many other wars, you know, like all the European powers sent observers to the American civil war to see what was going on in military technology, then You can imagine the Chinese are very, very interested in gaining some of that technical knowledge and experience that the Russians have gained during this war. I did see a report that a number of Russian specialists were in China for joint training missions. I don't think the Chinese were training the Russians. I think the Russians were training the Chinese saying, this is what we have learned in the course of this war, drone warfare, all the rest of it. And the Chinese are eating this up, especially since they have the the military technical base and the industrial base to build on that, and we don't. Speaker 2: Europe. Obviously, we're seeing the rise of Germany, the militarization of Germany, moving towards a wartime economy now in Europe. And it seems to be inevitable that Europe wants to go to war with Russia. I don't see any way around it at this point. I just look at look at France, look at what the UK is doing, look at what Germany is doing moving towards this militarization against Russia. Is there a way around it? And where do you see, obviously, this partnership between China and Russia playing out given a coming Western war, it seems, against Russia? Speaker 1: You know, for my Russian friends, I have different assessments of this. Some of them still are drinking the Kool Aid, the spirit of the Anchorage, and somehow Trump is still gonna be able to work out a deal with them. But those Europeans, those are the real problem. And others realize, and I think this is where I I tend to agree with them, that, there's a lot less daylight between Washington and the Europeans than people think. That early on, the Trump administration, mister Hegseth said, we're gonna try to dump this whole thing onto the Europeans. Let them carry the burden for this war while we move on to the Russians and the excuse me, the Chinese and the Iranians. I think that's what's really going on. This is division of labor. The the Europeans are stepping up to the plate because Washington wants them to. I have real doubts whether they can do that. There was a poll last year saying only 16% of Germans would fight to defend Germany, even if Germany were invaded. How many of them have an appetite for going to war anywhere in Russia or Ukraine? I mean, I hate to sound intolerant, but I don't think the gay Europeans are in a position to fight against anybody given the state of their society, given the migrant invasion, given the fact that their industry is falling apart without cheap Russian energy. I mean, what are they gonna do? Ask the Russians to turn the gas back on so we can make more weapons to fight you with? I mean, that's not gonna work out very well either. I think these countries are making lots and lots of noise, but they're not in a in a position to fight a war. I don't think industrial, materially, spiritually, morally, they're in a position to do any of that. I think the Russians are overestimating that as a problem, which is why and one reason, I think, in my opinion, they're making a big mistake in not finishing off this war in Ukraine sooner rather than later, which many more voices in Russia are calling for because, well, we have to wait for the big war against the Europeans in the future. Well, if they wanna avoid avoid that war, I think it's best to finish this now rather than give the Europeans time to ramp up, assuming they're even capable of doing that. Speaker 0: They're not. In Portugal, they're paying almost $10 a gallon right now for gas. Where are they gonna they they're not. I'm with you on this. I wanna ask you one more thing about president Putin because he is facing a growing backlash inside Russia for his inability to end the war in Ukraine. And, you know, I guess he had strong support when the military operation began. But now we're several years into it. Russians are tired of it. The Ukrainians keep playing dirty. Relying on Western diplomacy has proven to be a trapdoor. So what of his political prospects right now and the Russian appetite for continued conflict? Speaker 1: Well, I I don't think it's an inability to win the war. I think it's a deliberate decision not to win the war. I think Yes. Again, their whole approach, the Russians are practitioners of classic statecraft, so are the Chinese, by the way, and I think they only think in terms of and they have from the beginning of a settlement at the end. You you force the enemy to agree to your terms. Okay. Fine. Fine. We'll cry, uncle. We'll grieve your terms. I think that's what they've been thinking of all along, and their terms are still very moderate. The same terms that Mr. Putin laid out in June 2024, the four oblast Crimea agreements on no NATO neutrality, denazification, demilitarization. The problem is, as I said earlier, even if the West agreed to those terms, none of those terms would be honored. How do you insist on denazification or demilitarization if the Russian army is not in control of Kyiv? So if there's if there's look, I'm not gonna mention names, but I even have friends that say, well, they want binding treaty guarantees. What good is a treaty guarantee with The United States? We don't mister Trump says, we don't agree with treaties. We just have my own morality as a guide. So I I I I think they're barking up the wrong tree. They don't want to recognize that the only solution is a military one and really involves the destruction of the Ukrainian state when you have people like now mister Karaganov talking about striking targets in Western Europe, even nuke using nuclear weapons. I sometimes wonder, don't the Russians have a medium speed between holding back, being cautious, hoping for an agreement, and, oh, wait. That didn't work. I guess we better drop some nukes on I mean, why have they not taken out the leadership in Kyiv? Why have they not destroyed the bridges over the Dnieper so the Ukrainian army can't be supplied? I I've asked these questions many, many times over the last few years of various Russian interlocutors, and they can't give me an answer that makes any sense to them either. Yeah. Speaker 2: There is absolute frustration. Speaking to Russians yesterday on on our show, the very same thing that there is a level of a deep frustration or how this thing gets dragged out. And then 2,000,000 upwards of 2,000,000 Ukrainians dead, and a lot of these mercenaries on the battlefield now are French, they're Poles, they're Colombians. You know, how many more times we have to see videos now of people that aren't even, you know, Ukrainian are having to pick it up and continue this bloody nonsense. It's it's deeply disgusting as all of this money continues to flow in. Jim, great to see you as always. Thank you so much for your invaluable insights. Really appreciate it. And thanks for thanks for always kinda walking us off a cliff or pulling us back from a cliff, not walking us off Speaker 1: a cliff. Speaker 0: Keep stopping us. Speaker 1: I I like the I like the way you said it the first time. Let's go let's go off the cliff together. We can make it a truffle. Speaker 0: It's a Thelma and Louise moment. Yeah. Let's go. Speaker 1: Oh my gosh. There we go. A honor of pleasure as always. Thank you. Speaker 2: Thanks, Jim. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you want to follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 23, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - May 23, 2026 at 9:31 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🔥 The same donor class that took out @RepThomasMassie now wants Americans silent on Iran, Israel, AIPAC, & foreign influence. @joekent16jan19 says the mask is off, & the next generation is not buying it. https://t.co/Zfgdq9zBgI

Video Transcript AI Summary

Washington, DC saw two major Iran-related developments: a New York Times report alleging that Israel and the United States planned to install Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as Iran’s leader, and a tense phone call in which President Trump, pressured by Middle East partners, spoke with Benjamin Netanyahu for about an hour. The readout, echoed by three individuals in the room, said Netanyahu’s “hair was on fire” and that Netanyahu urged immediate action—“bomb them right now” and keep bombing Iran—while Trump said he would not resume military operations and wanted a peace agreement. Discussion turned to the claimed peace framework, with Joe Kent saying he was an optimist so long as realism is maintained: a peace deal “won’t be acceptable to Israel,” and Israel must be restrained for negotiations to move forward. Kent said the deal would not be everything either side wants, and he opposed “poison pills” about “zero enrichment” and “hand us over all your enrichment,” while emphasizing the need for “an end to the fighting.” He added skepticism that the first hard step has been taken to tell Israel it is “done taking offensive action without our permission.” Asked about the phone call details and Trump’s claim that Netanyahu would do whatever Trump wants, Kent said he had difficulty believing it, but could see how Netanyahu’s public posture would reflect pressure and public sentiment. Kent also said Israel’s early war actions were “very, very clever,” getting the U.S. committed to an initial strike against Iran’s supreme leader and killing off moderating forces, which he said makes the current negotiation harder. He described a likely “full court press” by pro-Israel lobbying and media to influence Trump, while suggesting time would tell whether Trump would dictate terms. The conversation then shifted to Ahmadinejad. Kent said the report shows Israel’s “main goal” before the war was to get the U.S. committed to conflict, using a “throw everything at the wall model” of far-fetched ideas to see what “resonated.” Kent said the proposed Ahmadinejad plan resembled a Venezuela model: decapitate the leadership and install someone who would stabilize and align with Israel’s interests, presenting it as a sales pitch rather than a detailed operational plan. He said the effect of the approach, in some version, was to push the U.S. into war and to take the strike that removed moderates, making Trump’s desired deal “more challenging.” Kent also addressed the idea that Israel could use chaos to prolong conflict, emphasizing Israel’s ability to tolerate chaos and describing internal pressures within Israel as the war continues. He said the Israelis’ longer-term incentives could align with preventing war conclusions, particularly from the perspective of internal political dynamics. A separate segment included a clip from Nick Fuentes on Alex Jones’ show, asserting that Israel might carry out a false flag on the United States (or Europe) to restart momentum and provide a new pretext. Kent responded that the war is “existential for the Israelis,” and said major concerns cannot be ruled out. He argued the U.S. has an unrealistic relationship with Israel, tends to accept Israeli intelligence “almost, like, verbatim,” and fails to discuss uncomfortable possibilities—such as whether Israeli intelligence is meant to influence the U.S. or whether Israeli operations involve spying. Turning to U.S. domestic politics, the discussion referenced the Thomas Massie election, claims about pro-Israel influence, and a Justice Department advisory committee on antisemitism. Kent criticized what he described as pro-Israel lobbying tactics and said campaign money and exposure may force changes in strategy. On election systems, Kent said election integrity issues remain, arguing that mail ballots and machine tabulation are difficult to verify and that Americans should demand scrutiny of verification and counting mechanisms. When asked about foreign interference, Kent said intelligence would track foreign interference if it existed, but described the difficulty of tracking money from super PACs under the current system. He also cited dual citizens and the ability to donate large sums as complicating oversight. Finally, Kent responded to claims that American journalists are on Israeli intelligence targeting lists, including a clip naming Tucker Carlson as “enemy number one,” and said U.S. intelligence discussions about Israeli agendas and operations are culturally constrained. He concluded by expressing optimism about midterms and future elections, arguing the younger generation will be more engaged and that increasing turnout and education on primaries can improve outcomes.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, a couple of big Iran stories hit Washington yesterday. Let's start with the bombshell New York Times piece yesterday that smacked Washington DC upside the head, claiming that Israel and The United States had planned to install Ahmadinejad, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Remember him? That's a blast from the past. Speaker 1: The guy they said did not win election because it was an illegitimate election. Now we like him. Speaker 0: Now we like him. Speaker 1: They call him a holocaust denier. But Israel all of a sudden loves him. Speaker 0: Anti Israel, anti Israel guy. We're gonna install Ahmadinejad to rule Iran. Why would they do that? Why exactly would they do that? Is it to keep this, like, perpetual war going? Wait a minute. Ahmadinejad, he's now the head of that country. Use that as, like, some sort of a false flag. I don't know. We'll unpack that in a second. Then a second story, the phone call president Trump under pressure from Middle East partners, to get a peace agreement in place on the phone with Benjamin Netanyahu for about an hour yesterday. And according to the readout and three individuals who were in the room said that Netanyahu's hair was on fire, what's left of it, after this tense phone call where basically he's pushed. He said, no. No. You're allowing them too much time. We need to bomb them right now. We need to keep bombing Iran. And president Trump saying, under pressure from Middle East allies. We're not gonna do that. We want a peace agreement. And then president Trump was asked about this, and he says, you know, I be Ben Netanyahu will do whatever I want him to do. Listen. Speaker 2: What did you said to to prime minister Netanyahu about Iran and how long to to hold off on strike? He'll do whatever I want him to do. He's very, very good man. He'll do whatever I want him to do, and he's a he's a great guy. To me, he's a great guy. Speaker 0: Yeah. He's a great guy. And so he'll do whatever I want him to do. Do you believe that? Trump telling Bibby what to do. We'll talk about that. The Massey election, this possible peace plan, seems to be coming together, at least that's being purported, but I'm not sure we believe it. And this new DOJ task force to combat antisemitism in The United States with our special guest today. We're gonna talk with Joe Kent. He is the former director of National Counterterrorism Center, and he joins us now. Joe, great to have you back on the show. Welcome. Speaker 2: Great to be you guys. Thanks for having me. Speaker 0: Our pleasure. So maybe I guess we could start at the top. There's rumblings of this peace agreement that seems to be in play right now over the past few hours, and a lot of people seem to be believing it. But it really shows that Iran is sort of giving up all of their chips here, all of their cards. When we see this talk of a peace framework, what did you think when you started hearing this? Truth? Speaker 2: I'm a I'm an optimist, and I think that there is a goal there there is a peace deal that we we can get as long as we're realistic. And and first and foremost, we have to be realistic that a peace deal won't be acceptable to Israel. So if we just look at the Israelis with clear eyes, which we've had a very hard time doing throughout this entire administration, and we actually take steps to restrain the Israelis, we can get a peace deal with the Iranians. We're not gonna get everything we want. They're not gonna get everything that they want. But I think if we don't bury any poison pills in the deal about zero enrichment, hand us over all your enrichment, and we're realistic about it and we get an end to the fighting, I I think it's I think it's definitely possible, but I am skeptical that we've taken the the first hard step in telling the Israelis, like, you you are done taking offensive action without our permission. Speaker 0: Do do oh, sorry. Just wanted to follow-up on that. Could you believe that phone call readout where Bibby's hair is on fire? Trump says he'll do whatever I want. Like, we've been played before, Joe. Right? Where we've been played where we're told that there's this rift between them. Right? When they're really on the same page. What do you believe from that phone call? Speaker 2: I I I agree with you. I have a hard time believing it at this point. But if Trump did say, I'm not resuming military operations, I still wanna get a deal, I could see where Bibi's hair would would indeed be on fire. He can see the public sentiment right now. He knows that president Trump is feeling a lot of the pressure. And the what the Israelis have done, though, has actually been very, very clever at the beginning at the onset of the war. I know we're gonna get into this with the Ottoman Ejad. They convinced president Trump this was gonna be very easy, and they got us on board of taking that initial strike against the supreme leader. And then the Israelis and us too, we killed a lot of the different moderates. So I I think Netanyahu and the Israelis know that really the Iranians that we're negotiating with right now are gonna be much more challenging for us to negotiate with. Again, I still think we can get a deal with them, but I think every time that president Trump doesn't get him exactly what he wants, I do think his hair is somewhat on fire. And then there's gonna be a full court press with the pro Israeli lobby, the pro Israeli media apparatus here, leaning heavily on President Trump. I'm hoping that by now President Trump is just frustrated with that. And he's starting to dictate terms, but but time will tell. Speaker 1: Well, in the wake of Thomas Massie's loss to the Israel lobby, it feels the timing might be there to show us like, look, we don't do what they say, even though they bought an election, even though they bragged about their influence in that election, which we'll talk about later. But no, it's us that's in charge. So it feels a little bit like a a vitamin that they're giving the MAGA crowd so that they don't start to buy in to this. What do you think about that? Speaker 0: That's a good point. I've Speaker 2: No. I I would I would agree with you. Look. It it's all gonna come down to I think there's there is a limited amount of time here because at some point, if president Trump doesn't see that he can get a deal with the Iranians, he's gonna be under pressure, and I think he's also gonna get frustrated as well. So I think a lot of what we're seeing right now is, like you said, that that vitamin to MAGA, like, hey. We're pushing back on the Israelis. They're not gonna come out and admit that the Israelis, you know, kinda pressured us into this entire thing, but they're gonna kinda throw us a bone right now. But they did have to just spend, I mean, however many millions last night just to take out one congressman. They they can't repeat that for the entire, you know, senate, the entire congress. They can't repeat that on the national level. They just simply they have a lot of money, but they don't have that much money. And they they they can read the same data that we can. They can see that, yeah, they still have, like, the boomer Fox News crowd, but the rest of the people that are out there voting and are engaged, like, they're really not gonna tolerate this. So I'm sure there's an argument taking place right now amongst the Israelis of, hey. Do we go for broke right now, and do we we really try and push this next offensive against the Iranians? Is it that big of a deal, or do we take a tactical defeat and kinda let president Trump get some kind of a deal and then kinda work our way back in from a different angle? I'm sure the Israelis are having that debate internally right now. We know where Bibi is. We know where Lakud is. They're probably much more maximalist only thinking about, you know, the next week or so or how long they can make this war last. But I think that's probably a debate that's taking place right now with the with the Israelis as well. Speaker 0: Fascinating. No. Let's talk about Ahmadinejad. So this New York Times piece, I mean, I what a blast from the past that that they're gonna install Ahmadinejad, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the Iranian leader. Speaker 1: The US and Israel, they didn't even answer his letters when he was they would ignore it. And they called him a holocaust denier and an illegitimate president. How did we get this guy on the phone? Speaker 0: What do you make of this report? Speaker 2: This this really to me, it just shows that the Israelis were their main goal before we got committed to the war was just to get us into the war. The Israelis knew they couldn't accomplish anything in Iran without us. So, basically, they were they were doing what what I would call the throw everything at the wall model and see what stuck. So they would, you know, tell us a variety of different things, and and a lot of it would end up being very, very far fetched, but they wanted to see if any of it resonated. And the second that any of it would resonate, they would, you know, stick on that and say, no. No. That's actually our plan. Trust us. We're really good at this, don't you know? We have great intelligence. And so I think what they were trying to do with, Armenia's job was basically the Venezuela model where, hey. We'll decapitate. We'll kill the supreme leader. And then we've got this guy who will just jump right in, and he'll stabilize everything. You know, mister president, just like you did in Venezuela. So I think they I don't think that the the Israelis ever got in a in a dark smoky room and were like, yeah, out of mean Najad, we're gonna install that guy, and here's how we're gonna do it steps one through 10. That wasn't ever the the case. This was just a sales pitch, and I think they were just trying to basically copy paste Venezuela just to sell it so they could get us on board. And I think don't know if the Armeniajad pitch worked, but it did work this some some version of that did work to a certain degree because they got us into the war, and most importantly, they got us to take that strike against the supreme leader, which killed off one of the moderating forces inside of Iran, making a deal right now that president Trump so desperately wants even more challenging to get. So the Israelis didn't have any foresight on, like, tactically how to take down the regime. They put all their eggs and all their foresight into how can they get us into this war and how can they keep us into the war. Speaker 1: But again, Ahmadinejad was not a western puppet. He tried diplomacy many times. Can we put this photo back up of him? The reason that Iranian politicians don't wear neckties is because it symbolizes Western imperialism to the Persians, to the Iranians. And so why? It's almost insulting. Like, we remember what the messaging was about him. It almost feels too stupid to be in New York Times. I can't I can't wrap my head around Speaker 0: it. They'll help you forget just like Donald Trump Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with and partnering with Saddam Hussein. There's like, don't forget about the the twenty years ago. Just forget about it. Memory hole it. Speaker 2: Yeah. And and it was a close copy paste to Venezuela. That that's where I think their head was at because I think they had already they had already tried the whole Shah. Hey. We'll bring this Shah's son back in, and that didn't pass the sniff test. There's the the MEK, the Muji ID and colleague. There's the Kurds. All of that was always hard to formulate, but I think they were able to say, like, okay. We've got a guy, and he was sort of part of this regime that we don't like, but trust me, he's our guy. That seems like a very Israeli pitch to me. I'm just I'm just guessing, and that he would jump in, and they they kept referencing in in my view. They probably just kept referencing Venezuela and saying, hey. It worked in Venezuela. You guys came in, you took out the leader of Venezuela. And then we had somebody, you know, just kind of step in who we were able to make into, basically our puppet, and that will work here. Again, none of it was ever a serious plan, but it was a serious sales pitch to to get us into the war. Speaker 1: Or if I could maybe use reverse psychology because Ahmadinejad many times questioned Israel's use of the Holocaust in order to expand their global war powers. If they got a Holocaust denier in there, that would really help them springboard what they've always been able to use to justify their war. And like, uh-oh, we got even worse guy. Now we gotta now we gotta go I now Speaker 0: I'm just still Speaker 1: calling. This is this is what I would do maybe if I were an evil regime. What do you think? Speaker 2: I think that's something that's underappreciated on our side about the Israelis because the Israelis are are very polished, and they're very slick at their presentation. And a lot of the Israelis that we deal with are dual citizens, and they sound just just like us. We forget that they have a much different mentality. So when we're talking like, hey. How do we take down a country? We want steps one through 10, and we wanna understand how it ends because in the American mind, we are not good with chaos. We do not like chaos. The Israelis view it much differently. The Israelis are completely fine of chaos. Look at their strategy in Lebanon. Look at their strategy in Syria. And so for them to say, like like you said, okay. We'll get this other guy in, but then we'll be able to come right back and be like, bad news, guys. This guy is just as bad, so we gotta keep going. The purpose of the war is for the war to continue, not for the war to to be concluded in any meaningful way, especially, you know, from the perspective of the Likud party with with the internal dynamics there in Israel, with BB being on trial. The longer the war goes on, the better. So, you know, again, I think this is mostly just a pitch to us, but I think I think you're you're probably onto something right there where they even could bake into the cake even further if this harebrained plan even kinda got off the ground. They would have a justification to continue the war. Speaker 0: You mentioned the chaos piece of this. I wanna play a soundbite from yesterday. This is Nick Fuentes on Alex Jones' show, and he thinks that Israel, in order to keep us in this war or push us back into it, especially if some sort of a peace framework is laid out by president Trump. He believes that Israel will carry out a false flag on The United States in order to keep this Iranian charade going. Take a listen. Speaker 3: You think about there was a show on Netflix, Zero Day, and then there was another show, leave it all behind. And they're they're both kind of predictive programming these scenarios where it's either a nuclear conflict or it's some kind of advanced cyber attack. But I think that that has been at the front of my mind or back of my mind ever since October 7, that they're gonna need another nine eleven, a new Pearl Harbor, a new new Pearl Harbor. How are they gonna restart that momentum? Well, how did this whole thing get started October 7? October 7 was a stand down order, and that pretext has been the rolling justification for everything. Lebanon, Gaza, the Houthis, Iran, the whole enchilada. So what what it clearly suggests is that there's gonna be another little triggering event, another little pretext where they're gonna get another Let get your estimation. Speaker 0: Let me get your dead reckoning. Does Israel hit itself or do they hit us? Speaker 3: I think they hit us or Europe. Speaker 0: Okay. Us or Europe. What do you think about that? Being hyperbolic there, or do you think you have serious concerns based on what you've seen in the counterterrorism world? Speaker 2: Well, this war is existential for the Israelis. So I I think we have to just recognize that and and to think, you know, would they thrive in the chaos? Would they thrive would would they be able to continue their overall mission by having us get attacked or another terrorism terrorist attack? We can't take that off the table. We can't rule it out, and we can't let anyone shout at us and say, like, that's a conspiracy theory. These are things that we we should consider, especially when we're looking at a air quotes here ally like Israel who basically has, you know, lied us lied to us to get us into this war, we really have to start being much more skeptical with what they're telling us, and we have to turn a very skeptical eye towards them and towards everybody for that matter, as a matter of fact. And we've had a very hard time institutionally doing that with the Israelis. And and I think if the Israelis believed that we were going to extricate ourselves from this conflict, I think that there would be an element within Israel that would say, hey. We we should look at some course of action that gets the the Americans to recommit to this conflict. So I wouldn't take anything off the table and we need to be not trusting and doing much more verification. Speaker 1: Now the American Zionist messaging tells us, for instance, there's Ben Shapiro saying if you think that A Pac had anything to do with Thomas Massie's loss, then you're an idiot. Israel is not involved here. They're not, you know, the main stage of everything, of all foreign policy. But at the same time today, I'm reading the New York Post and the mosque shooting in San Diego. The guy killed Muslims, but they're saying, really, he was anti Semitic. Mostly, it was an anti Jew mission. So you can have it both ways. We're involved in everything, but we're not. Let's listen to what Ben Shapiro had to say about this foreign influence. Speaker 4: Massey himself is out there saying that Israel is trying to buy his seat in congress. Again, Madhu, like, this this tactic is one of the dumbest tactics. I just have to say it's it's such an incredibly it's a tactic made for stupid people. And the reality is that people who are pro Israel do not like Thomas Massie because Thomas Massie has engaged in every conspiracy theory it is possible to engage in and has made common cause with the most anti Israel people. That's true. But the reason that Thomas Massie is actually in trouble is because the Trump administration has decided to oppose him on the basis of completely other issues. And so the usual game that is now played right now on the right, in the very podcast to stand right, the game that is played is there will be a critique that has nothing to do with Israel, And the first thing you do is you claim that it's about Israel. Okay. Speaker 0: But then APAC tweets right after the election to reaffirm their involvement. Ed Galraign's victory in Kentucky and Clay Fuller's win in Georgia ensures two outspoken pro Israel voices are positioned to fill seats previously held by outspoken detractors, Thomas Massey and Marjorie Taylor Greene. Our community was proud to help pro Israel candidates win these races. Right. Okay. And then even Haaretz. In Israel newspaper headlines. This is the most consequential Republican primary for Israel, and it's happening in Kentucky. That's a Israeli newspaper. But you're an idiot, Joe. I guess if you think that Israel had or the Israel lobby had anything to do with Thomas Massey losing in Kentucky, what do you think? Speaker 2: Yeah. I mean, Ben Shapiro, I know he he he gets a lot of traction by, you know, claiming everybody else is kinda dumb. He's super smart, but APAC didn't help him out there when they tweeted right afterwards that, like, yeah, this was us. We did it. I mean, we we all this stuff is verifiable. You can look it up. You can see where super PACs. You can see the donors for the most part. There's a lot of it still has has to come out later on in July when the super PACs are done doing their filings. But I mean, to say that, you know, the pro Israel lobby didn't have anything to do with Massey's loss last night is just absurd on his face. So, now now they're yelling at us for for noticing while at the same time they brag about it. So the the only good thing I would say here, the only silver silver lining, I mean, I I think there's a few silver linings, but really so much of this now is out there. It's exposed. People who don't follow politics even very closely, they're of it now as well. So I do think I'm not sure if it's, you know, if it's gonna run out of steam towards the midterms towards '28, if it's gonna take a little bit longer with, know, the baby boomer generation phasing out. But this, this campaign that APAC and the pro Israel lobbyists had, they're gonna have to change their tactics, because what they're doing right now, I think they're in the final throes of it, which is another reason why they just went all out on Massey's race, just, you know, a couple days ago. Speaker 1: And so maybe you can share your thoughts about it, because we've had two days now. Yesterday, Clayton was apoplectic. Today, he can string together a sentence with more optimism. How are you feeling? Speaker 2: Obviously, it's a bummer. I mean, it's hard to feel, you know, super energized about it. I was really looking forward to Massey Massey winning, and kinda sending a message to the establishment. But, I mean, it took a record amount of money to actually put down Massey. And in doing so, they made him even more of a national name than he already was. I mean, the the victory the the clips from his victory speech are going viral all over social media. And if you look at the demographic breakdown too, I mean, Massey, he did very, very well with the people that are going to be voting for decades into the future. So that that gives me a lot of optimism. Again, you know, as long as unfortunately, as long as voters can have voters will vote based on how many ads are on TV and how many mailers are in the mailbox and not do just a little bit of research, we are gonna have this issue. But I mean, if you just look at the demographic breakdown right there, if we can continue to get young people to vote, you know, and when I say young, it's actually like under the age of 55 to vote and to consistently get out to the ballot box, we're going to do very, very well. The high propensity primary voters that typically are a little bit older and are in the baby boomer generation are consuming Fox News and just mainstream media. They won the day because that's the demographic that tends to vote in primaries heavily. So if we can do more activism to engage that that younger base right there, we're gonna start getting results that I don't think the money is gonna be able to defeat. Speaker 0: Right. It seems like this strategy of claiming that you're anti Semitic if you somehow speak out against the Israel lobby. It doesn't seem to be holding among the young people. So your to your point, 82% of the young vote went to Massey. The boomer sort of Fox News viewers who are now hitting 80 years old, that 65 to 80 range. Though those people are aging out, And those are the people that voted for Ed Galrain, particularly, if you believe those numbers. You know, Congressman Ron Paul, friend of the show, legend, Congressman Ron Paul tweeted out, was Massey twenty twenty ed? Because there are quite a few anomalies now pouring in as Internet sleuths look through the the mail in ballots at the last minute, these weird anomalies with this election. That's congressman Ron Paul saying was he was he 2020. What do you think? I mean and to me, obviously, you were in counterterrorism looking at The United States Of America specifically. If there was, like, massive election rigging in Kentucky, would this cross your desk? Speaker 2: Not in not in the National Counterterrorism Center. It it wouldn't. It's domestic, and so this would primarily be the FBI. I mean, any place where there's mail in ballots and there's there's machines that we can't see the code in, I think the American people from both sides of the aisle should just demand a new system. Because when you have the mail in ballots, I'm originally from Washington State, that's where I ran for Congress, we can't even vote in person out there. It's all mail in. It is a terrible system. So I think just in general, it is good and right for us to question the mail in votes. It's good and right for us to question the machine tabulation. Because when you get down in the meat and potatoes of how is my mail in ballot even like verified? How do they count it? How do these tabulations on the machines work? It's all smoke and mirrors. It's almost impossible for us to get straight answers. And there's very few people that are looking over the shoulder of those who are behind the scenes doing the tabulation. And a lot of times, a lot of these states, I don't know Kentucky in detail, but a lot of the tabulation that's happening in most states, it's machines and it's algorithms. So even the people that are there in the polling station, they're not really able to even verify this. So we have major issues still in this country of election integrity. Speaker 1: Now, something that continues to baffle me is the headlines around, oh, let's say Hillary Clinton's loss, or Donald Trump's loss is that it was foreign interference in the election. It was Russia, it was China, it was Iran. And yet we have now proof of foreign intervention in Thomas Massie's election, and there are no headlines about it. It's totally fine. We know that it was money. And it was bought armies that helped to push Al Gowrin over the finish line. And where is the I mean, maybe I'll ask you from a official perspective. You know, is it something that would be tracked by intelligence? Speaker 2: In terms of the foreign interference, certainly. I mean, there's entire divisions. There there wasn't an entire division, for quite some time that was looking at the foreign interference, especially like the democrats did this, you know, with the when everyone believed that Russia had interfered in our elections. But it it still is something the intelligence community would look at if there was foreign interference. Unfortunately, with, like, the American system where the money is really, really hard to track, the money from the super PACs is really challenging. We get into a really weird situation too with dual citizens. A lot of folks that are very pro Israel, they have Israeli citizenship and they have American citizenship as well. Because they're Americans, they have American citizenship. They can give an unlimited amount of money to super PACs. I mean, most famously, the Adelson's, Miriam Adelson. She's an Israeli citizen. She's also an American citizen. She can give hundreds of millions of dollars to super PACs. I mean, that's absolute insanity, in my view. And getting a fix for that would be complicated, because of some of the rulings by the Supreme Court. But I think going forward in our country, this is something that we really need to look at and decide who the American people are good with being able to contribute money. And should there be a limit on that? And that's gonna be a dicey conversation because there's a liberty issue there where, like, your money is your speech, you can spend it however the heck you want if you're a free American citizen. But that kinda makes our elections the wild west, and we really just saw that play out in Massey's election. Speaker 1: But are there any other countries that are doing do we have wealthy Russians that are influencing elections? Do we have wealthy Chinese? Speaker 2: You know, I think if we did, it would be all over the news. I mean, can you imagine if if a if the Russian newspapers the day after the twenty sixteen election were like, yeah, that was us. We we got that Trump elected or whatever. I mean Right. We would never hear the end of it. You know, probably half of Trump's family would have been arrested. I mean, but here we here we have major publications in Israel saying, we did that. We got we got we took out Massey and then APAC, you know, saying that we helped take out Massey. It is a to say it's a double standard doesn't even do it justice. It's just absolutely absurd. Speaker 0: There's something that really bothers me. And from you, I wanna ask you, because in the counterterrorism world, and this is really troubling. You know, are a number of American journalists who've been on these hit lists, these kill lists, obviously, in Ukraine. But also this came to light, a former IDF unit eight twenty eighty two hundred soldier, just in an interview yesterday talking to Mario Narfal, that Tucker Carlson is number one on Mossad Israeli intelligence targets lists, Like, would and I'm gonna play the clip, but I wanna get you to respond to this idea that American journalists would be on Israeli target lists. And is there any discussion inside of the counterterrorism officer? Hey, maybe you wanna take those people off your list? Watch this. Speaker 5: The number one person on their list by far is Tucker Carlson. He is considered enemy number one by Israeli services. Speaker 0: Touch him. Speaker 5: I I I'm not saying they'll touch him. I haven't heard that they would. But that's where if there's one person who's being monitored carefully and there are plans and contingencies for, it'll be Tucker Carlson. Candace Owens may be number two. I think they take her less seriously, but still, those are two people I've heard Israeli intelligence people mention, which is which is bad. Speaker 0: Is that something that you would discuss in your I'm just curious why there wouldn't be more of an outrage and demand, to have Americans removed from these lists? Or why are you doing this? Why is Marco Rubio not standing up at a podium yelling about something like this? Even on the Ukraine side, on the MirrorVets website targeting, journalists. Speaker 2: I would just say in general because we have a very unrealistic relationship with with Israel. We in The US tend to think of the Israelis, like, literally, like, as our as our partner in the same way that, like, the Five Eyes countries are. And there's issues with the Five Eyes, you know, a whole different conversation. But we will basically take what they say almost, like, verbatim and just say, okay, this is coming from the Israelis. They have the same goals that we do, and we're not gonna talk about some of the uncomfortable stuff like what you just played there in that clip because the because the the mentality is because the Israelis give us so much good intelligence. And if you even say what myself and a few others, not not just me, there's been people over the years who've said this. When we say, hey, look, the the Israelis probably do give us some good stuff, but they're still a partner that has their own agenda, their own goals. And then we really fail to assess just how vital American support is to the Israelis. And so if you're in if you just put yourselves in the Israeli shoes, there's no length that you wouldn't go to to make sure that you don't get the support from America. But we fail to, like, accurately assess that. We're usually pretty good about playing the the adversary, in other scenarios, but we have these big blinders up with with when it comes to the Israelis. It's almost forbidden to think like to to even say out loud, hey. Do you think maybe the Israelis gave us that piece of so called intelligence to influence us as opposed to inform us? Or hey, do we think, you know, the Israelis might be aggressively spying on us? Do we think that they they might do some other kind of operation? Like those things are just not really that that discussion is just not tolerated within The US intelligence community right now. That that is something culturally that we just have to change because we do not have a very realistic outlook on how the Israelis view us and just the links they'll go to, to keep the relationship as it is right now. Speaker 0: Wow. Speaker 1: Well, now we see that the Justice Department has launched this advisory committee on antisemitism. What they say it is, is just a group of people who will advise the Department of Justice on combating antisemitism. The Department of Justice is constantly posting about antisemitism. They don't seem to need a new group of advisers, nor are they targeting any other anti discrimination programs for any other group? And I'm very confused because it feels very much like the Biden administration's protection of transgender people. But now we have it again for only one group of people. And, you know, this is something that will be done on American tax taxpayer dollars. The only thing I can think of is that they want to re stigmatize antisemitism because it doesn't hurt anymore as a label. Think back to the beginning of my career as a journalist, and I was terrified of that word. Now it's like a bee, like get away, you know, it's it's you shoo it away. You don't pay any mind to it. What do you think? Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a good point. I mean, lot of it to you just almost seems like at this point, because we have so many other issues right now in the country, we have so many other crises. For them to be focusing on this, it's just like, is this a statement where we just have to we have to say this? Did someone, you know, is someone guaranteed the APAC money next time in order to say this? Because, like, in terms of what we should be prioritizing right now, someone having their feelings hurt about any kind of speech, like, obviously, that's against the constitution. But, again, like, how is this even a a priority? So I I think your your theory makes sense, because they know that the whole antisemitism, insult or whatever, it's just kind of rolling off people now. And so now they want to put some sort of a, you know, legal label on it. So people are just they're back to being scared, like you better straighten up and fly right, and not ask about why APAC just spent, you know, tens of millions of dollars against Massey. Speaker 0: Right. Joe Kent, great to see you. You know, I guess, you know, we're also sort of ruminating over, you know, Tucker did a show yesterday saying there's a positive sign out of this, and, he was trying to talk me off a ledge yesterday. Like, he's like, promise you, this is the bottom. This is the bottom. It it goes up from here. And I I just I'm trying to see it that way. I'm trying to be a glass half full kind of person. And I hope that this was a major tipping point moment for Americans to see the amount of foreign influence money that poured into this election and we will not stand for it. But I don't know. What's your sense? I'll get you out of here on this. What you see in the midterms and maybe over the next, you know, election cycle or so? Speaker 1: Yeah. Glass half empty or half full. Speaker 2: I'm gonna go with Tucker and be a glass half full. I think we we basically, if we're gonna stay in this fight in which we have to, then we have to be glass half full. I mean, again, if you just look at the numbers, like the baby boomers, like, that's my parents, don't want to see that don't want to see them go. I love my parents. I love a lot of boomers. However, they are being phased out. And the younger generation Gen X and down, they understand everything that we're saying probably at a much deeper level, and they're passionate about it. So I think if we can drive voter turnout with those younger demographics, educate them about how to vote in primaries, we're going to be in a much better spot. I to Tucker's point to this was just so up in everyone's face to take a guy that they no one's ever really heard of before, to have the secretary of war literally during a war come out to the district to campaign for him, plus the what however much it was, you know, 50,000,000, 60,000,000, we'll find out later on. I I do think that they kinda went all in because they knew this is their last hurrah. The midterms, think, were in trouble, and I think that's just very basic math. If you have an r by your name in the midterms, everyone's gonna associate the price of the pump and the price of the grocery store with the Iran war and with president Trump. And so I think it's gonna be pretty bleak for the republicans. I'm I'm not a I'm not a democrat. I'm not fan of the democrat party, so I hope I'm wrong on that. But I think the midterms are gonna be bleak, and hopefully that serves as a wake up call. But, you know, we're we're probably gonna live through a little bit more of this, but I but I agree with Tucker. I think I think we're heading in a right direction as long as we we keep speaking truth and we we show that we have integrity and we show that we truly care about the country. Speaker 0: You know, from your mouth to God's ears. Joe, great to see you. Thank you so much for your time and your expertise. We really appreciate it. Speaker 2: Thanks, guys. Great to see you. Speaker 1: Yeah. You too. Appreciate it. Speaker 0: Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 22, 2026 at 3:31 PM

Saved - May 23, 2026 at 1:18 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🚨 Scientists working on plasma tech, hypersonics, EMP weapons, and advanced materials are suddenly disappearing in America and China. This looks like a secret weapons race spilling into the open. @WetheBrandon is our guest. https://t.co/gCF4gt6lnP

Video Transcript AI Summary

Speaker 0 said that people in the Missile Defense Agency, including the now deceased doctor Peter Pry and his colleague David Pine, had long claimed—about for a decade—that Iranian electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons were placed on satellites in orbit. Speaker 0 added that Space Force has been tracking such suspected EMP activity for years and that the situation might involve preemptive shootdowns of these suspected EMP bomb satellites as part of escalation against Iran. Speaker 1 said EMP attacks on U.S. infrastructure are a major concern, stating that “it wouldn't take much for entire electric grid to be wiped out.” Speaker 0 then stated that one EMP detonated 50 miles above the Continental United States would knock out 90 to 95% of the electric grid, that there is no restoring it for a minimum of two years, and that the grid would not come back online within two years because the physical gear needed to restore it comes from China. The discussion then shifted to missing scientists and technology origins. Speaker 1 said it was fascinating that there is “massive overlap” between U.S. and Chinese scientists who have gone missing, and he said that he and Speaker 0 could disagree on where the technology came from. Speaker 1 described a claim he had heard from special forces and involvement in a secret space program: the technology was accidentally discovered through crash retrieval from UAPs “long time ago.” Speaker 0 said he did not have special knowledge and expressed a belief that extraordinary people and technologies have historically come from hidden or inherited research, referencing Tesla and claiming Nazis developed advanced systems at Peenemünde that were inherited. Speaker 0 suggested that “the alien thing might be a cover story,” while stating he does not have anyone on the inside who could tell him one way or the other and describing it as his opinion. Speaker 1 said the cover story idea includes the pattern that people assume anything seen in the sky is an alien craft, but that it is often U.S. military technology. He also asserted that “the Nazi technology came from these crash retrieval programs in Russia, China.” Speaker 1 then asked a UFO-related question, saying they have seen six scientists go missing, including military personnel working in plasma physics, advanced heat-resistant materials, magnetism, doctors, and the director of MIT’s plasma science fusion center. He said he had sources from special forces that this plasma technology was found accidentally after a downed UAP. He also referenced Brendan Weichert’s earlier reporting that the issue is “not about aliens,” and stated that China and the United States are “playing this very dangerous game” by missing each other’s scientists.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: By the way, I'll just add one other thing, another input here. We have long suspected I say we. I say people I know in the missile defense agency and people like the now deceased doctor Peter Pry, my friend David Pine, who worked with Peter. All of these people have long said for about a decade that the Iranians placed electromagnetic pulse weapons on satellites in orbit, and that Space Force, what is now Space Force, has been tracking it for years. And we might be witnessing also preemptive shootdowns of these suspected EMP bomb satellites as part of our escalation against Iran. Speaker 1: That's been a big concern from a number of our guests who've said, you know, EMP attacks on our infrastructure, it wouldn't take much for entire electric grid to be wiped out. Speaker 0: One EMP detonated 50 miles above the Continental United States will knock out 90 to 95% of the electric grid, and there is no restoring it for a minimum of two years. And I guarantee you, it ain't coming back online in two years, especially when you consider the physical gear needed to restore the electrical grid comes from China. Speaker 1: Yeah. Right. And we don't have it. Right. Well, Brandon, we thank you so much. We look forward to reading your piece. I wanna dive more deeply into these missing Speaker 0: I'll send it to you guys. Speaker 1: It's a great piece. Fascinating that these Chinese scientists are there's this massive overlap here with these United States scientists who've gone missing. It's remarkable. Yeah. You and I can disagree on where they got this tech from. I've heard from special special forces and involvement in the secret space program specifically, that this was accidentally discovered as part of crash retrieval from UAPs, you know, long time ago. Well, I Speaker 0: don't have any special knowledge on that. I just I find I just I think that we have a lot of extraordinary people, and I think we have a lot of extraordinary I mean, go back to Tesla. He was playing with technology that was hidden. And go back to the Nazis. I mean, we know at Pina Munda, the Nazis were playing with really advanced systems that they developed that we inherited. And so that's why I think it's I I think the alien thing might be a cover story. But I don't have any, you know, I I don't have anybody on the inside that could tell me one way or the other. This is just my opinion. Speaker 1: Yeah. I think the cover story well, I would just say this as I could talk about this all day, and my wife will give me a a side eye. But I think the cover story piece of it is like, well, every time you look up in the sky, oh, that's definitely an alien craft. No. No. That's US military. That's definitely these advanced technologies. But I think at the at the core of Etikura, lot of this technology, the Nazi technology came from from these crash retrieval programs in Russia, China, and we we all have it. We all have it. In different striations and Yeah. Yeah. Anyway, I wanna ask you sort of a UFO related question. And we've seen now six scientists that have gone missing. Several scientists, military personnel working in plasma physics, advanced heat resistant materials, magnetism, doctors, director of MIT's plasma science fusion center. I know from sources that in special forces that this plasma technology was found accidentally after a downed UAP. That's how we obtained this advanced plasma technology. China has also scientists that have gone missing. Brendan Weichert reported earlier today, he said this isn't about aliens. I mean, that's where the tech came from initially. It's not about aliens. But China and The United States are playing this very dangerous game right now of basically missing each other's scientists.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 22, 2026 at 11:30 PM

Saved - May 23, 2026 at 12:40 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🫯 If the Strait of Hormuz stays closed, the world could face an energy crisis worse than anything in modern history. Food, fuel, fertilizer, and the economy are all on the line. @ChristMartenson is with us. https://t.co/Sh4fAHWtgO

Video Transcript AI Summary

Chris Martinson, an economic researcher and futurist specializing in energy and resource depletion, argues the U.S. may be facing a large energy shock driven by the prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz. He disputes claims that a “peace agreement” will reopen oil flows, saying Iran has prepared for this for “forty years,” has leverage, and has repeatedly indicated it will not give up control of the Strait, its nuclear material, or its demands for reparations and sanctions relief. He says the floated “wish list” version of the deal appears to reflect everything the U.S. wants, not Iran’s stated conditions. Martinson describes what he says happened after the U.S. decapitation strike: the U.S. allegedly suffered some of its worst military losses since World War II, bases were targeted, satellite-image releases were restricted, and since March 2 the Strait has been “effectively closed.” He claims Iran’s strategy involved layered missiles, from simpler to more sophisticated, used in sequence, with “extreme precision.” He says Iran can “run off the clock,” and every day the Strait is closed means oil and oil products not reaching market. He argues that oil-market reactions to statements about a deal—particularly Trump’s tweets—suggest the narrative is driving prices more than supply fundamentals, with oil reportedly dropping after tweets despite the constriction of supply continuing. He cites multiple industry and energy figures saying the situation represents an unprecedented or worst energy shock, but argues the oil price does not respond accordingly. Using a price-quantity framework, he says prices have been kept at a level where demand remains high. He claims the U.S. has been using Strategic Petroleum Reserve withdrawals and commercial stocks—calling them “seed corn”—to mask the problem, including “below market rates” for political reasons. He estimates constraints in the SPR and Cushing, Oklahoma: Cushing reportedly has 25,000,000 barrels with an operational minimum of 20,000,000, leaving only about 5,000,000. He argues the SPR caverns are salt caverns that limit how much can be drawn without physical damage, making withdrawal capacity uncertain. His “best guess” is about “sixty days until we hit tank bottoms.” Martinson anticipates inflation impacts through a “double hump inflation” analogy from the 1970s, and says producer price index data at 6% implies consumer prices could rise to around that rate in coming months. He describes inflation as already underway and portrays the situation as a “ticking clock” in negotiations: he says time benefits Iran and increases the likelihood of a broader global economic depression. He warns that if the U.S. attacks again, Iran has stated it would target Gulf Cooperation Council energy infrastructure, including the East-West pipeline across Saudi Arabia (with the port at Yanbu), the Omani pipeline, and it would close the Bab El Mandeb Strait in the Red Sea. He says this could raise the missing oil impact from 13,000,000 barrels per day to 25,000,000 barrels per day and notes that fixing damaged infrastructure could take months or years. He concludes that U.S. choices are limited and the outcome could be “bad or worse.” For personal preparation, Martinson emphasizes Maslow’s hierarchy—food, shelter, safety, and warmth—citing steps like solar and lithium batteries, an electric car powered by solar, growing food, and building neighbor-focused local relationships. He frames the situation as broader than oil alone, affecting fertilizer (including urea), natural gas, and other industrial inputs, and says these interconnected disruptions can be “dizzying” and “paralyzing.”

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, are we about to face the largest energy shock in US history? Our next guest says that's exactly what we have in store for us, and people are largely ignoring the story, or they're trying to cover it up and with some fancy math and trying to hide all of it. Nobody who lives in a real world can basically, continue to ignore this as you see it price at the pump, food prices, etcetera, across the board. Chris Martinson is an economic researcher and futurist specializing in energy and resource depletion. He's the co founder of peakprosperity.com, And really one of the keenest intellects, on X, which is saying a lot because there are quite a few keen intellects. There's also quite a few dolts on X, but Chris is what the top of the list on there. Chris, great to have you on the show. Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you. It's so good to be here with both of you and, real pleasure to be on. Speaker 0: It's our pleasure. I you know, there's lot of topics, and I'd love for you to tell us what you see right now, what you would love to talk about. But at the heart of it for me is obviously this sort of so called peace agreement that's floating around out there over the past few hours that there is going to be some sort of framework in place. We just had Joe Kent on who said he is a glass half full kind of guy. He's he's hopeful about it. But I I I sense from your tweets that you're not buying what's being sold to us about this peace agreement, which seems to give up almost everything from the Iranian side and sort of hand it over to The United States side. What do you make of peace that might open oil flows again in the Strait Of Hormuz? Speaker 1: Well, it's it's it's this simple. Seventy three days ago, we had Trump for the first time come out and say the war is over. And almost there's been this periodicity that that people have noticed, particularly people in the markets that Trump has these market moving sort of statements that come out. Always, you know, a deal is near. Iran has just died to fold, and, you know, we we own the straight. And every time it seems to dump oil and and move markets. So there's a whole component to this which which, you know, has a a side story to it. Here's the deal, though. The United States within five minutes of doing the decapitation strike was suffering some of its worst military losses since World War two. Right? We 14 bases around the region got dialed in. Within two weeks, The United States was kind of forbidding somehow private satellite companies from releasing actual satellite photos because it would have been embarrassing. And ever since March 2, the Strait has been effectively closed, and it's remains effectively closed. So a winning country, would be in charge of the Strait. Trump just said we control the Strait just today, and it's not true because if we did, there'd be ships going through it that aren't passing through. So here's the deal. Iran has a a lot of leverage here, and they've been preparing for this for forty years. Right? And they've built tunnels and put all their things under deep mountains, you know, and all their military assets. And it turned out we were largely unable to meaningfully deflect Iran from its strategy. And its strategy was to use different levels and layers of missiles ranging from relatively crude to highly sophisticated missiles. It used up its, say, you know, crappier stuff first, and then it moved into its more sophisticated materials later. And it showed a remarkable ability, Natalie and Clayton, to to hit what it wanted to hit. I mean, with extreme precision. Okay? And then we came into the ceasefire deal, and Iran's whole strategy at this point, which I totally understand, is just run off the clock. Every day that the Strait remains closed is another 13,000,000 barrels of oil and oil products that aren't making it to market. And this is an extraordinary shock. We can get into that in a minute. So when I see these things, you asked about the peace deal. So the one that just got floated today, I actually think it came off of an obscure telegram channel and, you know, the Axios angle, seems to be dead. So they pulled this thing up. And it was just a wish list of it was everything The US wanted. Right? Iran gives up complete control of the straight. It, you know, folds. It doesn't get any money. You know, all kinds of stuff. And Iran has been very clear. They've always said, look. We want we're gonna have control of the straight. That's a done deal. You're gonna have to pay us some reparations, you know, and we can discuss that later. We're not giving up our nuclear material. And, oh, yeah, you're gonna have to unfreeze all the sanctions and release our money. Speaker 0: So Right. Speaker 1: They haven't wavered from those conditions since ever so far. And and that's all I can tell you from from this point. I don't know what's actually going on, you know, with the negotiators inside. But taking Trump's statements, we're winning. They're losing. And that's not actually what the facts on the ground say. Speaker 2: It's very frustrating to see oil prices react to what seems like a meme because we don't have any official source of this peace deal, and yet we've seen slight movement downwards towards price of oil. And so what are we to make of that? Because the constriction of supply has not ended. It's only based on poof, a belief system of social media. Speaker 1: It it's astonishing. It's astonishing. So I I I don't know how we got here because remember 2022, the Iran the Ukrainian war kicks off, and the world was worried about a 3,000,000 barrel per day potential shortfall. That's a 3,000,000 barrels per day. And oil prices shot up to a $120 a barrel and all that. And and here we are, an order of magnitude beyond that in terms of actual impact. Secondarily, you're right, Natalie. Every time Trump tweets something, oil just gets slammed. Today, it got slammed for another $5. Went from a 101 all the way down to, like, 96 because of this tweet, you know, string that came out. And what's amazing is so you have that. You have the tweet moving oil five, six, seven percent usually to the downside. And on the other side, you have Fatih B. Roll, the executive of the International Energy Agency saying, this is the worst energy shock forever. We're running out quickly. You have, top commodity analyst at JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs. You've you've got, Jeff Curry out of Carlisle saying, wow. We are weeks away from tank bottoms. You have Exxon CEO, Chevron CEO saying the same sorts of things. Basically, everybody who's anybody who really knows this business is just running up the red flag saying, wow. We are we are, like, weeks away from imminent disaster, and that doesn't cause anything to happen to the oil price. But, uh-oh, Trump tweets out, you know, we're winning, and bang, $5. Right. I'm highly suspicious this isn't organic. Speaker 0: You're a futurist. I mean, you look at this data more than closely than just about anybody. So I trust your opinion on this, you know, implicitly. When you're you're listening to Jeff Curry, you're listening to all of these individuals, but you're looking at the data, what can we expect over the next few weeks? Like, what is the truth here? Speaker 1: The truth is that the simplest, most elegant chart in all of economics is the PQ chart, price, quantity, and, and demand. Right? So so there's supposed to be this relationship. If if demand is here, right, and supply is here, you need prices not to make more supply come out of the ground right away, but you need prices to rise so that demand comes down. Now we've been holding prices at a level where demand remains really, really high. And the way we've been covering that up, we in The United States principally. Last week, for the last reported week, 17,800,000 barrels left The United States of crude oil. It came out of our strategic petroleum reserve, or as I sometimes call it now, our strategic political reserve, and also commercial stocks. And and that's our that's our seed corn. That that's our national that's what we run our country on. And we're now just selling it at below market rates so that, I think, for political reasons, we can make this seem like it's not as bad a thing as it as it is. Speaker 0: How much is less in in the in the oil reserves? And how how long can we keep up that charade? Because I've seen you talk about this sort of moving paper around is not enough to hide the real story here, and I find that fascinating. Speaker 1: Well, you you go until you know, theoretically, you go until you run out. Now what's that? Where's running out? So we have two major stockpiles right now that we track pretty carefully. One is the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. That's four separate caverns along the Texas, Louisiana borders, near the Gulf. And then we have this big stockpile at Cushing, Oklahoma, the the big Cushing terminals. Cushing's at 25,000,000 barrels right now. Sounds like a lot. Problem. Its operational minimum is 20,000,000 barrels. It can't go below that because now the pipes are below that level. Like, 20,000,000 barrels is what it takes just to sort of, like, fill the system so it can operate. So we only have 5,000,000 barrels left there. The salt caverns that hold our SPR, different kind of a thing, it's hard to say because it these aren't giant holes in the ground. Well, they kinda are. But you fill it with oil. But to get the oil back out again, you don't just suck the oil down. You pump water in from below and you float the oil up. Problem is these are salt caverns and salt dissolves in water. It doesn't dissolve in oil. So as we pump water in there, it's doing some damage. There's only so much you can pump in there before it really would be inadvisable to go any higher than that. And so this is hard data to come by, but but for sure, if they say there's 374,000,000 barrels left in there, it's something less than that that we can actually realistically draw out without actually physically damaging our strategic petroleum reserve. Different from China. China built above ground storage tanks. They have some underground, but theirs is is like, if they say they have 1,300,000,000 barrels in in reserve, that's pretty tappable for the most part. We have a different situation here. So best guess, we have about sixty days until we hit tank bottoms here, tops. Speaker 2: Gosh. And so what do you think that this shock will look like for us at home? We've had experts on saying the Big Mac index is gonna go up upwards of 30. Can you imagine a $30 Big Mac? What do you think? Speaker 1: Well, there's this really famous chart circulating right now, and it shows we went through what was called a double hump inflation in the seventies. Right? So from '73 to '78, there was this big bad round of inflation. Then, oh, no. From '79 to '82, there was this next hump, and that was even worse. Now that second hump went up to about 14% inflation back then. And see if any of this rhymes. We had this thing called the oil embargo from, you know, the OPEC nations. And so the Arab oil embargo was a cause because oil went up a lot in price all of a sudden. We had this little thing called the Vietnam War, so there was high deficit spending by the US government. And so you get these twin forces, and it created that double hump of inflation. Almost in a perfect rhyme this time. And so I actually think this next hump of inflation, which has already started, we just had our producer price index. The PPI came out. It's at 6%. That means in three to four months, the CPI will also be at 6%. But the actual reading for the last month was 1.4% for the month. You annualize that out, and that's closer to 16% yearly inflation. So look at that at 6%. That's the the blended rate, but the single month of April came in at 1.4% just for that one month. So if that continues, hey. Here we go. So this is the ticking clock. So here's all all these pieces in. Trump can't just sit here and wait for Iran to drag its heels forever and ever. Iran knows that that's all it has to do. Get close to a peace deal. Walk away. Get get close. Walk away. Promise you're gonna get closer. Walk away. Because I think Trump legitimately wants out of this quagmire. Mhmm. But all Iran has to do is drag this out a couple more months. And now we're not just up against the wall. We're now responsible for creating what's a global catastrophe. A giant global economic depression would probably be the right word for it. So if you can't let Iran wait, what do you do? Well, either you're gonna have to give stuff up and negotiate like, a negotiation means you don't come in and dictate terms. That's what The US has been trying to do. Here's the 15 plan. Take it or leave it, or we're gonna bomb you back to end your civilization kinda. That's our language. If we wanna get out of this with negotiating, it's gonna have to be negotiation. Hey. We give up some stuff. You give up some stuff. Nobody walks away totally happy, but you get some stuff. We get some stuff. Problem. That makes us look weak. It makes it it really elevates Iran. You know, they suddenly, you know, actually took the bully on and won. And I don't think that constitutionally, I mean, from an ego standpoint, I'm not sure we have the people in positions of power right now to do that. Second problem, you can't bomb them and and get the more escalation is not gonna get us anywhere. Iran has already said that. Real worry here. So so listen. This is where I would put out my most urgent warning to all my followers, and you should do the same. If we do attack again, Iran has very clearly said, Speaker 2: if you Speaker 1: do this, we're coming after the rest of The Gulf Coast countries, the GCC energy infrastructure assets. The East West pipeline across Saudi Arabia with the port at Yanbu goes out, the Omani pipeline goes out, and we're gonna close the Bab El Mandeb, Strait in Red Sea, and that's it. That's it. Now we suddenly go from 13,000,000 barrels a day missing to 25,000,000 barrels a day missing. And if they damage those in a way that would take months or years to fix, this is now an absolute unmitigated disaster. And let me paint how much. If we took 25,000,000 barrels a day of crude oil out of our equation, and then we look back in history and ask the question, when was the last time we were burning that much less oil? The answer is about 2010 when the world economy was 36% smaller than it is today. Wow. That would be the minimum impact. Great Depression was about a 20% hit. So we're talking something worse than we've seen at a time of the highest debt, highest indebtedness, highest deficits, la la la. Right? So we're not coming into this from a really strong position financially, monetarily at this point. And that's how these pieces come together. We got talked into a super quagmire, and I don't I I I honestly don't see a way out of this and maybe I'm not clever enough, but it's bad or worse. Those are our choices as a nation right now. Speaker 0: Wow. When do you think this will hit? And what first of all, I guess I should say, do you think people are prepared? There seems to be a lot of ostriching going on, people burying their heads in the sand about this. Speaker 1: I I would say most people are unprepared. And a lot of people don't wanna know, you know, actively ostriching. I think that's the right way to put it. Because it's a lot. It's a lot to take in. I I I get it. This is you know, intellectually, I think most people can handle it. But emotionally, that's where it gets that's best part. Speaker 0: You gotta take, you know, you gotta get your kids to dance class at night. You know, you've gotta take your son to swim swim practice, and you gotta put food on the table, and you're running around. You're working. You're you're hardworking Americans who watch this show and have big small businesses, and they're busy. Speaker 1: Mhmm. Speaker 0: And to, you know, to have to sit down and sort of sit there for thirty minutes and really think, oh my gosh, in the next sixty days, everything could change for us unless we're prepared. What does that preparation look like to you? Speaker 1: Well, it it for me, it means first thing you do is the bottom of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Right? Food, shelter, safety, warmth. Right? And so what I've been doing personally is, I've I've bought some more EcoFlow lithium batteries, so I'll be and I've got a solar system, so I'll be able to at least have electricity for sure, you know, which can run some things. I bought an electric car. Never thought I'd be one of those guys, but it plugs in my solar panels. I I've been I've been thinking this is something like this is coming for a long time. So I actually live on a on a small gentleman's farm here, but I believe in in growing my own food, taking really good care of my neighbors, forming local relationships to as much depth as I can because, I I really duly truly believe if this gets as bad as it could, you know, we're all gonna be, our our neighbors are gonna be our most important assets. So, really, it's it's a fundamental shift in in believing that the systems will be there for you and understanding that maybe you get a little bit of your freedom back by taking care of as much of that as you can. I don't say go a 100% grow your own food. That's impossible, right, unless you become a subsystems farmer. But if you can grow 5% of your own food, if you had to grow 50%, going from 5% to 50% is easy compared to starting from zero. Nobody wants to start from zero in this story, right, if you have to. But if you can't grow food, well, then you, you know, maybe you got local farmers. Develop relationships with them. I'm really at at kind of at that level. It's it's very it's very basic. It's it's like food and energy is where I'm really focused because, you know, we talk about oil, oil products. That's the big thing in The Gulf, but it's it's much more than that. It's a story of sulfur, which is a story of fertilizer as well and also the fertilizer directly in form of urea. Oh, it's also an aluminum story. Wait. It's also got helium. It's yeah. It's natural gas too. Like, there's so many things that got impacted from this. It's it's it's dizzying, and it's paralyzing. I totally get it. Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah. Well, thank you for that sobering read. You know, I I think about my son who is in his he's 15 and thinking about getting a summer job. And I think, how are you going to climb this ladder? We really have just not made it easy for you. And my heart is broken for where they need to start. I feel so guilty for the the world we're putting them into. That's not a question I'm just sharing. Speaker 1: I I just had the same experience. I was talking with my youngest, my youngest daughter, and she's struggling to find a job right now because the field she's looking in is flooded with people who just got booted out from AI, you know, taking over positions. So she's up against people with decades more experience who are willing to work for peanuts because they're really desperate. And she's just trying to get started. And so, you know, this is where we've this is where we've gone as a nation. So here here let me be my best glass half full kind of guy. We have to go through these pains, I think, so that we can straighten up and fly right. You know what's that old saying like hard times create good men and good men create easy times and easy times create weak men. Right? Well, we're there. Right? And weak men create hard times. So, I mean, look at this what we're doing with, like, just AI, which it has an energy component. That's why I analyze it. So much energy is going into these things. They're boxes. They're basic I call them toasters. They don't make toast. You know? They just literally pour electricity in them. They make heat and cat videos. And we're doing that at a pace where we have no idea, not even having the national discussion about how people who are displaced, who no longer have a role in society, what we're gonna do with them. We just sort of shrug and go, I guess, you know, sucks to be you. It's awful. Right? And and so this is why I'm really excited to have these conversations. And I think, listen, if we have the hard times, we'll get back we'll find the good people again. I mean, it's kinda why I'm I'm pretty distraught over the Massey loss because he Yeah. Had integrity. He didn't have to like everything. He he said, I liked almost most of what he said because he was for the country against deficits, against wars, all the stuff I believe in. So, ideologically, I liked him. But more than that, he had integrity. And Washington DC took one look at that and said, we have no use for a person with that characteristic here. We're gonna replace you with somebody whose own SEAL team members hate it, you know, because he's our kind of guy, right, with outside funding. So so I'm hopeful that good people get to rise up again, and we we we're gonna but we're gonna have to do some rebuilding in this country. No question. Speaker 0: Yeah. You're right about that. And we need we need that strength more than ever right now. Chris, great to see you. The website is peakprosperity.com. Check out your latest episode, by the way, on, called the wake up call. Oil and AI time for some soul, for some soul searching. I like that. So check it out. New episode that just published called the wake up call. You so much, Chris. Great to see you. Speaker 2: It was a pleasure. Speaker 0: Yeah. Real pleasure having you on the show. We'd love to have you back. Speaker 1: Yeah. Thank you. I'd love to be back. Thank you so much. Deal. Speaker 0: Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you want to follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 13, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - May 13, 2026 at 4:00 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🔥 Washington thought Iran would fold. Instead, Iran is demanding the end of sanctions, billions in frozen assets, and leverage over the most important oil choke point on Earth, the Strait of Hormuz. @AnaKasparian is with us. https://t.co/impjz7goVd

Video Transcript AI Summary

The discussion centers on the Iran ceasefire, Iran’s negotiating stance, and how Israel’s actions and U.S. political dynamics are shaping perceptions and potential outcomes. - President Trump describes the Iran ceasefire as “on life support” and says Iran’s peace terms are “totally unacceptable” and “garbage.” Iran’s position, according to Iranian media cited in the segment, treats Washington’s peace proposal as a surrender document, insisting on the end of U.S. sanctions, release of frozen Iranian assets, the right to sell oil freely, and control of the Strait of Hormuz—a nonstarter for Washington. Trump also threatens more war, aligning with Netanyahu’s preferences. - On the ceasefire, another participant notes “the ceasefire remains in place for the time being,” while a speaker mocks the peace proposal as weak and life-supporting, using medical imagery to describe its fragility. - Netanyahu’s appearance on 60 Minutes is summarized as him “begging for more war,” outlining how to remove enriched uranium and how to achieve that goal, with emphasis on military action. He suggests “you go in” and take it out, implying American and Israeli cooperation, though one participant stresses not to reveal military plans and cautions about the feasibility and risks of such missions. There is also a claim that Netanyahu implies the United States should bear primary responsibility for military actions if needed. - The dialogue expands to a broader critique of Israel’s conduct in Gaza and the West Bank, with one participant stressing that Israel is “besieged on the media front” and that propaganda has harmed Israel’s image. There is a claim that social media manipulation by other countries has contributed to negative impressions of Israel, and a consensus that Israel has not used adequate or effective propaganda in its defense. - The panel discusses the ethics and consequences of censorship, with one speaker arguing against censorship yet acknowledging the impact of social media manipulation on public opinion. They contend that attempts to silence critics or punish those who oppose Israel’s policies are counterproductive and harm Jewish communities globally by conflating Jewish identity with Israeli policy. - Anna Kasparian (The Young Turks) weighs in, describing Netanyahu as untrustworthy and arguing that Israel’s actions—targeting hospitals, education centers, and civilians—have generated global criticism. She asserts the issue is not merely a social media phenomenon but an Israel-centered one, citing the ongoing destruction in Gaza and military actions in Lebanon. She argues that U.S. support for Israel is a political question driven by lobbying, and she predicts growing political pressure against leaders who prioritize Israel’s interests over American interests. - The panel critiques U.S. political alignments, noting that Democratic and Republican positions have not yielded a clear consensus on Iran. They argue that diplomacy has varied across administrations (Obama’s JCPOA vs. other strategies), and they contend that Netanyahu’s influence has pushed the United States toward a harder stance on Iran, often aligning with Israel’s regime-change objectives. - Looking ahead, the speakers caution against a renewed kinetic war with Iran, referencing military experts who argue that the United States lacks the capacity or strategic justification for a large-scale confrontation. They emphasize the high costs, the effectiveness of Iran’s drones, and the risks of escalating conflict, suggesting that a more restrained approach or different leverage might be necessary. - The closing segment underscores uncertainty about future conflict, with a warning that a return to bombing Iran could be counterproductive and that political and public opinion dynamics in the United States are shifting, especially regarding support for Netanyahu and Israel.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, president Trump says this ceasefire in Iran is on life support. Iran's terms for peace are totally unacceptable, he says. And he described it to a reporter as garbage today. Total garbage. Listen. Speaker 1: For the time being, the ceasefire remains in place. Speaker 2: It's unbelievably weak, I would say. I would call it the weakest right now after reading that piece of garbage they sent us. I didn't even finish reading it. They said, I'm not gonna waste my time reading it. I would say it's one of the weakest right now. It's on life support. They understand these are all medical people. Doctor Oz, life support is not a good thing. Do you agree? Diagnosed. I would say the ceasefire is on massive life support where the doctor walks in and says, sir, your loved one has approximately a one percent chance of living. Speaker 0: Okay. So he's laughing about it as if he holds all the cards here. That's the funny part. He doesn't. According to Iranian media, the problem here is that Washington's so called peace proposal didn't look like a peace proposal at all. It looked like a surrender document, and Iran wasn't having it. Iran is holding all the cards here. So they went in the opposite direction. They want an end to US sanctions, the release of frozen Iranian assets, the right to sell its oil freely to whomever they want, and they want control of the Strait Of Hormuz. So that's a nonstarter. So Trump threatened more war, and he's doing the bidding of Bibby. Netanyahu, of course, went on Larry Ellison's, own sixty minutes last night and essentially begged for more war, laying out exactly how he wants president Trump to carry this out. Watch. Speaker 1: How do you envision the highly enriched uranium will be removed from Iran? Speaker 3: You go in and you take it out. Speaker 1: With what? Special forces from Israel, special forces from United States? Speaker 3: Well, I'm not gonna talk about military means, but the president what president Trump has said to me, I wanna go in there. And I think it can be done physically. That's not the problem. If you have an agreement and you go in and you take it out, why not? That's the best way. Speaker 1: What if there isn't an agreement? Can it be taken out by force? Speaker 3: Well, you're gonna ask me these questions. I'm gonna dodge them because I'm not gonna talk about our military possibilities, plans, or anything of the kind. Speaker 1: And I'm just trying to get at how long is it going to take to achieve that aim? Speaker 3: I'm not gonna give a timetable to it, but I'm gonna say that's a terrifically important mission. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 4: Okay. Notice I were I noticed the words you. You go in. You're an American. Speaker 0: Right. Speaker 4: I'm not gonna talk about what our military does, meaning your military that I dictate. I hope you noticed those things because I certainly did. Speaker 0: Oh, yeah. It's all about us. It's The United States. We don't we're not position to do that. We want The United States to do that. He did say we are winning on about seven different battlefields right now, but completely exposed on the eighth battlefield, which is social media. So losing the propaganda war, and he says, we need to fix this. Watch. Speaker 3: You've seen the deterioration of the support for Israel in The United States almost, I would say it correlates almost a 100% with the geometric rise of social media. And that by itself is not what caused it. And I I don't believe in, you know, in censoring them or anything, but I'll tell you what happened. We have several countries that basically manipulated social media, and they do it in a clever way. And that's that's something that has hurt us badly. Speaker 1: Is it your belief, mister prime minister, that nothing that Israel has done tactically or strategically has made no mistakes either in Gaza or the West Bank that have, in their own way, contributed to this negative impression of Israel, whether it's on social media or some places? Speaker 3: No. Of course. Look. It's war. And in war, armies sometimes miss and civilians die. And these are mistakes. These are not deliberate things that happen. Israel is besieged on the media front, on the propaganda front, and we've not done well on the propaganda war. Speaker 0: So we need more propaganda. Speaker 4: Mistakenly disassembled all their food supplies, farms, factories, and infrastructure. That was a mistake. Speaker 0: And it was also just Speaker 4: war crime mistake. Speaker 0: It was just a mistake when our snipers intentionally would shoot children in the head. It was just a mistake. Do these things happen in the fog of war when you intentionally targeted surgeons inside of hospitals through windows as they're attending to people in the hospitals. That's just a mistake. Speaker 4: Following medics and executing them. Oops. Sorry. Speaker 0: This this right here is a whoops. Yes. Yes. A total This is Gaza. Speaker 4: Whoops. I hate when you do that on accident, like stubbing my toe. Speaker 0: Anna Kasperian is the host and executive producer of the Young Turks and joins Redacted for the very first time. I can't believe this is the first time. Anna, great to have you on the show finally. Great to see you. Speaker 5: Hi, Clayton. Hi, Natalie. Love the show. Thank you for having me. Speaker 0: Our pleasure. So you heard you heard, Netanyahu there specifically saying that they're losing this propaganda war. And he said that countries are manipulating the truth in order to spin a false narrative. I'm just curious, like, what countries do you think he's talking about? And also, what kind of false narrative are they putting out that isn't true? Genocide perhaps, and he doesn't agree with that. What do you make of his, statements on that? Speaker 5: If Benjamin Netanyahu's mouth is moving, he's lying. So, obviously, he refuses to take any responsibility for what the entire world has witnessed over the nearly last three years. And so most people are good people. Most people see the slaughter of innocents, the targeting hospitals, the destruction of universities and schools, and they don't like it. There's no amount of manipulation on social media that could convince the American people or people across the globe that what Israel has carried out over the last nearly three years is okay and should be supported. In fact if it weren't for the bribery that has been baked into our political system. I question whether the United States government would even support Israel in the first place and if it weren't for The U. S. Supporting Israel. Honestly I don't even see how it would exist certainly in the current form that it's in going around attacking your neighbors stealing land. I mean, it goes on and on, and it's been this way for the last several decades. I mean, since the inception of Israel. So, again, this is not a social media issue. This is an Israel issue. And the inability to engage in any self awareness or assessment in regard to how Israel has carried out, the complete demolition of the entirety of the Gaza Strip. The fact that they're killing innocents right now as we speak in Lebanon. They just refuse to acknowledge that most people don't like that and are gonna be critical of Israel as it engages in that type of behavior. Speaker 4: Now I wanna ask you what you make of Netanyahu putting the responsibility of the military mission on The United States. He said, you go in and take it out. Yes. There's military might. I'm not gonna talk about it when The United States should do it. It's worth remembering that Israel has never contributed ground forces to any mission that they endorsed on behalf of The United States. I find that so upsetting and the hubris of telling us what to do. Why do you think there's not a bigger outrage of a foreign leader telling us what we need to do? Speaker 5: I think there is outrage among American people. And in fact, you look at polling and each time a new poll comes out, Israel loses more and more support from the American people. Where you're seeing a disconnect is through our political leadership, which carries out what's in the best interest of Israel time and time again and it's really a bipartisan effort to carry out what's best for Israel to the detriment of the American people. But I think what we're noticing now among the electorate is those who are critical of Israel remain critical. However, that group is growing significantly and I think in the upcoming elections what we're going to see is this flat out rejection of political leaders or candidates who insist on taking money from the Israel lobby who insist on carrying out Israel's best interest who seem to prioritize Israel over the you know best interests of The United States and so I think that now there's going to be a lot more pressure from the electorate for the political leadership to change its behavior. And if they don't, there will be consequences for that. So, again, I really don't think there's anything Israel can do in terms of censorship, More media buys you know more efforts in punishing people who are critical of Israel, none of that is going to work. You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube and by the way one other thing I'll mention in regard to military operations and special forces in Iran to retrieve the enriched uranium. Remember, the enriched uranium and the nuclear weapons that Iran doesn't even have was always just a cover story in order to spur regime change in Iran, in order to start this war against Iran. Israel is a nuclear power. They're not worried about, nuclear weapons in Iran. By the way, the other thing is if you pay close attention to what Netanyahu says, he constantly moves the goalposts. So even if we were able to retrieve the uranium, which we don't even have the military capacity to do, it would literally take hundreds of thousands of troops in order to carry that out, and it would be a very dangerous mission. But even if we were to do that, Netanyahu also fearmongers about Iran's ballistic missiles. And I'm sorry. Iran has the right to have ballistic missiles. Israel would like to live in a region of the world where all of its neighbors, all of the countries in that part of the world have no way of defending it themselves and no way of challenging Israel as it expands its borders. Right now the biggest challenge to Israel happens to be Iran. Israel was never worried about Iran attacking them or invading their country or anything like that. But they do know that as they pursue the greater Israel project, which would mean taking land from Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, which, I mean, they've succeeded in some of Speaker 3: that Speaker 5: already, In order to do that, they need to rid themselves of the challenge that's posed by the axis of resistance, by Iran, by Hezbollah. And so we'll see what happens. But I think in the case of Lebanon specifically, the Lebanese government wanting to disarm Hezbollah is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard in my entire life. Not because I would, know, support Hezbollah necessarily, but Hezbollah is really the only thing standing in the way between complete land annexation by Israel. And so if the current Lebanese military doesn't have the capacity to fend off or fight off the IDF, why would you wanna disarm Hezbollah? That makes no sense whatsoever. Speaker 0: Well, don't you hate when people say I told you so? Yeah. That's me, actually, because I I did tell you. Sorry. But I told you that gold and silver were going to reap the benefits of excessive money printing, the Fed just printing money like crazy, overvalued markets, global unrest. It's here. It's happened. Gold and silver have both soared to all time highs. So I hope you called our friends at Lear Capital and you bought some. If you didn't, trust me. It's not too late. Experts are predicting even higher prices ahead. And they get it. They know what's coming. Isn't it time, folks? Get yourself some gold and silver today. Call the best in the business. I personally use them. So does Natalie. We both do. And our kids do as well in their IRAs. Lear Capital, it's a free phone call. There's no obligation to purchase, just education information on protecting and growing your wealth with gold and silver. I'm sure there are many of you that have called and haven't purchased yet for whatever reason. Don't make the same mistake twice. Now is the time to get some gold shipped directly to you or shift some dollars in your retirement accounts over to physical gold and silver. It's easy to do. Natalie and I have done it for both, and I've been extremely satisfied with Lear's knowledge, their service, their prices. I urge you to call today and learn more. Call them. 1806133557 or go to learredacted.com, and you can receive up to $20,000 in free bonus medals with a qualified purchase. Right. You talk about keep moving the goalpost, and that's you may you bring up some great points. The goalpost keeps shifting. You hear from, you know, you hear from Israeli defense, officials who say this is about regime change. Like, that's the ultimate goal. It's regime change. Reiterated that again a few weeks ago. So if it's not about uranium, then it's about regime change. It's not it's not about uranium. It's about ballistic missiles. It's about, as Yatin Yahweh said yesterday on sixty minutes, it's also about proxies, so that includes Hezbollah. So this is really not ending anytime soon. And, know, inevitably, of course, Netanyahu points out that they need to fight back big time on social media in order to try to change public perception. Here, listen to him on this fighting back listen. Speaker 3: I think there's been a concerted effort by several states, to to basically vilify Israel, in the, social primarily in the social media, in the standard media too, but that's less effective. The effective thing is in the social media, And we have, we've not fought back yet. So we we'll have to do that. Speaker 0: So he says we need to try harder. We need to really employ the shift now in social media, and we need to go harder. We don't wanna censor anybody, though. He was very I don't I don't wanna I don't wanna censor what people are saying. Speaker 5: They've done. That's all they've done. Speaker 0: But now I wanna go Speaker 5: on people. So what's that that difficult. Maybe stop slaughtering. The heart Speaker 0: of it. Like, maybe also, your genocide is is at the heart of it, is the root cause of this. It's the manipulation of our American politicians, right, through APEC and other lobbying opera apparatus coming to the White House on a regular basis and manipulating us. So I guess maybe you should stop some of that. Speaker 4: And the way the reporter asks, it is comical because he doesn't wanna say, well, maybe when people see innocent children dying, they don't like it. And that can he says, is there any way that you could have done something wrong and it just was on social media? Maybe. Not like, hey, this is offensive to the human soul. He just tips tiptoes around it. That's not journalism. That's pandering. Speaker 5: Well, major Garrett works for CBS, and I'm sure he doesn't wanna draw the ire of Barry Weiss and lose his job. But either way, I mean the framing of the questions obviously were incredibly sensitive to the Israelis and that's that's not how you do journalism. You're supposed to ask the tough questions regardless of, any backlash you might receive, in this case from the Israelis or Barry Weiss. But, you know, just going back to the notion of, you know, engaging in censorship in order to change the perception of Israel. No. No. It's doing the exact opposite. So when Americans are being censored or when Americans literally lose their livelihood because one of these pro Israel groups targets them over their criticism of Israel and gets them fired. Is that going to improve The U. Perception of Israel or is it only going to further damage its reputation with The United States and honestly everything that I've seen from the Israeli government including the behavior of their own pro Israel influencers here in The U. S. Has been incredibly counterproductive and one of the worst things that Israel does is they conflate worldwide Jewish populations with their genocide and their border expansion project which is incredibly unfair to Jewish people across the globe because not all of them agree with Zionism not all of them agree with Israel and when you do that conflation which is very much intentional if you ask me unfortunately people who might not know better might start harassing or insulting Jewish people who are incredibly critical of Israel. So I just think this entire project has been incredibly counterproductive to the Jewish population. Way Israel is responding through censorship and destroying people's livelihoods is incredibly counterproductive for their own cause. But they can't help themselves because the other option would mean they'd have to stop pursuing the greater Israel project they'd have to stop annexing land that doesn't belong to them. And they would have to stop slaughtering innocent people, including doctors, including peacekeepers, including humanitarian aid workers, including women and children. And they just can't stop themselves from doing that. They they can't get enough. It is what it is, and we have to be honest about that. Speaker 0: So then the other side is then they can start to try to shut down social media companies, something they would never do, like TikTok or otherwise. They would never do something like that or have those projects sold. And now, I mean, they do have a massive PR problem. The fact that you have, like, CNN literally devoting an entire segment about how, Americans really don't like Benjamin Netanyahu. Take a listen. Speaker 6: Yes? Yeah. It's exactly right. But it's not just a problem that Israel has with when it comes to public opinion in The United States. It's Netanyahu himself who has a major problem when it comes to public opinion in The United States. Look at this. Americans say they are not confident when it comes to Netanyahu and world affairs. Look at this. In 2023, the not confident percentage was 42, up significantly, up like a rocket, up to 59%. That's a nearly 20 movement in just three years' time, and now the majority of Americans say they are not confident when it comes to b b Netanyahu and world affairs. And we're not just talking Democrats here. We're talking the entire American public nearly three and five. Alright. Speaker 0: Yeah. So it's not just Democrats, Anna. Speaker 5: Right. Well, I think if we had independent media around for longer than it's been around, I think that that percentage would actually be much higher. I mean, look at the Israeli population. The disapproval numbers are much higher in Israel as it pertains to Benjamin Netanyahu. He's a war criminal. He doesn't care about anyone but himself. He's obviously deeply corrupt and is avoiding, his own prosecution when it comes to his corruption. And so I I honestly, 59% is too low when it comes to the percentage of Americans who have no trust in Netanyahu. It should be a 100%. Speaker 4: That's what I was Speaker 0: thinking. I think he's polling too is probably a lot of older people. Speaker 4: Sure. Speaker 0: That's just my sense. Like, what young person do you ever know that answers a poll? But anyway, go Speaker 5: ahead. True. True. That's a good point. Speaker 4: I wanna ask you about the vomit that is partisan politics. You do a really good job of seeing through it. There's this false dichotomy that president Trump is trying to put forward, and I think it's an effort to win midterm elections that, you know, Democrats versus Republicans on Iran, that Democrats were soft on Iran, and Republicans are not. He's trying to promote this idea that Democrats are pro Iran. It's sort of a stupid argument, and it's not true because both Obama and Clinton rejected diplomacy with Iran. Clinton used them to get weapons to the Bosnians and then screwed them over when they asked for sanctions release. Obama launched a cyber weapon on them and ignored efforts for diplomacy. Speaker 0: Destroyed their centrifuge. Speaker 4: And so president Trump trying to sell this idea that Democrats and Obama were pro Iran, it just betrays the historical truth. The evidence suggests otherwise that The United States has been unilaterally for forty years working against Iran at whose behest we don't quite know. I have a guess. But will the voting population buy this sort of democrats are for Iran, that's why you can't vote for them? Speaker 5: I don't think so, to be honest with you. I mean, look, there's one small area where I think Obama did pursue diplomacy to some extent. Although, overall, his foreign policy was basically George W. Bush's foreign policy on steroids. However, he did secure the JCPOA, so I gotta give him some credit for that. I think that, you know, there's this big misconception, which is that in order to avoid war, right, you have to love the country that you're negotiating with. You don't have to love Iran. You can actually really dislike Iran, their system of government, whatever it is. But you could pursue diplomacy in order to secure certain things that you want. Now here's the problem, In the case of Iran, no one's really worried about them building nuclear weapons. That was always a cover story. So what exactly is it that we want from Iran? We want regime change. Now we, as The United States, doesn't necessarily want that. Israel wants that. Israel dictates our foreign policy, which is why that was what Trump initially pursued. The fact of the matter is Trump is the only president who was stupid enough to enter this war against Iran despite the fact that we had Benjamin Netanyahu egging it on for decades. Obama didn't do it. George w Bush, even though he was war hungry, didn't do it. Biden didn't do it, although I wasn't a huge fan of his foreign policy. That's for sure. Trump was the only US president who was stupid enough to be manipulated by Mossad, manipulated by Netanyahu to enter this war under this ridiculous impression that the regime is going to be toppled immediately. We're gonna weaken their military and then the people of Iran will rise up and, you know, essentially topple the regime. But obviously, that didn't. That wasn't carried out. And anyone who was paying close attention, anyone who was more informed than Trump was would have avoided this war. He is gonna suffer political consequences. The Republican Party is gonna suffer huge political consequences for this. And so if we're having a comparative, you know, analysis over which party is gonna suffer the most over decisions made with Iran, I would say it's the Republicans because of what Trump has just done. Speaker 4: Right. And I find myself my my reaction when president Trump says Obama chose Iran over Israel, I find myself thinking, I'm actually okay with that. Like, I would I would make that choice now knowing what I know that doesn't make me pro Iranian leaders. And is that the reaction they want from us? Because that's what they're getting, and it's human after what we've endured watching Israel do. Like, forgive myself that response. Speaker 5: Well, we are aligned with all sorts of world leaders and countries that have a system of government that we vehemently disagree with. I mean, are we really let's do a comparative analysis of Iran versus Saudi Arabia. Are we pretending like Saudi Arabia is, like, at the pinnacle of, you know, humanitarian rights or human rights? Please. I mean, come on. Speaker 0: So Trump's meeting with China, Xi Jinping, I mean, for crying out loud. Speaker 5: Exactly. And so I think that it would have been far better if we had formed some sort of economic alliance or just alliance with Iran as opposed to Israel. I mean, you look at the conduct of Iran versus Israel, and, I mean, it's night and day. How can you deny that? Iran is specifically targeting, you know, military bases and strategic sites. In fact, I think the best way to end this war is for Iran to maybe take it a little lighter on the Gulf countries. It it's been a smart strategy for sure. However, you need to give Israel a reason to end this war. And so maybe some of the strike should be focused on Israel until they cry uncle because obviously and unfortunately, they're the ones who get to dictate when this war ends. So maybe, persuade them that it needs to end. Speaker 0: Right. And how much of the fog has hidden? Absolutely. How much has been damaged inside of Israel? We'll probably never know. I'll get you out of here on this, Anna, which is you heard president Trump there at the very beginning saying this ceasefire is on life support, joking about it today, saying that you about a 1% chance that the ceasefire sustains. So by all accounts, we're heading back into some sort of massive conflict. What that looks like, we don't know. What's your sense of where things head next? Speaker 5: If Trump makes the mistake of reengaging a kinetic hot war, he would be making yet another mistake. He would be compounding his mistakes. All you need to do is listen to people who actually know what they're talking about. So I'm not a military expert, but I do trust those who are. So colonel Douglas MacGregor, Daniel Davis is another example. These are individuals who understand what would be necessary in order to secure the gains that Trump is seeking here, whether it be regime change, it be the retrieval of the enriched uranium. And fact of the matter is or even forcing open the Strait Of Hormuz, we don't have the military capability to make any of that happen. We just don't. And just because we're spending now close to $1,000,000,000,000 a year on our military doesn't mean we're getting our money's worth. We know that these defense contractors are overcharging American taxpayers. We know that they're increasing their profits to the detriment of, you know, military preparedness and the American people. And so, I mean, just consider the fact that Iran is, like, using these incredibly cheap, easy to make drones, and they're posing a real challenge to our military capability. That is insane, but that's just the facts on the ground, or those are the facts on the ground. So I I just don't know what Trump thinks he would accomplish by going back to bombing Iran. It didn't accomplish anything in the past. It's not gonna accomplish anything moving forward. Speaker 0: No. It's like the Vietnam conundrum, doubling down because you can't admit defeat. And just take the l and go home, unfortunately. Anna, great to see you. Thank you so much. Host of the Young Turks. Great to finally have you on the show. I can't believe, we haven't. But, you know, finally, the stars align and schedules align. So thank you for joining us. Great analysis. Really appreciate it. Speaker 5: Love the show. Keep kicking ass. Love you guys. Ditto. Speaker 0: Ditto. Thank you so much, Anna. Great to see you. Alright. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and Speaker 3: we'll Speaker 0: see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 12, 2026 at 11:35 PM

Saved - May 13, 2026 at 5:49 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🚨 Dr. @PierreKory says the sudden hantavirus media frenzy has all the hallmarks of early COVID. Vaccine development media panic censorship around ivermectin and a nonstop fear campaign over a virus that supposedly barely spreads from human to human. https://t.co/2t9uNbiwsb

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 11, 2026 at 11:30 PM

Saved - May 12, 2026 at 9:54 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

👀 Why does the US Air Force need giant tunnel boring machines? Why are there underground “continuity of government” cities beneath mountains across America? And why does Denver Airport keep expanding underground? Something massive is being hidden from the public. https://t.co/FA4SkMzogC

Video Transcript AI Summary

The program explores the idea that vast underground cities and networks exist beneath the United States, ranging from acknowledged facilities to heavily classified installations and conjectural systems. The hosts present a mix of documented facilities, declassified or acknowledged programs, and controversial theories about deeper, hidden infrastructures and their purposes. Known, acknowledged underground facilities and their functions - NORAD at Cheyenne Mountain (Colorado): Built in the 1960s, designed to withstand a direct nuclear strike, with fifteen three-story buildings mounted on springs inside a granite cavern; during the Cold War, over 1,800 personnel worked inside. NORAD’s operations have partially relocated to Peterson Air Force Base, but the Cheyenne Mountain Complex remains operational as an alternative command center. - Raven Rock Mountain Complex (Site R) near the PA-MD border: A 650,000-square-foot facility serving as an emergency operations center for the Department of Defense, designed to withstand a nuclear apocalypse; it can support about 1,400 people and maintain command and control if Washington, D.C. is destroyed. It is maintained and upgraded as part of continuity of government plans. - Mount Weather Emergency Operations Center (Virginia): An underground complex operated by FEMA to evacuate the president, the Supreme Court, and other leadership in a national disaster; features underground offices, dormitories, a full hospital, reservoirs for water, a power plant with backups, advanced air filtration, and other facilities that would sustain a city-like functionality for officials. - Greenbrier Bunker (West Virginia): A 112,000-square-foot bunker beneath the Greenbrier Resort built during the Eisenhower era to house all five–five members of Congress in a nuclear emergency; it was exposed by the Washington Post in 1992, decommissioned, and is now open for tours. It was designed to be hidden in plain sight with a cover as an exhibition hall and maintenance area for the resort. - Other publicly acknowledged, classified or partially disclosed installations: The World in the interview suggests dozens of similar installations exist, many operational and classified, beyond the ones named above. Underground transportation and “cities” - Senate Subway System (Washington, D.C.): Connects the Capitol with Senate office buildings and has existed since 1909, with ongoing modernization. There are rumors of a deeper system (the “tunnel”) that connects the White House, Capitol, and other agencies with escape routes, though confirmation is limited. - Underground networks beneath major cities: The Capitol and other government buildings have underground evacuation routes and networks; the interview notes a broader system of tunnels in D.C. that may connect to other government facilities. - Denver International Airport: Highlighted as having an unusually large amount of underground space and murals that fuel conspiracy theories about a vast underground network. The airport’s automated baggage system is described as running through underground tunnels; some whistleblowers claim a vast underground city exists there. - Civilian underground infrastructures: In New York City, Chicago, Seattle, Portland, and Savannah, there are extensive corridors, abandoned stations, tunnels, and “underground cities” that have been repurposed, repurposed into data centers, housing, or other uses. Examples include New York’s Freedom Tunnel, Grand Central’s Track 61, Chicago’s 60-mile underground freight tunnels, Seattle’s post–Great Seattle Fire releveling, Portland’s Shanghai Tunnels, and Savannah’s hidden underground areas; these spaces often sit in a grey area between official infrastructure and hidden spaces. Deep underground military bases (DUMBs) and the conspiratorial layer - The existence of DUMBs is treated as plausible by the speakers, with a 1992 Pentagon report noting at least 32 deep underground facilities in the U.S., designed to withstand nuclear attacks and to host sensitive operations. Details about locations and functions remain largely classified. - Dulce Base (New Mexico) and Area 51 (Nevada) are cited as examples of alleged underground facilities with claims of extraterrestrial involvement. Dulce Base is described as an alleged multilevel underground facility co-operated by humans and extraterrestrials; Area 51 is noted for underground hangars and workshops that could support testing away from satellite observation. The discussion suggests a broader network of such bases. - The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico, is cited as a known underground facility (buried 2,150 feet underground in salt) that demonstrates government capability to construct and maintain deep underground installations. Financial and organizational underpinnings - The “black budget” for classified programs is cited as evidence of extensive underground work, with a 1997 DoD disclosure of a $59 billion black budget (acknowledged; current figures are suggested to be higher). - Continuity of operations planning (COOP) is presented as a framework that supports the existence and maintenance of underground facilities to ensure government continuity during emergencies. Civic and media angles - The Greenbrier bunker’s exposure and public accessibility serve as a counterpoint to the idea that all such facilities are entirely hidden. - The program discusses the possibility that some civilian underground developments might connect to government networks, particularly in major cities, and that such links could exist for emergency evacuation or data storage. Special guests and cross-cutting themes - Dr. Michael Sala is featured as a proponent of the idea of a Galactic Federation, with claims that Trump’s actions in Washington, D.C., include efforts to remove “satanic” deep state elements and advance disclosure of advanced technologies and extraterrestrial collaboration. - The discussion weaves in Freemasonry, the pentagram and inverted pentagram symbols, and alleged higher-level occult practices, suggesting that Washington, D.C., sits at the intersection of political power, occult symbolism, and a supposed struggle between “white hat” forces and hidden satanic networks. - The conversation also touches on whistleblower figures, congressional investigations, and the possibility of military tribunals handling certain cases due to compromised civilian courts in a world where underground networks and rituals are claimed to exist. A closing note emphasizes that America has been digging for decades to create an underground infrastructure designed to ensure survival, maintain security, and perhaps serve other purposes that are not fully disclosed. The program invites viewers to remain curious about what lies beneath the surface, both literally and politically.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: For years I've been fascinated by the idea that there are vast, hidden, underground cities in America, not small caves, we're talking sprawling cities like the size of Phoenix, intentionally built and hidden in plain sight massive cities miles under the ground in Colorado, Alabama, Nevada, and more. Insiders have confirmed to us here at Redacted sophisticated military infrastructure, interconnected transportation systems, UFO, reverse engineering programs, all of it, jump rooms, and more. We've spoken to experts here at Redacted about these structures and cities, and we've put together this comprehensive collection of interviews about what's really hidden underneath America, including Washington, D. C. I hope you'll sit back and enjoy these interviews. And thank you for subscribing. Enjoy. Imagine standing on an ordinary street in America, cars passing by, people walking their dogs, a normal day. But what if I told you that beneath your feet, sometimes thousands of feet below, exist entire cities, underground complexes that could house thousands of people equipped with hospitals, power plants, food supplies to last for years. Cities hidden from the public, designed to survive anything from nuclear war to natural disasters. Some are known, some are classified, and some might not exist at all. Hey, everyone. I'm Clayton Morris. Thank you so much for subscribing. You know, I've been wanting to do this story for a long time. I've been fascinated about America's underground cities since childhood. The idea that there would be massive, huge, I mean, I'm talking like New York City level cities underground somewhere that we don't even know about. But even growing up in the state of Pennsylvania, hearing the stories about Centralia, which was a city that's burning from underneath because the the coal vein that ran through a fire broke out, and it's impossible to ever put it out. This city will just collapse in utter ruin. People that had homes there in the nineteen fifties and sixties just finding out that they can't live there anymore because the entire city is on fire, but not from above, underneath. So I've loved and been fascinated by America's hidden underground cities since childhood, and the truth is America has been digging for decades, creating a subterranean world that most citizens will never see. From proven government bunkers to controversial deep underground military bases, we're going deeper than ever before. Stay with me for the next thirty minutes. What you learn by the end might change how you see the ground beneath your feet. Welcome to the Redacted Files where we explore the stories hidden between fact and fiction. And today, we're going underground. America's fascination with subterranean construction began in earnest during the Cold War. As nuclear tensions escalated with the Soviet Union, the United States government realized that survival might depend on going deep, very deep. What started as simple fallout shelters evolved into sophisticated underground complexes designed to ensure government continuity even after a devastating attack. But as declassified documents reveal more about these underground facilities, they raise as many questions as they answer: How many exist? What's their true purpose? And are there connections between them that we're not being told about? So let's dig into the evidence. Let's start with what we know for certain. America has several massive underground facilities that have been acknowledged by the government. Perhaps the most famous is the North American Aerospace Defense Command or NORAD, which is buried inside Cheyenne Mountain in Colorado. Constructed in the nineteen sixties, this underground complex was designed to withstand a direct nuclear strike and it's built in the middle of the country on purpose. The facility consists of fifteen three story buildings mounted on springs that would absorb the shock of a nuclear blast. These buildings sit inside a massive cavern carved from solid granite. During the height of the Cold War, over 1,800 personnel worked inside the mountain on a daily basis. Can you imagine? Inside of a mountain, 1,800 people? Monitoring for potential Soviet attacks, that's what they did all day long. While NORAD's operations have partially relocated to Peterson Air Force Base, the Cheyenne Mountain Complex remains operational as an alternative command center ready to activate in moments of crisis. Less than 30 miles from Washington, DC sits another underground marvel, the Raven Rock Mountain Complex, sometimes called Site R or the Underground Pentagon. Built inside a mountain near the Pennsylvania Maryland border, this 650,000 square foot facility serves as an emergency operations center for the Department of Defense. Construction began in earnest back in 1951, and like the NORAD complex, it was designed to withstand a nuclear apocalypse, so only the elites would survive. You and I would be vaporized. Inside Raven Rock are all the necessities for running military operations: communication centers, conference rooms, and a self contained power system. The facility can support about 1,400 people for an extended period of time, allowing military leadership to maintain command and control even if Washington, D. C. Is totally destroyed. Though many details remain classified, we know that Raven Rock continues to be maintained and upgraded as part of America's continuity of government plans Perhaps even more critical to government survival is Mount Weather Emergency Operations Center in Virginia. This underground complex would serve as the evacuation site for the highest level of civilian and military officials in case of a national disaster. It would house the president, house the Supreme Court, and other key leadership. Mount Weather is operated by FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and features underground offices, has full dormitories, a full hospital, and above ground, the four thirty four acre facility includes training areas, a fire station, and even an entire police force. What's particularly interesting about Mount Weather is how it's designed to function as a genuine underground city. It has reservoirs for fresh water, power plant with multiple backup generators, advanced air filtration systems, even dormitories that could house hundreds of officials. And during the nineeleven attacks, guess what, many congressional leaders were evacuated to Mount Weather, demonstrating its continued importance in emergency planning. One lesser known facility is the Greenbrier Bunker in West Virginia, a place that I know well. I spent a lot of time in West Virginia as a young reporter in Bluefield, West Virginia. For decades, this massive bunker lay hidden beneath the luxurious Greenbrier Resort, unknown to the public, until it was exposed by the Washington Post in 1992. It was built during the Eisenhower administration, and its 112,000 square foot facility was intended to house all five thirty five members of Congress in the event of a nuclear war. Perhaps most fascinating was its cover. The facility was hidden right in plain sight. And that's my point. How many of these exist that are sitting in plain sight? It was designed and disguised as an exhibition hall and maintenance area for the resort. Government staff posed as TV repairmen, regularly maintaining the bunker's equipment while pretending to be servicing the hotel's televisions. After its exposure, the bunker was decommissioned and is now open for tours, one of the few such facilities accessible to the public. These known facilities represent just the tip of the iceberg. We all know about these. Declassified documents suggest dozens of similar installations were constructed across The United States, many of which remain operational and classified. What's particularly noteworthy is how these aren't merely bunkers, they're fully functioning underground cities designed for long term occupation and governance. The question is how many more exist that we have no idea about? If underground cities exist, then logically, there must be ways to reach them quickly, especially in emergencies. This brings us to one of the most persistent claims about America's underground infrastructure, the secret subway systems that are connecting important government facilities all across The United States, never having to jump on the interstate highway system and sit in traffic. We know for certain that Washington, D. C. Has an official underground transportation system that's used by government officials. The Senate Subway System connects the Capitol Building with the Senate office buildings, allowing lawmakers to move quickly between locations without going above ground, dealing with us reporters asking tough questions. This system has been in existence since nineteen o nine and has been gradually expanded and modernized. What's more intriguing is the rumored deeper system, sometimes called the tunnel, that allegedly connects the White House, the Capitol, and various government agencies with escape routes leading out of the city. While officials have never fully confirmed these tunnels' existence, former government employees have occasionally referenced them. For instance, during the Cold War, plans were certainly drafted for emergency evacuation routes. It's reasonable to assume some were constructed. One partially confirmed underground transport system is the one beneath The US Capitol Building. Beyond the known subway system, security protocols include underground evacuation routes, and after the nineeleven attacks, additional security measures were implemented including improved underground connections between these buildings. These tunnels serve both practical daily functions and emergency escape purposes. More controversial however are the claims about a vast underground maglev train network that connects various deep underground military bases across the country. It's a magnetic levitating train that moves at supersonic speeds, just like the ones in China that are above ground that get all the press and fanfare that can travel nearly as fast as a Boeing seven fifty seven. According to these theories, the United States government has developed high speed underground trains capable of traveling hundreds of miles per hour through vacuum tunnels. These would theoretically allow for rapid deployment of personnel between facilities spread across the continent. While no evidence proves the existence of such a network, there are some interesting facts to consider. The U. S. Government has funded research into these transportation advanced technologies including Maglev systems. Patents exist for various underground high speed transportation concepts. Additionally, tunnel boring technology has advanced significantly in recent decades, but even look at these old photos. The tunnel boring air force machines. Why does the United States Air Force need tunnel boring machines? Air Force? Tunnels? Makes no sense, does it? Well, making the construction of such networks would be far more feasible than ever before by using these types of more advanced equipment. I mean, these photos are decades old. Some former military personnel have actually come forward and claimed knowledge of these systems. Their accounts remain unverifiable unless I'm able to climb down there myself and see it. Philip Schneider, who claimed to be a former geological engineer engaged in constructing underground bases across The United States, became notorious for his lectures describing an extensive network of underground facilities connected by maglev trains. Before his controversial death in 1996, it was ruled a suicide Schneider alleged that this subway network could transport people between facilities at speeds up to 1,500 miles per hour. While Schneider's more extreme claims lack corroboration, the concept of connecting underground facilities makes logical sense, right? During the national emergency, rapid and secure transportation between command centers would be crucial. The question isn't whether underground transportation networks exist, but rather their extent and their sophistication. Interestingly, some of these underground transportation concepts may be moving into the public sphere. Elon Musk's Boring Company aims to create networks of underground tunnels for high speed transportation. While presented as a private venture, some speculate that it could be building on existing government research or technology. Whether there is any connection remains speculative but the technological overlap is worth noting and it is worth also pointing out that Elon Musk is America's biggest defense contractor. Take SpaceX for crying out loud. Look at Starlink, The Boring Company. Makes a lot of sense. Another documented underground transportation system exists beneath Denver International Airport, though its purpose has generated considerable controversy. I had the opportunity to meet a whistleblower who worked at Antarctica's South Pole Station, and he said, Clayton, are you ever curious about what sits beneath Denver's International Airport? It's a vast, vast underground city. I said, you gotta be kidding me. I live not too far from the airport. He said, oh, yeah. It's very convenient cover to have trucks going in and out, they're just there for the airport, when in fact, they're there to support this massive underground city. The airport's automated baggage system runs through a complex network of underground tunnels. What makes this interesting is that the airport was built with an unusually large amount of underground space, much more than seemed necessary for its stated purposes at the time. Why were they doing so much digging? What did they need down there? This combined with strange murals and other unusual features at the airport, in fact, satanic symbols, has fueled a lot of theories about its possible connection to a larger underground network. Now we venture into more controversial territory. Deep underground military bases, often abbreviated as DUMBS, d u m b s. These are massive military installations buried hundreds, sometimes thousands of feet below the surface. And unlike the acknowledged facilities we discussed earlier, the full extent of the dumb network remains largely classified if it exists as described. What we do know is that the US military has constructed numerous underground facilities. A 1992 Pentagon report acknowledged the existence of at least 32 deep underground facilities in The United States, with others overseas. The report noted that these facilities were built to withstand nuclear attacks and house sensitive operations. However, it provided few specifics about their locations or their functions. Dulce Base in New Mexico is perhaps the most notorious alleged dumb site. According to theories, it's a multilevel underground facility that's jointly operated by humans and extraterrestrials. These claims originated largely with Paul Benowitz, a businessman, UFO researcher, famous, famous man Paul Benowitz. He claimed to have intercepted electronic communications from the base in the late nineteen seventies. The theories were further developed by Phil Schneider, who claimed to have helped construct a portion of the facility himself. While there's no definitive evidence that Dulce Base exists as described, the area does have some interesting characteristics. It's relatively close to Los Alamos National Laboratory, which plays a key role in nuclear research. The region also has experienced numerous cattle mutilations, UFO sightings over the decades. The native Americans who live nearby the base regularly see weird craft exiting the mountain. However, these could be just coincidental or have conventional explanations like these are all US Military craft that travel in unbelievable ways using antigravitational capabilities that you and I don't even know about, but the US military does. Maybe it's that. Area 51 in Nevada, while famous for different reasons, of course, also reportedly contains extensive underground facilities. Former employees have described elevators leading to multiple subterranean levels. Given the sensitive nature of the aircraft that's tested there at Area 51, underground hangars and workshops would make strategic sense, allowing aircraft to be developed away from satellite observation or spy planes flying over to see that you're building an SR 71 Blackbird. What lends some credibility to the concept of DUMS is the acknowledged existence of the waste isolation pilot plant, WIPP, near Carlsbad, New Mexico. This Department of Energy facility is buried 2,150 feet underground in a salt formation, serves as a repository for radioactive waste. Now the facility demonstrates the government's capability to construct and maintain large deep underground installations. Another factor supporting the possibility of extensive underground facilities is the government's continuity of operations, COOP planning. Now these plans ensure that the government can continue functioning during emergencies. Documents released through the Freedom of Information Act requests confirm that extensive underground facilities form a key part of these continuity plans. However, many details, of course, remain classified for national security reasons. In 1989, Washington Post article titled Doomsday Project described a shadow government that would operate from secure bunkers during national emergency. The article mentioned a network of approximately 100 underground facilities across the country designed to house different government agencies. The extent of this network has never been fully disclosed, of course. The technology required to build DUMs certainly exists. The US military and private contractors have developed advanced tunnel boring machines, TBMs, that are capable of cutting through solid rock at impressive rates. These machines can create tunnels up to 40 feet in diameter like the ones I showed you before from the United States Air Force. What's particularly interesting is that some patents for these machines include methods for melting rock forming it into tunnel walls, leaving no excavated material to be removed at all, potentially allowing for more secretive construction. What are you gonna do with all of this granite that you're pulling out of the ground? Oh, you're not gonna use it in countertops, in luxury homes? No. You're just gonna melt it down and form the walls like glass. One compelling argument for the existence of dumbs comes from the black budget allocations. The US government acknowledges spending billions on classified projects each year. In 1997, the Department of Defense admitted to having a $59,000,000,000 black budget for classified programs. More recent estimates suggest this figure has grown substantially. That was how many years ago? Could some of this money be funding the construction and maintenance of underground facilities? Oh, yeah. It's certainly possible. Former government officials have occasionally made statements suggesting extensive underground facilities exist. In a 1995 interview, Richard Soudre claimed that there are 131 deep underground military bases in The United States. They've been building these 131 bases day and night, unceasingly since the early nineteen forties. The strategic value of underground facilities is undeniable. They offer protection from surveillance, from air strikes, nuclear attacks, even public oversight. From a military perspective, having such facilities makes perfect sense. The question is how extensive they really are. Beyond military installations, America has another category of underground developments, civilian underground infrastructure, and repurposed spaces that form hidden cities beneath our urban centers. New York City's underground exemplifies this perfectly. Beneath the bustling streets lies a complex world of subway tunnels, maintenance passages, abandoned stations. The infamous Freedom Tunnel was named that after a graffiti artist housed an underground homeless community for years before being cleared out in the nineteen nineties. The tunnel running beneath Riverside Park on Manhattan's Upper West Side became a legendary example of how underground spaces can be reclaimed by those seeking to live off the grid. Even more fascinating is the network of tunnels beneath New York City's Grand Central Terminal. These include the secretive Track 61, which connected directly to the Waldorf Astoria Hotel and was reportedly used by Franklin Delano Roosevelt to hide his polio from the public when traveling to the city. This private railway track included an elevator large enough for Roosevelt's presidential car, allowing him to be transported directly from the train to the hotel without being seen publicly. Incredible. Similar underground network exist in Chicago, where freight tunnels constructed in the early twentieth century created a 60 mile underground transportation system. Though officially abandoned, urban explorers report that sections remain accessible and have been repurposed for various unofficial uses over the decades. In Seattle, the underground city there presents a unique case. After the Great Seattle Fire in 1889, the city was rebuilt one level higher to address flooding problems, leaving the original street level to become a network of underground passages. Today, parts of this underground city have been restored and offered tours. Other sections, though, remain largely forgotten and closed to the public. Portland, Oregon features the infamous Shanghai Tunnels, the underground passages allegedly used to kidnap men for forced labor on ships in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The same thing in Savannah, Georgia, the hidden underground areas and layers used by pirates to ferry people off out into the waters. In Portland, though, historians are still debating the extent of Shanghai that occurred there. The tunnels themselves exist and connected the basements of numerous business to the waterfront. Cold War preparations also created numerous civilian underground shelters. Many government buildings, schools, and hospitals were equipped with fallout shelters designed to protect the population during a nuclear attack. While most have been repurposed or abandoned, some remain intact, forgotten relics of an era that was defined by the constant threat of nuclear annihilation. Maybe more relevant now than even back then. More recently, wealthy preppers and survivalists have created their own underground dwellings. The Survival Condo Project in Kansas converted a decommissioned Atlas missile silo into luxury underground condominiums with prices starting at 1,500,000. These units offer protection from nuclear attacks, pandemics, other catastrophes. The facility includes amenities like a pool, movie theater, five year food supply, essentially creating a self contained underground city for the wealthy. Underground spaces have also been repurposed for data storage. The SpringNet Underground in Springfield, Missouri uses former limestone mines to house servers that are held in a naturally climate controlled, secure environment. Similar facilities exist across the country, taking advantage of the natural protection offered by subsurface locations. Now, what makes these civilian underground developments interesting is how they blur the line between acknowledged infrastructure and hidden spaces. Many began as official projects but were later abandoned or repurposed. Others operate sort of in a gray area, neither fully public nor completely secret. Together they form a subterranean layer of American cities that most citizens never see, despite living directly above them, walking right on top of them. Some researchers suggest connections between these civilian tunnels and government underground systems, particularly in major cities like Washington D. C. And New York. While such connections would make strategic sense for emergency evacuation purposes, definitive evidence remains elusive. However, recently, Catherine Austin Fitz, who is a former government official speaking on the record to Tucker Carlson during an interview, dropped a bombshell about all of the trillions of dollars in government spending. Where did all of this money go? She claims that it was used to build a vast network of massive underground cities across The United States. Speaker 1: One of the things I've looked at is the underground base and city infrastructure and transportation system that's been built. Speaker 0: What is certain, though, is that America's underground spaces represent a parallel world, one that exists literally beneath our feet but remains largely invisible to daily life. Whether repurposed for commerce, shelter, or more clandestine purposes, these spaces remind us that the ground we walk on has depth and history that often goes unnoticed. As we return to the surface, the question remains just how extensive is America's underground world? We know with certainty that massive government facilities exist beneath mountains and fields across the country. We've confirmed underground transportation networks from simple subway systems to more elaborate tunnel complexes. The existence of deep military installations seems probable, though their full extent and purposes remain shrouded in secrecy. What is clear is that for decades, America has been digging, creating an underground infrastructure designed to ensure survival, maintain security, and perhaps serve other purposes we can only speculate about. The next time you walk down an ordinary street, remember what might lie thousands of feet below, an entire world of tunnels, bunkers, and underground cities. Some acknowledged, some classified, some perhaps merely rumored. Are these facilities simply prudent national security measures? Or do they suggest preparation for catastrophes the public hasn't been told about just yet? The truth as always lies somewhere in the documentation, the testimonies, and perhaps in the Earth itself. If you found this journey underground fascinating, make sure to like this video and subscribe to the Redacted Files for more explorations of the hidden world around us. Until next time, keep questioning, guys, because the truth is out there, sometimes buried deep beneath the surface. Speaker 2: Do you Speaker 0: think there are other massive, like what we saw at the South Pole Station that they're building 10 times the size of it is now? Is there one in Nevada? Is there one in Hawaii? Is there one anywhere else in The United States other than South Pole Station? Speaker 3: There can't possibly be anything under the Denver International Airport. Speaker 0: Oh, don't say that. Really? Well, I know. So many people talk about the Denver area and Mhmm. Colorado Springs area. Eventually stop taking dirt Speaker 3: out of the ground from the Denver International Airport. Right? Speaker 0: Is that what they're doing? Speaker 3: Have they ever stopped from the time they started building? Speaker 0: That's true. I don't think they have. And I I've heard about the massive, like, tunnel complexes underneath Yeah. It's a perfect cover. Mhmm. It's a perfect cover to have a massive airport Mhmm. Where people are coming in constantly. There's trucks. There's all sorts of you can just go to work that Speaker 4: day. Speaker 3: That airport is one of the furthest airports from the city that it supports that I've ever seen. It's quite a drive from Denver to the Denver Airport. Are are you Speaker 0: you sound like this is an informed this is this is like an informed an informed opinion. Speaker 3: I I I'm in the trades. I mean, I kinda understand infrastructure, proximities, you know, how challenging it is to instead of building your airport next to where your infrastructure is, oh, let's just move it way out there, Speaker 0: because that's easier. So Denver International Airport. I've heard of massive cave structures, underground tunnels and systems that massive. Huge cities, underground cities. Speaker 3: Have you heard similar? I've absolutely heard that. I I don't doubt that at all. I mean, we've all seen these. The United States Air Force tunnel boring equipment. I mean, does that make sense? Speaker 0: Yeah. Let's put a we'll drop a picture in here of that because I remember when I was, years ago, ten, fifteen years ago, when I first saw these giant Air Force boring machines. Mhmm. Why the hell does the air force need massive tunneling equipment? And then Elon Musk launches the boring company, get right, to build massive tunnel infrastructure under. So what's going on underneath The United States to me is one of the most fascinating stories right now, and I want to dive more deeply into it. Besides the Denver International Airport, where do you think we have we have the Air Force Training Academy in Colorado Springs, Colorado, but other spots that might be in the Speaker 3: About Montauk, Long Island seems to have a rich history of subterfuge. Right. Brookhaven National Labs. Shoreham, Long Island, had the world's only privately owned nuclear power plant. Dulce Dulce, New Mexico. There you go. I mean, there's there's so many lists of places that are extremely questionable. One of the things that I've, you know, learned in my experience is that a lot of these things are in plain sight, and we just don't know. Long Island was very much the hub of the manufacturing of the military industrial equipment for the wartime periods, and they had Nike nuclear tipped missiles all over Long Island next to people's homes. Did they tell the locals that's what it was? Speaker 0: Of course. Yeah. Of course. Speaker 3: No. They said it's a it's a Air National Guard Reserve Training Facility. Yeah. Wow. So these these things I mean, people have to realize, like, if you wanna have a, you know, super secret stuff, then you wanna staff it. You can't move it out into the middle of nowhere for your enemy to start tracking. Oh, here, we have 300 people that go out into the middle of nowhere every day and then go back. Right. So you have to cover all of these things. This is engineering, plausible deniability for both the, population and your enemy. Speaker 0: So it makes sense then. Right? They maybe learned their lesson with Area 51. All these people have to go out there on a regular basis. They leave from Las Vegas and those those secretive aircraft. Mhmm. People are tracking them, following them. That's a problem. Right. And they have to live there on base for a long time, periods of long time. Have it at the Denver International Airport where no one's Speaker 3: gonna notice. Yeah. People come and go. If you put up barbed wire fences and signs that say super secret facility and you have armed guards working the perimeter, you've just shined a spotlight Yeah. On the place you're trying to hide. You're blowing my mind. Next time I Speaker 0: go to Denver International Airport, I'm gonna be asking looking for some secret doors and what you got on there. Well, it's no secret. Americans love sushi, my daughters included. And over the last two decades, raw fish consumption has exploded. Sushi bars everywhere, grocery stores selling it, gas stations selling. Millions of people now eat raw fish weekly, but here's a hidden risk most people never think about. Parasites. Yeah. Salmon, one of the most popular fish worldwide, but it naturally contains more than 70 parasites. Most of them are tiny, nearly impossible to see them. I'm sure you've seen the videos where people have gone to, like, Costco and they come home and they let their salmon sit down on the counter for a few hours and suddenly the little white parasites start popping out of the fish. But once inside the body, parasites can hide for years while frequently laying eggs before any symptoms appear at all in the body. That's why many physicians are raising awareness about parasite exposure. Our friend of the show, Doctor. Peter McCullough, recommends doing a parasite cleanse at least once a year as a preventative measure. The wellness company offers a hard to access Rx Parasite Cleanse, USA compound with ivermectin and membenzadol. Ivermectin paralyzes the parasite's nervous system, and then membenzadol starves them. Each capsule contains twenty five milligrams of ivermectin, two fifty milligrams of membenzadol lab tested for quality. You can now get a more budget friendly forty five capsule option that costs $250 less, giving you two twenty one day parasite cleanse cycles. It's the same formula as the original, just a smaller quantity. So head right now to twc.health/redacted and use that code redacted to save $35 off plus free shipping. Well, our next guest says that everyone is missing the true intention of Trump locking down Washington DC, trying to federalize the police force there and take things over, trying to eradicate crime. He says to pay attention to Trump's words. In yesterday's press relief press release, Trump said, quote, I'm announcing historic action to rescue our nation's capital from crime, bloodshed, bedlam, and squalor and worse. This is Liberation Day in DC, and we're gonna take our capital back, end quote. Doctor Michael Salas says everyone is missing the real story here. There is a hidden intent in his press briefing to liberate Washington DC from the satanic forces that have run DC since its establishment. And doctor Salas says it all has to do with the Freemasons that build Washington DC and were infiltrated by dark forces. So to help educate us on this topic and dive deep on this, so many people have been asking. Bring up the Masons on a regular basis in our comments feed. Doctor. Michael Sala. Michael, it's great to see you again. We haven't seen you in quite a while. Welcome back to the show. Speaker 4: Thank you. Great to be back. Speaker 0: So can you explain as we look at this unfinished unfinished pentagram here on the show, on this map, can you explain to me, like, first of all, what are we looking at here? And why do you think that this is a deeper move by president Trump to stop these demonic forces in Washington DC? Speaker 4: Well, that dates back to the design of Washington DC by a French architect, Pierre L'Enfant, who was a Freemason. And the Freemasons understood the power of symbols, occult symbols, such as the pentagram, which is a way of being able to create a power vortex for various ceremonies. And so as far as the Freemasons associated with George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were concerned, they thought that this Freemason symbol would kind of like help establish or promote their idea of the new Atlantis, that America was the new Atlantis, it would be a place of high technology, and show the way for the rest of the planet. But what happened was that the Freemasons were infiltrated at the higher levels. And this is something that I've been able to confirm that Freemasonry today at the 33 degree level, those that achieve that rank typically have very positive views about Freemasonry and helping establish their goals, their positive goals. But at that level, thirty third degree, they are introduced to the deeper, darker mysteries, and they swear allegiance to these satanic forces. And these satanic forces are connected to extraterrestrial life that many Freemasons at that higher level believe who it was that established the ruling bloodline families going all the way back to Sumeria, Babylon, and so forth. And so these ruling bloodline families, they believe that they are the direct descendants of the gods or the Anunnaki, the fallen angels, whatever you want to call them, and that those who are worthy of the truth will be initiated into those truths. So that's how they establish secret societies. But it is something that is segregated from the from the most practitioners of Freemasonry who know nothing about this up until the 33 degree level. And if they progress beyond that, then they're initiated into the kind of satanic practices that are what enables a lot of these ruling blood like families to get their power and to control the rest of the world. Speaker 0: You know, a lot of people on our chat room are saying you're spot on about this, and there's some really deep dark forces here with this. So and a lot of people in our chat room saying that this even goes much higher than sort of like the the levels that we know about in Freemasonry. There's like a whole other section of levels inside of this. Maybe you could talk a little bit about that. A number of people in our chat room are saying that. Speaker 4: Yes. Well, those that progress beyond the 33 degree level, they are initiated into all of these occult programs dealing with extraterrestrial technology, ancient build a race technologies, and even being a part of these meetings with visiting extraterrestrials. There are both positive and negative extraterrestrials. The US government in the 1950s under the Eisenhower administration made agreements with some of these extraterrestrial races, and they have joint projects. So people who are initiated at those higher Freemasonry levels are part of those classified programmes. People call them unacknowledged special access programmes, and they will go wherever there's a crashed UFO, wherever an extraterrestrial is captured, wherever they find some ancient technologies such as in Antarctica and so forth. There'll always be a high level Freemason there above the 33 degree level who will essentially kind of like take control of the situation. And you have the military, which is merit based. Obviously, they are also having a very keen interest in all of these technologies and these extraterrestrials that are part of how the planet is governed. And so there's a power struggle between these high level Freemasons above 33 degree and the the military, the rank and file military, who want to take control of these advanced technologies for the betterment of society. And and so this power struggle, I think, is what's reflected in what's happening in Washington DC now. I think Trump federalizing police in Washington DC has much more to do than just dealing with criminals, petty crime, homeless vagrants, so forth in Washington DC. It's this is the move that the White Hats have been waiting for to finally take out the satanic cults that are in charge of Washington DC and of these deep, dark projects that are all about control of these advanced extraterrestrial technologies. And the pentagram that you showed earlier on is vividly demonstrates how this was from the very beginning envisaged by these higher level Freemasons. Now, you know, many critics will say, well, you know, that's not a pentagram. That's something else because you don't see it joined. See the the line from that one of the lines doesn't extend across to complete the pentagram. Well, actually, in occult circles, this is described as an incomplete or broken pentagram. Now, a pentagram normally is something that you can use to protect yourself from satanic forces. But the broken pentagram is an invitation for satanic forces to come out. And so you have that pentagram immediately above Washington, DC. And I think this is what the intent was from the very beginning, that at some point Washington, DC would really be subverted from its goal of or the original intent was to establish the new Atlanta, something positive and hopeful for all humanity. But instead, through Speaker 0: the Speaker 4: broken pentagram and the establishment of these satanic groups in Washington, DC that control the power elite there, it became the center for this very aggressive American imperialism, which we have witnessed all around the world. But I think Donald Trump, he's working with these very positive white hat forces, the Earth Alliance, to take Washington, D. C. Back and to remove the satanic groups from the power they hold. And they are very, very dark and very powerful, but they can be removed from power. Speaker 0: Well, we know how deeply dark these satanic forces are in Washington DC. I mean, just hear the horror stories, these parties, all sorts of really disgusting stuff that happens in Washington DC, whether it's, I mean, on the child trafficking side or just these weird these weird parties. I mean, it's really deeply disturbing. So based on your research, I mean, you you know so many of these insiders who've been speaking to members of Congress and other members. Do you believe that that Trump is on the side of the white hats with this and that there is an active movement to try to maybe excommunicate some of these satanic forces in DC? Speaker 4: Yeah. Totally. I mean, we know now that Trump's being briefed about this positive extraterrestrial alliance called the Galactic Federation. We know that from Professor Haim Esched, David Grush has also said that Trump was briefed. And we also know from an Italian newspaper, Espresso, that said that Trump was briefed about Project Preserve Destiny. And Trump was told by the Galactic Federation that in order for disclosure to happen, in order for all of these advanced technologies to be released and the extraterrestrials to show themselves, that global peace has to be established. And then that's going to enable these advanced technologies to be released. And so to establish global peace, he has to remove the satanic deep state, which is behind all the wars and the imperialism that's been happening under the American flag for for many, many decades. And that's what he's trying to do now with all these peace agreements. He's meeting with President Putin on Friday in Alaska. All all of that is deeply symbolic about this white hat effort, this effort by Christians, leaders that believe in Christian values and in a positive future for for America and for the planet to come together and to remove these very dark Satanists from power wherever they are. So I think that's really what's what's happening right now in in Washington, DC. And in order for Trump to succeed and and move not just The United States, but the whole planet into this future where we have open contact, then he has to bring about world peace. He has to remove the deep state satanists from power. And he's using all the resources he has as president, as commander in chief to do that. And I think that's what's really happening in Washington DC right now. Speaker 0: Well, I think people need to open their eyes to this if for for people watching this for the first time, and this is like new information to them. Well, what's really hidden underneath Washington DC? For years, there have been whispers of vast tunnel systems underneath the capital, not just for the government use, of course, but for something darker. Now, new reports suggest president Trump's recent moves from federalizing DC's metro police to pressuring the Smithsonian to release long hidden artifacts, maybe part of a much bigger operation. And, so what is the police move actually covering here for federal forces raiding an underground network tied to the deep state? Satanic cults in DC, even extraterrestrial allies? Yes. So all of the deep state forces that Trump is up against. We wanted to talk about this today with doctor Michael Sala, author, researcher, one of the leading voices on exopolitics to help make us make sense of all of this. Doctor, welcome back to the show. Great to see you. Speaker 4: Thanks for having me, Clay. Speaker 0: My pleasure. Now, I think, you know, what's interesting is that, last week when we started covering this story, there's been new revelations that have come out since then. In many ways, I think vindicating some of what you were saying. And so many viewers, I mean, had thousands of people saying thank you for covering this story because it doesn't get any attention. So can you talk about what some of these new revelations are that we might have been learning about with the Smithsonian and, like the Scottish Rite temple, etcetera? Speaker 4: Sure. Well, the Smithsonian, that received an executive order or was the subject of an executive order from president Trump where there would be an effort to pressure the Smithsonian to release much more of its holdings to be reviewed for release. And that comes on top of what has been really decades of complaints that the Smithsonian, rather than revealing America's history, its ancient history and the true level of civilization here, has been suppressing and hiding it. And so there have been stories dating all the way back to the 1800s that the Smithsonian, once it is called out to investigate an archaeological finding of any significance, whether we're talking about the discovery of giant skeletons, whether we're talking about the discovery of Egyptian artifacts in the Grand Canyon, and anything to do with, say, the mounds in Ohio that contain supposedly technologies that go back to the Atlantean era, that the Smithsonian, rather than getting its hands on these artifacts and reviewing them for public release, really just locks them away in in vaults. And the place where it's been doing that is in this kind of vast underground tunnel tunnel system in the Washington, D. C. Area. And it the tunnel system dates all the way back to the early eighteen hundreds when Washington, D. C. Was being designed as the nation's capital. So they needed a tunnel system so that members of Congress and the executive branch could get around quickly if they needed to. Of course, you had the British invasion in 1812, so that only accelerated things. And you also had a vast aqueduct system that also was responsible for a lot of the underground tunneling in Washington, DC. On top of that, you also had a underground trolley system that began as early as 1862. And it was until 1962 that the trolley system was finally put to an end. And over the course of that century, they eventually started to build underground tunnels for the trolleys. Now that was abandoned in 1962. And in late sixties and early seventies, they started to build Washington's metro system. But the tunnels that were used for the trolleys, the underground tunnels are still there. They're unused. And so you just have this vast network of tunnels, whether they're built by private entities, whether they're built by federal entities or government agencies that are throughout the Washington, D. C. Area. Speaker 0: And deeply, deeply dark stuff that's happening here as one of our viewers here on the screen says, you know, deeply being used for, like, child trafficking, really demonic things, down here in these tunnels. And we've had we've heard from different whistleblowers on this. Somebody in the chat was just saying Freemasonry connected to the inverted pentagram, on this as well. Let me put maybe we can put that inverted pentagram, up here on the screen and take a look at it. Maybe you can recap for our audience that maybe missed this last week. What are we seeing here, and why is this deeply troubling? Speaker 4: Well, the pentagram was something that was part of the architectural design for Washington DC. Pierre L'Enfant was a Freemason. And and what you see there is an incomplete pentagram. And critics say, well, because it's not a complete pentagram, then it could not have been designed for occult purposes. But actually a broken pentagram has even more significance because while a pentagram, a complete pentagram is a symbol of protection, the broken pentagram that you see there, that's a symbol that welcomes the satanic forces. And what's very interesting is there's I think I sent you an image that shows the compass at the bottom the pentagram, and that compass that extends to the US Congress. And that shows that the the compass being the symbol of Freemasonry, that that was connected to this pentagram. There you go. And what's very interesting here, of course, is that many of the founding fathers were Freemasons. And I think the vast majority of them really did have noble intentions and wanted to make Washington, D. C, a kind of beacon of light and a replacement for Atlantis, like the new Atlantis. But there were very deep, dark, hidden forces that came in and infiltrated. And so you see that in the different lodges in the Washington DC area. And and there's the the temple house of the temple on 16th Street, just near Dupont Circle. And I think I sent you an image of that as well. And that is the headquarters of Scottish Rite Freemasonry, 33 degree in The United States, or a very important element of that. And underneath that is supposedly, according to a book titled Weird America and other sources that cite it, remnants of an ancient Atlantean tunnel system. Now, I mean, that sounds pretty far fetched that you could actually have something as ancient as that. But in fact, I mean, I've been doing work on the underground tunnel system in America. And what typically has been happening, especially when it comes to the development of deep underground military bases, is that they have found a much older tunneling system that dates back to the Atlantean era. And they either kind of repurpose that or they build alongside that. And so I think it's very feasible that underneath Washington, DC, in addition to this kind of like human made layer of tunnels, whether they're made for the federal government or for Congress or for the aqueduct system or for the trolley car system, that you could have something much, much older, an Atlantean tunnel system. And that's where things get really very interesting, because I think that's where you get probably the deepest, darkest rituals being conducted by those that make it their life or their job to explore and research these tunnels for satanic practises. Because what Satanists do and there is an element of Freemasonry, you know, it's very important to say that not all Freemasonry is satanic. It's only those that are above the 33 degree level that are introduced into this kind of like satanic element where they're told that humans are descendants of gods and they rely on blood sacrifice and that they can invoke demons or these draconian reptilians. And so these temples or these lodges are often built on areas that have some kind of energy vortex. And so that's why they actually do a lot of these practices, like satanic rituals at these energy vortexes because they know that that's how you can control an area or even an entire planet. And that brings us back to the whole inverted pentagram, because within there at the different nodes, you're going to have rituals being conducted in underground locations that that really ensure that this kind of dark satanic element predominates in Washington. Speaker 0: Well, I sat down last night, had a multi hour discussion with Timothy Alberino, who's a researcher, and we talked about the giants. And he was telling me, and I didn't realize this, that in the Smithsonian's own documents, they say that they have giant skeletal remains of giants, giant bone fragments, jaw bones that are bigger than, you know, bigger than my entire head in the Smithsonian. So I'm hoping as part of this audit, members of congress will sort of piggyback maybe on this, start to put forth some pressure to release all of it. Like, what sort of demonic stuff are they keeping there? What sort of stuff do they have under Washington DC? I think that Trump is onto something with this, and I think you're in many ways vindicated for your position on this. Thank you for being brave and talking out about this. Most of our audience is saying, thank you for talking about this. There's a few people that are like, this is what? I can't even believe this. This sounds crazy. This sounds out of this sounds like total BS, but, you know, some people are take a little bit longer to be awakened by this. Well, yet more evidence is growing by the day that the federalization of Washington DC, metro police by president Trump does in fact involve cleaning out the underground satanic networks as well as petty crime and homelessness on the streets. Turns out that well, as we've reported on this over the past couple of months here on the show, that these underground satanic tunnels underground underneath Washington DC. And actually, members of the house of representatives have actually called these out, and they've lost their jobs for telling the truth about what's actually down here, what's actually going on underneath DC. It turns out these satanic networks would comprise public officials, compromise public officials by using these underground SRA rituals, thereby impacting the performance of federal institutions, which basically constitutes treason. And Trump knows about it. And the inner circle knows about it. That's why they're doing this. And by the way, the mayor of DC just admitted that crime has now plummeted in DC, thanks to the federalization of the National Guard troops that are in Washington DC. Crime has all but disappeared. Thanks to the US military being there. It's kinda crazy when you think about it. Doctor Michael Sala was the man that broke the story originally. He broke it wide open a number of weeks ago here on our show and now has more evidence. More evidence is emerging that he was right. In fact, doctor, welcome back to the show. Great to see you. Oh, it sounds like you're muted, doc. We good now? Speaker 4: Yes. I I was muted. Speaker 2: So Oh, worries. Back. Speaker 0: Oh, my pleasure. My pleasure. We always have our guests mute their microphones before they join us because we have other guests live on the show. So they might hear like a cat in the background or a dog in the background. So so that was that's us asking you to mute. So thank you. But I do wanna bring your attention to this new headline that just came out about military lawyers handling civilian crimes in Washington DC. And I think to your point, this is further evidence that this is exactly you cannot rely on the Satanists that are running Washington DC to prosecute their own, can you? You need the military to basically step in in Washington and now handle the caseload from these people. Speaker 4: Well, that's right. Yes. I mean, what we have here is a situation where these satanic networks have been operating for decades, compromising, officials from all branches of government, including the judiciary, which is very, very important because that means when it comes to the arrest of Satanists that are apprehended in these underground enclaves, which can extend as far as 10 miles underground in Washington DC and elsewhere around the country, that when it comes to trying these officials, you can't do it through the the normal court system because a lot of these judges are compromised themselves. So the normal courts cannot operate. And in such a situation, that's where the military courts come in. And also another consideration for why these satanists being arrested are being subjected to some kind of military judicial process is that the punishment, in the civilian courts for sedition or treason is a maximum of twenty years imprisonment and a fine or both. Whereas in the UCMJ, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, people that are convicted of sedition, treason are sentenced to death. And now normally, the The US MJ, they that does not apply to civilians unless martial law has been declared, or as in the situation currently in The United States, when normal judicial courts can't function. Now, of course, they can function at a at a superficial level in dealing with petty crime and so forth. But as far as trying individuals that have been compromised, which includes members of the judiciary, then I think you can make a very strong case that that civilian courts should not be trying these because some of the judges themselves may be compromised and may be, in fact, under investigation. So I think that's why, the the military courts are being secretly used, convened under some kind of special tribunal, and which is why I believe these JAG officers have been summoned to Washington DC to begin helping in the prosecution of so called petty crime. But I think that's just a cover for these deeper satanic crimes. Speaker 0: That's amazing. And this isn't being reported. I mean, you have JAG officers coming into Washington DC to handle the amount of crime that they're having to now handle outside of the, like, basically, the satanists who running Washington DC. This is an incredible story. PJ Pickett in our chat just said, what's scary about this, but it's like they're they're they're they're like sort of putting it right in our faces. Like, they're sort of flaunting this. It's like kinda out there in the open in in a lot of ways. And now we actually have the military there to stop it. Speaker 4: Well, yes, the military, I think the only branch, where you you have, officials running it who have been thoroughly screened and vetted and have no real ties to these satanic networks. And so that's why, you know, there is this ongoing campaign to clean out the satanic networks, not just in the Washington DC area, but also other areas in The United States where you have the same networks operating, compromising public officials and the judiciary too. So really, the civilian courts are not the way to prosecute Satanists who have been apprehended. And the the military tribunals that have been, I believe, secretly set up, that's the way to proceed. And and really, in terms of, giving out justice, you you I think the the justice can only be achieved through these very stringent penalties that you find in the, uniform code of military justice rather than in civilian courts. Speaker 0: And we've been talking about this in terms of the Masonic order. Right? And maybe you can educate our audience a little bit if they're new to this or they missed, your appearance on our show a couple of weeks ago. Maybe you can lay out sort of the pentagram description and, and just and describe, just how insidious this is. Speaker 4: Sure. Yes. Well, the the pent we have an inverted pentagram in the design of Washington DC, but it's a broken pentagram, not a intact pentagram. And that actually has more occult significance because it's an invitation for the devil or Satan to come in. And so in the middle of that pentagram, it's a major access is on 16th Street, Washington, DC, and it goes directly from the White House right up 16th Street. And and it runs through something called the House Of The Temple, which is the center for Scottish Rite Freemasonry in The United States, or at least one of the most important centers of Freemasonry. Now Freemasonry itself has what is publicly known to be 33 degree levels. So a Mason can progress through doing public works and good deeds all the way up to the thirty third degree. And they can be, as far as they know, part of an organization that promotes philanthropy and various projects to kind of uplift humanity, deal with poverty and and help the society evolve in a positive direction. But at the 33 degree level, that's where there is a secret initiation into higher levels if you pass a test. The test is essentially, the Freemason is presented a copy of the bible. And if they desecrate it as they are asked to do in some way, whether spit on it or something else, then they are told that, they have passed the test and that they can now proceed to higher orders. And in those higher orders, 34, 35, and and so forth, they are told about the secret extraterrestrial origins of the bloodline ruling families, told about the history of of giants, the secrets of the antigravity free energy technologies and so forth. If that Freemason chooses not to spit on the bible and says, no, I worship this, then they told, you've passed. Congratulations. You're a Freemason, 33 degree Freemason for life. And so they go away thinking that, well, they are at the highest level of Freemasonry, but it's not. Speaker 0: So, yeah, the highest levels are demonic. That's crazy. That's crazy to think about. Hopefully, this message is getting out there and people are aware that if they go they get to 33 and they they don't spit on the bible, that they're hitting a wall, basically. They're not gonna go past that. Can you talk about because for some people this might who don't know what's going on here in the satanism in Washington DC, it's it's it's large and it's been well documented. As you pointed out to me offline, you and I were chatting. You said, this was well documented by journalist John DeCamp in his book called The Franklin Cover Up. What happened here? People might not even know the story that happened in Washington DC. Speaker 4: Sure. Well, John DeCamp, he was a journalist and also a state senator for Nebraska. And and he uncovered evidence, extensive evidence, that young boys from Boys Town, Nebraska were being taken to Washington, D. C, and that they were being used in these kind of like honeypot operations against sitting members of Congress or high level public officials, that whatever happened between those young boys and those public officials were taped, and that those officials were then manipulated or blackmailed into doing whatever it was that these satanists wanted. Now these boys were basically well trained through SRA practices, and that is that they were often subjected to a ceremony where one of them was essentially cannibalized, killed and cannibalized, and they were commanded to eat the heart and so forth and different body parts. That's how they would be conditioned to do everything that was asked of them when they were in these kind of honeypot operations against members of congress. So John DeCamp documented this. I mean, there was clear evidence that this was happening, and no one really kind of pursued what he uncovered. Speaker 0: It just I mean, it's just like Washington DC, isn't it? I mean, we've had, you know, we've had HHS whistleblowers and others, like Tara Rodis and others calling out how the Biden administration was facilitating the massive sex trafficking of children. They were literally facilitating it at the Department of Homeland Security, and we had whistleblowers in the federal government calling it out and in front of Congress. And what happened? Nothing. The Biden administration did nothing about it. Fortunately, the Trump administration and at least under the FBI and Cash Patel, they've been going after these sex traffickers by the rounding them up by the hundreds. So at least yeah. I'm I'm hopeful anyway about that. That's unbelievable. That's called the Franklin cover up. If anyone wants to read read that book by John DeCamp. Any final thoughts on this, doctor Sala? Like, you know, when you talk about how are we gonna see any of these people, at least like sort of perp walked, you know, in front of court and proceedings, these people who have been leading a lot of these satanist rituals and and trying to compromise members of congress and others? Speaker 4: Well, you know, that's a very interesting question. I don't know. I think that the, white hats, the earth militaries, forces that are involved in these kinds of operations, and as far as I know from my sources, they are being helped by positive extraterrestrials as well because, you know, the Satanists themselves, they they directly worship these negative extraterrestrials. Some call them Dracul reptilians. And so the the White Hats, they understand the the depth of the kind of, like, corruption and how long it's been going on for. So they're cleaning it out. So right now, Washington DC is is the target. I believe that as they move forward and succeed in cleaning out Washington DC, that they will start doing the same in other major cities, and we'll probably see the same pattern, national guard, judge advocate generals coming in to to help the district attorney of of that area to deal with these the so called petty crime. But but really behind the scenes, they're dealing with these satanists. Now whether they will reveal that at any time, I don't know. I mean, hopefully they do. But then again, the public really hasn't been prepared for this. I mean, are films like Eyes Wide Shut, which kind of helps prepare people for the truth of just how deep this corruption goes and how it involves high level officials. But as as far as the general public being prepared, I don't I don't think they really are. So it may well be that the White House just kinda keep this all in in done in secret and will move ahead with their their agenda, which I think is to reveal the truth about many subjects that has that have been suppressed for a long time. And I I think we have a lot to look forward to because this is actually a major cleanup operation. And once it reaches its end, then life in The United States will be changed forever, and it'll be much easier for the forces of good to to really bring about policies that that help all Americans prosper and experience abundance. Speaker 0: I I hope you're right. I like that. I like the positivity. I'm a glass half full kind of person as well. Protect your children. As someone said in our chat room, these these these sick people are everywhere. So we need to protect our children. So hopefully, what we're seeing in Washington DC right now with this eradication of crime is a template maybe we'll see in other places. Doctor. Michael he writes over at exopolitics.org. You can read all of his great works. He's got incredible books as well. Please go to Amazon. Check out his books, under Doctor. Michael Sala on Amazon. I've read many of them. They're just eye opening. Absolutely eye opening. Great to have you back on the show as always. Speaker 4: Thanks for having me. Speaker 0: Well, what is Lockheed Martin hiding at their Skunk Works facility in the desert? UFO technology reverse engineered into secret craft that we're not allowed to know about for another thirty years. Antigravity propulsion technology, or a new version of their Tic Tac antigravity aircraft, of course, that was spotted famously off the coast of the USS Nimitz and off of the the the pilots on the off the USS Nimitz, of course, famously testifying before congress. Just man made craft that could travel in ways that humans never could. What is being hidden right now at Skunkworks? Well, Anders Otisan decided to find out. He's been sneaking out in the desert near the Lockheed Martin Skunkworks facility, camping out overnight using some incredible night vision technology as well as telephoto lenses to get as close as he possibly can without breaking in the law to try to get images of these secret aircraft. Watch. Speaker 2: I thought I heard a plane circling straight up ahead, and, looks like we got a predator drone. It's been flying circles. I, I still have service over here, so I was able to pull it up on my ADS B app too. Speaker 0: Yeah. They're tracking him there or or something. Who knows exactly what what they're doing with that craft above his head. Maybe just testing out all sorts of new technologies. Well, Anders joins us now to talk about his experience there. And I, you know, I watch your videos and just been fascinated about this. So, you know, sometimes people do like clickbaity stuff, not you. Like, you camped out trying to get answers at what's going on at Skunk Works. So thank you so much for joining us here on the show. Was excited to talk with you. Speaker 2: Yeah. Thanks so much for having me, Clayton. I really appreciate you having me on. Speaker 0: My pleasure. So what was the impetus for you to first start seeing and getting as close as you could to Skunk Works? What what rumors had you heard over the years that you wanted answers to? Speaker 2: Well, I guess, going back, I've always kind of been fascinated with the idea or the concept that elements within the military or military industrial complex are like thirty to fifty years ahead of the regular public technology wise. So that's kind of what started my channel is I really wanted to go out to these sites. You know, you have Area 51, but you also have places like this, Lockheed site that are run by private contractors where a lot of this, new technology is developed. So I wanted to, you know, I'd seen official press releases from Lockheed of this place, but I had never actually seen somebody go on the ground and just film stuff that happens, whether it's in the day or the night, and just kind of record and see what what they can find out there. So I kind of wanted to do that. And, this was my second trip out there, actually. I did another one back, and I think it was either February or March of this year. And, I brought my night vision gear with me. I brought a really long telephoto lens, and I basically just went up into the hills all on public land and, recorded whatever I could, capture. Speaker 0: So on the screen here, Philip, if you could leave this up here, this is some of the night vision stuff that you were capturing. And we didn't know until the daytime when you woke up the next day what we were looking at this weird I guess you would call you call it a pylon. You call it a pylon with some something on top of it, which looks like some sort of a craft. It was shocking. Speaker 2: Breakdown, like so we have we have the pylon, which, what what this is for is it's what's called radar cross section measurement. So this, facility out in the desert, it's called the Hellendale Radar Cross Section Facility, and they constructed this pylon to have a very low, almost invisible radar signature, which aids them in their measurement. Because what they're trying to do is they're testing these advanced aircraft and seeing how stealthy they are, seeing how they show up on radar. So what we're looking at here is, the night vision footage was, I think, it was definitely a different airframe than what we're looking at in the daytime. The one we're looking at here, it could be, you know, it's really hard to say, you know, I'm not Lockheed Martin, so I'm not entirely sure, but it is some sort of a fuselage, I believe. It could be a model specifically to test like a new stealth material, or it could be like a fuselage with the wings removed of, say, a new drone. Lockheed Martin did recently announce the new Vectrus drone. I don't think that's what this is, but it could be something similar. It could, yeah, it could just be, an airframe designed to test new particular technology. There's there's quite a few possibilities. Speaker 0: And you what's crazy is you saw this giant pylon, like, coming out of the ground and then going back into the ground with the aircraft, like, attached to it. And I was racking my brain. I was talking to, you know, a couple of my UFO buddies that we commiserate from time to time about different stories and things. And I'm just curious why why why this pylon comes out from underneath the ground, from their facility underground, and then stick straight up in the air? Like, what's the point? Is there some sort of an aerodynamic test point for it? Because you would think you would do that in your facilities underground. I just don't understand why they're sticking this thing up in the air. Speaker 2: Well, I'm I've honestly kind of been fascinated with the way this facility has been constructed. So it has this massive 200 foot deep underground chamber that the pylon is actually stored in, and it does allow them to really quickly extend and retract the aircraft. So they actually store the aircraft underground. But for a lot of the measurement, I'm not the best at scientifically explaining it, but for the radar measurement that they blast the airframe with, it does have to be at least partially above ground. There are some indoor facilities now that do this, but this one, it was built, during the Cold War. They kind of designed it to be able to quickly hide it from, Soviet spy satellites, which is why it retracts, below ground like it does. Speaker 0: So when you've been out there at nighttime, maybe we can play some of the nighttime footage as well. Have you in the times that you've been there, have you witnessed anything in the air that you just think, wow, we I've if if Americans could see this type of technology or the speed with which these things move, they would be shocked. What did you have you what have you seen while you've been there? Speaker 2: Well, at the at the Skunk Works facility in particular, I haven't seen anything flying except, the drones like the Reaper drone. I did see the first time I was out there, a kind of interesting looking drone that was more angular shaped. It wasn't a Reaper. I'm not sure what it was. But it was, yeah, it was flying circles above me, kind of like the Reaper was in this video. When I've been out, more towards Nevada, like towards Area 51, when I've been looking through my night vision, scope, I can sometimes see some things moving really high altitude that are pretty strange. Like, for example, you'll see something that looks like a satellite. It's moving consistent speed and consistent direction, But then all of a sudden, it'll quickly change directions and suddenly it doesn't look like a satellite anymore. So there are certainly are things flying around that, I think the American public should know about and we don't. So Speaker 0: Yeah. That was, to be honest with you, hand to the heavens. That's when I witnessed the fur my first UFO that I ever saw. Speaker 2: Oh, Speaker 0: yeah. Looking up into the night sky, Natalie and I both saw it. Because we were both looking we we both we were checking with each other. Like, are we seeing this? And way up there. And just started moving in an unbelievable speed in a box pattern way up in the sky. You know, just right across the sky up, then just back down, like in traveling in enormous speeds. Yeah. I figured I'd share that. Yeah. That's awesome. Speaker 2: I I truly believe if anyone who spends enough time looking up at the sky, you're eventually gonna notice something unusual because it it's up there. Speaker 0: Maybe we can show some of the the footage of here you I mean, the security trucks. So maybe you can explain, like, where you are on these mountains here because we know at Area 51, they have all sorts of ground sensors that if you get near any of the gates, I've known from different reporters who've tried to get close, like, the sensitivity. I mean, they'll even if it's like a they they know if it's like a a gecko or a prairie dog is moving out there with these ground sensors. So, maybe you can talk about some of the security precautions that Lockheed has around this facility. And where exactly is this facility located? Speaker 2: Yeah, so, this is, like I said, it's called the Hellendale Radar Cross Section Facility. It's technically located in Hellendale, California, which is like a really small, unincorporated part of, rural L. A. County. So it's it's out in the Mojave Desert. It's pretty remote. You'll have a few houses kind of scattered around out there, but it's it's far enough from L. A. To where you're not getting a whole lot of prying eyes on it out there, except people like me. But, yeah, you got, as far as security, they do have the marked, they're marked with Lockheed Martin security on the side of the pickups. They they drive around the perimeter. I do notice if you drive by the gates or basically anywhere along the fence line, they come out really quick, even if you don't have a direct line of sight to the guardracks. So I do think there is some kind of a road sensor system they have going on. Because as you say at Area 51, they operate those. And I know these kinds of facilities are just as sophisticated really. I did have some sort of a, there was a black pickup that came out and was kind of looking at me. I don't know, he may have been getting my plates or some people, theorize they may have been like capturing, packets from my, my, cell phone, you know, who knows? But they basically just kind of parked in the road next to me for maybe twenty minutes and were just kind of watching me. So I don't I don't know exactly what to make of that, but it was interesting. Speaker 0: So, I mean, not to get in the realm full realm of speculation, but I think we Sure. Just have a little fun here. What do you think Speaker 2: I like that. Speaker 0: Yeah. Do you think that there's any advanced off world technology being held and analyzed, rebuilt, reverse engineered at the Skunk Works facility? Speaker 2: My personal opinion is that probably yes. Now I don't we're we're definitely in the realm of speculation. I don't have any direct evidence of that, but I think there's enough credible testimony out there, that would suggest that Lockheed Martin is probably one of the companies that would be involved in this. You know, they're they're the largest US military defense contractor. They're the largest defense contractor in the world. So if if it is true that the US government has reverse engineered technology, I would certainly think Lockheed Martin would be one of the companies involved. And I think there's enough, enough whistleblower testimony. You know, you have David Grush, you have, Dylan Borland who just came out. I'm big fans of what what they've had to say to Congress. And, I look I look forward to really hearing more. And, I think we will hear Lockheed Martin's name come up as, these, kinds of hearings continue. Speaker 0: You know, not to tell tales out of school, but I'm sure once your videos hit and they became, you know, pretty big, have you heard from any whistleblowers or you can you can just shake your head or just wink, from any any Lockheed Martin individuals who are like, wanted to fill you in on some of the stuff that they they know about at Lockheed at Skunk Works? Speaker 2: I haven't had anyone reach out, unfortunately, to to fill me in. I think it is so compartmentalized and so secretive that, you know, people people reaching out like that would be taking a pretty considerable risk. I did get a private message from somebody who said they worked for Skunk Works, after I published my first video, but they were more just kind of asking like where and when I filmed it, which I don't really know what kind of quite what they were getting at with it, if it was like, you know, probing for security reasons or what, but it didn't seem hostile or anything like that. But that was the only message I got directly from a Skunk Works employee. I've had a few, I've had a few high profile people that were either former air force test pilots or former civilian employees at some of these kinds of places, like follow me on Instagram and Twitter. So I'm I am hoping that, you know, some of these people are gonna start start reaching out to me because, I would love to to pick their brain and hear what they have to say. Speaker 0: Well, I I love the videos. I love what you're doing over at Uncanny Expeditions on YouTube. Give them a follow. Thank you. If you're into this sort of thing like I am, I think you would really find it fascinating. I you know, check out this hit the series that that Anders has done here on the Skunk Works facility. His most recent one was just published about seven days ago, and that's where we got some of this remarkable footage. Before I let you go, like, we're seeing this truck you know, I just wanna keep talking to you. But this flatbed truck with this, you know, airframe that's on it, you watch this truck kinda going back and forth here. What and what's remarkable is this truck goes underground. Like, this thing is huge. This underground facility must be massive. Speaker 2: Yeah. You know, there's there's so many theories about this Hellendale facility. It's it's it's definitely kind of a cornerstone in, UFO, UAP lore because it has such a large underground component to it. So the pylon that comes up from the facility, it's it's 200 feet tall and the facility is 200 feet deep. So you could really hide a lot of things down there. And there's all kinds of speculation out there that there's underground tunnels connecting this to other facilities in the area, Area 51, Edwards Air Force Base. You know, the only way I'd be able to confirm that is if I were able to rent rent like some, ground penetrating radar or something like that. But, we do know for a fact that it would be a great place to hide some of this stuff just because you already have that underground infrastructure there. As you say, this truck was able to drive down there and that the truck, you know, it it it fully entered the underground test chamber and they loaded the model onto it and they drove it right out. So Speaker 0: Yeah. How hot it is and inhospitable. Even in your video, you're talking about how, my god, it's just been brutally hot. So Yeah. It's just not it's it's a great place to hide stuff. Speaker 2: Yeah. For sure. Speaker 0: Yep. It's like Walter White in Breaking Bad out in the out in the New Mexico Desert. It's a good place to Speaker 2: have stuff. Yeah. The the underground laundry facility or whatever he had out there. Speaker 0: Right. Exactly. Anders, great to have you here on the show. Again, the the webs the the YouTube channel is called Uncanny Expeditions. Check out his latest videos on Skunk Works, and I'm looking forward to your next videos, by the way. Thanks, Andres. Great to have you here. Speaker 2: Yeah. I really appreciate it. Thanks so much. Speaker 0: Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you want to follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 11, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - May 11, 2026 at 1:46 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

Oil is $118 a barrel in India. Jet fuel is $250. 27 US bases were struck and largely destroyed. @DougAMacgregor says we killed cheap energy and cheap credit at the same time, and we are headed for a giant concrete wall. https://t.co/Y73NR5sjLc

Video Transcript AI Summary

Ken Griffin, CEO of Citadel, warned that energy costs will lead to a global recession. Jeff Curry of the Carlyle Group said we are in a deficit for oil in the United States, and once shortages hit, “it's game over.” He stated he’s never seen anything like this. The discussion continued with a guest predicting that Europe could hit “tank bottoms” in May and the US around July 4, with inventory numbers acting like sharks circling a beach in the movie Jaws. They defined a deficit as demand above supply and inventories being drawn, with shortages not yet global but appearing in Asia, while Europe and the United States were in a deficit and would not hit shortages until tank bottoms. The panel emphasized the immediacy of the situation, noting that the fin of the inventory numbers signals risk. Colonel Douglas MacGregor joined to discuss the energy shock in the context of the war with Iran and the Strait of Hormuz. He reported that in India, oil was $118 a barrel and jet fuel over $250 a barrel, predicting airlines would go under. Distillates, LPG, LNG, and other fuels would be at premium prices, with all energy forms becoming more expensive. He warned that if fertilizer doesn’t move and feedstock doesn’t arrive, crops won’t grow and livestock won’t eat; if fuel doesn’t flow, trucks won’t run, and diesel is in short supply. He argued the situation is driven by “the stupidity in the Persian Gulf” and criticized Secretary Rubio for advocating free flow of traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, noting that that was the status quo before attacking Iran. The hosts and guests discussed popular sentiment against further military action, with social feeds showing resistance to engaging Iran further. The conversation drew a comparison to Vietnam, highlighting that the public perception of the war has shifted, and questioned who governs the United States. They argued that the government derives its legitimate power from the consent of the governed, not foreign interests, and criticized a State of the Union moment about Iran having to never have a nuclear weapon as pandering. The question arose: if Trump succeeds with no new wars and Iran remains Nuclear, how would that be viewed? One participant remarked that Iran having its own nuclear power would support its people, while noting a prior claim that the US “blew their nuclear weapons last.” The dialogue explored the reality that both India and Pakistan possess nuclear weapons, and North Korea’s deterrence is shaped by statements from China and Russia about consequences of using nuclear weapons. Iran developing a nuclear capability was framed as Iran’s business, given it has not opened a war against anyone for two hundred years. The future was described as a multipolar world with resource sovereignty and energy self-reliance becoming central; Europe, according to the panel, would struggle with “resource sovereignty” and access to cheap energy and credit, while Africa and Europe would shift alignments, and rare earths and critical minerals in the Arctic could alter dynamics. The panel warned that cheap energy and cheap credit have been eroded, inflation would rise, and the private equity and banking sectors would face liquidity issues. The discussion concluded with a sobering outlook: if the United States withdraws from the region on humanitarian grounds, Israel would be unhappy, and the war’s current trajectory could be sustained or escalated. The hosts urged viewers to wake up to the mounting economic and geopolitical pressures, and to reverse course.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, a few minutes ago, Ken Griffin, the CEO of the CEO of Citadel came out and said that energy costs will lead to a global recession. He was emphatic about that. Jeff Curry of the Carlyle Group said, people don't understand what we're about to face here, that we are in a deficit right now for oil in The United States, and that once the shortages hit, it's game over. He's never seen anything like this. He just spoke about this a few hours ago. Watch. Speaker 1: I I still say that with you, you know, it's gonna be, you know, sometime in the month of May that you're going to end up with Europe hitting tank bottoms. And in The US, it's somewhere in that July 4 time period. If not sooner, by the way, the inventories number coming out of The US, the ones we got last night, the ones last week, I've never seen anything like that before. You know, the the analogy I think is like in in that movie Jaws when the mayor declares the beaches are open. You can see the fins swimming around around there. The fin are these inventory numbers. And I think that it's important to remember that these inventory numbers. Let's define terms. A deficit versus a shortage. We have a deficit today, meaning that demand is above supply and we're drawing inventories. It's not a shortage yet. So to answer your question, you have the shortages in places like, you know, Asia, and it's not that bad yet because you're not completely at tank bottoms. But in places like Europe and The United States, you're in a deficit, and you don't hit the shortages until you hit tank bottoms. Speaker 0: Tank bottoms in July 4. Already feeling this, of course, across Asia and Europe. We're joined by colonel Douglas MacGregor now to talk more about this energy shock that we're about to about to see. Of course, you were talking about Jeff Curry earlier. Colonel. Just your thoughts on what we're about to see from an energy perspective as it relates to what's happening with the war in Iran and the Strait Of Hormuz. Speaker 2: My friends in India talked to me this morning and told me that, oil is a $118 a barrel right now. Wow. If you're talking about jet fuel, then it's going to it's it's it's exceeding now $250 a barrel. That's jet fuel. That means that the airlines, in many cases, are gonna go under. Now people will say, well, Spirit was already in trouble. That may be true, but I know that Lufthansa has canceled thousands of flights. We're gonna see much more of that. Anything involved in distillates, LPG, LNG, all these things, they're all at a at premium prices. Everything is gonna become more expensive. When it tanks to the extent that Jeff Curry, pointed out, imagine what the cost will be in this country as as well as overseas. How do you get it across to president Trump that when fertilizer doesn't move, crops don't grow? When feedstock doesn't arrive, livestock don't eat. When fuel doesn't flow, trucks don't run, and trucks run on diesel. And diesel is in very short supply. Heat doesn't show up, air conditioning doesn't work, and food doesn't end up on the shelf. That's really where we're headed right now, and it's all because of the stupidity in the Persian Gulf. Now, you know, when I listened to secretary Rubio this morning said, what we really want is a free access and flow of traffic through the Strait Of Hormuz. Well, mister secretary, that's exactly what you had before you attacked Iran. Speaker 0: Right. Speaker 2: Good lord. Speaker 0: Now we're going back to what we already had. And that's now I guess that's now the strategic goal in all of this is go back to where we were before we started decided to start bombing them. Speaker 3: Right. I see my feed is full. My my sort of Instagram stories are all people who are like, leave Iran alone. I do not want these prices at the pump. They're not buying it. Even if you're president Trump is telling these children, we had to do it. It had to be done. They were gonna nuke us all. Nobody buys it. Can you believe what you're seeing? And, you know, you've been through many war propaganda cycles. This seems like the worst. Speaker 2: Well, it it certainly is, at least as bad as I remember in Vietnam. You know, it took took us a long time to figure out that contrary to popular belief, we weren't really stopping communism in Vietnam, that this was actually a civil war that we'd involved ourselves in. You know, here's here's the most important question. Who is governing our country? Gotta answer that question. And for whom are the people in Washington governing The United States? Now our founders, you know, answered that question pretty clearly. Actually, unambiguously. They said the government of the United States derives its legitimate power from the consent of the governed, not from foreign sources, foreign courts, foreign treasuries, foreign governments, foreign interests, it comes from the American people. And go back to what you said, Clayton. He's never talked to the American people about this war. Mhmm. And when he did as sort of a sideshow, when he spoke, on the State of the Union and he mentioned Iran must never have a nuclear weapon, and like trained seals, everybody stood up on both sides of the aisle and clapped. Right. Even though there was no such animal in Iran. Speaker 0: Right. Well, that's a question Speaker 2: Who is in charge? Speaker 0: Yeah. Who is in charge? Here's a question from Southern Grifscom. I'm gonna put this up on the screen. It says, how will you guys feel if Trump succeeds? He campaign on no new wars, and Iran with no nuclear power is a better world. Otherwise, China or Russia would have sold them nukes. What are your thoughts on this? I mean, I'll just say, I don't know that Iran having its own nuclear power to support its own people is an affront to the world. I think that it would enrich and help the Iranian people. I think I I would be fully supportive of them having their own nuclear power to power their buildings and infrastructure. But if Trump succeeds, how will we feel? What does what does success mean to? Speaker 3: Well, I thought we already did succeed because we blew their nuclear weapons last Yeah. Speaker 2: Go ahead, Philip. Speaker 4: Well, question, like, defeats itself because if he campaigned on no new wars, this is he didn't step into this already in in process. Wasn't like he just walked into a war in progress in Iran. He started it. Already Speaker 1: you can't Speaker 4: you can't succeed. You can't succeed and then start no new wars argument. You already lost that argument. Speaker 0: Colonel, what do you make of that question? Speaker 2: Well, first of all, India and Pakistan both have nuclear weapons. We have not gone to war with either state. We have always had concerns about Pakistan because it has been, in many respects, a hotbed of radical Islam. But thus far, the Pakistani military has been very professional, exercised close control over those weapons. We know that North Korea has nuclear weapons. We also know that the North Korean dictator has been told in no uncertain terms by president Xi of China, and for that matter, president Putin, if you initiate a war with someone and use a nuclear weapon as a result, we will not support you. However, if you are attacked, that's a different story. So contrary to everyone's public criticism and insistence that North Korea could attack us at any time, it's very clear they're not going to attack us because they don't want to be obliterated, and they know that's what would happen. But they've also been told by the two nations that have acted in their behalf not to do it. So I agree with you, Clayton. If if Iran develops a nuclear capability, that's Iran's business. Iran has not opened a war against anybody for over two hundred years. It has not tried to expand its borders at anybody's expense for over two hundred years. I I think we're going to live in a world in the future that's that's going to be different from what we think it ought to be. It's a it's a collection of states that have clear and unambiguous interests. And the big issue for everybody is going to be resource sovereignty. Everybody is now going to be very concerned that they have on hand all of the things that are essential to their survival, and that means energy. Energy in all forms and all types. Speaker 0: Resource sovereignty. I think you're absolute man. You hit the nail on the head. Forget this unipolar world order. It is really shifting to this multipolar world order where they need to protect themselves. Go ahead. Sorry. Speaker 3: I guess when I think about who could actually do that, Africa has aligned itself greatly with China, they will have more access, than they have now with sort of the crappy relationship they have with The United States and our sort Speaker 0: of And France. Speaker 3: Right. Europe is the one place I think that cannot do it, that cannot be resource sovereign. And, you know, they're just going be dragged through the mud. I don't see how Europe can survive. I don't see how NATO can survive something like this. Do. I don't know. What do you think of that? That that was sort of my need for Speaker 2: Setting aside the possibility that, the aliens that we talk about periodically operating aircraft that we can't explain may land and ultimately share with us the secret to relating light, gravity, and magnetism, then I guess you're right. Europe is gonna have more difficulty than most, but not not totally hopeless. Right now, the largest cache of rare earths in Europe thus far has been discovered just a few 100 feet offshore from, from the Norwegian coast. We know there are tremendous stores of energy, rare earths, and other critical minerals in the Arctic. And the other thing is remember that one of the reasons we ended up in this terrible position now with Russia is that we, as led by globalists, and unfortunately, president Trump has not turned us around, although he promised to do so, convinced everybody that you you shouldn't buy cheap energy from Russia because Russia's real insidious plan was to conquer you. Well, that was always nonsense. There's no money in territorial imperialism. I thought everybody figured that out. That's a dead end. Governing other people's nations is, both wasteful, counterproductive, doesn't work well because people want to govern themselves. Right. So much better to do business. Germany has been practically destroyed, deindustrialized because under its own leadership and ours, what have they done? They've cut themselves off from Russia's cheap gas. And we know historically that cheap energy, cheap credit are linked. If you don't have cheap energy, you can't get cheap credit. And that's what we're seeing happen slowly but surely with each passing day. You'll heal you'll heal people who finally speak up and say, have you noticed the bond yields are rising? Yeah. They're rising. And we have a $39,000,000,000,000 sovereign national debt. And how is that amassing with each passing month, with each passing year? It's unsustainable. So you need the cheap energy. If you got cheap energy, you're also combating inflation. We are in a terrible mess right now because we've killed the two, cheap energy and cheap credit. No cheap credit means you can't refinance. And right now, all the private equity big private equity firms are in trouble, BlackRock and a host of others, because they can't refinance. They're trying to borrow money to become liquid because none of their very few of their assets are liquid. They need liquidity. The banks need liquidity. How do you get it? You borrow but you can't borrow at higher and higher interest rates. So we're headed for a giant steel reinforced concrete wall. It's coming, and I don't see how we avoid it at this point. And I think that will be the end of president Trump, and I think it'll be the end of his administration. It may ultimately be the end of the government that we see right now in Washington, period, because let's face it. President Trump has done something that as we saw during the State of the Union, everybody on the Hill supported. Now not everybody. There were a few lone rational actors, but the point is Washington is in this with both feet. Speaker 0: You know, we got this question here. I can't believe I'm gonna ask this question, colonel. But one one of our viewers, thank you for your super chat says, would we have been better off with Kamala? Thank you for your thoughts on this. And just want to show you this Times of Israel article published Speaker 3: During the campaign. Speaker 0: During the campaign. Harris told Jewish voters all options are on the table to stop Iran from going nuclear. He was very vocal about basically going to war with Iran even if she was elected. So, I mean and now she's the front runner. If you look at the latest polling numbers for the twenty twenty eight election, she is now the front runner for the Democratic side. I mean, it's like, I don't know, man. What do you what do you make of this? Would we have been better off with her? Speaker 2: If that's remotely true, I suggest that we immediately make Natalie our candidate and rush her for all of this. Yes. Save us from Kamala. Speaker 3: Alright. I think Speaker 2: we could say we could say with absolute certainty that, no, we would not have been better off, and I'll tell you why. When Kamala Harris, on numerous occasions, demonstrated that she could not string coherent sentences together, that she was essentially an empty suit that cackled whenever provoked, The Zionist billionaires that ultimately put Trump into office turned away from the Democrats. Remember when they had Biden there, they got what they wanted. If Biden had run again, of course, he couldn't do that because he was noncompass menace. But if he had, I'm sure they would have supported Biden instead of Trump. But once it became clear that Kamala was was the one, everyone ran for the exit doors right away because they knew they were dealing with someone who was dangerously stupid and ignorant. So that meant you gotta you gotta support Trump, but you had to extract promises from president Trump. And one of the key promises was very simply, Israel gets whatever Israel wants. Speaker 0: Yeah. That's it doesn't matter who's in charge, it seems. You know, you could have Ron Paul. That'd be the only chance, maybe, maybe a Thomas Massey. Colonel, I wanted to ask you, I mentioned before the break this Washington Post report this morning. I'm sure you saw it. You Brandon Weichert, had reported this, I think on Tucker Carlson's show. He was maybe the first to report this. We also had sources that covered this as well. We covered the injury aspect of this story, which was the devastating attacks on American infrastructure in The Middle East. A lot of the military bases there largely destroyed. A lot of infant infrastructure destroyed. This was, of course, kept for kept from the American people. And then now the Washington Post comes out with this report, and it's suddenly like front page story, like exclusive. The Washington Post is now telling us what Brandon Weichert reported, what we reported here on all the injury and death numbers. But now the Washington Post is reporting it, so we got that stamp of approval, colonel. What do you make on first of all, on the story, and then on the actual Middle East infrastructure, The US military bases, and how devastated they may or may not be? Speaker 2: Well, I was castigated for telling everyone within the first few days that 27 of our bases had been struck and largely destroyed. Speaker 0: Yeah. They were saying you were lying. You were a liar. Yeah. Speaker 2: Right. Exactly. So I can tell you now, having seen the satellite pictures I mean, we've got a lot of commercial satellite photography, so you can't hide this sort of thing for very long. And I think that's probably why the CIA decided to tell the Washington Post, go ahead and release this. Because otherwise, the Washington Post would repeat whatever lies they told them to tell. And it's pretty obvious that these these bases are finished. And if we were ever to get back into the Gulf Region, which I highly doubt at this point, we would not wanna have to rebuild all these bases. It would cost us billions of dollars. We can't afford it. And right now, who in their right mind among the Gulf States is going to try and fund it? I mean, right now, the the last man standing is not really the last man standing, but the last one continuing to pitch for The US Israeli Alliance is The UAE. And The UAE is in a lot of trouble. And that's one of the reasons over the last twenty four, thirty six hours you've seen strikes go in to target, places in The UAE. The UAE is seen as a not so terribly secret Trojan horse for Israel, and the Iranians are sick of it. So I think two things we need to take away from this. First of all, yes, the bases are destroyed. They're done. They're finished. Number two, these Emirates are probably not gonna make it through this war either, And that is dependent upon whether or not we decide to renew the war against Iran, which I think we will sooner rather than later. I don't see how they survive. There are artificial constructs, perhaps even more artificial than the rest in the Arabian Peninsula. They can't export the oil. They can't generate the income that they have historically. You know, there's 67,000,000 or there were 67,000,000 people living from the Iraqi border east down to the border with Oman. That's a lot of people. They can't stay there anymore because they're gonna lose their desalination plants. They're gonna lose oil infrastructure because the Iranians have made it clear that if we attack them again, they are going to do that because I'm sure we will hit their desalination plants as well. I don't think there's much question about that. Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, colonel, I guess we'll we'll let you go here. I know Larry Johnson, friend of the show, Larry Johnson saying May 7 is a date that he's been hearing restarting of this war. You said about forty eight hours for some sort of a new strike. Is that can is that what we can expect? Some sort of mass Speaker 2: Well, has excellent sources. I I I cannot say with absolute certainty it starts tomorrow. All I'm saying is that we we're on the precipice. Yeah. And you've got a lot of people out there, soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. You can only cut squares in the ocean for so long. You can only burn fuel for so long. You can only sit on strip alert for so long. And you've got an estimated 15,000 light infantrymen, marine, and army. And, you know, I wouldn't wanna be in that part of the world this time of year. I don't if you've been over there, but it's like a 140 degrees in the shade. It's crazy. Speaker 3: Yeah. Right. Speaker 2: So you're you have to do something or not. Speaker 3: But do something to get them killed. Like, I think I'd rather, you know, sit there and skip stones. Yeah. Speaker 0: Get a sunburn than do something. Speaker 3: Right. Speaker 2: And, you know, the the larger question, Natalie, to go to your point is, if we if we leave, if we say that's enough, on humanitarian grounds, this must end. And we don't we just get out. What happens? Speaker 0: Mhmm. Speaker 2: Well, Israel's gonna be very unhappy. They're gonna have a lot of trouble surviving. Let's be frank. You can't tell all your neighbors you're subhuman and then expect them to embrace you. So I think Israel's in a lot of trouble, but we're not. We'll survive this. We can get back back to something important, and let's focus on our country. We don't need to invade Cuba for God's sakes. Speaker 0: Yep. That's next. Yeah. Speaker 3: Don't wanna do that either. I'm not available for that. Speaker 0: Well, I hope people are I I hope Americans Americans need to wake up. They need to wake up to what you're saying. We are heading into a dark time right now. Yeah. Unless we reverse course immediately. Colonel, thank you so much for your insights and analysis as always. Speaker 3: And for the record, I'm not running for any office. I go to bed at 09:30. I cannot be up. I I cannot be up Speaker 2: for I Speaker 4: was I was already looking on Ticketmaster or whatever I was gonna order tickets to that debate because I want to go to that debate. Okay. But I guess it's never Speaker 3: me against who? Speaker 2: Oh my god. Speaker 4: Kamala Harris. Speaker 2: Whatever you do, don't drink heavily. Speaker 3: Stop. Yeah. I don't. Speaker 0: Let's get that going Speaker 3: for you. Speaker 0: Kamala has to bring a big bottle of wine. Colonel, great to see you as always. Thank you so much, sir. Thanks, Doug. Alright. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 10, 2026 at 11:02 PM

Saved - May 11, 2026 at 1:31 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I hear US intel leaks claim the White House lies about Iran; Iran supposedly has 70% of its missiles and American bases were devastated; the head of the NCTC resigned. @RealScottRitter says Trump’s war is run from Tel Aviv.

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🚨 US intelligence officials are leaking because they say the White House is lying about Iran. Iran has 70% of its missiles. American bases were devastated. The head of the National Counterterrorism Center resigned. @RealScottRitter says Trump's war is being run out of Tel Aviv. https://t.co/Y9oM0qtryj

Video Transcript AI Summary

Speaker 0 describes exclusive reporting that there is major activity inside President Trump’s intelligence operation, with American intelligence professionals inside the administration allegedly furious because they believe the public is being lied to about the Iran war. They contend the official White House story does not match intelligence and that Trump’s Iran policy has been hijacked not by U.S. officials or agencies, but by the Israeli government and its intelligence apparatus, effectively running the White House messaging from Tel Aviv. Leaks to media, including the Washington Post, are said to reveal this truth, and examples are promised. Speaker 1 cites Jesse Waters’ framing of the blockade and “Project Freedom,” arguing the president paused it to save face for Iran, suggesting Iran controls the Strait of Hormuz and that American negotiators would lose leverage if the plan continues. The host claims the president delays to secure a deal, and mocks the notion that the White House is in control, insinuating insanity in the regime. Speaker 2 interjects with a hostile remark, then reiterates the claim that Zionist forces are pushing misinformation to the American people and that the White House is “Israeli run.” Megan Kelly’s commentary is invoked to illustrate the information loop: a cabinet member seeks Fox News reach, then Fox News informs the president, continuing the cycle. The segment notes Tucker Carlson’s appearances in the run-up to the war but asserts the president was not persuaded, while asking who pushed the president to war and who made representations. Speaker 0 continues, saying brave patriots inside Trump’s ODNI reveal the truth through leaks that show a different story from the White House narrative. The administration allegedly says Iran is being crushed and its missile program decimated, while leaks claim Iran can survive the blockade for at least three to four months and that the Iranian underground tunnels and missile production have reopened. The question is raised why this information comes only via leaks and whether Tulsi Gabbard, supposed to oversee intelligence, is still involved, or if she’s been sidelined. John Brennan’s investigation is described as collapsing, with lead prosecutors replaced by voluntary interviews, while Brennan himself reappears as a commentator. Scott Ritter’s criticisms are cited, arguing U.S. policy toward Iran is written by circles aligned with Israel, not the CIA or DIA. Speaker 3 elaborates with insider perspective: leaks in Washington DC have long occurred, and leaking does not prove truthfulness. Leaks may be used to shape perceptions; the reality is that the White House manufactures perceptions and facts are suppressed. The dysfunction is described as Megan Kelly’s reference to the president’s adviser circle needing to go to media outlets to deliver messages, with the conflict of interest highlighted. The war’s scale is stressed as one of the most serious strategic campaigns since Desert Storm, with tens of billions spent and perhaps over $100 billion in damage to American assets, criticized as being treated like a parlor game. Speaker 0 asks for Scott Ritter’s view on leaks and the accuracy of the assessments about Iran’s damage and survivability. Speaker 3 says he is cautious about discussing battle damage but would take the Washington Post at its word; he believes the CIA underplays Iran’s missile survival and criticizes the president for lying about 18% and the broader economic impact, suggesting the CIA lacks a comprehensive grasp of Iran’s economy and military. Speaker 3 offers his assessment that a new round of Iranian action could be imminent and describes the president as clinically insane, with surrounding aides flattering him rather than telling the truth. He argues Iran could devastate Gulf energy infrastructure if attacked again, potentially collapsing the global economy, and that posturing may be a political maneuver to avoid disaster. He contends the intelligence apparatus is effectively run by Israel, with humans in Iran managed by Israeli sources, and the U.S. intelligence community unable to counter these narratives, urging congressional investigations. The segment closes with acknowledgment of Kishem Island attacks and Scott Ritter’s assertion that Israel heavily influences U.S. Iran policy, while noting the broader consequences. Speaker 0 wraps, thanking viewers and urging engagement.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, Americans better buckle up for some hard truths. We can exclusively report here on Redacted that something very big is happening inside of president Trump's intelligence operation. And if you care about the national security of The United States, then this should alarm you. Sources are telling Redacted that there are American intelligence professionals inside this administration who are furious. They believe the American people are being lied to about what's really happening in the war with Iran. They believe the official story coming out of the White House does not match the actual intelligence at all. And they believe Trump's Iran policy has been hijacked, not by America first national security officials, not by sober military planners, not even by the CIA or the DIA, but by the Israeli government and its intelligence apparatus. In other words, Trump's intelligence operation is truly being run out of Tel Aviv. And now those US officials are leaking information to the media, including the Washington Post, in order to get these stories out about what's really happening in Iran. I'm gonna show you examples of that here in a minute. But first, we've all been spoon fed lies about this war. Mainstream media is feeding you fake stories about what's really happening in Iran, what's happening in the Gulf States, like this laughable gem over the last twenty four hours from Jesse Waters. Watch. Speaker 1: President says based on the request of Pakistan and other countries, we have mutually agreed that while the blockade will remain in full force and effect, project freedom will be paused for a short period of time to see whether or not the agreement can be finalized and signed. We suspect the president is letting the Iranians save face. The enemy just yesterday said they controlled the Strait. That was obviously a lie. And watching the Americans escort ship after ship out of the Gulf and them not being able to do anything about that was gonna be humiliating. Not only were they gonna lose whatever military prestige they had left in the region, their negotiators weren't gonna be able to fight for their position after they lost their last bargaining chip. The commander in chief must believe that the Iranians are serious about surrendering. If he's gonna pause Project Freedom for the sake of a deal. Because you could also continue Project Freedom during the negotiations. You know, you do wanna get these foreign ships moving. The president must know what he's doing. And we're about to find out how insane in the brain the regime really is. Speaker 2: I wonder what it feels like to have your head that far up your ass. Speaker 0: I mean, and up the up the ass of the president and regurgitating Marco Rubio talking points. Okay. So Right, Jesse. Right. So Trump is losing on purpose because he wants the enemy to feel good about itself. Speaker 2: That's so nice. Speaker 0: That's why project freedom has been put on hold. The Zionist pumping these lies out to the American people think that you are stupid. The truth cannot be revealed by the Israeli run run White House. Trump watches Fox News nonstop. So the information loop is happening in real time. One of his favored cabinet folks begs to go on Fox News, does an interview, pushes propaganda fed to them by the Israeli intelligence. Trump watches it then on Fox News, and the circle repeats itself. Megan Kelly recently summed it up, summed up this loop perfectly. Watch. Speaker 2: I've spoken to many people at Fox who've told me that administration figures will come to them saying, please put me on because I have something the president has to hear. And also, if their fortunes are dwindling, they want a a hit like on Fox and Friends, for example, because they wanna show, I'm on TV. See? I'm relevant. I'm making your points. They know the shows he watches, and they try very hard to get on them. But look, we know that the case was made because we know that Tucker Carlson got in front of him three times in the month leading up to this war. And, you know, just he he wasn't persuaded. So there but there were just so many other voices. It was nine to one, you know, that he was listening to pushing him into it. Not to take agency away from the president at all, but I do think a full assessment. We know Trump made the call. That's not a mystery, but the who pushed him into it, who made these representations also matters. Speaker 0: So this is what we're watching unfold in real time. Now you have brave patriots inside Trump's intelligence team at ODNI revealing the truth. And the leaks are starting to tell a very different story from the one that the Trump administration has been selling to the American people. For weeks, president Trump and his team have told us that Iran is being crushed, that Iran's missile program has been obliterated or decimated to use their words. Jesse Waters and his types have been telling you that The US blockade of the Strait Of Hormuz is is breaking Tehran economically, that The US military assets in the region are secure, nothing to see here, and that it's all going going according to plan. But now look at what leaks are coming out this morning. The Washington Post is now reporting that a confidential CIA assessment delivered to the administration policymaker says Iran can survive Trump's naval blockade of the Strait Of Hormuz for at least three to four months before facing more severe economic hardship. That directly undercuts what the White House narrative is that Iran is on the verge of collapse or that they've already collapsed. So the Israeli intelligence team running the White House messaging is lying to you, and they're lying to president Trump, selling him falsehoods about Iran's ability to control the Strait Of Hormuz. Here's the Daily Mail. Another leak from the patriots and Trump's ODNI reports that despite what you've been hearing, Iran still retains 75% of its mobile launchers, 70% of its prewar missile stockpiles, not 18% as they're telling us. And they're not mostly decimated, 70%. And according to these folks, inside Trump's intel team, they've even reopened much of the underground tunnels and missile production. So we have to ask ourselves, why is that information only reaching the American people through leaks? Why are we learning from, like, anonymous intelligence officials that Iran's underground storage facilities have largely been recovered or even reopened? Why are we learning that Iran has repaired some damaged missiles, even assembled new ones? They've been producing missiles during this time period? I thought they were decimated. This is the intelligence problem Trump has on his hands right now. And since Trump only watches Fox News and gets his information from Israeli intelligence, how is he being informed? So Tulsi Gabbard is supposed to be there every morning providing the intel assessment. Right? Is that still happening? Has she been pushed out? Is he seeing this truthful info, or is it being kept from him? I know Megan Kelly's giving him, you know, credit saying he he has agency here, but does he? Either he's not being told the truth or he knows the truth and is allowing the public narrative to continue anyway to save face. But it gets worse because the Washington Post this week also, thanks to these leakers inside ODNI, published satellite imagery analysis showing that Iranian strikes damaged or destroyed at least 228 structures, pieces of military, equipment at US military sites across The Middle East. That includes barracks, hangars, full fuel depots, aircraft, radar, communication systems, air defense equipment. We talked to colonel McGregor yesterday. He says uninhabitable most of these places, probably never to be used again. Now the post says that level of destruction is far larger than what the US government has publicly acknowledged. Think about that. The American people were told the reports of major US losses were fake news, exaggerations, propaganda, same kind of propaganda that Israel sells to its own people. The Iron Dome stopped all the missiles. No. It didn't. The satellite imagery shows that US facilities were hit and destroyed. It shows that Iran's targeting was more precise than officials wanted to admit. It also shows that American bases across the region may be far more vulnerable than the Pentagon has been willing to say out loud. And this is exactly why intelligence sources appear to be going outside normal channels right now trying to leak this info to the American people because sources are telling Redacted that they believe the war is being run through a foreign intelligence apparatus. And this brings us to Joe Kent. Kent was the head of the National Care and Terrorism Center. He was close to Tulsi Gabbard. He was a Trump supporter. He was not some left wing resistance nut job. And he resigned over the Iran war. In his resignation letter, Kent said he could not support the war. He said Iran posed no imminent threat to The US, and that was the assessment of the intelligence agencies. And he said The US went to war because of pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby. So the Washington Post reported that Kent accused high ranking officials and an influential media figures of pushing misinformation about a swift path to victory. It was gonna be four days in order to sell the American people on this war. It didn't work. The American people hate this war. So I don't know what selling they were really doing anyway. And then Kent went even further in an interview with Tucker Carlson. Kent said that senior officials who had doubts about the strikes were not allowed to share those concerns with president Trump. He said that Israeli officials were providing information that US officials could not confirm through intelligence channels. That's shocking. Meaning, our own CIA didn't trust what the Israelis were selling. And notice something else here. Where the hell is Tulsi Gabbard? Tulsi Gabbard is the director of national intelligence. She's supposed to be the person overseeing the intelligence community, advising the president on national security. But since this war began, you don't see her doing Fox News hits. She's not popping up on Fox News so that she can sell anything to the president, not being even allowed to do those hits. And that tells you something. And here's something else, the John Brennan investigation. We were told for months that accountability was coming, an indictment was coming. We were told the former CIA director was under serious scrutiny, whether he lied to congress, and then also, I mean, criminal, really demonic stuff that they were apparently uncovering. And then suddenly, the lead prosecutor was no longer on the case. Subpoenas withdrawn, replaced with, like, voluntary interview requests. CBS News, Barry Weiss' CBS News reported the lead prosecutor overseeing the criminal investigation was no longer assigned to the case. Done. Gone. So John Brennan now is a cushy consulting gig, appears as a contributor on MSNBC. So all good. Nothing to see here. And former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter is saying the quiet part out loud in a recent interview with Glenn Deeson. He said that US policy towards Iran is not being written by the CIA, not by the DIA, but by the policy circles aligned with Israel. Well, don't you hate when people say I told you so? Yeah. That's me, actually, because I I did tell you. Sorry. But I told you that gold and silver were going to reap the benefits of excessive money printing, the Fed just printing money like crazy, overvalued markets, global unrest. It's here. It's happened. Gold and silver have both soared to all time highs. So I hope you called our friends at Lear Capital and you bought some. If you didn't, trust me. It's not too late. Experts are predicting even higher prices ahead. And they get it. They know what's coming. Isn't it time, folks? Get yourself some gold and silver today. Call the best in the business. I personally use them. So does Natalie. We both do. And our kids do as well in their IRAs. Lear Capital, it's a free phone call. There's no obligation to purchase, just education information on protecting and growing your wealth with gold and silver. I'm sure there are many of you that have called and haven't purchased yet for whatever reason. Don't make the same mistake twice. Now is the time to get some gold shipped directly to you or shift some dollars in your retirement accounts over to physical gold and silver. It's easy to do. Natalie and I have done it for both, and I've been extremely satisfied with Lear's knowledge, their service, their prices. I urge you to call today and learn more. Call them. 1806133557 or go to learredacted.com, and you can receive up to $20,000 in free bonus metals with a qualified purchase. So former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter joins us now to dissect all of this. Scott, great to see you. Welcome back to the show. Speaker 3: Thanks for having me. Speaker 0: So you when you hear these leaks coming out of the Washington Post and other media right now from sources at ODNI and others trying to get this information out to the American people, what does that tell you about the people that are surrounding Trump right now who are providing him with intelligence assessments of the Iran war? Speaker 3: Well, you know, Washington DC has always leaked. I had my first experience of that was in the, late nineteen eighties, with the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty, and we saw there were elements inside the United States Congress who had allies in The US intelligence community who didn't want this treaty to work. And so they would leak misleading intelligence, to, you know, the the the Washington Times that would publish it on the front page and suddenly became a talking point. So we we've seen leaks used for a number of reasons. Just because something's leaked doesn't mean it's right. It means that there are, interested parties within the United States government who take Umbridge at the official line. So this isn't new. The the the leaking, Washington DC has been leaking like a sea forever. But what it tells us about the Trump administration is that there is pushback from within the system, to the narrative that's being promulgated by, the White House and the, the people surrounding them. Then what makes this, interesting is that the facts tend to align with the leakers, not the policymakers. Sometimes it's the opposite case as was with the INF treaty where the, leaked information was factually incorrect. They leaked it not not to tell the truth, but to create perceptions because perceptions create their own realities. Here, we have the White House in the business of manufacturing perceptions, and the reality is being suppressed. And we have people seeking to release fact based evidence that contradicts the narrative. I I'd always like to believe that, our policy aligns with truth, and what we see here is that it doesn't. We have a a White House that's been lying to the American people, a White House that's been lying to itself. I mean, just listen to what Megan Kelly said. I mean, you I know you did because you you spoke about it, but just for a second, understand the dysfunction. You're somebody who, was brought into your position to advise the president. You were picked for that purpose. But because this president operates in such a tight circle of sycophants who exist only to appease his narcissism, you can't get access to the person you're supposed to advise, so you have to go to a nongovernmental entity, you know, a a mainstream media outlet, Fox News Right. Order to send a message. I mean, this is dysfunction at its, at its worth. This is dangerous dysfunction. This is the kind of stuff that should prompt immediate congressional investigations. But instead and and and it also should prompt the outrage of the American people. We went to war. And I know the president is playing stupid, you know, games. It was a skirmish. It was a no. This was a war. This is one of the the most serious strategic air campaigns launched since operation desert storm. This is a big deal. Tens of billions of dollars of American taxpayer money was expended. Perhaps over a $100,000,000,000 of damage has been done to, American assets in the region. And, you know, this president treats it as if it's some sort of parlor game. This is insanity, personified. Speaker 0: When you hear the assessments from these leakers inside the administration who are trying to get this information out about, like, the military The US military bases destroyed Iran's ability to with withstand months of Hormuz closure pressure, their stockpiles of missiles, etcetera. Do those leaks sound accurate to you based on your assessments? Speaker 3: Well, first of all, I'm always a little bit, reticent to talk about battle damage assessment because, I'm an American. And although I'm not in favor of this war, the last thing I wanna do is give somebody who's firing missiles at American service members an indication of how successful those, those strikes are. So I'm always a little hesitant to talk about batted battle damage assessment, but I'll take the Washington Post at its word. I will also say this about the, the the the assessments coming out from The US intelligence community about, you know, surviving percentages of missiles, etcetera. I think that these are, inaccurate numbers. I think that they, underplay, actually the survival rate of the of the, Iranian missiles. Speaker 0: Wow. Speaker 3: You know, we and the because they're derived from, you know, reporting, that that includes, you know, battle damage assessments from the people launching the strikes. The president's just straight up lying. So when he says 18 it's just a manufacturer number. We know that. But The US Intelligence Community always, you know, leans towards what the, the operators say. And I just go back. I I I can speak on personal experience here during the Gulf War. If we say we destroyed you know, if there's 70% left, there's 90% left. If you know, it's it's that's the case because we Wow. We clearly don't know what the Iranians are capable of, or we don't know what they've done. The same thing with, we the you know, this the estimates about, you know, three to four months worth of, you know, sustainability on the energy side. I I'd say that's probably, three to four years, because we don't know the truth about Iran's economy. There's a this is conventional analysis done without any, incorporation of, you know, the extensive gray markets that exist, the black markets. I wonder if they calculated accurately how much oil is consumed domestically by the Iranians that doesn't need to go into storage, or what's going on with the amount of oil that's being shipped across the Pakistani border, by trucks now. From all accounts, it is literally, you know, the the the entire border has been turned into a massive highway. So I would say that the doesn't have as clear picture about Iran, you know, as some people wanna give them credit for. I give them credit for, you know, putting out assessment that isn't, spun politically, but I would say that the CIA doesn't have dive into the reality of, Iran, both in terms of their military and their economy. Speaker 0: So, Scott, I'll get your assessment then where you think things are heading. We've been hearing reports from, Larry Johnson and others, believe that a new round of military action is imminent, maybe within forty eight hours, against Iran. What what do you what do you what are you hearing? What do you think? Speaker 3: Well, I'm not as plugged in as Larry is, so I can't say I'm hearing anything. This is just purely assessment on my part. But it's an assessment based upon reality. And and there's therein lies the problem. I think we need to acknowledge upfront that we're dealing with a president who is clinically insane. The man is, you know, suffering from narcissistic personality disorder of the most malignant nature. It makes him antisocial. If he lived in the state of New York, he could be involuntarily, confined because he represents a danger to society. But he's the president of The United States with his finger on the nuclear trigger. You know? And I'm being serious here. I'm not I'm not being facetious at all. This is a man whose social boastings are are clearly of mental instability. And so that means we don't know what is going to happen. But what I can say is that the people surrounding the president know exactly what would happen if we resumed attacks against Iran. We can't beat the Iranians. We proved that with thirty nine days of incessant bombardment that accomplished literally nothing. And we now know that, the Iranians retain capacity to strike back. The military knows that it can't accomplish any mission given to it to, you know, eradicate in short order Iran's ability to launch ballistic missiles. We had thirty nine days to do that. We didn't do that. The Iranians only got stronger. Now the Iranians are locked and loaded. We know that they accurately, that they can accurately strike targets that they aim at. And the Iranians have made it clear that if, there's renewed action against them that targets their energy infrastructure, that they will eradicate the energy infrastructure of the Gulf Arab states. That means that Kuwait will no longer produce energy. Qatar will no longer produce energy. Bahrain will no longer produce energy, and The United Arab Emirates will no longer produce energy, and Saudi Arabia will no longer produce energy. That's it for the global economy. Game set, match, shut it down. It's all over. You know, even though it's 22%, when you remove 20 purse 2% as precipitously as it's being removed right now, it will cause a collapse, a total collapse. A building structure that loses 22% of its of its, you know, load bearing capability collapses. You can say, well, there's, you know, 78% remaining or 88%. It doesn't matter. When you remove that much this fast without any shoring taking place, the global economy collapses. And this includes the American economy, and people, I believe, are telling the president that, you will be committing political suicide, that there is no recovery from this. So I believe that what's going on is a lot of posturing right now that this president is desperate for an off ramp, and, the the the militant rhetoric that we're hearing is simply flexing of muscles that no longer exist. Now I could be proven wrong. As I said, this man is clinically insane, and clearly the people surrounding him are sycophants, whose job is to, you know, stroke his ego, not to tell him the truth. But I think this president is politically savvy enough, and there's enough, you know, the the the narcissist wants his legacy to survive, and he's watching his legacy go down in flames right now. And he recognizes that he needs to stop the damage, and pray for some sort of policy based miracle this summer that can reverse the, the poll, when it comes to, you know, the support for his policies, which is plummeting. So I personally believe that there isn't going to be a resumption of, military action against Iran by The United States because to do so would be the kiss of death for this president. Speaker 0: Interesting. We just saw attacks on Kishem Island, some drone attacks that were intercepted by Iranian air defenses. That's reporting just a few minutes ago. Likely Israeli, I would imagine, to to your point. Which final question, Scott, then on take that Kishem point, but also, you know, is Trump's intelligence apparatus really just being run basically out of Tel Aviv right now? Speaker 3: Yeah. You know, we we we've seen this in, in a lot of areas, especially in The Middle East, especially pertaining to, Iran. You know, the CIA doesn't have a good track record. We we know in the nineteen eighties, Steve Richter, who who ran the, Near East directorate, you know, through incompetence sacrificed it in, you know, the the totality of America's human intelligence network in Iran. We painstakingly, have sought to rebuild it. We sacrificed it about six years ago when a a Gmail based, communications capability was, was compromised. And, again, everybody com communicating got arrested and killed, and we attempted to reconstitute it again today. We don't have a human intelligence capability. We have totally farmed out, human intelligence, in Iran to Israel, which, you know, which means now that when when whenever somebody's putting together a, you know, an intelligence assessment to drive all sources, you know, you can sit there and say, have a I'm I'm looking at this photograph. This is my assessment. You'll photographic intelligence gives you a snapshot. You can look at it over a sustained period of time and derive some sort of, insight. But at the end of the day, if I'm sitting here telling you what I see based upon several snapshots in time and somebody else says, yeah. But I got a human source close to, so and so in Iran. Everybody likes the human source. They like the sexiness. The same thing with signals intelligence. Unless you're monitoring the feed full time, you're only getting snippets of conversations. And so somebody who has the human intelligence can come in and say, I can bring additional context to that communication. The Israelis right now run the human intelligence out of Iran, and The United States is held hostage to it. And but even worse is that The US intelligence community isn't given the chance to, to counter what the Israelis say. The president will meet in private with, prime minister Netanyahu and the head of the Mossad who will brief him independent of any, US intelligence personnel present. And the president, you know, is won over by the, the the the strength of the personalities delivering fundamentally flawed arguments. So this is an absolute intelligence failure on the part of The United States. Again, something that normally would trigger congressional inquiry, but congress is asleep at the wheel. Yeah. Absolutely. Speaker 0: Scott, great to see you. Thank you so much for your assessment on this. Really appreciate it. Speaker 3: Thanks for having me. Speaker 0: Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's if you want to follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 9, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - May 10, 2026 at 11:59 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

DID you know? ✝️ The theology that leads millions of evangelical Christians to support Israel unconditionally derives from a single book. Wall Street elites and Zionist activists funded that book. Evangelicals were never told any of this. https://t.co/Djp5eVzT02

Video Transcript AI Summary

The video argues that evangelical support for Israel in the United States largely stems from a late-19th-century theological system that crystallized around the Schofield Reference Bible. The Schofield Bible is portrayed as a Cliff’s Notes for the Bible used by Christian Zionists to justify support for Israel, even as Israel is described as committing violence against innocents and Christians. A central claim is that the Schofield Bible was funded by Wall Street elites and backed by early Zionists long before the state of Israel existed. Cyrus Scofield, the Bible’s namesake, is described as a controversial figure. He is labeled by evangelical standards as a scoundrel: a philanderer who abandoned his wife and two daughters, sued frequently for fraud, and served time in prison for forgery. He was ousted as district attorney in disgrace after lying about his Confederate military record. Despite this, he became a prominent Bible teacher and later a celebrated Christian convert, though the narrative notes he never publicly corrected the stories about his supposed Confederate bravery or his wartime decorations. Scofield’s early life is summarized: raised in Michigan after his mother’s early death, he moved with his sister to Tennessee, briefly joined the Confederate Army but requested to leave, and shifted into religious circles after moving to St. Louis, where he married Leontine, a Catholic of French descent. He did not convert to Catholicism and later complained about her Catholicism. He had two daughters and a son who died in infancy. His ascent into religious influence came despite questions about his schooling and integrity, aided by his sister’s connections which helped him win election to the Kansas legislature and later serve as the District Attorney for the District of Kansas (1873). Fraud accusations continued, including forgery, but he eventually was pardoned and rose as a biblical leader. Scofield’s conversion is linked to a business figure in a mythic account, and he moved to Dallas where he remarried to Hetty after leaving his first wife. His network extended into Dwight L. Moody’s revival circles and the Niagara Bible Conference in 1878, where a new dispensational theology emerged. This theology divides history into eras, with Israel slated for a pivotal future role and the belief that the world would not be converted during the current dispensation—the church would decline before Christ's return and the millennial age would begin with Israel restored to its land. This “Israel-centered” prophecy would become central to American Christianity, even though at the time there was no modern Israel (it would come in 1948). Scofield’s influence extended into elite circles: he joined the Lotto’s Club in New York City, a club of financiers and writers including figures like Mark Twain, Andrew Carnegie, JP Morgan, and Samuel Untermeyer, a Zionist heavyweight. It was through the Lotto’s Club that Untermeyer facilitated Scofield’s connection to Zionist goals and to publishers (Oxford Press) that issued the Schofield Bible. Scofield then traveled to England and reportedly to the Holy Land, though travel dates are uncertain. The Schofield Bible’s publication and widespread distribution—funded by Wall Street real estate magnates and Zionist elites—produced a widespread, enduring belief in a distinct Jewish track in Scripture and the idea that Israel should play a central role in end-times prophecy. The Bible significantly altered American Christianity by systemizing, funding, and distributing a dispensational theology with Israel at its core. The video closes by inviting viewer feedback on this history.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, the evangelical Christians in The US that support Israel mostly do so from the theology that came about in the late 1800s, from what's called the Schofield Bible. Now evangelicals evangelicals know what the Schofield Bible is, but a lot of us don't. It's basically like a cliff notes for the Bible that Christian Zionists use as their reason behind supporting Israel, even when it becomes readily apparent that Israel continues to murder innocent people and attack Christians. They hold tight because of this one seminal text. What most people don't know, though, is that text, the Schofield Bible was funded by Wall Street elites and supported by very early Zionists long before the state of Israel ever existed. Now, they may not know also who is Cyrus Schofield. So I'm gonna give you a brief biography of him. He was by evangelical standards, a scoundrel. He was a philander who abandoned his wife and two daughters. He was sued many times and in fact, served to prison time for fraud. He was ousted as district attorney in disgrace. He lied about his military record, having been a confederate soldier. So how did this person become a biblical leader that led so many faithful Christians towards supporting the government of Israel and all of its subsequent wards? Well, let's take a look. Cyrus Schofield was not a religious man from his upbringing. He was raised in Michigan. His mother died very young. He was raised partly by his sisters. And he followed one of his sisters to Tennessee. There he briefly and volunteered to join the Confederate Army, but he didn't really like it. So he wrote a letter and said, you know, I'm not really even a southerner. I'm from Michigan. I want out of the army. And his request was approved. During his time in Confederacy, many of his fellow soldiers converted to Christianity. He was not one of them. Later in life, when he was a well known Bible teacher, stories would circulate that he had received what was called the cross of honor for bravery in the army. The problem is the Confederacy never gave out any decorations for bravery. So he kind of let those war hero stories circulate, and he never corrected them, even though he did know about them. Now, he followed his sister later to St. Louis, where he would marry a Catholic woman of French descent named Leontine. Her family was very well connected, and he then married her. He did not convert to Catholicism. Later, he complained about her Catholicism as one of the sort of sources of strife in their marriage. They would have two daughters and a son. The son only lived a few months. The daughters lived well into their adult years. Now her connections helped him get elected to Kansas legislature despite never really having much formal schooling. And later he became the district attorney for the District Of Kansas in 1873. Now, this time, Schofield and his sister as well begin to be sued many times for fraud. He was accused of forgery, financial fraud, giving and taking loans that he did not pay back. He had many issues tied to other people's money. In one case led to formal charges and conviction, others were dropped or just left unresolved somehow. Eventually, he would resign as the district attorney due to allegations of blackmail. He also did serve time in prison for forgery. He would eventually be pardoned for this when he became a biblical leader. Now it was around this time that he has his Christian conversion. Schofield said it had to do with this businessman named Thomas Mc Peters in St. Louis. Both men said, oh, we were just having a conversation in my law office despite the fact that he never even had a law office. But, you know, the stories sort of get passed around. It was this funny story. And almost immediately, his life takes a sharp turn from disgraced lawyer and convicted forger to Bible student and then superstar preacher. He has this rise as a Christian convert, and it was unusually fast. From there, he moves to Dallas on the invitation of a person named AJ Gordon. And more directly, he's connected through Dwight L. Moody, the revival movement, you may know about that. He leaves his wife and two daughters behind, and he leaves them for good, never to come back and parent them. His wife has to work two jobs to support these two girls. They go on to be upstanding citizens in their hometown of Atchinson, Kansas. And in fact, when the Joseph Canfield book about Schofield was published, about twenty years ago, the local library there refused to carry it. And I think this is such an interesting note, because the author of the Canfield book offers to send the local library a copy of this book, and this is what the library sends back. As you recall, mister Scofield left missus Scofield with small children and no money, not too responsible of a person. I don't think we need his biography. Many Atchinson citizens remember what a rascal he was. So his reputation there was so bad that the local library didn't even want a copy of the book there. In Dallas, he marries his second wife. Her name's Hetty. Records show that the divorce from Liantine was not completed by the time he married his second wife, raising serious questions about his faithfulness to his first wife. And, again, he's an evangelical founder. He is who evangelicals look to for their theology. Nevertheless, he becomes a rising star. Now maybe he does reform his personality from thief, fraud, deadbeat dad, philandering husband. A lot of people do. That's between him and God. It's not for me to say, but it is odd get given all of these promotions of the church, he never prof properly atoned or made explanation for these crimes and sort of personal failings. Later in life, his daughter will ask him for money when he's an internationally known author. He still does not help her. But back to the story. Now from Dallas, he's drawn into a growing network of influential evangelical leaders and invited to the Niagara Bible Conference. This is a gathering that would prove pivotal for Schofield, but also for the future of American Christianity. Most people understand that in Niagara and in general, the Northeast, there was a new system of theology being born in American Christianity. It emphasized a literal interpretation of prophecy, a coming rapture, a distinct future role for the nations of Israel as pivotal in God's plans. These were not fringe meetings. These were well attended and very well funded. It was here in 1878 that church leaders adopted a series of revelations about their belief in Israel, specifically look at article 14, saying, we believe that the world will not be converted during the present dispensation. So these are like eras, basically. But it's fast ripening for judgment. Well, there will be a fearful apostasy in the professing Christian body. And hence, the Lord Jesus will come in person to introduce the millennial age when Israel shall be restored to their own land. So the theology taking shape here is basically this. History is divided into stages. The Bible can be divided into these stages too. And the one we're in now doesn't actually end in revival. It ends in decline. The church weakens, the world is ending, and then God intervenes. Tied to this idea is that it is Israel has a pivotal future role. The story is not complete until Jews return to their homeland. And look at where this is landing. There is no Israel at the time. We're talking late eighteen hundreds that won't Israel won't exist until 1948. But the expectation is there. They're setting the stage more than fifty years before the country comes into existence. Now, this sounds extreme, but you have to think about The United States at this time, late eighteen late eighteen hundreds, just coming out of the civil war, economy's terrible, social upheaval, everything feels unstable. So when someone says, hey, this isn't chaos. This is the biblical timeline, people lean into that. It validates their experience. Other incidentally, of days religions are born at this time too. Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh day Adventist, Christadelphians. Some refer to this as the doom boom, this idea that everyone's looking around and they're like, man, the world is so screwed up. But the Bible says so, so we feel better. There's this sense of everything breaking down, and that history is gonna get worse before it gets better. You can see why that appeals to people. Right? Now, Scofield will stay in the Northeast for some time as a preacher. And then mysteriously, he becomes a member of the Lotto's Club. The Lotto's Club is an elite New York City gentlemen's club with members who are writers, financiers, Wall Street power brokers. Now on his stated salary, he should not be able to afford this. But he never explains how he is a member of this elite society or how he pays for it, but he remains a member until his dying day. This is not a natural landing spot for a pious and humble preacher. Famous members included Mark Twain, Andrew Carnegie, JP Morgan, and Samuel Untermeyer. Untermeyer was a prominent prominent voice in Zionist activism. He advocated for establishment of a Jewish homeland in what was then Palestine, and he used his influence and international, influence and and money to push towards that cause. It was through the Lotus Club that he then that Schofield gets the idea to write a companion bible, a CliffsNotes like bible, in order to push through this dispensational theology with Israel at the center of the rapture. He's then, introduced to real estate tycoons who are eager to fund the Bible. And then he's introduced to the ox Oxford Press, which will then publish it. So I just wonder, do evangelicals know this, that the reference Bible that they used was born and funded by New York City elite social clubs? Do you think they know this? I'm just curious. Now, Scofield takes the money, he begins working on the Bible, he travels throughout England. He also says he goes to The Holy Land, but his travel dates don't end up. He was sick that has not been verified. It takes seven years. When it finally comes out, it leans heavily into what he frames as a distinct Jewish track in the scripture, a sharp separation between Israel and the church with Israel taking future stage in the prophecy. And here's the tension. Schofield was not trained in Judaism. He was not a historian of the ancient world. You know, he didn't speak any ancient languages. So how he came up with this is anyone's guess. Once the Schofield Reference Bible is published, though, it spreads like wildfire, goes through multiple printings, lands in seminaries across the country, and pastors start preaching from it pretty quickly. Schofield isn't just a name, he's an authority. He is famous all throughout Christian society. He will die a wealthy man having never passed any of that down to his first wife and oldest daughter. And the Schofield Bible is still used in churches and Bible colleges and study groups today. In many cases, the noted notes are treated almost as sort of a built in guide passed down alongside the biblical text itself. Now before Schofield's reference Bible, this idea that Israel would play this central role in end of times prophecy was not a dominant view in Christianity. It did exist, but it was on the margins. It was still pretty nation in England. It was not widely taught. The Schofield Bible, at least in American Christianity really changed that. And it was not a grassroots movement. It was systemized, funded, and published at scale. It was a niche theological idea that was packaged and printed directly into the pages of scripture and distributed to millions funded by Wall Street real estate tycoons and Zionist elites. So I just think we need to know that history when we consider the birth of Christian Zionism. Let me think let me know what you think of that. Speaker 1: Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 9, 2026 at 11:47 PM

Saved - May 10, 2026 at 12:38 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

We sank Iran's navy. It didn't matter. We bombed their leadership. It didn't matter. We blocked the strait. It didn't matter. @ProfessorPape has been right about everything, & he says punishment almost never works. https://t.co/bvY8FyPbkk

Video Transcript AI Summary

The discussion centers on Iran’s response to the latest US peace terms and the broader trajectory of the conflict. Iran publicly rejected the terms, calling them “completely unrealistic” and signaling that they would not open the Strait of Hormuz. At the same time, the claim is made that the rumblings from US outlets and the president’s rhetoric suggested closeness to a deal, but those impressions are challenged as inconsistent with Iran’s stance. Project Freedom is said to have been shelved after Saudi Arabia reportedly refused to allow US forces to use its airspace and a key regional airbase, making the Trump administration’s stated option to advance that plan unworkable. The host asks where things stand on the escalation ladder. Professor Robert Pape, director of the Chicago Project on Security and Threats, describes the situation as a trap. He argues that the fundamental issues in play have not changed since the bombs began falling about seventy days ago. He praises the US military’s tactical performance—air, naval, and leadership-target strikes—but criticizes the strategy as fundamentally flawed. According to Pape, tactical successes do not yield meaningful strategic results, and Iran’s power is growing due to geography and cheap technologies like drones and mines. He notes that even after sinking Iran’s navy, the impact was negligible because Iran’s power persists and expands, especially given a Gulf-wide vulnerability to Hormuz. A critical development discussed is Iran’s action near the UAE, striking a pipeline that bypassed Hormuz and moved nearly 2,000,000 barrels of oil per day. This demonstrated Iran’s capacity to inflict damage despite a naval blockade, contributing to Gulf states’ reluctance to participate in or support US actions. The implication is that US punitive measures—hitting energy infrastructure or power grids—are unlikely to force Iran to kneel and may instead provoke greater retaliation. Pape warns that the escalation could drag on for months, with consequences such as rising gasoline prices in the US, potentially reaching about $6 in May or higher in some places like Chicago. The conversation turns to more immediate developments: fresh drone attacks around Kishem Island with Iran claiming air defenses intercepted the assaults; Iranian officials reportedly require compensation for damages and the withdrawal of all US forces from the Gulf as preconditions for ending the war. Pape reframes these attacks as part of Iran’s effort to keep the United States off balance and off leadership leverage, suggesting that Trump’s approach—driven by civilian leadership and charisma—misses the realities of great-power politics. He discusses the broader risk of increased Gulf infrastructure targeting if the US escalates, including the potential for higher gas prices and substantial infrastructure repair costs. The interview ends with reflections on the limits of punishment as a strategy, the enduring influence of Iran’s geopolitical position, and the likelihood that even if further force is used, it may not yield the desired strategic outcome. The speakers acknowledge the difficulty of predicting exact moves but emphasize the persistence of the escalation trap and the real-world consequences for energy markets and regional stability.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, a short time ago, Iran said no deal. Sorry, president Trump. Your terms are total garbage and frankly don't make any sense. Iran publicly rejected the latest, US peace deal. They will not open the Strait Of Hormuz, calling The US plan completely unrealistic. Completely unrealistic. But if you listen to, like, Fox News and The US president and you listen to The US media, it seems like we were pretty close to a deal here. The markets responded. Everything was exploding as a result of it. Wait a minute. Was that all a lie? Was that an exaggeration? Project Freedom has now been shelved according to the president. Trump was forced to stop that after Saudi Arabia reportedly refused to allow the US military to use its airspace, its airbase, a key airbase in the region. So there's no way for president Trump to essentially implement project freedom. So game over. Where are we on this escalation ladder right now? Are things getting better or worse? Professor Robert Pape is the director of the Chicago project on security and threats at the University of Chicago and the author of escalation trap on Substack. And he's absolutely been nailing it week in and week out with, with his assessments and predictions on this, and it's based on data. Professor Pape joins us once again. Great to see you. Welcome back to the show. Speaker 1: Well, thank you for having me back. And I wish I could say next time you bring me back, I'll have something wrong. So making me feel that great. This is a this is a tragic situation. Speaker 0: It really is. So what is your assessment of this latest back and forth? The Iranians saying, sorry. This is completely unrealistic. The president of The United States saying we're calling off project freedom in order for the Iranians to save face. I mean, that's literally what what they're basically saying. Where are we on this escalation ladder right now? Speaker 1: Where we are is we are stuck in the trap, and where we are with the negotiations is what I've been warning about now for days on Substack, on x, and so forth. The fundamental set of issues has not really changed. That is since almost seventy days now, when the bombs first fell, our military has been tactically terrific. I talked for The US Air Force. I'm not surprised we would be tactically terrific. And the fact is what you're seeing is whether it's bombs against leadership targets, the bombs are hitting targets, killing leaders, whether it's the naval blockade, whether it's the air campaign. The military at a tactical level is doing every single thing that we would want. This is not a case of bad execution of tactics. This is a case of horrible strategy. This is a case where we are going down a road where that tactical success is not leading to any strategic result that matters. Now just to pick one example, yes, we sunk Iran's navy. Remember a month ago, we were bragging about how much that was going to matter, and now notice it doesn't matter at all. And the reason it doesn't matter at all is because Iran's growing power is built on two factors. One is geography, and the other is really cheap technology called drones and mines. You put those two factors together, and you have Iran emerging as the fourth center of world power because those two factors are more than sufficient to tighten the grip of, Hormuz. And now what you're seeing is it's more than sufficient for Iran's power to grow even during the naval blockade. So what happened with Operation Freedom wasn't just that this failed and it got canceled right away. It's that when Iran struck a target near The UAE's key, pipeline. They had a pipeline that was bypassing Hormuz with, nearly 2,000,000 barrels of oil a day that was actually getting getting out. Once, Iran did that, that sent a clear message to everybody in The Gulf that, Iran has more than enough, technology and geo geographic power in order to hurt them even more than they've been hurted they've been hurt already. So this is why you see, the Gulf States themselves, saying, we're not playing. We're not getting involved with this because all it's doing is hurting them. It's not protecting their security. Another way to put it is we are losing more power day by day, including this week. And that is really just such a tragic situation, but it's not changing because, president Trump is, he doesn't have that military option to just reach to that's gonna break the back of Iran, and suddenly, we're gonna get this, lap of, good benefits, and it's all gonna have been worthwhile. I'm really sorry to say this this trajectory can go on for months. And I know nobody wants to hear that, but sometimes you just gotta hear the bad news, which is, this is gonna this is unfortunately gonna go on for for months. You might see not just $5 gas, $6 gas here in Chicago. We're already at $5.20 where I fill up. I'm expecting this to hit $6 by the May. Speaker 0: Every day, we're exposed to more chemicals sprayed into our skies, leaching into our food, and polluting our airways and waterways. Speaker 2: But did you know that your gut can help you fight back? That's why we wanna tell you about kimchi one from Brightcore Nutrition. It contains over 900 strains of beneficial proto probiotics that help flush toxins, restore gut balance and support your immune system. Because when your gut is strong, your body can resist and you'll feel the difference better digestion, more energy, clearer thinking, stronger immunity, and even improvements in your skin, hair, and metabolism. This just doesn't isn't just hype. Studies show that fermented foods like kimchi can reduce the risk of obesity, improve blood sugar, and support whole body wellness. Kimchi one is an all natural non GMO, dairy free, gluten free, 100% made in The US by a company that actually cares about your health. Clayton and I take this every day. You can check it out for yourself by going to mybritecore.com/redacted, or you can call them at (888) 404-6312. Sign up for 50% off plus free shipping. If you use the code redacted, you'll get 25% off. But if you call, you could get up to 50. So you should do that. But check it out for yourself. Mybrightcore.com/redacted. One more time. That's mybrightcore.com/redacted. You know, some military experts have said that they expect the war, the actual combat portion, to heat back up, which would only make this worse because The United States doesn't have an easy win from so far away. We mentioned earlier that Saudi Arabia now is saying no landing on our airspace. That was a key ally that we have alienated. So, you know, I would like to ask you about what would happen if there is a renewal of hot battle. And I just wanna push you a tiny bit because the tactically terrific part, you know, obviously not the school of girls. Can we just pull that out? Speaker 1: Oh, no. Absolutely. I'm sorry. I should have definitely and in fact, that's gonna come back to haunt us with, oh my god. You know, I'm pretty thank you very much for giving me that chance to qualify what I meant. So no. Speaker 2: I just I think that as Americans, we should not forget it. It shouldn't I I don't mean you Speaker 1: doing the best we can, we're making mistakes, and those mistakes are bad, are enough to kill Americans down the road. So this isn't just an oops here. This is that will be haunting us as there are, I hope not, but future attacks, against Americans. So let me say two things about the point about stepping up. Why is it that we would step up? There's an assumption, and this is one of the big things when I teach for the US Air Force, when I teach at the University of Chicago, and this is an assumption by smart people. This is not a dumb person's assumption. This is an assumption by generals. This is not an assumption just by civilians, which is punishment if we're not a nice guy and we put our morals aside. Once we hurt the enemy enough, we kill enough civilians, we make them unemployed, what we're gonna do is they will bring them to their knees, here. And that is what you are seeing with, the, blockade. The idea is we're gonna crush their economy, and that's gonna bring them to their knees. Or now if we go after the electric power, that's gonna hurt them more quickly, cause the punishment to happen more rapidly. And here's the bottom line, which is hard in just a short period of time to get across to your audience, but, the punishment almost never works. And it can be extreme. In World War two, during I'll just pick the most damaging punishment campaign with conventional weapons that ever happened was when The United States turned loose our b 20 nines on Japanese cities before we dropped the atomic bombs. Starting in March 1945 until the July, we picked out 58 cities in Japan, and we bombed them one after one after one, and we killed 700,000 Japanese civilians. This did not budge the Japan one inch, and there's many cases of this. And so the problem here is this basic assumption that people think, and it's a basic assumption. I know because I've been teaching smart people for thirty years. They need to see the evidence up close and personal. That's what's in my books. That's what's in, the lectures I give to the military. That's what I'm showing them. I'm taking them through this, in detail. And quite honestly, they changed their mind. Once they see enough cases, they realize, oh, it's not just about we're not nice. It really does stiffen the back of the enemy because what it does is it makes them wanna fight back and kill us even more. And that's why that's not gonna work. Now why do we go to that? We go to that because people like president Trump, he's a real estate guy. He has no real experience in military history. He's never really sat down and had a even a twenty minute version of how punishment has really failed in in history to do this. And so this is we we are run by civilians. We have civilian control. We'd never wanna give that up, but this is this is how you end up going down these roads here. And, unfortunately, if we do launch that bombing campaign, what you can expect is the lashing back here. They're gonna come at us eye for an eye or maybe two eyes for an eye, and they're gonna hit the Gulf infrastructure really hard. And when and that may that may play out over weeks. And when that happens, then we're not talking about $6 gas anymore in Chicago. We're gonna be talking about 8 or $9 gas. This this is really gonna have that big of a consequence because you're when you have the infrastructure of anything damaged, it's like in your house, you can have, a little tiny leak roof, but have you ever had the water running in your basement where there's holes in your basement? Now you're talking not about a $3,000 leak roof repair. You're talking about a $30.40, $50,000 basement repair. That's the difference here when we start taking down the infrastructure in of the oil and the gas and the fertilizer, not just simply threatening ships. And that's where we're headed. Speaker 0: Couple of, news items that have just kinda moved over the past few minutes, professor Pape. One, I wanna get your take on this. A new, drone attack, and there's been reports of explosions on, Kishem Island from on the Iranian side. Iranian state media reporting explosions said, they were caused by air defenses intercepting several drone attacks. So where is that coming from? The United States, Israel, and then we also just got word from senior, Iranian officials just a short time ago, even before we came on the air, that says they're not gonna consider ending this war under two under two conditions. First, all compensation for all damages, and the second, The United States must withdraw from The Gulf. So to your point, we're sort Speaker 1: of trapped. I was just on Times of London radio a few hours ago saying you were gonna start to see the Iranians will likely pull out. They want the withdrawal of all forces here, which I haven't heard much about. So I'm I'm sorry to say that it's not just the generalities, it's even the details are actually fully well, not fully, but but we're quite predictable in this, in this situation. Now what would that drone attack be? Of course, you just laid out the possibilities, but we do need to recall that we've been talking for a long time about seizing certain islands, either Kars or right near Hormuz. That island is one of the ones right near Hormuz. We have all the forces there, those 10,000 marines, the special forces, they are there. They're on a hair trigger, and president Trump has been warning here in his post now for, actually, several days that he's gonna move right away. So, I can't say for sure this is the beginning of an actual effort to take one of those islands, but I would hardly be surprised that that would be where this White House would go. And it's, it is the escalation trap. It's what Iran has just done is, humiliated yet again president Trump, who's who's been bending over backwards begging for any deal whatsoever. And they're not giving them, what you just showed is they're not even giving a hint of a fig leaf here because what they wanna do is they wanna wreck his presidency. The goal here is, I believe, by Iran becoming more and more revealed by their behavior. They don't wanna talk to us face to face because that would give us too much prestige. They're in the driver's seat at every step, and the only way you're gonna knock them off the driver's seat is with force. But even then, I'm telling you, that's probably not going to work. But what that doesn't mean we're not gonna try it. And if we're trying it for the reasons I just said, unfortunately, we're, you know and I hate to be so blunt because I I'm I'm not trying to be political here. But, I mean, the bottom line is I I teach people coming in all the time who are real estate agents and they're they're, you know, pilots and so forth. And they think right away coming in, and and these are folks with 120, 140 IQs. These are not dumb people. And they think right away that, oh, the only thing holding us back, say, from winning in Vietnam is we didn't hit them hard enough. If we had just killed more than 900,000, you know, ratcheted up, we would have and once they see the real data and I take them through it, they not all of them, but most of them really come out much more sober and realize, oh, this is just not gonna work. Speaker 0: Professor Robert Pape, gotta follow his incredible work on his Substack. He has been absolute I mean, follow him on X, but read his great Substack because he's been nailing it. Left and right. Correct. Correct. Correct. Correct. Like you said, hope you'll come back when you're wrong. And Speaker 1: Yeah, please. Yeah. I'm I'm there. I'm I'm there. Maybe maybe the professor's maybe the professor's predictions are causing it. Maybe it's causing it. Maybe he should just predict the other way. Yeah. And it'll happen that way. I've I've tried. Speaker 0: If you Speaker 1: recall, I don't know if you recall, but early in the war, I was trying to give all these off ramps to president Trump here. So so it's now being lost, of course, because we've moved past that. But believe me, one of the reasons I've been on news I've been on Newsmax almost not every day, but my goodness gracious, how much more can I go on? I'm trying to talk directly here to, all sides, really, but I've tried to give a lot of it, you say, predictions or advice, though that was there. Had had we just decided after the first few days so president Trump said this was only gonna be on February 28 in the opening thing when he's asked Speaker 2: Hours. Speaker 1: A couple days. We only got a couple days. I've got all these off ramps. I was trying to give him those ideas. Take the off ramp then. Go now. Yeah. Yeah. Didn't happen. Speaker 0: And it didn't happen. And when you're controlled by the Israeli intelligence operation, it's not gonna happen. Professor Pitt, great to see you. Speaker 2: Thank can actually tell if it's his predictions or not. So you're like Schrodinger's cat. We have to put you in a box. Speaker 1: Well, I'm yeah. I'm I'm sorry to say it's what's happening here is that it's not the paved predictions that are that are driving it. It's the reality of the limits of punishment and the fact that when a state has great power as Iran does now, the idea they're just gonna give it up because president Trump's gonna bamboozle them with some charisma or some tweet or so forth, this is not this is great power politics of the first order. And when president Trump gets to if if he even goes to meet with president Xi you know, he always said in the campaign that he could stand up to president Xi. Well, he's about to find out what that looks like because Xi has got now a lot of cards here, to play with, and our we're the ones who are coming on bended knee. And this is just not a good situation here. I'm not I'm not sure president Trump should even go. I mean, it's, you know, it's just really it's hard to believe this is gonna work out in a positive way. You never say never. I understand. He's gotten reelected in a miracle. I really, I've been to his rallies. I really understand so much about how, you know, this has been a miracle here, but the bottom line is that this isn't just getting reelected here in a democracy. We're up against great power politics, and what you're seeing is Iran has got us, and they're not gonna let that grip up because they're suddenly bored or they don't like their power. And look at them. They got Kuwait now saying, oh my god. We can't get them. Iran's looking at that. And they're saying, you know, this is mana from heaven for them because they wanna get American forces out. Well, we got a base in Kuwait. Now now you see there if this is the leverage that Iran is using. Speaker 2: Yes. Well, thank you again for that. It's always a pleasure to read your work and to have you explain it to us in person. Please come back. Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you very much. Speaker 0: Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's if you want to follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 9, 2026 at 12:00 AM

Saved - May 9, 2026 at 12:26 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

The moment peace talk reports surfaced, Israel launched devastating new strikes on Beirut. @DougAMacgregor joins us to ask the one question nobody in Washington will answer: who actually controls this war? https://t.co/VnbBETiV7A

Video Transcript AI Summary

- The conversation centers on Congress’s upcoming hearing about MKUltra, prompted by Representative Anna Paulina Luna. The hosts note Luna’s history of revisiting old conspiracies that later proved real and caution that expectations for the hearing should be modest, recalling past revelations about JFK. - Kevin Shipp, a CIA whistleblower and author of Twilight of the Shadow Government, joins the discussion to discuss MKUltra, CIA secrecy, and the current relevance of past programs. He notes that MKUltra was a covert CIA program that ran for decades, focusing on mind control, behavior modification, and interrogation techniques with experimental drugs like LSD, sensory deprivation, and hypnosis, often conducted without consent or knowledge. He emphasizes that the program’s full details remain murky because the CIA destroyed large portions of records in the 1970s. - Shipp asserts that while the CIA claimed MKUltra ended in 1973, there is no evidence they actually did end it. He cites Victor Marchetti, author of The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence, who suggested the program continued under a different cover name. He argues that the same “matrix of secrecy” and “special access programs” persist today in the CIA, and oversight committees have failed to reform the agency; they meet less frequently and are subject to CIA secrecy agreements. - On historical exposure, Shipp mentions Operation Paperclip, where Nazi war criminal scientists’ files were falsified and handed to Truman; some of these scientists were hired by the CIA and used in MKUltra and related programs. He claims the CIA has a “bloody and deceitful track record” and questions whether the CIA has terminated MKUltra, suggesting it could continue in a different form. He also references his interviews with Carol, the daughter of John Warner, who says her father resigned in response to the CIA’s actions, including MKUltra, and that she has counseled patients who exhibit MKUltra-like damages. - The discussion turns to the possibility that MKUltra exists today outside the CIA’s direct umbrella, via NGOs and other facilities. Speaker 2 mentions an upcoming MKUltra whistleblower interview revealing astonishing claims about experiments on children and ongoing concerns about the hearing being sabotaged by false information to distort public perception. - The speakers discuss the plausibility of “Manchurian candidates”—mind-controlled operatives at high levels of government and industry. Shipp confirms that MKUltra involved training in forensic psychophysiology and manipulation of the mind, and that former agents could still be operating under new programs. He argues that the CIA’s morality is lacking, that “human life is cheap,” and that the agency would engage in such activities, though not all CIA personnel share these views. - The conversation covers the shift to more covert technologies: targeted energy weapons, nanobot and drone-like surveillance, and the integration of the CIA into an “ Directorate for Digital Innovation” merging with artificial intelligence. Shipp warns of risks associated with AI and nanotechnology, arguing for Congress to conduct a genuine church-style committee to break up the CIA or place its functions under the DIA. He asserts that many elected officials are influenced or controlled by the CIA, and that public pressure is essential to demand thorough investigation and reform. - The program closes with praise for Shipp’s book, Twilight of the Shadow Government, and with well-wishes regarding his son’s recovery after directed-energy-related incidents. The hosts encourage viewers to subscribe and share the video.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, Congress will hold a hearing about MK Ultra next week. Representative Luna announced this recently. Now she has a reputation for looking into old conspiracies that turned out to be true and watering them down. So let's lower our expectations of what will happen in a congressional hearing. Recall her big revelations about JFK assassination. But still, this is the government acknowledging that MKUltra is real. As a reminder, MKUltra was a covert CIA program that ran for decades. It was focused on mind control, behavior modification, and interrogation techniques with experimental drugs like LSD, sensory deprivation, hypnosis. It was often conducted without the consent or knowledge of the people involved. Now I'm talking about it as if it's past tense. We all know it's really not, and we're gonna get to that. But a lot of the program still remains quite murky because the CIA destroyed large portions of the records in the seventies. What we do know came out of congressional investigations, whistleblowers, and surviving documents. So, yes, this is a conspiracy that turns out to be real. What we will learn from congress, I have tepid expectations for. So what will we learn? Well, Kevin Shipp joins He is a CIA whistleblower. He's the author of Twilight of the Shadow Government, How Transparency Will Kill the Deep State. He has been talking about, government programs like this for decades, for years now. So thank you for joining us. Speaker 1: Hi, Clayton. Hi, Natalie. Thanks for having me. Speaker 0: Great to see you. So what do you think that we could learn about MK Ultra and why do you think the government is admitting this now? Speaker 1: Well, Anna Paulina Luna started the process, as you you said so well, starting to examine some of these conspiracy theories. So hats off to that. But as usual, it's almost impossible to go deep into a CI Special Access Program like MKUltra was. And, of course, they claimed that the the program, was ended in 1973, so, why are they bringing it up fifty years later? I I think it may be attempt by congresswoman Luna to look into this. I hope so, and I hope they have the courage to dig, deeply. We know that, during MKUltra, at least 10,000 documents were destroyed, that we know of. The CI claimed to end the program in 1973. They claimed to end it. There was no evidence ever that they actually did. And, Victor Marchetti, author of the CIA and the Cult of Intelligence, which was a very accurate title, Marchetti said in his view, they continued to program just under another cover name. Now we have to understand that the same dark system, of secrecy that the CI has been functioning in since its creation in 1947, that same system of deeply layered special access programs still remains today. It hasn't changed. The CIA has never been reformed. Even the oversight committees, quote unquote, that that are supposed to be reforming the CIA have done nothing. As a matter of fact, the oversight committees meet once a year less than any other committee. They're more concerned about the reelection than they are about digging into the CIA and risking their careers like Frank Church did. He was threatened, and he lost his career. And the oversight committees have to sign a CIA secrecy agreement, which threatens them with prison if if they, divulge anything. They tried that with me as a weapon instead of its real intent. So, we have to understand the system, the matrix of secrecy that the secret that the CIA still has and still operates in. It has a bloody and deceitful track record, one of which is MK Ultra. We also have to understand too with Operation Paperclip, Alan Dulles, falsified the files of Nazi war criminal scientists, scrubbed them and gave them to Truman so he would approve them. Some of those scientists came in, were hired by the CIA and used by the CIA for guess what programs, MK Ultra for starters. These scientists that had done mind control experience experiments on men, women, and Jewish children. One of the most deceitful and despicable things that could have been done. Has the CIA changed its mode of operation with no morals and and basically will do anything necessary to gain intelligence? Absolutely not. I was in there. I saw that personally. Can we believe the CIA has terminated this program? No, we cannot. Can we reach a conclusion that perhaps they continued under a different special access program, something similar to MKUltra? And and and I know they still have a behavioral science unit, by the way. Would they continue with something like this under a new special access program? I think we could conclude based on their deceitful and bloody track record that they would. Now I have interviewed the daughter of John Warner, who was Richard Helms, the DCI at the time. John Warner was the was the legal counsel, the general counsel for Richard Helms trying to protect him from lawsuits and trying to protect him from perjury charges and other things. And Carol told me that her dad resigned from the CI Office of General Counsel, which is a powerful position and many times complicit with what the CI does. She said her dad got so disgusted with what Richard Helms was doing, including MK Ultra, that he literally resigned from CI and left his position. Carol has told me in an interview that she has had several patients that she has counseled with that exhibit MKUltra like damages, mental, psychomental damages, and she is convinced they're linked to MKUltra and that is today. We're doing a documentary on that in the next few months and getting that in more detail. So can we conclude that MKUltra exists today? Well, based on the the the CIA system of of secrecy, it's on it's gross abuse of power and unaccountability through plausible not viability and and these things. Can we conclude that they would do this? Of course, they would. There is no indication that they've changed anything in their system and anything regarding their use of special access programs and anything regarding human rights or ethics. And human life is cheap, as we all know, with the CIA. So could MK Ultra be con continuing today in a different form? I would say yes. We could conclude that just based on on some of their past performances and and how they operate. Speaker 2: And operating outside of the CIA through NGOs and other facilities now, rather than just being in the CIA CIA umbrella. I just spoke this morning. It was unbelievable to a to a an MK Ultra whistleblower. That interview is gonna be coming out very very soon. And some of the things that he told me were absolutely jaw dropping and the experiments on children, just absolutely horrifying things. And it's as it's continuing. His biggest concern about this hearing that is upcoming is that, yes, it will be basically like a dog and pony show that and he's one of his biggest concerns is that there will be sabotage. That in the same way, like the book Mirage Men, where you have you have individuals purposely trying to sabotage these hearings by putting in false information in order to color the entire thing. Are you worried about that as well? Speaker 1: Absolutely. And and I don't don't wanna be pessimistic, but I don't think that these hearings are going anywhere based on what what I know of how the CIA operates and conceals information from congress. And they these people will not have the CI clearances that will be required for some of these special access programs so they're never going to see those. Now we have to remember, you made a great point, Clayton, about the CI using cutouts. In MK Ultra, the CI used 81 different institutions. There were universities, there were hospitals and big pharma to do their dirty work and their research. And none of these universities knew that they were working for the CIA. Saw something recently very similar with COVID. We know now that the CI was instrumental in developing with Johns Hopkins University, the COVID lockdowns and rollout propaganda program. I don't know if Johns Hopkins knows they're involved. Well, they do now. But, so the CI continues using universities as cutouts without their knowledge. So we know they're still doing that. Speaker 2: Wow. That's unbelievable. 81 of them, and they don't even know that they're working for the CIA. Just carrying out these operations experiments. Unbelievable. Speaker 0: Now, something you've talked about a lot is directed energy weapons because you have felt like your family was targeted by directed energy weapons. You detail this in your book. Yesterday was May 4. So you know, Star Wars Day, people are thinking about directed energy using the force and so on. And then the US government put this out, saying directed energy weapons are a fine addition to our arsenal. May 4 be with you. And I felt like, wait, they're they're just saying that they do it now because that used to be a conspiracy. I mean, we know that it's a thing, but how did you feel seeing that? Speaker 1: Well, it was pretty astounding. We know we know that, we were put in a I blew the whistle, as you guys know, on a on a CIA cover up without the CIA knowing. I to work with Department of State IG who publicly rebuked the CIA for covering this thing up. So I was targeted from that. As the book goes on and won't go into detail, but I was targeted. We were placed in a contaminated, badly contaminated house. The CIA knew it was contaminated and the family got physically ill. But the strange part, especially with my oldest son was a dramatic, almost within a day or two change, personality change, he was diagnosed clinically, and I have that in the book, with severe PTSD, which essentially ruined his ability to work and his financial life and he disappeared. Matter of fact, for the last two years, I didn't know where he was. Well, we're now in contact and I have found him, which is wonderful, But there's no doubt about the fact that we were hit with something. My wife at the time was bedridden. She was on morphine. She completely lost her short term memory. Was having headaches so severe. As I mentioned, they had her on morphine. We had a CAT scan done without the CIA knowing it. There was no indication of any tumor or any brain anomalies. So we were hit hard with something. There's no question about that. And would the CIA do it? Well, we all know, of course they would. And why has the CIA been so resistant in acknowledging the existence of directed energy weapons? They haven't said they don't have them. They just said that, well, the Havana syndrome is something that we think is just in these officers' heads. We don't take it seriously. But they didn't come out and say they didn't exist, and they didn't come out and say they weren't using them. Once again, here we go, CIA, lying like a serpent to the to the people again. So, they exist. Something hit us and hit us badly. Almost ended the life of my oldest son, and my former wife who who still is recovering today. So, yes, I think they do exist. Speaker 2: I just wanna say I'm Speaker 0: so glad you've Yeah. Speaker 2: We just learned and we just learned that, that your son your son Joey, so you've been able to find him. That's unbelievable. So, you know, congratulations on that. That was, it must have been absolutely horrible for you. And you talk about, of course, in the book, these directed energy weapons. Again, speaking to different MK Ultra whistleblowers who were in the program, and they they were paid through facilities with the CIA to carry out these programs. And when they were starting to blow the whistle on this, they were hit with directed energy weapons as well, to the point where walking down the street hit enormous headaches, vomiting on the ground, to the point where their their minds haven't worked properly since as they've described it to me. And you hear this across the board. Is that similar to what you experienced? Speaker 1: Yes. Had all of us, including my younger children had severe headaches. My wife's headaches were so bad. They had to put her on morphine, as I mentioned, and we would be sitting there and all of a sudden, of us hit this and my current wife never recovered and she's so afraid of the CIA. I'm asking her to come out and give an interview, but she's too afraid to do that yet. My current wife and I, she, she, we've been followed. We've had people sitting outside our window watching us, even these these years later. She and I were sitting in the living room one day and boom, all of a sudden, we both at the same time went into this deep depression for no reason. And we're we're a very happy couple on an off grid farm, and, it lasted two full days. We were like, what the heck is this? And boom, it was gone. So, they will use these on people that they think are a threat. We know they monitor the emails of whistleblowers. Brennan, John Brennan was caught doing that. And so, yes, severe headaches are one of the indications of some sort of energy weapon hitting our brain, which is, which is basically a complex energy circuit. And that is one of the symptoms of severe headaches, mental confusion, a loss of memory, and things like that, which I'm sure some of these targeted people have experienced. Speaker 2: It is so vast and so large. And one of the concerns about MKUltra is the Manchurian candidates. I know it sounds like a movie, but it's real. And according to the sources we've spoken to, and I'm sure you can confirm this, there are these Manchurian controlled candidates that are basically running large portions of our government. They're involved at the highest levels of places like Lockheed and Boeing and other places and in our government who have had have gone through and have been mind controlled and who are operationally controlled through this program. Would you confirm that? Speaker 1: Yes. I would say that though. I was trained in the CI with a master's levels degree on forensic psychophysiology and control and manipulation of the human mind. I have since recovered, by the way, since I became a whistleblower, but they absolutely absolutely would. The the CI has no morals. It has no values. As I mentioned earlier, human life is cheap, they have the tools to do this. So would they do it? Yes, they would. Are they doing it? I think they are. Speaker 0: And and is there a variety of use cases for something like this to hurt someone they wanna hurt and also optimize? I'm I'm thinking obviously of Jason Bourne, you know. Speaker 2: Oh, blackmail operations, honeypot operations, trafficking operations. Absolutely. Speaker 0: Yeah. Okay. Speaker 1: So Absolutely. Speaker 0: Can you expand on that? Because I'm guessing. Tell me what you know. Speaker 1: Sure. No. No. That was a very good point. The Some pundits are out there claiming that the CI had no relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, which kind of gets my dander up because I know they did. And he was an access agent that the CIA was using to get into his vast global network of money laundering. Buzzy Crongaard, the executive officer under George Tenet, his former bank was involved in money laundering. So the place is just evil. And in my book, I've got 10 steps to reform it, as you guys know, and I put many out on X also. But the CI, if you are thirsty for intelligence, and I'll give you an example. I was leading a team down to a specific country in South America to do an operation. And when you go into that country, the first thing you have to do is meet with the chief of station who's the director of the CI in that country. So I dutifully reported to the station, which was down in the basement of a certain building. And I walk in there and the lights are turned down. It's almost dark. The chief of station is sitting behind his desk with one of those green library lamps, and he had a chair facing his desk and he said, have a seat, Kevin. And it's one of those deflatable chairs the CI likes to use. You sit in the chair and you sink down below looking up at the guy behind the desk. It's just another mental technique. He leaned over his desk, and he said, let's get something straight right off the bat, Kevin. I said, yes, sir. He said, I will I will sell my soul to the devil for intelligence. Do you understand that? And I remember thinking, well, that makes one of us, buddy. I said, yes, sir. I understand that. And he said, okay. That will be all. And, and I left, and he proceeded to go behind the ambassador's back and conduct programs that the embassy had not sanctioned. Anyway, there are some wicked evil people. Now I have to say this because it's important. 80% of the workforce in the CIA are good patriotic American people just trying to provide for their families. And they don't know that these special access programs are going on. Not even some of the higher level GS-fifteen. Well, I know they don't know. They have no idea these programs are going on. It is the upper 20% that are these narcissistic sick individuals. Even Mike Pompeo when he came out said that, 20% of upper management in the CIA doesn't believe in the constitution. They believe in the expansion, power, and protection of the CIA, and that is exactly correct. These people are sick. They're malignant narcissists. I was on the 7th Floor. I was one of William Casey's staff. These people are narcissists. They're sick. And all they care about is their power and expanding the power of the CIA. And so we need to understand that difference because it's it's important. Speaker 2: John Brennan, you brought him up. Before we let you go here, Kevin, whatever happened with that indictment? I mean, according to sources we've been speaking to on this, there was quite a bit of dirt there. Really dark things, as it relates to Brennan. But now he's got like a broadcasting job on MSNBC. So I'm not really sure what happened there. Speaker 1: Well, think about it. Has ever a CIA director been charged or indicted or investigated ever in our history? I mean, really investigated or charged? We we remember the CIA destroyed 10 subpoenaed torture videotapes, and it wasn't just waterboarding. It was ugly stuff. They were subpoenaed. The CIA destroyed them and came out and had the nerve to say, oh, well, they were accidentally destroyed. So Brennan was a director of the CIA, and getting charges or indictments against the director of the CIA is it can be done. I believe it can. That's why I wrote my book. But it's extremely difficult because they're so protected by the intelligence apparatus around them. Brennan should have been indicted for breaking in to the senate torture report skiff and going into the computers and spying on the torture report documents. He should have been indicted for that, but he wasn't, was he? So it's the system, you guys. The upper level system of our government, the system of secrecy that that even some congressmen I'm convinced are part of that blocks and stops these things from happening. Speaker 2: Well, I I'm sorry. I I know that I said I was gonna last last question, but I just I gotta get you out of here on this, Kevin, which is these more sophisticated weapons they're now using through these cutouts. You know, forget just human to human control, manipulation through sleep deprivation, and all the awful things that they were doing to people to get them to have split personalities and using those split personalities for Manchurian Candidate stuff in MK Ultra. What do you believe the the tools they're currently using look like? Nanotechnology, six g, where they don't even have to, like, have face to face contact. They can have this anonymity. What do you think that they're using right now? Speaker 1: Yeah. That's an excellent question. They don't even have to go into your house to bug you anymore. So people looking for bugs in their house might as well just give it up. They can they can eavesdrop on you from outside your house. I I don't wanna go into I can't go into the technology there, but they have that technology. And of course they have nanobot technology so small that they can create flying cameras that look like insects, dragonflies, and others. And what really concerns me is they have now created the Directorate for Digital Innovation where the CI is merging all this over into artificial intelligence, which should scare the daylights out of everyone because they're involved in these programs and now with artificial intelligence and now with nanotechnology, I mean, God have mercy on us because there is no limit to what they can do now. And we've got to, as I do routinely, we've got to demand that Congress conducts a real church like committee and does a legitimate deep investigation in the CIA and breaks the CIA apart, removes its national clandestine service, which has all these special access programs and either creates a new agency or puts it under the DIA. But the only way, really it comes down to us because congressmen and senators, most of them are in the CIA's pocket and I have proof of that. It's up to us, the American people, to get motivated and demand our congressmen and senators conduct another real investigation of the CIA with the intent of breaking the CIA apart and eliminating its unbridled power of secrecy. We've got to let our congressmen and senators know that if they don't do that, and many of them won't because they're in the C. I. Pocket, then we are gonna vote them out of office, and we're gonna make it clear that's why. And that, I think, is probably our only hope. Speaker 2: Kevin is the author of Twilight of the Shadow Government. If you can put it up here on the screen again, Philip, it's really one of the best books that I've read in years. Unbelievable book. I encourage every American to read it, to really give you an understanding of how deeply dark and demonic this deep state actually is, and Kevin trying to actively, end it. So it's a it's a great book. Kevin, great to see you as always. And congratulations on finding your son. Yes. That that that is great news. What we weren't expecting. Speaker 1: Yes. Thank you. Thank Thank you very much, and thanks for having me, guys. Speaker 0: Yeah. Great to see you Speaker 2: as great to see you as well. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 8, 2026 at 12:33 PM

Saved - May 8, 2026 at 1:18 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

Lockdown stocks are spiking. Oil infrastructure is burning in the UAE. Iran claims it hit a US warship. @DanielLDavis1 says this energy crisis will be bigger than 1973, and something big is coming. He can feel it too. https://t.co/08PHrk36qb

Video Transcript AI Summary

NATO may have just took its last breath with the announcement by president Trump that thousands of US forces stationed in Germany would be removed. More on that part of the story in a minute. But first, some breaking news to cover. Over the last few hours, Iran struck multiple targets throughout the Middle East, including oil infrastructure in The United Arab Emirates. And of course, this is vital infrastructure to that region and to the world, and now a lot of it on fire. Different oil infrastructure here in The UAE on fire. The US Navy also reportedly attacked, by Iranian ships. Iran hit US Navy ships with multiple missile strikes. CENTCOM is saying that that didn't happen, but Iran is saying, yes, it absolutely did happen. Here is the British news covering it. Watch. State media that a US warship has turned back from the area of the Strait Of Hormuz, and that according to Iran's navy, it's prevented the entry of US warships into the Hormuz area according to state television. Going on to add that two missiles hit a US warship near Jask Island Island after it ignored Iranian warnings. Now this is being reported by the Fars News Agency. That's state media in Iran. I cannot, at this moment, independently verify that for you. So this what we're hearing from the Iranian. On their side saying that this didn't happen, but the Iranian is saying it did. So we're at this sort of end pass now. But things are deteriorating, it seems, quickly. And Iran says, look, we threatened you. If you try to move through the Strait Of Hormuz, we will attack you. And that's by all assumptions, that's exactly what happened. Colonel Daniel Davis is the host of the deep dive with Dan Davis, and he joins us now to break down the NATO piece of this, US forces missing in Africa, and what is happening route right now with the Strait Of Hormuz. Colonel, great to see you as always. Welcome back to the show. Our pleasure as always. I think we maybe should start with the NATO piece of this. As we've been covering here for a couple of years, it seems that NATO has been on its last legs. Now this move seems a straight affront to the NATO structure by moving thousands of forces out of Germany and basically saying you're on your own. What do you make of this latest move? And is this just the latest sort of death by a thousand cuts for NATO? I it it may just be the latest one, death by a thousand cuts. It's just the next one in line, I suppose. And and, of course, it's it came about like so many other things that the Trump administration does as a knee jerk reaction to something because Friedrich Metz, the lead chancellor of Germany, came out and said that United States has no strategy. They don't know what they're doing in the Iran war just like they didn't in Afghanistan and the Iraq wars. And, what a shock. Trump didn't like that very much. And so I I think within a day, he, you know, first of all said, oh, well, he's dumb and whatever. But then he said, you know, we're thinking about taking some troops out. And then that seemed to pick up some some speed. And then we said, know, actually, we're thinking about maybe taking 5,000 troops out now.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: NATO may have just took its last breath with the announcement by president Trump that thousands of US forces stationed in Germany would be removed. More on that part of the story in a minute. But first, some breaking news to cover. Over the last few hours, Iran struck multiple targets throughout the Middle East, including oil infrastructure in The United Arab Emirates. And of course, this is vital infrastructure to that region and to the world, and now a lot of it on fire. Different oil infrastructure here in The UAE on fire. The US Navy also reportedly attacked, by Iranian ships. Iran hit US Navy ships with multiple missile strikes. Now, the CENTCOM is saying that that didn't happen, but Iran is saying, yes, it absolutely did happen. Here is the British news covering it. Watch. Speaker 1: State media that a US warship has turned back from the area of the Strait Of Hormuz, and that according to Iran's navy, it's prevented the entry of US warships into the Hormuz area according to state television. Going on to add that two missiles hit a US warship near Jask Island Island after it ignored Iranian warnings. Now this is being reported by the Fars News Agency. That's state media in Iran. I cannot, at this moment, independently verify that for you. So this what we're hearing from the Iranian. Speaker 0: On their side saying that this didn't happen, but the Iranian is saying it did. So we're at this sort of end pass now. But things are deteriorating, it seems, quickly. And Iran says, look, we threatened you. If you try to move through the Strait Of Hormuz, we will attack you. And that's by all assumptions, that's exactly what happened. Colonel Daniel Davis is the host of the deep dive with Dan Davis, and he joins us now to break down the NATO piece of this, US forces missing in Africa, and what is happening route right now with the Strait Of Hormuz. Colonel, great to see you as always. Welcome back to the show. Our pleasure as always. I think we maybe should start with the NATO piece of this. As we've been covering here for a couple of years, it seems that NATO has been on its last legs. Now this move seems a straight affront to the NATO structure by moving thousands of forces out of Germany and basically saying you're on your own. What do you make of this latest move? And is this just the latest sort of death by a thousand cuts for NATO? Speaker 2: I it it may just be the latest one, death by a thousand cuts. It's just the next one in line, I suppose. And and, of course, it's it came about like so many other things that the Trump administration does as a knee jerk reaction to something because Friedrich Metz, the lead chancellor of Germany, came out and said that United States has no strategy. They don't know what they're doing in the Iran war just like they didn't in Afghanistan and the Iraq wars. And, what a shock. Trump didn't like that very much. And so I I think within a day, he, you know, first of all said, oh, well, he's dumb and whatever. But then he said, you know, we're thinking about taking some troops out. And then that seemed to pick up some some speed. And then we said, know, actually, we're thinking about maybe taking 5,000 troops out now.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 7, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - May 7, 2026 at 2:04 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

Weather WAR: 💣 They weaponized weather in Vietnam. They droughted out Iran for 40 years. They flash-droughted Maui one week before the fires. A military tanker dumps 100 tons of aluminum in one pass. This isn't chemtrails. It's a weapons program. https://t.co/DJhnUGkMQY

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 5, 2026 at 11:45 PM

Saved - May 6, 2026 at 2:57 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🤯 In 2013, a scientist bragged about injecting nanobots into humans via vaccine and controlling them remotely like an Xbox. In 2015, @pfizer partnered with him. @zeeemedia says this isn't a conspiracy theory. It's a patent. https://t.co/4HlQQjI8d4

Video Transcript AI Summary

The discussion opens by recalling Sweden’s microchip implant program, where RFID/NFC chips the size of a grain of rice were embedded in thousands of citizens to speed up daily life—opening doors, access to homes, offices, and gyms with a swipe. When the program began, demand was high, with waiting lists and rapid adoption by companies, and it even received praise from the World Economic Forum. The World Economic Forum portrayal described the implantation as a minor sensation, with “a simple like a slight sting” and nothing more. The conversation then shifts to 2026, examining whether these chips are tied to Sweden’s digital ID and digital currency ecosystem, and how they might integrate with Sweden’s dominant bank ID system, which reportedly has near-universal usage (approximately 8.7 million users). Marie Z of Z Media joins the discussion to provide perspective on how chip implantation relates to digital IDs and tracking across Europe, Australia, and the United States, and to comment on related legislation. She begins by downplaying concerns about microchip implants themselves, noting that uptake slowed significantly after an initial rush around 2018. Her primary concern, she says, stems from an MIT admission in November 2025. MIT News published a piece stating that new therapeutic brain implants could defy the need for surgery, describing microscopic wireless bioelectronics that can travel through the bloodstream to target brain regions, self-assemble after injection, and be wirelessly powered to provide electrical stimulation for precise areas—aimed at treating conditions like Alzheimer's. She emphasizes that the technology involves self-assembling nanotechnology administered via injections (potentially through vaccines) with no human intervention required once in place. Marie Z connects this to broader claims about smart dust and geoengineering, noting that programmable dust has been discussed for years and that graphene has been repeatedly observed post-geoengineering. She cites claims about graphene’s use in medicine as highly conductive and capable of sending data back to researchers, and references Albert Bourla’s statements about future pills that could indicate whether a person has taken them, supposedly enabled by graphene. She asserts that studies and literature indicate possible covert deployment of nanotechnology via vaccines, medicines, and possibly food, and that the threat extends beyond voluntary chip implantation. The conversation introduces a provocative piece of alleged evidence: Ilan University (Bar-Ilan) and its chief scientist Ida (Ido) Bachalet allegedly presenting a 2013 TED Talk about implanting hundreds of billions of nanorobots into vaccines, with the claim that the controller is connected to the Internet like an Xbox and remotely controllable. Marie notes Pfizer’s 2015 partnership with Bachalet and suggests covert applications of nanorobots, connecting this to Bill Gates’ patent O60606, which she says proposes mining cryptocurrency with the body’s data via sensors and quantum technology, and references Gates’ quantum dot microneedle patch for real-time bodily data and potential monetization of compliance. She discusses Canada’s Biodigital Convergence policy by the government’s Horizons publication, which imagines a future where AI inside the body prescribes supplements and prints them, and a system where access to cryptocurrency depends on living in an AI-governed societal standard. The hosts and Marie acknowledge that free will matters and emphasize awareness and informed choice as potential checks against participation in what they frame as a transhumanist agenda. Marie closes by reiterating why awareness and scrutiny are essential and thanking the hosts for the discussion.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, a few years ago here on Redacted, we covered Sweden's bizarre microchip implanting story and their plan, which would have everyday citizens opting to have microchips implanted right into their bodies, right into their hands, the RFID or near field communications chips, or NFC, be basically the size of a grain of, a grain of rice. And thousands of Swedes took the plunge. And many since this story first published, many more thousands have taken the plunge. The idea is that the chips would speed up your, you know, user's daily life, make their lives more convenient, access their homes, office, gyms, just swipe it right on your door or keypad, and you're right in there. Here is, one of the individuals lining up to get one of the chip implants and, just being able to get it, you know, poked right in the hands. Now when the program started, the demand was off the charts. There were waiting lists. Companies could insert these things. They couldn't insert these things fast enough. And then shortly after it, it won high praise from the World Economic Forum. Speaker 1: Well, yeah. I mean, if you want to track people and they let you. Exactly. That's on them. Speaker 0: So World Economic Forum is like, hey, this is great. And if you read the article, the World Economic Forum, piece on this, they specifically, they even point out that's no big deal. It's just like a a simple like a slight sting, in when you get it. No big deal. Speaker 1: Imagine telling our youngest who hates shots. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: That you're just gonna get this chip forever. It's only gonna hurt for a little bit. Speaker 0: And it will be able to track everything that you do. Yeah. Yeah. Flash forward to 2026. And now these micro and and where where are things at with this program? We wanted to check-in on this program, see how it's being floated for digital IDs, digital currency, how it's competing with the incredibly popular bank ID system bank ID system in Sweden. It's very, very popular. It's almost at a 100% usage, the bank bank ID system in Sweden. A 100% up to, 8,700,000 users now across the country. It's basically their dominant digital ID system. So is there a marriage between, like, implanting yourself with these chips and using the country's digital ID system? Forget cash. Forget everything. It's all digital now, and all they wanna do is is track you. Well, today, we're we're thrilled to have Marie Z joining us today to talk all about this from Z Media and who's been watching. Of course, she has very keen insights into watching how all of this tracking across these countries around Europe, through Australia, The United States are unfolding and watching this legislation that's been moving. Great to see you, Maria. Welcome back to the show. Speaker 2: Great. You both again. Thank you so much for inviting me. These particular chips, I will say from the outset, I'm not that worried about the microchips, and I'll explain why. The uptake, yes, there were a few thousand people that rushed to do it in the beginning. But I think that pretty much after 2018, it that slowed down a lot. There was the initial rush of, you know, a few thousand that said, yeah, this is great, and we're probably paid to do it. But it's not something that's widely popular at this stage. What I'm more concerned about, truthfully, is an admission from MIT that happened in November 2025. So a publication from MIT News actually reads, quote, new therapeutic brain implants could defy the need for surgery. Now, I'll read you a couple of quotes from this article. It is extremely alarming. MIT researchers developed microscopic wireless bioelectronics that could travel through the body's circulatory system and autonomously self implant in a target region of the brain where they could provide, quote, unquote, focused treatment because it's about treating Alzheimer's and things of this nature. Right? Not covert operations, everyone. In a study on mice, the researchers show that after injection after injection, these miniscule implants can identify and travel to a specific brain region without the need for human guidance. Once there, they can be wirelessly powered to provide electrical stimulation to the precise area. So couple of things here. We're talking about self assembling nanotechnology that can form brain implants that is, one, done through injections, so vaccines, and two, does not not need any human intervention once it's been administered through the, quote, unquote, vaccine. Now we know, Clayton, that this is happening through, geoengineering. Smart dust has been happening for a very, very long time, And we know that they can administer various types of nanotechnology that can be self replicating, self programming, through vaccines and other medicines and also potentially through our food. I'm actually far more concerned about the covert applications of this type of technology than I am about people going in and planting themselves. I dare say there could be quite a few people walking around with chips already inside of them without knowing it's actually there. Wait. What is SmartDust that you mentioned? Smart dust, they've been geoengineering for a very, very long time. As you both know, smart dust is, essentially programmable dust. This is something that is not detected through the human eye. People talk about how it forms structures even on their walls. I mean, there's a lot of anecdotal information about what smart dust has achieved. But, basically, when you're talking about the various, chemicals that they're spraying, and that also, by the way, includes graphene, Dane Wiggington has done independent testing of soil and air and things of this nature and found graphene immediately present after geoengineering has occurred. When you look at what they refer to when it comes to graphene, they say that it's essentially a miracle, component that they have started using in medicine. And you'd recall Albert Burla talking about how, you know, in the future, we're gonna have these pills that people can take, and they'll tell us whether the person's taken it, what it's doing inside of their bodies. That, of course, is achieved through graphene because it is highly conductive. It is able to send a message back to them, and it's no secret. This isn't a conspiracy theory. Albert Bella himself has spoken about their ability to do this. There's been a lot of talk back and forward as to whether they can achieve this through geoengineering or vaccines or things of this nature. Their literature absolutely says that it can, and these studies go back decades. Speaker 0: Yeah. Here's just an example of some of the graphene oxide being manipulated using, high different frequencies. So this is exactly what, you know, individuals like Dean Wigington have been talking about, David Ike, the manipulation of graphene oxide that's in our bodies, these nanoparticles that can be manipulated and moved. So I think you're right. I think you're hitting on something because when you look at just the the thousands of people that have, like, willingly put these microchips in their hands, That's a small percentage. But so many people are have this in their bodies because of, you know, geoengineering, because of what they're spraying in our skies, and because of these COVID jabs. Speaker 2: Yes. Let me give you some really shocking information. You may know about this. A lot of people don't, actually. So I spoke to Nick Holcher a little while ago, prominent epidemiologist after I learned about what MIT had admitted here and asked him whether it was possible that they already covertly did this through the COVID injections. He said, definitely possible. There is some evidence to suggest that they did. But there is another very, very important puzzle piece here, and it comes to us from Ilan University rather. That's b a r I l a n, University in Israel. And their, chief scientist, Ida Bachelet, was actually presenting to, he was presenting a TED Talk all the way back in 2013. And he basically said at that time, we can implant he said that we can implant hundreds of billions or one one thousand billion, I think he said, nanorobots into vaccine. He proudly held up a vaccine during that TED talk. I've done a a whole expose on this. He then said in his presentation that people can, that they can ensure that they don't, quote, unquote, lose control of the nanorobots after they've been injected into people. He stated that the controller is connected to the Internet, and I quote, like an Xbox. He then said that the controller actually links these nanobots to the network, that they have an IP address, and that they can be accessed remotely. He bragged about how they can control these nanobots, like with a joystick to release payloads into humans. This TED talk happened in 2013. Now here's the kicker. In 2015, Pfizer announced their partnership with Ido Bachelet of Baralan University who already had this tech. So my point is that while I, of course, am concerned about people willingly implanting themselves, and I do believe free will plays a part in in the control of the technocrats, I am very concerned about what covert operations and convert covert applications have on, I'm concerned about those impacts on the population, and you only need to look at something like Bill Gates patent O60606. Yes. That's real. Everyone, please go and look up patent O60606, and you will see that the plan is to actually be able to mine cryptocurrency with your body's data. Well, how would they do that? They need some sort of sensors, conductors inside of us feeding information back to the data centers, through quantum technology. And by the way, Bill Gates is also developing the quantum dot microneedle patch. We can talk about that, which is real time data being sent to the powers that be of everything that's going on inside of your body at any given time and also, of course, your ability to bank, aka mine cryptocurrency, with your body's data, which will tell the powers that be if you are being compliant or not. Speaker 1: I mean, this is a transhumanist agenda. How far do you think that they will take it? I mean, we see evidence of this every single day of the the desire to continuously break down the human elements of our lived experience, but only for us, not for the elites. And, you know, can you play out how far they wanna take it? Speaker 0: Yeah. It's always for safety. Speaker 2: Yes. You only need to look to the government of Canada to see how far they wanna take it. Publish something Chilling you. Horizons. Well, right. No. But but they actually publish something. Policy Horizons published something called biodigital convergence. It's an official publication from the government of Canada, and they give you some fictional scenarios in there, but it's absolutely where they wanna take it. And they say that we're gonna live in a future where you wake up in the morning and the AI that is connected to you through sensors inside your body, which, of course, are, enabled through self assembling nanotechnology, which can happen covertly. That AI, you wake up. The AI will say, okay. You're missing this vitamin or this nutrient, and then it's gonna three d print it from your counter, and give you what you need, based on what the AI has assessed that you need. They say that, the UN, actually, the the, their their publication remaking the world towards an age of global enlightenment, It's the Boston Global Forum that's published it, but they're part of the UN. They say that although we we're not gonna have a social credit system in, China, but you will only be rewarded with cryptocurrency if you do things that are, you know, acceptable inside the AI world society. So in other words, if you don't live the way we want you to, you will not have access to any currency, and your own body will betray you by the use of patent o six zero six, of course. Speaker 0: Unbelievable. Well, thank you so much, Marie. We really appreciate it. And I I'm I I guess I'm heartened in one way. It's a you know, we're not getting the government is not forcing people to get these implants, but they're doing it in far more nefarious ways, which is spraying our skies with it so that they're able to manipulate us through six g technology and otherwise. So they don't need us. They don't need us to go down to the clinic and get a microchip in our hand. Speaker 1: Yeah. There's part of me that's also anxietized about having old technology. Like if you're going to give me you know, how fast technology evolves. Like, I don't want an iPhone five inside. How are we going to make sure? Speaker 0: Yeah, I'd be like, Natalie, she's got an iPhone 3GS in her hand. Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, how are they gonna make sure they continuously upgrade me if I do become a transhumanist experiment? Oh, god. Speaker 2: I I will just end on this. I truly do believe, and I believe that the, quote, unquote, elites believe that our free will actually does matter. And, although they do the revelation of the method and they tell us what they're doing beforehand and if we don't, you know, push back, then that's sort of our consent. I I don't think that if you are a human being that is aware of this information, which is why it's so important that you're that you're both covering this, if you're someone that's aware of this and internally your free will says, uh-uh. I'm not participating. For them and their occult mad rituals, that actually means something. And so the more informed that we are, the better off we are, and the more we cannot consent to this madness. Speaker 0: Yeah. Maria Z from Z Media, always great to see you. Thank you so much for your research on this, and, we'll be watching it closely. Thanks so much, Maria. Great to see you. Speaker 2: Thank you both. Speaker 0: Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much. And we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 6, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - May 6, 2026 at 12:45 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

💣 Lockdown stocks are spiking. Oil infrastructure is burning in the UAE. Iran claims it hit a US warship. @DanielLDavis1 says this energy crisis will be bigger than 1973 and something big is coming. https://t.co/Ywp3RnqTxd

Video Transcript AI Summary

The discussion opens with breaking news: President Trump announced that thousands of US forces stationed in Germany would be removed, prompting claims that NATO may have taken its last breath. In the same hours, Iran struck multiple targets across the Middle East, including oil infrastructure in the United Arab Emirates, with oil facilities in the UAE reportedly on fire. Iran also claimed US Navy ships were hit by multiple missiles, while CENTCOM denied the strikes occurred, though Iran maintained they did. British coverage through state media reported that a US warship turned back from the Strait of Hormuz and that two missiles hit a US warship near Jask Island after warnings were ignored; this is contested, with independent verification not established at that moment. Colonel Daniel Davis, host of The Deep Dive with Dan Davis, joins to discuss NATO, the US force presence in Africa, and the Hormuz situation. The NATO piece centers on the move to pull thousands of troops out of Germany, described as an affront to NATO structure and raising questions about whether NATO is effectively finished. Davis notes it followed French Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s remarks that the United States has no strategy, which Trump reacted to with threats to withdraw troops. He explains that pulling out could take six to twelve months due to the logistics of moving equipment and posts, and suggests the Pentagon might prefer redirecting troops eastward to Romania or Poland rather than home to the US, though Davis doubts that would happen. He argues the purpose would be to have Europe bear more responsibility for its own security, but stresses that a coherent plan with allied coordination would be required. He says NATO’s relevance began to fade after the Soviet Union’s disbandment in 1992, with the alliance failing to improve US national security and becoming a drain, and he predicts NATO may be replaced by something else, though the future shape remains unknown. He criticizes a knee-jerk, emotionally driven approach to the issue. Speaker 3 (Natalie) references Trump’s “Project Freedom,” criticized as potentially Orwellian in branding, and notes Trump’s shift from offering to escort ships through Hormuz to presenting a humanitarian-guiding service. Davis counters that CENTCOM initially stated it would not escort ships due to lacking the capacity, yet later posts suggested some ships and resources were out in support of the operation, and that two American-flagged vessels were claimed to have moved through the Strait of Hormuz (though Iran disputed this). The administration’s mixed messaging, the possibility of staging or false-flag actions, and the reality that 2,000 ships are clustered in the Persian Gulf are highlighted. There is concern that Iran might be provoked into attacking ships to justify further military responses, potentially escalating tensions and oil disruptions. The conversation then returns to the broader implications: the oil infrastructure attacks, the uncertain status of vessel movements through the Strait of Hormuz, and the risk that escalation could push global oil prices higher, with projections of spikes to $150–$175 per barrel or higher if the conflict intensifies. Davis notes that the situation could trigger broader economic pain, including energy lockdowns and disruptions in fertilizer, farming, and related supply chains, unless a diplomatic solution is found, which he implies is preferable to more military action. Finally, the discussion turns to Operation African Lion, where two US soldiers are missing and a search-and-rescue operation is underway. Davis questions the purpose and benefit of continued US involvement in Africa, arguing that similar interventions have occurred for years without clear American national interest or clear outcomes, citing Somalia as an ongoing series of airstrikes (61 in 2026 so far) without a lasting solution. He emphasizes that bombing and troop deployments have not solved the fundamental conditions and warns that continued military engagement risks reputational damage and ongoing costs. The segment closes with Davis reiterating concerns about perpetual intervention and the need for reconsidering strategic aims. The broadcast ends with the hosts inviting viewers to subscribe and share the program.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, NATO may have just took its last breath with the announcement by president Trump that thousands of US forces stationed in Germany would be removed. More on that part of the story in a minute. But first, some breaking news to cover. Over the last few hours, Iran struck multiple targets throughout the Middle East, including oil infrastructure in The United Arab Emirates. And of course, this is vital infrastructure to that region and to the world. And now a lot of it on fire. Different oil infrastructure, here in The UAE on fire. The US Navy also reportedly attacked, by Iranian ships. Iran hit US Navy ships with multiple missile strikes. Now the CENTCOM is saying that that didn't happen, but Iran is saying, yes. It absolutely did happen. Here is the British news covering it. Watch. Speaker 1: The state media that a US warship has turned back from the area of the Strait Of Hormuz, And that according to Iran's navy, it's prevented the entry of US warships into the Hormuz area according to state television, going on to add that two missiles hit a US warship near Jask Island after it ignored Iranian warnings. Now this is being reported by the Fars News Agency. That's state media in Iran. I cannot, at this moment, independently verify that for you. So this what we're hearing from the Iranian. Speaker 0: On their side saying that this didn't happen, but the Iranian is saying it did. So we're at this sort of impasse now. But, things are deteriorating, it seems, quickly. And Iran says, look, we threatened you. If you try to move through the Strait Of Hormuz, we will attack you. And that's by all assumptions, that's exactly what happened. Colonel Daniel Davis is the host of the deep dive with Dan Davis, and he joins us now to break down the NATO piece of this, US forces missing in Africa, and what is happening right now with the Strait Of Hormuz. Colonel, great to see you as always. Welcome back to the show. Speaker 2: Always a delight to be here, Clayton. Thanks for having me back. Speaker 0: Our pleasure as always. I think we maybe should start with the NATO piece of this. As we've been covering here for a couple of years, it seems that NATO has been on its last legs. Now this move seems a straight affront to the NATO structure by moving thousands of forces out of Germany and basically saying you're on your own. What do you make of this latest move? And is this just the latest sort of death by a thousand cuts for NATO? Speaker 2: I it it may just be the latest one, death by a thousand cuts. It's just the next one in line, I suppose. And and, of course, it's it came about just like so many other things that the Trump administration does as a knee jerk reaction to something because, Friedrich Metz, the the lead chancellor of Germany, came out and said that United States has no strategy. They don't know what they're doing in the Iran war just like they didn't in Afghanistan and the Iraq wars. And, what a shock. Trump didn't like that very much. And so I I think within a day, he, you know, first of all said, well, he's dumb and whatever. But then he said, you know, we're thinking about taking some troops out. And then that seemed to pick up some some speed. Then And we said, you know, actually, we're thinking about maybe taking 5,000 troops out now. Now, we'll see if that materializes. I've heard various reports connecting to the Pentagon that it could take anywhere from six to twelve months to actually pull that off anyway. Cause it's a big issue. I actually was part of two separate groups during my six years. I lived in Germany during my active duty days where I helped draw down some posts and it's a long painful period of process just to get the thing shut down anyway, unless you literally just don't care. You just tell everybody to drive to the exits and leave, but you have to move gear and equipment and that's got to be flown back. It's a very, very time consuming process anyway. There's also request of the Pentagon not to take those troops out of Germany and move them back home, but to move them further east, like into Romania or Poland, possibly even. There's some you know, they would love to have that. They wanna pick up whatever Germany may lose. But I I doubt that we would do that because I I don't think that the point is to, you know, just spread them somewhere else in Europe, but to to bring them back to The United States. But it it's if this was a coherent process, I'm for it. I I think that we should. I think that we've way outlived the the life of NATO, and it it should come to a reasonable end. And the nations in Europe should be responsible for their own security. They should pay all of it just like we pay all of our security. Nothing special for them. This is no longer 1949 when they were devastated from the Second World War and you know they didn't have the capacity, needed us and we were all together. Made sense then. I was 100%, obviously I wasn't around then, but looking back I would have been 100% for that because it did make sense. And we all benefited from it to include us, but not anymore ever since the end of the 1992 when the Soviet Union disbanded and then the Warsaw Pact disbanded. The reason for NATO's existence disbanded, but we couldn't do that. We tried to make it something it wasn't etcetera and that's led to the Russia Ukraine war and moving it closer to their border and all that went together. It was a mess and it never did anything to improve our national security. It was just a net drain. And so it needs to go away. But the problem is now how do you get that done? And again, if it was done with a coherent plan, that would be fine because they may not like it. But if you do it in coordination and cooperation with allies that we've been with for decades, I think that we have a responsibility to do it the right way. But it doesn't look like we are. It looks like we're going to do it just like so many other things in the Trump administration, emotional driven, and then forget about the consequences and just move out of it. But I think to your bigger question, is NATO done? I I think it is done. And I think it's gonna be replaced by something else, and nobody knows what that's gonna be yet, but they're gonna have to figure it out. Speaker 3: Now, you're talking about emotionally driven. Over the weekend, President Trump announced what he's now calling Project Freedom. You think you would just stay away from a name like that because it signals Orwellian malintent. But what he's saying is, hey, we can now it's like a humanitarian effort to guide stuck ships through. Before he said we would sort of rhino them through, like, we're the best, we're the greatest, we're gonna guide you through. When no one took us up on that, he's like, well, then, actually, it's just like an a humanitarian guiding service that we're offering. It's the same effing thing. What how are we supposed to like, is there any difference? He's still trying to do the same thing, just rebranding. Speaker 2: Well, yeah, I tell you, Natalie, it's just it's even more weird than that because you you had CENTCOM actually put out, there's a lot of contradictory information. First of all, they're saying, well, we're we're not escorting anything through there. Let's be clear on that. We don't have the ships for that. But then they separately put out this post a on X where they said in support of this operation, we have, I forget the number of ships that they have out there. There's like a 100 aircraft, a bunch of other things that they said. Some of the I can't remember the third category. All this is in support of president's move there to get ships through, etcetera. And then we then we wanna go and we wanna brag and say that we got two American flagged vessels out. So it wasn't international. There were two. That's disputed too because we claim two American flagged vessels came out. The Iranian side says no vessels came out. I have maybe it's been out there. I haven't seen in the last couple of hours but earlier today when I looked, I didn't see any independent confirmation like where people can track, you know, a ship's tracker as it goes through. Maybe it's true, I don't know. But then also, Sydcom said that separately or in different order that two American warships went through the Strait Of Hormuz and then allegedly backed out of it and were now in the Arabian Gulf. But then that they didn't escort these tankers through. So, it's not clear what happened. But no matter what you want to say. Look, there were two ships that allegedly went through. There's about 2,000 of those ships of various kinds that are stuck inside the Persian Gulf. So if you got two out, great. Those are two American flags. They're not anybody else's. And there was at least one South Korean tanker that was attacked in a report of one other by Iran because they tried to get out without their permission demonstrating that the strait is still closed and that it is still in the control of the Iranian side. So one has to wonder, and this was by Barak Ravine in Axios early this morning, that there are those in the administration that are saying, We just want to set up something so that Iran will then attack these ships and then we can say, See they did it. They were the ones who broke it now we have to go and respond. That's in the news today. That's not any sources that I have. That's just published in Axios. So, you have to look at what's actually happened and not just what's said because that's the one thing that might make some sense. We'll see what happens later on, though. Speaker 0: Yeah. Using it as sort of a false flag. You know, here we go. See, we told you these ships are gonna be, gonna be attacked. Speaker 2: Is is it a false flag when you when you pick the flag up and go, here's the flag I'm gonna put. It's false. Speaker 0: Right. You know what I mean? Speaker 2: It's really bad the way we're doing it, but I get your point. Speaker 0: Also, the oil infrastructure, you know, Iran well, we have this and talk about CENTCOM, this back and forth today with with CENTCOM saying, They would you know, US Navy ship destroyer, whatever, not hit. Iran says, yes, we did hit it. Two two missiles. And they it was forced then to leave as a result and retreat. Of course, in The United States media, you probably won't hear anything about it. People are sharing all sorts of old videos, fake videos, whatever. So don't fall for those videos that are being shared online about this ship being attacked. One of them, I think, was even from, like, video game footage. So I don't know. It's crazy. The the lies, the dis you know, the fog of war. Then that and then the attacks on oil infrastructure in The Gulf. I mean, just at a high level, it seems escalating. I thought we were I thought we were getting off of this. Speaker 2: Yeah. And and the problem is, and going back to that Axios piece that, president Trump is just getting impatient and and that he's he's tired of the situation of no war. Is it a war? Is it a ceasefire? Is it a pause? What is it? I want it to be solved. So he's trying apparently some kind of forcing mechanism, at least according to the reporting. He initially actually wanted the Navy to physically escort people through there, but man hopefully and I presume it in the article didn't address this, but presumably either the Navy said that's not going to work sir. Then we're going to get our ships hit and we won't be able to defend with with that close range and especially logistically there's 2,000 ships in there. Are you gonna like send American vessels? Remember the last one that we did there in the Reagan administration. Was in place for nine months and we had more or less something close to double or triple the number of ships available for that. And even that was on selective when we weren't at war with Iran. This time we are, so it's radically different. But you don't have a fraction of the number of ships to do that. And that wouldn't work anyway because that's not how the Gulf is closed. And you just it would just be inevitable until we finally got them hit. So that's not a solution. The only thing that is for is whether it's false flag or stupidity. That's how you get things escalated because at some point you're gonna put a ship in there and it's gonna get hit. And then of course we have to respond then and we are not going to let a warship get hit and do nothing. Again, it just really looks like that somebody is hoping that happens so that they can go back to fighting so that they can prove there is no military solution then either. All that's gonna do is get more oil infrastructure burned up throughout the region. It's gonna drive oil two fifty or higher probably because now you're physically taking, the potential for even making more, oil back on the international market, pushing it back into 2027 probably in a best case scenario because it'll take forever to get a lot of this stuff rebuilt. And right now, we're in a position to where within weeks we could be seeing $151,175 dollars oil and you can't hide that with a paper price anymore because of the problems that are already built in and naturally you can get the fertilizer, the food production, the helium, aluminum, all kinds of stuff already. So we have got, we are really under the gun. We have a very short period of time to get this fixed and off the table very soon, or the price is gonna be more than just a recession, but maybe a depression. Wow. Speaker 3: I wanna ask you about Operation African Lion because there are two missing soldiers, search and rescue underway. It just feels like one of those times when you're resisting something and you keep going towards it, like there's continuous egg on the face of The US Military. What do you make of this and what it costs us reputationally? Speaker 2: Listen. I I mean, I've been asking this for years even when I was on active duty. Why are we in Africa Right. At all? Why do we have and and so many things have happened bad. You know, we've had troops that have been killed there before. On whose benefit are we there for? How is this an American national interest? And and these kinds of things keep periodically happening because all you can have when you get into the hornet's nest is you're gonna get stung periodically. That's just how it works. And I just for the life of me don't understand why we want to keep going in there. I mean, we sent, you know, the president Trump fired some missiles into Nigeria a few months back, you know, because allegedly there was some, you know, attacks on some Christian churches there. That was legit, there was. But what was the point of it? What you taking to because that was basically something close to a civil war in Nigeria. There are two big warring factions there. There has been a lot of Christians that were attacking the Muslim groups, and Muslim groups that were attacking the Christian groups. It was more cultural than it was even religion, they just happened to be in those religions. But they were definitely going after each one of them. And now that we went in and they threw a few cruise missiles in, and then what? What did that solve? Did that solve the war itself? Did that solve any of the fundamentals that were involved with it? Or it is just kind of like, well that's what I did today and now I'm going to move on because I got bored and I went off over here. I mean that's kind of how President Trump operates. And then we sent some troops in after that to do what was never fully explained. And this is just endemic across the whole African continent is that we keep doing stuff like this in just little bits and pieces. And unfortunately this is not just Trump, this is all the administrations going back a long way. I think Bush did some, Obama did some, certainly Biden did. They they just we just have to have our fingers everywhere towards no evident benefit to our country or even to our allies for that matter. Speaker 3: Right. It it's it's not just a little bit here, little bit there. In Somalia, we've launched our sixty first airstrike. Anti war is keeping track of that and 61 airstrikes in Somalia since calendar year 2026. And we're in May. What are we accomplishing? What is that doing? That Speaker 2: is insane. Mean, we this goes back to the Clinton administration for crying out loud. Nothing has ever been solved here. What do we think is gonna get solved this time? I I mean, this this is just part of the sick mind. I'm gonna just gonna call it what it is, of many people. This is not just a ding on Trump because this predates him by a large measure, but it's those in the Pentagon and whoever is calling the shots here, and I don't even know for sure, both policymakers and and military leaders, they just have this obsession to doing something because we can. And and you can see, I mean, I I had not seen those numbers for Somalia this year. I've been obviously focused on all these the bigger wars here. And I have to admit that shocks me. I did not know it was that many because it's been so many years of just languishing doing nothing. And I have argued in the past about why are we in Somalia at all? Because all you do is you can hit targets. It's like Afghanistan. All the time that I was in Afghanistan and was studying it in the years in between my two combat deployments, it was evident that you could have a combat operation every other day and you could kill a quote bad guy. You could find somebody to consider a bad guy and you could have a tactical operation and we have guys on the ground who are really good at what they do and they can take out this target. They can kill that person. They can blow this thing up. And what? What did it accomplish? Nothing except servicing a target and keeping alive the flow of needing more money and more deployments and of course all these guys, Natalie, they always do this. It just drives me crazy. All these like leaders, then they'll publish all this stuff about, look at all this thing we accomplished. We attacked all this list of things and we killed all these bad people and then they'll show some pictures, some happy pictures of the Somalia side whose side we are taking. And we are doing all this great stuff and they have improved all this. It's all fiction. It just all it doesn't mean anything. Either the good stuff or the bad stuff because nothing changes. And it is not going to because you can't solve those problems with bombs and missiles and deployed ground troops. All you can do is periodically get some killed and have some other things that happen. Who knows what has happened to these current two you are talking about? But it's just the next two in line, and it'll continue happening until we withdraw those troops and let the people of Somalia figure it out without our keeping trying to keep a finger on the scale. Speaker 0: It's a world going mad. This is what I feel right now. You know, the discussion right now about energy lockdowns, number of experts coming forward saying, we were heading there. We're heading for energy lockdowns, colonel. And it's like, I feel like, you know, you have Scott Benson on TV just a few minutes ago saying, you know, short term pain right now for everything that we're dealing with. Gas prices will continue to go up. It's it's, you know, you and you're starting to see some of these lockdown stocks. This is concerning to me. Things like Zoom starting to turn a corner in a big way. And all these investors are like flooding into some of these lockdown stocks. Like I'm just watching the money flowing right now, and it's terrifying. It's terrifying. $1,500,000,000,000 for a military budget scattered around the world right now. Lockdown stocks are starting to pop back. I don't know. I just you know, I don't wanna go with emotion, but I just feel like something something big is coming, and it's really Speaker 2: going to tell This is not a conspiracy. I mean, you just just look at the fundamentals, the economic fundamentals, energy fundamentals. I mean I mean, unlike like the COVID time where you had government mandates and this and that, maybe we'll get there some of this, but, know, this this won't even be like that. You don't even hardly have to have any of those. If there's not fuel, you're not driving anywhere. If if there's not enough diesel, you're not gonna be able to do sufficient amounts of farming. If there's not the fertilizer, you're not gonna be able to grow sufficient amount of food and we're going to be in a real world of hurt. And right now, our actions like what looks to me today that we may have lift the fuse back and I mean, who knows as soon as tonight, tomorrow night, later this week, we could be back into the hot phase of this, which is going guarantee this energy is gonna this energy crisis will extend into next year. And this is gonna be the biggest one in our history, bigger than the 1970, 1973, strikes that have happened, because they were short term and they were relatively small percentage of the oil that was off the market. We're already beyond that. And when you have these alleged smart people like Scott Besson saying this, he's not a dumb man. So that that almost guarantees he's lying because he can't be can't be this stupid that he believes what he said, that this is just a short term and everything is going to turn around. Anyone with any kind of knowledge about the system understands that that's not true, that it's already baked into real trouble right now and it should send off all the alarm bells to do whatever you have to do to get this stupid war of choice off the table now to limit the damage, but instead it looks like they're ready to ramp up to additional damage, which is gonna make the pain later this fall, even into the summer. But man, when you start getting into the fall and into the winter, into first part of next year, I mean, we're gonna be in a real world of hurt here. And there's no obvious answers to how do you how do you mitigate this further absent finding a diplomatic solution which we'll hate, but is much better than trying one more time with military which will bake in and and physically destroy infrastructure making it take now we're in the years with an s of trying to get out of this, and it's it's gonna be a problem. Speaker 0: Yeah. I think lit the fuse is the right phrase to be sure. Colonel Davis, always great to see you. Hosted the deep dive. Check him out, of course, on YouTube, on X, and follow him all places. We love we love having the colonel on. Thank you so much. Great to see you, Dan. Speaker 2: Always my pleasure. Thanks, you guys. Speaker 0: Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 5, 2026 at 9:33 PM

Saved - May 5, 2026 at 11:19 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I report that the Trump administration is preparing major military operations to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Key U.S. assets are being positioned near Iran, with discussions of a coastal island seizure that could drag the United States into a prolonged war. What is this operation meant to accomplish, and can the Strait be secured by force—or are we walking into another endless conflict? I discuss that, and more, in this interview.

@RedactedNews - Redacted

Are boots on the ground coming to Iran? The Trump administration is reportedly preparing for major military operations to force the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. @WeTheBrandon reports that key U.S. military assets are now being positioned near Iran, with discussions of a coastal island takeover that could drag the United States into a prolonged war. What is this operation really meant to accomplish? Can the Strait actually be secured through military force, or are we walking into another endless conflict with no clear exit? We discuss that, and more, in this interview.

Video Transcript AI Summary

Marco Rubio suggested that the current actions are all about the Strait of Hormuz, questioning why the focus would shift after “weeks ago” the Strait of Hormuz was open, and asking whether boots on the ground are being considered to keep it open. An analyst who spent time with the Air Force at an undisclosed location said there is a clear ramp-up and that sustaining a ceasefire or finding an off-ramp does not seem likely based on what was observed. The analyst noted that in recent weeks CENTCOM commander Admiral Pearlo briefed Trump for forty-five minutes on a “final blow plan for the Iranian regime,” and that key assets have been moved into the region that go beyond naval interdiction or a potential air campaign. The analyst is hearing that resources are being positioned to support a ground force of at least 15,000 troops to operate in the Iranian area, likely pursuing a coastal strategy and possibly invading one of the islands previously discussed on this program. The analyst suggested this could resemble a Gallipoli-like disaster for U.S. Marines or Army elements. Overall, the war appears to be heating up for the American side. Another participant reacted with “Wow. That's some breaking news.” The discussion then revisited the question of end goals. The analyst stated there is no end state to the conflict, calling it “strategic malpractice on an epic level by the White House.” The question of how this ends was raised from Petraeus’ famous line about Iraq in 2008. There is a tension between arming supposed rebels in Iran, denouncing claims of victory, and denuclearization, with claims that denuclearization occurred last year but Iran is back in action. The analyst stated there is no clear end state, and without an end state, “it doesn’t really matter how you get there. You’re just gonna keep going.”

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: So what you're seeing now from this administration, you just heard Marco Rubio about thirty minutes ago, basically saying this is all about the Strait Of Hormuz. This is opening up the the they're wait a minute. I I thought the Strait Of Hormuz was open weeks ago, and now that's that's the whole focus of this? Are we talking about boots on the ground, ground forces in order to get this open? Speaker 1: Well, I will tell you so I spent some time with the air force the last week at an undisclosed location, and it is very obvious. Nothing was said to me classified or any or anyway, but it was very obvious just looking at the some of what was happening on base that the the we are ramping up. The the idea that we're gonna sustain the ceasefire or know, look for an off ramp. Doesn't look like it to me just based on what I saw. We are in this for the long haul. What that looks like, I know that the last week, the reporting was that the CENTCOM commander, Admiral Peparo, briefed Trump for forty five minutes in the White House on what was referred to as the final blow plan for the Iranian regime. I also know based on what I have heard, that the US military has moved the last several weeks very key assets into the region that are not just for naval interdiction of the kind we're seeing outside the Strait Of Hormuz. It's not just for another potential air campaign. But I am I'm hearing that we are moving the resources needed to support a ground force of at least 15,000 troops going into the the Iranian area in some way likely to do some kind of, you know, a coastal strategy where we invade one of those islands that I was originally on this program several weeks ago talking to you about. I likened it to Gallipoli, which I still believe would be a Gallipoli like disaster for The US Marines and or Army elements that would be deployed. But it is very obvious to me, based on everything that I've heard and seen over the last week or so, that this war is just heating up on the American side. Speaker 0: Wow. That's some breaking news. Speaker 2: And, again, so let's revisit that first conversation we had. To what end? We have one island and then what? Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, there is no end. This is, you know, strategic malpractice on an epic level by the White House. There is no end state to this conflict. Remember, this was the famous, you know, tell me how this ends general Petraeus, line in 2008 that they were the congress was begging for answers from general Petraeus on Iraq. This is the same question we have today. Tell me, mister president, how this ends. And mister president, unfortunately, doesn't seem to have an answer that's satisfactory for anybody, including himself. You know, on on the one hand, he wants to, arm the the the rebels in in Iran, the mythical rebels. On the other hand, he's saying we've won already. If we've won already, what are we still doing there? Then he talks about denuclearization that we supposedly obliterated last year, but they're back in action, I guess, in Iran. So we don't know what the end state is, and he talks frequently about regime change. This has never gone away, by the way, is this idea of regime change plus unconditional surrender in bold letters. We don't have an end state, which is why if you have no end state, it doesn't really matter how you get there. You're just gonna keep going.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 5, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - May 5, 2026 at 1:45 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

Without fertilizer, the planet can only feed 4 billion people. We have 8 billion. The Strait of Hormuz is closed. Natural gas for fertilizer plants isn't shipping. @HealthRanger says 2026 is just the preview. 2027 is when it gets catastrophic. https://t.co/RvOxJreg6C

Video Transcript AI Summary

For weeks the focus has been the food side of the Strait of Hormuz story—fertilizer, shipping routes, diesel, natural gas, and the inputs that keep the global food system moving. Now the war with Iran has shifted this from theory to reality: oil spikes, shipping insurance surges with Lloyd’s of London canceling many contracts through the Strait, fertilizer prices jump, farmers are squeezed, and food prices rise. The host notes this is not a surprise; warnings were issued years in advance. Mike Adams, founder of Brighteon and naturalnews.com, joins to discuss the looming global food crisis. The Financial Times warned of disruption hitting before the fall harvest. Higher fertilizer prices and lockdowns reduce fertilizer use, leading to less planting and lower future food production. Adams warns Western countries will face higher food prices, while mass starvation could occur in other nations, including Sudan, Yemen, Bangladesh, with India and Egypt also at risk. Tens of millions in these regions rely on food aid, which could become less available or affordable. A double hit compounds the problem: fertilizer exports from China and Russia have halted; China refused fertilizer to India to feed its own population, and Qatar Energy has declared force majeure, meaning even countries with local fertilizer plants may not receive fertilizer. Adams predicts hundreds of millions could face extreme famine later in 2026 and into 2027. Speaker 2 emphasizes the humanitarian impact on allies and the potential for global instability and conflict as populations face hunger. Adams adds the phrase “nine meals away from anarchy” to illustrate social upheaval when people cannot feed themselves. He points to Egypt’s Suez Canal as a potential leverage point that could be affected if food aid is insufficient. He frames current events as the end of decades of global abundance linked to controlled routes and resources, suggesting a broader energy-food geopolitical shift tied to the war. The discussion broadens to Europe, with criticism of German leadership and the push to militarize Europe. Adams challenges the idea that depopulation is a conspiracy and references historical coverage of population-control discussions in 1969, including Paul Ehrlich’s Population Bomb and alleged infertility chemical ideas. He cites vaccines in Kenya allegedly tested for infertility and asserts the COVID years were a pilot program. He asserts that the UN and other bodies show famine risk, including in South Sudan. Adams argues the United States could face higher food prices even if shelves aren’t emptied, and he envisions a mid- to late-2020s scenario where many Americans, especially those earning under $100,000 annually, struggle to feed themselves. He calls for resilience through decentralization: breaking away from the banking system, the medical system, public education, and the energy grid; promoting homepower with solar and batteries, local farming, and community-supported agriculture. He suggests stockpiling food, diversifying wealth (gold and silver), and growing food locally as preparation. The conversation then covers civil liberties and surveillance. They discuss the extension of FISA Section 702, describing it as an erosion of Fourth Amendment protections and a system enabling widespread spying on Americans, often used for blackmail against public officials. Adams argues that data sharing with foreign nations, including Israel, exacerbates privacy concerns and that tech devices in homes—Alexa, Ring, Windows—provide backdoor access to agencies. He warns that robots and smart devices will intensify surveillance, and advises privacy-focused measures like using Linux and de-Googled devices. Finally, Adams promotes his resources: naturalnews.com for articles and infographics, brightvideos.com for daily videos, and brightlearn.ai offering free books and Spanish translations at Brightlearn. He reiterates the need for self-reliance, local communities, and preparedness, including solar power and homesteading as resilience strategies.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: For weeks, we've talked about the the food side of the Strait Of Hormuz story, not just the oil, not just the gas prices, but the fertilizer, the shipping routes, the diesel, the natural gas, the basic inputs that, of course, keep the global food system moving. And now it's here. And the war with Iran has essentially pushed this crisis from a theory now into reality. The entire global economy starts seizing up. Oil skyrocketing again. Here is look at this. The the price of Brent crude jumped to a $126 a barrel, earlier than today and then fell back down about 113, but hitting a high that we haven't seen for years today. Shipping insurance, of course, exploded and also being canceled as we've highlighted here at the Lloyds of London canceling, many of their, insurance contracts through the Strait Of Hormuz. Fertilizer prices surging, farmers getting squeezed, and food prices moving much, much higher now. And most of the infuriating part of all of this, of course, is none of this is a surprise. The people in power were warned about this. We warned about it here. Our next guest has been warning about it for years, even far longer than we have by a landslide. Mike Adams is the founder of the Brighteon platforms, naturalnews.com. You might follow him on X under the health ranger. He has been out on this for years. Mike, great to have you back on the show. Speaker 1: It's great to join you again. Thanks for having me on. Speaker 0: Our pleasure. You know, the Feet, the Financial Times had a pretty ominous story about a week ago. I just wanna put up the headline here, the coming global food crisis. It's a really interesting read. But I think one of the most interesting parts of this article stood out to me. The disruption is especially dangerous because it hits before the harvests that are coming in the fall. Higher fertilizer prices now and the lockdown now means that farmers use less fertilizer, have don't have access to it, which means they plant less, which means they produce much less food. And then so we might not see it on our store shelves at the moment, but this is the cascading effect. What do you think about that? Speaker 1: We will be impacted in Western countries, even in The United States. Although we won't face mass starvation in America, we will face much higher food prices, but there will be mass starvation in other countries around the world. And research, leads to being able to identify exactly which countries those are. That includes The Sudan. It includes Yemen. It includes Bangladesh. There are risks in India, risks even in Egypt, and many other countries that are on they have tens of millions of people that are just marginally getting by every single year. Many of those people are in states of famine every year, and they would die if not for food aid, but that food aid will not be nearly as available or affordable. So the the food aid organizations around the world are going to be wrecked. Now there's there's actually a there's a double threat here that your audience needs to to keep in mind. Number one is, of course, fertilizer exports from countries like China and Russia have been halted. So when India went to China and said, hey. We need some fertilizer in order to feed our people. China said, sorry. We have to keep it for ourselves domestically. But then there are countries like Bangladesh that have their own fertilizer production plants using the Haber Bosch process that converts natural gas into ammonia and urea. But you need natural gas as the feedstock, and, of course, natural gas is not shipping. Qatar Energy has declared force majeure on their commitments. So even if you have a fertilizer plant in your country, you don't get fertilizer right now. So it's a double hit on these countries. And the bottom line is that literally hundreds of millions of people are about to be thrust into extreme famine and real starvation deaths, later this year and well into 2027. Speaker 2: The cruelty of on imposing this on countries that are allies, countries that have nothing to do with this. And they can't do anything about it except maybe cry and beg, but the the globalist will do nothing about it. And so, you know, this will create warlike conditions. This is going to create instability. So can we talk about that as well? Speaker 1: Well, as they say, nine meals away from anarchy. Right? So when your populations can't feed themselves, then they begin to revolt. So we will see social upheaval in many countries, but not in Russia. They can feed themselves. Not in China because they have resources and multiple trading partners with lots of food redundancy. And and not in America or Canada or The UK, but, again, these vulnerable countries, many of them in Africa, some in The Middle East, and some in Southeast Asia, it's going to be brutal. Even for Thailand, I didn't even mention Thailand. They're they're going to face a lot of political instability because of this. But the bottom line is that that will lead to global instability in supply chains because many of these countries are involved in things that affect us. For example, Egypt runs the Suez Canal. Right? And if we can't use the Suez Canal for some reason because Egypt is demanding food aid and they're not getting it, they could shut down the canal. And it's like, you know, your your guest and my friend Michael Yon has warned for years about routes and resources. What we're actually witnessing right now on a global scale is the shutting down of those routes and resources that have created food abundance and material abundance for the human species for decades, and that is now ending. That is ending at least until there's some resolution of this war of choice that Trump has thrust us all into even though he didn't have to. That's where we are. Speaker 0: You know, I heard a member of congress saying just the other day, you know, it's costing about $1,000,000,000 a day now just for the Strait Of Hormuz to be for us to to be dealing with the Strait Of Hormuz being close. So wait a second. We're spending that now that it's closed, but when it was open, we weren't spending that. It absolutely makes it's it's maddening. It makes no sense at all. You know, Michael Jan, as you pointed out, he was talking about, of course, about the Strait Of Malacca specifically coming next. And, of course, what's happening in the Baltics, what's about to happen, in the Arctic Circle as well. And, you know, his whole point has been that this is really a globalist push for depopulation agenda. That this is all part of the plan. And so we need to go a layered we need to go look at layer deeper here than what Washington newspapers are telling us. Right? Speaker 1: Well, absolutely. And it's hilarious to me that every AI model today and every search engine will still tell you that depopulation is a conspiracy theory. But if you go back to 1969, The New York Times covered a meeting of over 200 organizations that also included president Richard Nixon's science adviser who said that controlling population needs to be the number one priority of every nation on Earth. And that meeting was also they they headlined doctor Paul Ehrlich, the author of, I believe, the Population Bomb. And he specifically proposed, and it was widely supported, that we should put infertility chemicals into the water supply and also into food exports that would affect countries like Africa. And then, of course, years later, we know that, for example, the Kenyan Catholic Bishops Association started testing the vaccines that were being given to the young women of childbearing age in Kenya and found that they were laced with infertility chemicals. So there has been a decades long effort to achieve depopulation, and I believe that the COVID years were also one test case, kind of a pilot program, to see how much they could get away with, and they got away with a lot. And now we're facing the full rollout. And it is deliberate, and it is going to be devastating to those who are not prepared. Speaker 0: Yeah. Look at I mean, just look at the United Nations. You put this up on the screen. You mentioned Sudan earlier. I mean, we just put this up on the screen here. Over half of South Sudan's population faces acute hunger as we speak as we speak right now. Speaker 2: And then for Americans, there will be supplies. We won't have the same abundance, and it will be incrementally incrementally higher. We saw this happen right away during when the war in Ukraine broke out. Prices went crazy. It's hard to imagine it getting worse, but it will. Right? Can we talk about that? Speaker 1: Given that so many Americans are one paycheck away from being kicked out of their apartment or their home, given that Americans are paying the highest prices ever for health insurance, car insurance, home insurance. Many Americans are on the verge of bankruptcy right now, of being homeless. And I've painted a picture where if you fast forward to mid twenty twenty seven, you're going to see millions of Americans, millions more living out of their vehicles, even with their families, with children in a van, trying to raise a family in a van because food is so so expensive that it displaces the income they would otherwise spend on rent or, you know, or a home or other things. Many Americans are going to have to start letting go of key expenditures, in order to not starve. I I do believe the food will still be available in North America. You're not gonna see shelves completely wiped out, but prices are going to be so high that those who don't have over a $100,000 a year in income are going to find it very difficult to feed themselves. Speaker 0: It's just absolutely devastating. Let's talk about Europe a little bit. Fredrik Mertz today was playing dress up, wearing a military, you know, garb, like he's about to be attacked, standing there in front of, armored vehicles, talking about Europe and how basically Germany now because it's become massively, militarized and spending billions now to militarize Germany, I guess, to fight Russia. But we will open the Strait Of Hormuz, essentially. Like, we've got to stop this. Germany is gonna step in now. We are being devastated, but Europe is getting desperate. Just watch Fredrik Mertz here playing dress up. Germany is now gonna step in to secure the sea lanes in the Strait Of Hormuz. So Europe is getting desperate. And of course, the joke in Europe, you know, where we live for a number of years was, what is it if Germany Speaker 2: If Germany sneezes, the rest of Europe gets a cold. Speaker 0: Yeah. So, obviously, so goes Germany, so goes Europe. So they're getting desperate in Europe. This is hitting them particularly hard. Speaker 1: Well, that saying that you just mentioned actually comes out of an era when Germany was fueled by cheap Russian gas. Right? That era is long gone. Right? So Germany is not the industrial center of Western Europe. And and by the way, you saw Mertz there, you know, dressing up, as a clown. I I think his, collar is too small. He needs more cowbell for that one right there. It's just it's it's a clown show every single day what what they're doing. But Germany's leaders and and by the way, I'm not directing my comments towards the German people or the or the British people or the French people because there are good people everywhere, and everybody wants to survive and and thrive and and raise families and and be able to keep what they earn. But their leaders are running a suicide cult. That there's no question about that. It's it's cultural suicide. It's economic suicide. It's energy suicide. They can dress up all they want. It doesn't change anything. The leaders of Germany are anti German. The leaders of France are anti French. You know? I mean, it's so bad that Western Europe will be lucky to survive this era of horribly treasonous leadership. And I I just I feel very sad for the people of Western Europe and what they're having to endure. Speaker 0: Right. Hopefully, you're seeing some signs of life, though, at least from, from the opposition inside of Germany standing up to this Yes. This tyranny. So, hopefully, we'll see a shift there. But, you know, again, I mean, maybe you can just paint a picture for us, Mike, as we we wrap up this segment on the on the energy issue and the food issue right now. I know you've done some really nice infographics. People can follow you on on X on that to show how this is all layered out. But maybe you could really paint a picture for our audience, like, when these different markers start to hit and how it's gonna start to affect us. Speaker 1: Well, the the key thing to understand is that our modern food supply is simply energy repackaged through photosynthesis to create calories. That's the way the agricultural industrial complex currently operates. And without nitrogenous fertilizers that are produced as a result of natural gas, we would not be able to feed more than about 4,000,000,000 people or about half the current population of the world. And that's that's a very optimistic estimate. So there's a delay though, as you mentioned the timeline there. There's a delay. So we're still eating last year's food right now for the most part. As current crops begin to fail, we don't have a total failure in North America, some farmers bought fertilizer, Some paid a lot higher of a price. Some applied less fertilizer, so they'll have lower crop yields, but it's not Mad Max yet. However, when you get into the fall planting season in America and in places like Canada, that's when you're really gonna feel the shortage, and that impacts then the food that people eat next year. So 2027 will be far worse than 2026 for North America, for The Middle East, for Africa, for Southeast Asia, India, even Turkey, you name it. So the real hard part of this happens in 2027, and almost nobody is really aware of that yet. I mean I mean, your viewers are, so thank you for covering this issue. Speaker 0: Well, and I just wanna put this up on the screen. You posted this on naturalnews.com the about the engineered collapse here and the collapse by and I love how you started off the collapse by design because that's exactly what this is. Speaker 1: Yeah. Absolutely. This is clearly engineered, and it's it's like I said, see, I I think the COVID years were kind of a pilot program to see what they could get away with, what level of obedience could they achieve, what level of shutdowns could they get people to go along with. And and and it turns out that most of the world was very obedient to these insane demands. Like, you have to wear this mask that doesn't work, and you have to stand five feet away because a virus can't can't fly six feet. You know? Things like that. It it was all nonsensical. It was almost like a like a Simon Says game on a global scale for low IQ obedient cultists. And as a result, then they realized they can tell people almost anything. They can tell people, oh, you're gonna have to pay higher gas prices so that we can win, and that when you're starving, it's a new golden age, things like that. And a lot of people will go along with that, but not the ones that wanna live. So for your audience that wanna survive and thrive, it's actually very doable. I'm not actually a doomer. If you're well informed and prepared, you can learn to grow food, you can stockpile food, you can, you know, get your money into a system that preserves wealth, like actual gold and silver, things like that. There there are things you can do. It's not the end of the world if you're informed. Speaker 0: Right. That's what we try to hit on people here. Like, if you've been watching our show, you watch what Mike does, you write you you read what Mike writes. Like, just just take care of your family. Like, are certain steps you can put in place to start really, you know, like we have in our garage, we have, you know, in our food stores, like making sure that we have extra food and extra food supplies that can last years preparing for that and having gold and silver, when this monetary system collapses, which is which is coming. Mike, stick around. We wanna talk about FISA with you if we can, after a short break here. Every day, we're exposed to more chemicals sprayed into our skies, leaching into our food, polluting our air and water from pesticides, heavy metals to hormone disruptors, synthetic additives. These toxins are bombarding our bodies, silently destroying our health. But there is something you can do to fight back, and it starts in your gut. Kimchi one from Brightcore Nutrition contains over 900 strains of beneficial probiotics. I take it every day. I take two capsules every day with with my supplements. It help flushes out toxins, restores gut balance, and support your immune system. My mother-in-law takes it. My mom takes it. My wife takes it. We all take it. When your gut is strong, your body can resist. You'll feel the difference, better digestion, more energy, clearer thinking. Lot of Americans don't like the taste of actual kimchi, but that's why they developed kimchi one because it has no taste. It's cold pressed, so you don't have to taste it at all. You don't have to worry about the fermented foods, you know. South Koreans love it, but Americans maybe don't have the taste for for fermented foods like they do. Kimchi one is all natural, non GMO, dairy free, gluten free, a 100% made in The USA by a company that actually cares about your health. So check them out. Go to my brightcore.com/redacted, and you'll get 25% off your order or call them. And here's the best deal. If you call them, you'll get 50% off and free shipping. They're an American company, so they wanna actually develop an American friendship and relationship with their customers. Imagine that. (888) 404-6312 get up to 50% off and free shipping. (888) 404-6312 to get 50% off and free shipping. Speaker 2: Alright. Well, the house passed a three year extension of FISA section seven zero two, one of the worst violations of American civil liberties in history. It allows Americans to be surveyed under a mass dragnet aimed, of course, at foreign terrorism. They need to do this to stop the terrorists. It's really the terrorists that are doing it. Little did people know that back during the Obama administration, they entered into an agreement with Israel around FISA to actually share that surveillance about Americans with a foreign nation. And before you ask, yes, that data includes spying materials used on American citizens. We've talked to you about how AI systems being built now would compile your social media, in addition to whatever else has been collected on you to decide on the spot whether or not you need need to be killed. If you think that's only for people in Gaza, wake up. So in other words, the Israeli Israeli government can effectively access data on American citizens with little to no oversight. Mike Adams is the founder of Brighteon platforms and naturalnews.com. He's been warning about this. What do we make of this? Did I get anything wrong there? Is it in fact as dystopic as I just described? Speaker 1: Well, it is. It's it's essentially unlimited illegal spying on American citizens because it's very easy under FISA to create a justification to spy on anyone they want. For example, they can have a CIA office overseas email you from a, quote, terror group. And then they can use FISA rules, which require no warrant and no real due process to then hoover up all of your email claiming that you are now adjacent to that terror group that's actually run by the CIA or Mossad or whoever. So this is this is again, this is total violation of the Fourth Amendment. It's unlimited illegal spying on all Americans for any reason whatsoever. Now the the important thing, though, as as I'm sure your audience knows quite well, is that this is actually used to hoover up blackmail material on important people, whether they be Supreme Court justices or governors, members of Congress. They spy on you. They find something that you might be embarrassed if it went public. It doesn't even have to be anything too crazy. You know, you you took money from the wrong donor or whatever, or they spy on your family members. Then they can threaten to expose a family member or even a niece or a nephew or or whoever. And then that's used as blackmail material to keep you online. So it's not just that Jeffrey Epstein has blackmail material. You know? So does the deep state of the United States government. And above all, it's absolutely shameful, in my opinion, that Donald Trump, who himself was a victim of FISA spying, is supporting it now and throwing the American people under the bus in the process. Speaker 0: You bring up such a great point. Friend of the show, FBI whistleblower, Kyle Saraffin, one of his, like, I I hate to say caused a celeb because it sounds like it's he's doing it for for, I don't know, points, but he really has, like, tied know, he he's been so passionate about fighting this and, educating Americans about all of this and how this is used as this massive dragnet. And then you have, like, members of administration, members of congress who get caught up in this FISA, and it's all intentional so that you have almost like a J. Edgar Hoover style blackmail operation against powerful people in The United States and people in our own government who are you know, this material, however it's being used up, hoovered up, as you say, is totally unrelated to the target. It's like ancillary material that's being sucked up and used. Am I wrong? Speaker 1: You're absolutely correct. And remember that this also allows backdoor access into all of the corporate run, services and devices that are in your home that are listening to you. So, you know, your your Alexa device. Remember, one of Amazon's largest customers is the CIA. And everything that you say in your home around a device like that and there are other companies with other devices in the, you know, the doorbell video cameras and so on, that are constantly watching and listening and uploading this information to platforms that can be instantly and illegally accessed by the NSA or even in some cases, the CIA. Now this is only gonna get worse with robots. So once people start inviting humanoid robots into their homes, then they'll be offered on a lease basis. You know, you pay a monthly fee. This this is still a couple years away, by the way, but it's coming. Those robots are gonna walk around your house, and they're gonna video everything. And if they see something that they wanna report, oh, I saw an AR 15 leaning up against the ball. Yeah. It's Texas. We have 50 of them, by the way. You know, it's not it's not crazy. That's gonna get reported, and then, oh, ATF's gonna knock on your door. Why do you have so many guns? Because it's Texas again. But, anyway, that's just an example, or they see gold bars. Where did you get the gold? You know? That's what's gonna happen. If you invite robots into your home, they're gonna be spy machines unless they're, you know, disconnected from the cloud, which is not the way they will be sold. Speaker 0: Right. I mean, Alexa devices. Right? I mean, literally, it's like the ultimate, you know, backdoor CIA tool that's been just millions of Americans just, like, allowed it to flow right into their houses. And then, of course, I think, you know, the Ring doorbell, right, was then purchased by Amazon as well. So that's now part of the the Amazon network. Speaker 1: Yeah. And, on top of that, you know, Windows, in in my view, based on my research, and I I I have a technical background. I'm a developer. Windows appears to be increasingly just spyware where it it's it's seems to be keylogging. They have a feature that they announced that would be rolled out where it takes a screenshot of your screen every few seconds so that you can have AI go back and undo things or remember what you were doing or organize your projects. Well, I don't know about you, but I don't want Microsoft Corporation watching my screens all the time. You know, I don't want them listening to monitoring my keystrokes if I'm typing in a password to a banking website or something like that. But that's what's increasingly happening, And all of that has backdoors to the NSA. So, if your audience wants to maintain their privacy, you have to go to more and more well informed measures like using de googled phones or using Linux operating systems and things like that. Speaker 2: If it comes increasingly arduous to do, and I just feel really sad that Edward Snowden, you know, created this wave of allowing us to know what the government was doing. We had this sort of cursory response from the Obama administration where they introduced the Freedom Act and ended bulk collection. But it's just a reach. They're doing it a different way. So it's still happening and if if not worse. So what was it all for? Speaker 1: Well, concentration of power in the hands of the regime, whatever whatever regime happens to be in power. As you know, it's all the same uniparty, and they are just highly focused on maintaining their power. That's also why and I I understand this may be controversial, but I've seen documents from the treasury that talk about how reducing the lifespan of Americans will save the treasury over $11,000,000,000,000 over the coming years because of not having to pay out Social Security and other benefits. So we actually the the more people that get on government benefits, whether it's disability or pensions or Medicare, they become a an accounting liability to the system that then sees, oh, how do we reduce our liabilities so that we can print more money for war and still maintain the currency? And their answer eventually is get people to die off. Well, how do we do that? Hey. Start a war. Starve everybody. Make make food expensive. I mean, it's actually it's not a conspiracy. It's accounting. It's accounting at this point. That's what's happening. Speaker 0: Yeah. Let's just talk about that Israel Israeli piece of this. Again, as you mentioned, Obama or we you mentioned Obama and the the this was made during the Obama administration. This deal was made during the Obama administration under FISA to hand over surveillance data of Americans to the Israelis. Like, what? Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, we know who runs the current administration, and it's it's not the American people. We know that they answer to seemingly Netanyahu or maybe there there are a lot of blackmail elements from, you know, the Epstein years that are still in circulation. That's the currency of the system is blackmail. So what we're looking at here is the complete abandonment of the representational constitutional republic that we were promised and that we are repeatedly promised in every election cycle. Vote for me. I'll represent you. Vote for me. I'll put America first. That's not happening, and it never will happen until there's some kind of real fundamental reform of how the money flows through our political system. And that's why I I'm I'm a fan of colonel Douglas MacGregor. I know you are too. And I think his thinking along these lines is very important, and he's got some good ideas about reform. And I think you're gonna have some interesting interesting and maybe positive things happening ahead, I mean, after this current collapse. Speaker 0: Well, yeah, I think you well, inevitably, something has to give here because we are in an empire that is collapsing in real time. I mean, $39,000,000,000,000 in debt is unsustainable. And, of course, you saw the new GDP numbers that came out, and you see what's happening right now. The markets are kind of excited about a lot of different things, but underlying massive fault cracks right now seems to, seems similar to right before the Roman Empire collapsed. I mean, it's hard to disagree with that. Speaker 1: Decentralizing from the control grid is the number one survival method right now. So decentralized out of the banking system if you can, decentralized away from the medical system to the extent you can, decentralized from public education if you can home school, and also decentralized from the energy grid as much as you can. So, you know, home power actually, solar is making a comeback. If you have solar power and a battery system and an EV, then you don't need petroleum to have transportation. I mean, Trump has become the greatest EV salesperson in history, actually, Speaker 0: because Who would have thought that? Everyone would say, we're gonna go back to gas guzzling cars. We're gonna, you know, get six miles to the gallon. And then suddenly now as this oil shock hits and people are really paying attention to how they can protect their families, and you have all these homesteaders. I I I you know, just go out. I don't I don't leave the house very much. But when I do, and I occasionally see some redacted viewers, a gentleman came up to me just recently, and he's a homesteader. And he said, yeah, I've got solar panels set up. I've got chickens set up, you know, all of it for my house. And, he's like, you know, I know they love to vilify solar. He's like, no. My homestead runs on solar. Mean, I look at congressman Massey. It's like being able to protect yourself right now against these people, these globalists. Speaker 1: Yeah. We we really have to learn to be more self reliant and build local communities. Strong local decentralized communities is where all the action is at, especially when it comes to food resilience. So it's not just grow your own food, but also meet your local farmers and visit the farmer coops and the CSAs, the community supported agriculture, and support them financially by purchasing from them. So, you know, look, humanity will make it through this, but not all current humans will survive it. I think that's an honest assessment of where we are. Speaker 0: Yeah. I think you're right. Mike Adams, great to see you as always. Where can people find out more of your great work? Because we follow you on x, but there's plunge you you've got your hands in a lot of different baskets. Speaker 1: Well, thank you. My articles and infographics are at naturalnews.com. My videos each day are at brightvideos.com. And I have free tools for people. Brightlearn.ai is a free site. 53,000 books available to download free. Hundreds of audiobooks, full length. And now we've just launched books in Espanol. So we have hundreds of them translated into Spanish available completely free. Speaker 0: Wow. Yeah. I love what you're doing there. I I really do. Mike, great to see you. Thank you so much for joining us as always. Speaker 1: Thank you so much. Take care. Speaker 0: Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 3, 2026 at 11:30 AM

Saved - May 3, 2026 at 11:44 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

💣 The US bombed Iran's nuclear ambitions. Not its weapons. Its ambitions. The blockade isn't working. Putin just warned Trump in a two-hour call. @DougAMacgregor says this will make 2008 look mild & Iran may force the issue before Trump does. https://t.co/L2l5mPoyKb

Video Transcript AI Summary

President Putin spent nearly two hours on the phone with President Trump, delivering a forceful warning that if the United States and Israel restart a war against Iran, there would be “dire, extremely dire” consequences for the region. The show then shifts to the wordplay about Taco Tuesday and a new word: nacho, standing for “not a chance” or “Hormuz opens,” with Axios reporting that Trump rejected Iran’s proposal to open the Strait of Hormuz and that the U.S. has prepared a plan for a short, powerful wave of strikes on Iran. Trump reportedly met with energy CEOs, informing them that the blockade of the Strait could go on for a long time with no end in sight. Trump posted on Truth Social claiming Iran is “in a state of collapse” and that they want the Hormuz Strait opened as they figure out their leadership. The panel notes this may be delusional or not true, referencing a Moon of Alabama post arguing that bombing would not alter Iran’s decision making and that the U.S. has lost its war on Iran, with Iran delivering “the checkmate” by controlling Hormuz. Secretary of War nominee discussions and testimony are recapped, highlighting contradictions: the claim that Iran was destroyed, but that Iran still controls Hormuz, and that Iran was not close to nuclear weapons, yet bombing occurred due to ambitions. Speaker 2’s remarks emphasize that Iran’s nuclear program was said to be “completely obliterated,” but ambitions remained, leaving the situation in a stalemate. The hosts and guests debate what constitutes “winning” in the context of Iran closing Hormuz, with instances of the blockade becoming a reciprocal constraint, and a comparison to “tag” or “double stamp” dynamics. Colonel Daniel Davis and Colonel Douglas McGregor join to unpack the day’s events. Davis notes Putin’s warning implies global implications beyond Iran. He cites fertilizer shortages and rising energy prices, noting the Department of Agriculture’s letter about risks to U.S. farmers, rising bankruptcies, and the potential for a different outcome if war resumes. He questions whether the blockade will produce a different result than prior attempts and points to a potential long-term economic impact. Colonel McGregor adds that Israel’s demands, particularly Netanyahu’s, drive the policy: no more nuclear enrichment, dismantling missiles, and regional coercion, which he argues Iran will not accept. He warns that the U.S. economy hinges on cheap energy and cheap credit, and as energy prices rise, liquidity problems could cascade through private equity and financial markets, potentially resembling or surpassing the 2007-2008 crisis. He posits that Putin’s warning signals fear of global economic consequences and possible coalition formation against U.S. actions, including China and others who could hedge their dependence on energy, and argues that allies in the Gulf face mounting costs and possible strategic realignments. The discussion extends to regional shifts: UAE leaving OPEC, potential breakdown of alliances with the United States and Israel, and fears of broader regional instability. McGregor suggests five of six GCC states are near storage limits, threatening supply flows, and that allied states might ultimately align more with alternative partnerships, such as with China as a safer economic and financial hub. Davis emphasizes the human and civilian toll in Lebanon, Gaza, and Syria, noting destructive actions and questioning the moral and strategic justification. The panel concludes with a warning that the blockade could provoke broader escalations, including potential responses from Iran or other regional powers, and that domestic economic pressures could intensify if the situation remains unresolved. The hosts and guests express concern that cooler heads must prevail, acknowledging the serious risks of a wider conflict and global economic collapse.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, a lot of moving parts today. First, president Putin of Russia spent nearly two hours on the phone with president Trump today giving him a pretty forceful warning that if The United States and Israel restart this war against Iran, that there would be, quote, dire, extremely dire pretty consequences. More on that part of the story in a moment. But first, forget Taco Tuesday. Trump always chickens out. That's what that stands for. Taco, Trump always chickens out. The new word of the day is nacho. Speaker 1: I like nachos. Speaker 0: Nacho. Yeah. I know you love nachos. But this is, so far and nacho stands for not a chance or mousse opens. Speaker 1: I don't like those kind of nachos. Speaker 0: Yeah. I don't either. But that appeared that apparently is seems to be the case. Nacho, not a chance that Hormuz opens. Just a few hours ago, according to Axios, President Trump rejected Iran's proposal to open the Strait Of Hormuz. And The US has prepared a plan for a short and powerful wave of strikes on Iran. So is president Trump trapped in this war with Iran? According to reports from Washington, the president is getting desperate about this. He met yesterday with energy CEOs notifying them that this blockade of the strait could go on for a long time. No end in sight. And he posted this on Truth Social. Iran has just informed us that they are in a state of collapse. They want us to open the Hormuz Strait as soon as possible as they try to figure out their leadership situation, which I believe they'll be able to do. Thank you for your attention to this matter, president Trump. So is that delusional? Is that true? What about the real possibility that The United States has already lost this war? Wanna read a remarkable post from the moon of Alabama this morning. He wrote, quote, even if bombing resumed, there's a there's little evidence that would alter Iran's decision making process. Quote, The US has lost its war on Iran. Not even one of its not even one of its strategic goals has been achieved. All its military tactical actions intended to disarm Iran have failed to reach their aims. By taking control of the Strait Of Hormuz, Iran delivered the checkmate. So The US has lost, if you listen to what he just wrote. Damn. And then secretary of war Pete Hegseth spent the morning being grilled on Capitol Hill about these contradictory statements that we've destroyed Iran, they're totally decimated, but somehow they're still controlling the Strait Of Hormuz, that Iran is somehow a nuclear threat, but then admits Iran was not close to nuclear weapons, and we only bombed them because of their ambitions. Like, they don't have any nuclear weapons. They don't have any nuclear capabilities, but their ambitions were enough to bomb them. Here's what he had to say. Watch. Speaker 2: In a way that you should never have it. So they haven't had to start this war, you just said, sixty days ago, because the nuclear weapon was an imminent threat. Now you're saying that it was completely obliterated? Not given up their nuclear ambitions, and they had a conventional shield of thousands of operation midnight Hamburg cop moment. Nothing of substance. It left us exactly the same place we were before. Speaker 0: You're missing the point. What is the point exactly? Speaker 1: Can I just Speaker 0: Can you unpack that? Speaker 1: We needed to go to war with them in February to bomb ambitions. Speaker 3: How do Speaker 1: you bomb ambitions? I'm so curious. Speaker 0: But what we were told though, that their entire nuclear program was decimated, but they were told this Operation Epic Fury was in order to further decimate them. Speaker 1: The ambitions only. Because there was there was no military establishment or nuclear establishment anymore. We had already six months before. Speaker 0: Yeah. Just ambitions. Speaker 1: Just the ambitions. Speaker 0: Just the ambitions were decimated. Speaker 1: It's like a Yeah. Okay. Speaker 0: So is this what winning looks like? Congressman Seth Moulton said it's is it winning when Iran had closed the Strait Of Hormuz? Like, it doesn't make sense. Watch. Speaker 4: So do you call Iran closing the Strait Of Hormuz winning? Speaker 2: Well, I would say the blockade that we hold that doesn't allow anything to come in or out of Iranian ports Okay. Speaker 0: So we Speaker 4: So we've blockaded their blockade. So they blockaded us, and then we blockaded their blockade. That's like saying tag, you're it. Or, you know, if if president Madison has said, well, the British just burned down Washington, but don't worry. We're gonna burn it down as well. Speaker 0: Good point. No. We're gonna do it on top of what you just did. Speaker 1: Uh-huh. Speaker 0: So try to unpack all of this. We've got a great panel of guests joining us here on the show today, colonel Daniel Davis and colonel Douglas McGregor, both to try to unpack the day's drama. Welcome, gentlemen, to both of you. I wanna start. Doug, let's start with you. We saw president Putin on the phone today warning president Trump in a two hour phone call that if this escalates again, if we go back to this war, US and Israel, that there would be extremely dire consequences for the region. Do you think that we are slipping back into a kinetic war? Speaker 5: You could certainly make that argument, Clayton. And I think judging from what's gone on during testimony and some of the things that have been said today by president Trump, certainly seems as though he's opting for door number one, which is to go back and repeat the performance of the previous weeks in the hopes that he's gonna get a different outcome. Obviously, all of them need to go back and carefully reexamine mister Netanyahu's talking points before they recite them to check whether or not there's any logical coherence. So I think they themselves are rather rather confused right now. They're trying to put a happy face on the dead rat that they've got on their hands. I don't think it's gonna work, but that's where we are. And I think that president Putin probably I I obviously haven't seen the readout either on the Russian side or The US side, but I suspect he's probably warning him that the implications go far beyond Iran all over the world, frankly. The implications are now global. The absence of fertilizer guarantees that in five to six months, you've got perhaps several 100,000,000 people who are not going to get very much to eat. And I think that's probably the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Fertilizer is down to almost zero. In fact, even here in The United States, the Department of Agriculture sent over a letter signed by various corporate farmers as well as individuals saying that our own farms, are at risk. You've got people that can't afford to buy the fertilizer. It's simply too expensive now. We don't stockpile fertilizer the way we stockpile oil. And, you know, they're worried about farmers going out of business right here in The United States. In fact, bankruptcies among farmers is up by 46%. Now president Trump received that letter back in March. So this is not news to him, but it doesn't seem to penetrate. Doesn't seem to have any impact. He's obviously listening to people around him who who want to bomb, want to attack, and I don't see how that's gonna produce a different outcome. Speaker 0: Yeah. Colonel Davis, you I mean, we saw gas prices yesterday hit their new high, highest they've been since August, $4.18 a gallon. And then Axios reporting just a few hours ago, as I mentioned in the intro here, that president Trump has rejected Iran's offer and say you know, saying a blockade will stay until they get this nuclear deal. So maybe you can unpack that. What what will this blockade look like then over the next few weeks? Are we talking months? Speaker 3: Well, you know, the the real issue that that is apparently what they're talking from The US side, that that they think they can go two or three months, from from what I've can gather from various sources. But that look. That that keeps the that just looks at the uranium portion of this. Number one, our our blockade is clearly, not foolproof despite the claims made by the secretary of war and president Trump today. There's lots of evidence that, some Iranian control ships are still getting through there, but it's still not that much. But they're ignoring the other half of this equation that all of our GCC allies or the majority of them anyway are also still blockaded, and they're not getting anything through. I think only the, if I'm not mistaken, UAE or Oman is getting a few out because they're on the Gulf Of Oman side, But that's it. And so we need to be taking a look at that because that's what's driving the higher price in oil. See, I don't think that we can sit here and just say, yeah, I'll just, you know, play a game of chicken and see if I the pressure I can put on you is greater than the pressure you can put on me, and who's going to blink first, because it affects the entire world. And I mean, we see in Asia, in Africa, in Europe, all over the place, and including The United States, it's driving the price of literally everything up. And it's the absence of things like even helium, aside from the eating part, it's affecting our ability to make chips, which means everything that we have, all the economic activity is being set up to have a real problem. And this is these are talking about medium term things that are already baked in, that already are gonna be in short supply. So we're we've already got a problem here. And then the question is, how long can we go? The other question is, how long will Iran go? Because they initiated the drop side news today, was reporting that some of the Iranian sources that they're talking to say, listen. We're not just gonna go on forever like this and saying, you can just keep this blockade on us and this price be get picking up because at some point, we're gonna take matters into our own hands and end the blockade one way or the other. So it's not just whether president Trump is gonna reinitiate combat. By having the blockade, he may prompt Iran to finally say, alright. The price the the pain got too high. Now we're gonna take some action. Speaker 1: It reminds me of Dumb and Dumber, where he's like, you can't double tap step as triple stamp. You can't triple sap a double stamp. Like, that's what we're doing. Speaker 3: Never thought I'd see Dumb and Dumber analogy in foreign policy be so appropriate. Speaker 1: So Thank you. Speaker 3: That's pretty good. Yes. Speaker 1: Thank you. I'm really good with the pop culture references. Colonel McGregor, I wanna ask about the defense secretary's testimony today because this idea that, no, we did destroy their nuclear facilities, but we are now after ambitions, and they keep expressing ambition. So we I mean, that is an open ended game. What do you make of this? That also feels like a line from Dumb and Dumber. It's not, but I probably could write a movie around it. Speaker 5: I think we have to go back and understand, that everything is based on Israel's demands or mister Netanyahu's demands that you have a a no more nuclear enrichment of any kind in Iran. Of course, you dismantle half your arsenal of ballistic missiles and unmanned systems, and then you don't cooperate with anybody in the region anymore. These are the same old demands. We're determined that Iran will be compelled to accept those demands and subordinate itself to Israeli dominance in the region and effectively Jewish supremacy in the region. I don't think that's gonna happen. It doesn't make much difference what we do, but I think that's where we are. So what he's doing is, you know, moving the so called gold posts. It's not enough to tell people, you can't enrich uranium. We can actually read your mind now and tell that you're truly trying to enrich uranium, and if given the update, we'll build a nuclear weapon. It's just you can't make this sort of thing up, but the logical inconsistency ought to worry everybody. There's something else, though, that's going on here that nobody pays any attention to. Our entire economy is based on two critical pillars. One is cheap energy. The second is cheap credit. And as energy becomes more and more expensive, credit dries up. In other words, you have to pay more interest for the money you borrow. We already know that we have a liquidity crisis, not just in banks, but in private equity funds. You've got BlackRock and k a KKR and others right now that are trying to borrow cash against the assets they have under management. Just imagine that. That's because they have no cash to pay out to people that want their money. And they've now simply said, we're not gonna pay you any money based upon what you invested with us. This is a very bad sign. And as the energy get becomes more expensive as it goes to a $110 a barrel of oil, a $120, a $130, a 140, 150, and keeps going until this crisis ends globally, we're going to go under financially. You're gonna have a crisis here that makes 2007 and 2008 look mild. Many economists are predicting not just a serious recession, but certainly in much of the world, depression. And I think all of these things are what president Putin was trying to convey to president Trump because at some point, everybody says these Americans are maniacs. They've lost their minds. Yeah. They're gonna destroy the whole world. And so suddenly you have China, which is obviously very dependent upon the energy even though they have stockpiled more oil than perhaps anybody else. They're rapidly expanding their nuclear power. They've got enormous quantities of coal and coal fired plants. They've done a lot of work in renewables. China will survive this. Japan and Korea, they're on the edge. And these people are supposed to be our friends. Yeah. We've done this damage to them. Same thing is true in India. And at some point, Egypt, is trying to feed a 100,000,000 people and is having great difficulty doing so, is gonna face famine. Then, of course, you have the Turks at the other end. All of these states are being pushed into a state of war, not just with Israel, but ultimately with us. Because without Israel, we wouldn't be doing any of this, and they all know it. So Russia, China, Egypt, Turkey, India, who knows who else may join such a coalition to force us to stop. I'd prefer that we not go there. And I think president Trump ought to end this stupid blockade. I think he adopted the blockade approach because that was the only thing they could think of short of going back to war. But the blockade isn't going to work because the world's not gonna tolerate that. Speaker 0: Right. Speaker 5: So I think he's increasingly moving in the direction of going back to bombing and missile strikes, which again, I don't think it's gonna prove effective. Speaker 0: Well, don't you hate when people say I told you so? Yeah. That's me, actually, because I I did tell you. Sorry. But I told you that gold and silver were going to reap the benefits of excessive money printing, the Fed just printing money like crazy, overvalued markets, global unrest. It's here. It's happened. Gold and silver have both soared to all time highs. So I hope you called our friends at Lear Capital and you bought some. If you didn't, trust me. It's not too late. Experts are predicting even higher prices ahead. And they get it. They know what's coming. Isn't it time, folks? Get yourself some gold and silver today. Call the best in the business. I personally use them. So does Natalie. We both do. And our kids do as well in their IRAs. Lear Capital, it's free phone call. There's no obligation to purchase, just education information on protecting and growing your wealth with gold and silver. I'm sure there are many of you that have called and haven't purchased yet for whatever reason. Don't make the same mistake twice. Now is the time to get some gold shipped directly to you or shift some dollars in your retirement accounts over to physical gold and silver. It's easy to do. Natalie and I have done it for both, and I have been extremely satisfied with Lear's knowledge, their service, their prices. I urge you to call today and learn more. Call them. 1806133557 or go to learredacted.com, and you can receive up to 20,000 in free bonus medals with a qualified purchase. Speaker 1: Colonel Davis, we already see now breaking alliances in The Middle East, and we cannot put those things together. Now The UAE has left OPEC, which has removed a lot of power from Saudi Arabia. Colonel MacGregor, last time he was on the show said that, you know, Arab nations are really gonna be pushed to stop their alliances with The United States and Israel, and we cannot repair those relationships. So how do you see this further breaking down if we don't, you know, humble ourselves and stop it? Speaker 3: Yeah. That's that's one of the the the least considered. And oddly enough, even in our mainstream media, Everybody likes to focus on, you know, what we're doing to Iran or when they're gonna buckle, but there's hardly any focus on our allies because they are paying an enormous price. It's it's not even just that, you know, they can't get their ships out. I mean, they're not getting things in either. That I mean, these are countries that are desperately dependent upon imports also for their for their population. They're obviously even more critical to their, the money they get from the selling of this oil. So they they have a lot of issues. President Trump has been focused a lot here the last, thirty six hours or so on allegations that the the the block in of the oil from Iran because they're running out of storage space is gonna cause their pipelines to explode and crazy stuff like that. But nobody's paying attention to the fact that the exact same dynamics occur for our allies. I think five of the six GCC countries are either at or very nearly max capacity on their storage, and they don't have anywhere else to put it, so they're gonna have to stop pumping oil too. And and it's unknown what kind of implications that could have. We've had a situation like this in the in our lifetimes to where as a system here, you've had a a forced stoppage of being able to draw oil out of the ground. So it's kind of a theory. We don't know, but it's very likely to be a big problem. And that means that, you know, once you get this open, it's going to be a problem to get it unwound and they'll have to figure out what's going to happen. I can't help but think if I'm putting myself in their positions, they know that this was a war completely of choice. And the only reason behind it was none of these nonsense about a nuclear weapons program. That was it's not we've already known always known that there was no nuclear weapons program. It doesn't matter how much they can reprocess. It matters whether they're gonna do anything with it. And everybody in the region knew that it wasn't about nuclear weapons. It was, as Doug just said, it was about Benjamin Netanyahu coercing Trump or convincing him, whatever word you wanna use, to start this war that was not related to our national security at all. Well, they can now see that because of that choice by Trump at the insistence of Netanyahu, they are paying a tremendous price. That's on top of the physical damage that's already been caused in their countries. And God forbid, if we return to a hot war here, and now then they're the targets in their infrastructure where it's gonna cause systemic damage that's gonna take into 2027 in a best case scenario once the war is over to get that stuff repaired. Now then, their entire country is on the brink here because if they had go an extended period without getting to have any revenue to to just content duct the affairs of state to just feed their population and just continue to have economic production, etcetera. I mean, they're gonna get pretty angry because they know that all of this was because of the choice made by Donald Trump. So I haven't seen a lot of information on that. I think there's a lot of grumbling behind the scenes. But, man, if it was me, I'd be pretty upset about it. And once this is over, I'd be looking nearly anywhere else for any kind of future connections, and Brix is gonna start to look more and more appealing. Speaker 1: Right. Yeah. Speaker 0: Doug, know, Doug, I want to get your take on what, colonel Davis said there and earlier when he said, you know, we keep talking about The United States would be the ones to end the blockade. But what if Iran says enough is enough, and we start kinetic war from their side saying, we're gonna break through. We're with this, and they start to push through. What would that look like? Do you see that happening? Speaker 5: Well, I don't think they would do it alone. I think if the blockade lasted that long and did that much damage as I think it will to the rest of the world, I would not be surprised to see the Chinese fleet show up in the Indian Ocean. Speaker 0: Wow. Speaker 5: Oh. My point is that there are many people who have much to lose here, and we are dismissing their concerns out of hand. We're not even talking about our own people. You go to California right now. California is heavily dependent on imported oil. Most people don't know that. I mean, they've had years and years of this brilliant green leadership. They So don't have very many refineries. They don't have much storage. They don't have much drilling in in terms of extracting oil. So how do we get the oil to California? We don't have any pipelines that run over or through the Rockies. Pretty soon, we're going to have to store oil in trucks and then ship it over to California. Things are gonna get very bad in California very quickly. Nobody's pointing that out. And by the way, the rest of the world is is beginning to do exactly what Dan said. The president of The Republic Of Korea, we call it South Korea, has now announced publicly it's time for Korea to defend itself. Well, it was time for Korea to do that a long time ago, but we wouldn't leave. We currently control all of their armed forces, and the Koreans don't like that. They haven't liked that for at least twenty years. Now they want control of their own armed forces. I think we're going to watch the dissolution of our unofficial overseas imperial holdings take place. I think the Koreans are gonna toss us out. I think that Japan is right behind them. And now we have efforts in The Pacific to organize these trilateral relationships where the the Koreans, the Filipinos, the Japanese are all going to cooperate with us in a future war with China. Not on the planet, not in our lifetimes. Nobody's interested in going to war with China at all. In fact, China is beginning to look like a better place in terms of being a a safe house for your cash and your investments in The United States. And this began when we started telling the Russians that we have billions of, rubles, and you're not going to be allowed to have any of it. We're going to tie it up. We may even give your cash away to the Ukrainians. People have watched this and said, do you really wanna depend on The US financial system? Do you want them to tell you how you're gonna manage your own bank accounts or worse, steal your money? I mean, there are so many things going on right now that are bad. The last thing that the American people need is a war and certainly no war under any circumstances that involves China or Russia or any other powers along with Iran. And yet that seems to be the direction in which we're headed. Speaker 1: I wanna ask about further about, the secretary of war's testimony to congress. He was asked about the bombing of the base in Kuwait, and he said, oh, that's just US troops spreading falsehoods about me, where six soldiers were killed in in a retaliatory strike. Has there ever been a fallout like this between soldiers and the secretary of war that is supposed to represent them like this? How is that gonna play out to the troops that they're he's throwing them under the bus, and he's supposed to represent them? Maybe either of you. How how do you think that would be received by, members of the military? Speaker 3: Well, mean, I can just tell you for for my own perspective. Obviously, pretty badly. I mean, you you're already putting this out there and I and I know this from from some direct contacts from some folks that are deployed in this operation. They're already going, why are we even here? What is this for? I mean, at least when Doug and I fought together in Desert Storm, we knew it's because Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. We were trying to restore it, and they could move on Saudi Arabia, and we had a UNESC Security Council. We had authorization from the US Congress. We all were very confident about what we were doing. We knew what the mission was. We knew we had the capabilities, and we were pretty enthused, if I can just be honest, at the time about getting it done. But now that these guys are going here and they are like going, Why are we here at all? There is no UNSC, there is no anybody else in the world, only the country of Israel that is behind putting this in. Everybody can see that there is no play for America here. Our security wasn't a threat, it wasn't at risk. And yet now here at least thirteen of us are dead, four hundred are wounded that we know of. The numbers could well be higher according to a lot of information. And then you hear this dismissive talk by the Secretary of War, Don't worry about this, it is like complaining. Or they saw how he dismissed a lot of the senior leaders there a month or two. I guess it was a little while back when he brought them all to the Pentagon and kind of lectured everybody like he was the king and they were the little guys. It just didn't have a good look. So, is not a lot of respect, I don't think from the bottom to the top, because they don't see a lot of respect from the top to the bottom. He went out there today, and by the way, the only thing that really got my goat up is that when he went on there and he was actually using these people, our deployed troops as bait to throw in the face of some democratic lawmakers by saying, you know, you dishonor our troops here by calling into question this mission. And I actually did a show just before we came on here, I said, no, we're not no one's calling into question their dedication. We're calling into question your judgment to put them in a position where they can't win, and now four hundred are wounded and thirteen are dead so far. So that's, I think, the bigger question that needs to be answered. Speaker 0: Yeah. Doug, do you wanna take that as well? I mean, saying that you accusing The US troops of just like spreading falsehoods. This idea that those service members said publicly that they were moving them to a completely undefended location in Kuwait, and then six soldiers were killed as a result of it. He says they're just spreading falsehoods. Speaker 1: It's personal. Speaker 5: Well, the first thing is that president Trump has never made his case to congress or to the American people about the need for this conflict. He simply acted independently. I think he didn't bother going to Congress because he knew that the Israel lobby and its agents in The United States effectively control Congress. And so he probably decided, I don't need to go over there. And if you go back to his, state of the union speech when he mentioned that Iran must never have a a nuclear weapon, well, everybody stood up and gave him a standing ovation. But the problem is he never went to the American people. And contrary to popular belief, the American people are not necessarily a 100% aligned with the congress. That's pretty obvious. And then in addition to not having gone to the American people, has any of this ever been adequately explained to the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines that you expect to fight? We we actually received pretty thorough briefings from the entire chain of command starting with president George Herbert Walker Bush all the way down back in 1990. Everybody knew why we were there. Everybody recognized that we didn't want the oil fields to fall into the hands of Saddam Hussein. There was concern that he might just keep going and move right through Kuwait and straight down the coast on the Arabian Peninsula. So I think everybody understood that. And it was made clear that we were not necessarily going to stay there in perpetuity, and the rest is history. There's been no effort on the part of the president to communicate anything. Now having said all of that, the secretary of defense did not personally order these soldiers to some location where they were unfortunately killed and wounded. That's not the way it works. And I think most people know that. To blame the secretary of defense for everything that happens anywhere at any time, particularly in combat zone, is ridiculous. Secretaries of, of war, specifically during World War two in Korea and Vietnam, did hold forth and explain why things had happened. But I've never seen the kind of hostility, lack of confidence, that that you see in the congress right now directed at a secretary of war or secretary of defense. I mean, that's Yeah. That's new to me. I I've just not seen that. Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, when you see that yeah. When when you see that this Pentagon is doing the bidding of Netanyahu and what the Israelis want, you also see the silence that's happening now on Lebanon. And, in a few minutes here, we're gonna be joined by a reporter, Steve Sweeney from Beirut, of course, who was target targeted in an assassination attempt there for covering the war. But by all accounts, there is a genocide unfolding in Southern Lebanon right now. Entire neighborhoods, infrastructure, hospitals, schools, civilian infrastructure being totally decimated. And it looks like Gaza two point o. The world seems or at least The United States seems silent on it, of course. Colonel Davis, I'll start with you on Lebanon. What do you see happening here? And where will the Gulf States be in support or distancing themselves for from Lebanon? Speaker 3: You know what? I was I was actually on, Mario Nafal show. I think it was yesterday, and he started showing some footage from, Southern Lebanon that I had not seen up until that point. And I mean, I was just shocked. I thought for a minute that it was Gaza, but then I could tell from the terrain that was different, then I thought, Oh my God, that's new. And it looked like a nuclear weapon had gone off. I mean there was that level of utter destruction. There was hardly any structures that were still left standing. And I'm saying from a military perspective you can't hide behind this ridiculous statement that the Israelis have been saying for so long that, Oh, well, there was Hezbollah fighters in there, and they were using his human shields and hiding behind whatever hospitals and anything else. So, we just had to go in and take it out. That's self evidently untrue. But, unfortunately, it it just keeps working, and so they just keep doing it. And you can see that it's a methodical destruction of the territory on there, and there's no military need for it whatsoever. It's just we're gonna mow the grass of everything that exists and get it out. I I don't know what their ultimate purpose is, whether it's just ethnic cleansing or just moving everything back so that there's not even a theoretical possibility of anybody can use in that territory for anything against Israel. I don't know. But that is a real question, how long will the global population, and not just the regions, the countries in the region, but the whole global population just sit passively by and watch this methodical destruction? I mean in in the last year, toward the end of the summer and into the early fall, there was a lot of uprising because of what was happening in in in Palestine people in Gaza. And you saw, you know, the Manuel Macron and French people, I'm sorry, some British folks, etcetera, they were all saying, Hey, are going to recognize the Palestinian state to put pressure on Israel. And so, then they backed off a little bit, Speaker 4: and at Speaker 3: least gave some eye dressing to having a so called cease fire which has been anything but. But it placated people enough, and so really Israel went to a lower level of war. They didn't really go into a cease fire. Kind of the same thing in Lebanon so far that we've seen. But one wonders at some point are the people going to get back up to annoyed enough to say, you're still doing it in the in the Gaza, you're you're still doing versions of it in the West Bank, and now here in Lebanon, and you never gave up the territory you took in Syria either. I mean, I I I wonder if there is a limit. So far, there doesn't seem to be one. Speaker 0: Yeah. Is the footage you're referring to, by the way. This is Israel. Speaker 3: Yeah. That's exactly it. Speaker 0: Doug, what do you what do you have to say about that? Speaker 5: I think that this Israeli war for the greater Israel project is the catalyst for the collapse of American power around the world because we have unconditionally supported it. We're on a road to an economic crisis, a financial catastrophe, something that we really haven't experienced since the 1930s. That's how bad it's going to be. Until it gets that bad, people are not going to stand up. They're not going to go into the streets. They're not gonna make their views felt and understood in Washington. And right now, both the Senate, the House, and the White House, all of these three institutions are firmly in the grip of the lobby. So when this collapse comes, and I think it's coming sometime this year, it's gonna be god awful hell to pay for the Israelis, and it's going to be the end of this administration, and probably the end for most of the people on the hill. I think that's how serious it's going to get. It's hard for people to imagine, because what we're really seeing happen right now is a movement from abundance, which we've had now for decades, an abundance of oil, an abundance of cash, an abundance of everything, to scarcity. We're suddenly not going to enjoy the living standard that we've enjoyed for so long. We're gonna look a lot like Great Britain after World War two, hopelessly debt written and busy extracting our forces from everywhere in the world to try and cut expenses and get back on our feet. And we all know, historically, Great Britain never got back on its feet. It was finished after World War two. I hope it's not gonna be that bad, but the way I see it right now, if if things happen as I anticipate, we're gonna have a larger war. Let's assume you just stick with the blockade initially. How long before others show up to force your blockade to end? Are we going to try and extend this blockade to becoming a global event? That that's already been uttered by the secretary of war. He said we're going to have a global blockade. You've got, general Kane who's talked about, boarding ships and blockading ships that are coming out of the Persian Gulf and headed somewhere inside the Strait Of Malacca. I mean, talk talk about stupidity on stilts, taking something that should already be over. It should have ended, and now turning it into a global phenomenon that's going to lead to a global war of some kind. And I just don't see anything good happening for us, and I don't see the American people profiting in any way. And and I don't blame the American people for their complacency. Americans are human beings. If they're not hurt immediately, if they don't feel immediate pain, their tendency is, well, let's see how this turns out. This is not gonna turn out well. It's gonna turn out very badly. Speaker 0: Yeah. I think you're right. I think so many people, going about their lives, they're not intentionally burying their heads in the sand. But until they notice it on the grocery store shelves or they see it at the gas tank in a much larger capacity, the, you know, inflation going up and housing prices coming down, and mortgage rates going back up, and all of these things that are tied to this, lack of food on the table, etcetera. That's when they're gonna there's gonna be an awakening. And I I hope that people wake up ahead of that, but I don't anticipate. Just a few minutes ago, Natalie just shared this with me. This is disgusting. But this is Benjamin Netanyahu just posting this on social media about Lebanon just a few minutes ago. Says Lebanon continuing and, just sharing, bombs just hitting infrastructure all throughout Lebanon. So this is the Jeez. This is the president of of Israel, prime minister of Israel, just sharing. Speaker 1: Just sharing their war crimes. Just might as well put it out there so we don't catch them. Speaker 0: Colonel Davis, colonel MacGregor, great to see both of you. Thank you so much for your analysis as always. And, we hope that cooler heads prevail, but god knows that doesn't seem to be the case. Thank you both gentlemen. Great to see you. Speaker 3: Thanks for having us. Speaker 0: Bye bye. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 2, 2026 at 11:04 PM

Saved - May 3, 2026 at 3:12 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🇮🇱 Israel is bombing bridges, targeting ambulances, and blocking humanitarian aid from reaching southern Lebanon. 25% of the population faces acute hunger. @SweeneySteve is reporting from Beirut after midnight and has one word for it: Gaza 2.0. https://t.co/lNIFeuR528

Video Transcript AI Summary

Israel’s bombing campaign in southern Lebanon continued this morning, with devastating strikes on civilian infrastructure, houses, schools, and hospitals. A social media post by Benjamin Netanyahu about Lebanon continuing the attack was shown, illustrating the ongoing bombardment and civilian toll. Footage included an Israeli soldier taking a selfie amid destruction. The segment emphasizes that this destruction is happening in Lebanon, not Gaza, and that civilians are being killed and infrastructure decimated. Steve Sweeney, RT bureau chief, reports from Beirut and confirms there is no ceasefire. He states there has never been a ceasefire since March 2, when Israel escalated its war on Lebanon. Since then, 2,500 people or more have been killed, the majority in the South of Lebanon, according to the Lebanese health ministry. The previous ceasefire, declared on 11/27/2024, was never adhered to; the UNIFIL peacekeepers recorded about 15,400 breaches by Israel over that period. Bombing has largely been conducted by air, with settlements and towns in southern Lebanon repeatedly destroyed. Sweeney describes the attacks as a continuation of Gaza-style destruction, calling the South of Lebanon “Gaza two point zero” and Lebanon’s Nakba. He notes that in Bint Jbeil (capital of resistance) Israeli operations included a ground encirclement followed by fierce Hezbollah resistance, but most destruction has come from air strikes. He recounts that Israeli maps showing settlements harboring Hezbollah weapons were often inaccurate; in Batlaya (Bateleaf) they found many homes already destroyed or homes with ordinary basements—not actual Hezbollah tunnels or weapons caches. Since the ceasefire’s April 16 implementation, Israel created a Gaza-style yellow zone, making 55 settlements entirely inaccessible and effectively a kill zone, with soldiers reportedly instructed to open fire on anything within the area, including unarmed civilians. Sweeney highlights the killing of Amal Khalil, a respected Lebanese journalist, near the yellow zone. He describes how Amal and colleagues sought shelter in a building, which was struck after Lebanese emergency services were blocked from accessing it, resulting in Khalil’s death. Her colleague Zena Farage was rescued with serious injuries; ambulances were shot at en route to Tebnine Hospital, which itself came under attack. He notes this pattern of attacking hospitals, schools, and civilian targets, while IDF videos circulate showing soldiers detonating buildings and graffiti. He mentions the destruction of Shimu Al Safar (Saint Peter’s site) and the killing of a priest in Qlaia, illustrating broader attacks on Christian sites and communities. Sweeney observes a broader humanitarian crisis: 1,200,000 people displaced in Lebanon (about 20% of the population), with most internally displaced in Beirut. Food and medical supply shortages are severe, and prices for food and petrol have surged. Bridges across the Natani River were bombed, isolating the south and hindering humanitarian aid. Civil services are strained, with NGOs and volunteers bearing the burden. He notes that the U.S.-backed regional economic plans—linked to a broader “Greater Israel Project” and proposals such as a regeneration scheme funded by U.S. and Gulf money—would depopulate and displace communities, conceptually aligning with how land and settlements in southern Lebanon are being treated amidst the current bombardment. The interview concludes with questions about evacuation notices, propaganda, and the role of journalists in documenting events, acknowledging the ongoing, dire humanitarian situation and the difficulty of delivering aid while bombardment continues. Steve Sweeney reinforces that the situation remains grim, with a humanitarian catastrophe potentially unfolding as the conflict persists.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, Israel's bombing of Southern Lebanon continued this morning. Devastating strikes on civilian, infrastructure once again, to the point where Benjamin Netanyahu just, a few minutes ago posting this little tweet here. Lebanon continuing, which is, you know, continuing. So sharing a social media post of all of the bombings that are happening, civilian infrastructure and otherwise, and hitting houses and schools and hospitals. That's exactly what he loves to do, of course. It's one of his favorite pastimes. Just take a look at some of the targeting, from this morning and some of the some of the footage coming in from this morning. Watch. So that's just some of the infrastructure being decimated. And Israeli soldier doing a selfie, posting video, of himself showing utter destruction. You would think, oh, this is Gaza. Right? Clearly looks like Gaza and what Israel loves to do there in, total destruction. But no, this is Lebanon. And Israeli soldiers sharing the I mean, nothing left. A Speaker 1: tree. His labor. Speaker 0: Not a tree, not a school, not a house, nothing. Absolutely nothing. Not only is Israel targeting civilians, they're once again actively killing journalists. They haven't stopped doing that by the hundreds, by the way. Steve Sweeney is the bureau chief at RT. He was reporting from Lebanon when Israel tried to assassinate him and his crew. Watch this. Speaker 2: Further rocket attacks were reported against Nahariya on a minute. Fucking hell. Speaker 0: Intentional targeting. And Steve Sweeney joins us today from Beirut, Lebanon with the very latest on this. Steve, thank you for your incredible reporting and bravery. And maybe you can just give us an update. We just saw the president, prime minister of Israel posting that video, sort of celebrating that it's continuing in Lebanon despite what the world was hearing that there is a ceasefire. Here is his post, again, just a few minutes ago. Lebanon continuing. So what is what are what is the state of this so called ceasefire and the attacks that you're seeing? Speaker 2: Well, first of all, we we should say that there isn't a ceasefire. There never has been a ceasefire since March 2, which is when we we we called it the Israeli escalation in in the war on on Lebanon. This is when they started the bombing of Beirut once more. We woke up that morning with around something between eight and ten blasts attacking capital city. Now since then, two thousand five hundred people or more than 2,500 people have been killed. That's according to the Lebanese health ministry, and the majority of those people have been killed in the South Of Lebanon. Now the previous ceasefire came into effect on 11/27/2024. And again, that ceasefire was never adhered to. The only one side ceasefire. In fact, there were something like 15,400 breaches for, violations of that ceasefire by, Israel, over that period. That's according to the United Nations, the UNIFIL peacekeepers, the, that monitor, that ceasefire. Now those breaches took place on a daily basis. They were targeting civilian infrastructure as your previous segment showed. I think part of that footage was of Binger Bail, which is called capital of resistance here in Lebanon. It's where side has a nest runner made a very famous speech in 2006 after Lebanon had pushed the Israelis out during what they call the July war. And he made a speech in the, in the stadium there and he called Israel weaker than a spider's web. So this destruction that you're seeing on your on your screen now is seen largely as revenge. Now, there was intense battle for control of that city starting after the latest ground invasion by the Israelis. They encircled the city, but they met fierce resistance from Hezbollah fighters who didn't allow them to take control of the city. So all of the destruction that you're seeing there, most of that has come, via air strikes. There were also, a number of, of settlements that have been detonated. And you probably saw the footage of of Al Kantara, which was just a day or so ago subjected to this huge blast, this huge detonation. Israel always says that it's targeting Hezbollah infrastructure, Hezbollah tunnels, this kind of thing. But the reality on the ground is is very different, and we've witnessed this firsthand. We've been on the ground for the past two years. We've been to, for example, Baitlif, the Israelis issued a map and they said that there were, I think, 34 settlements that were harboring Hezbollah weapons in the basements of these homes and that those homes were then going to be destroyed. Now, we went to Bateleaf as soon after they issued this this map and you've probably seen these maps that the IDF issues. They often issue them over social media and we went to the majority of those homes. Now, as I recall, more than 20 of them were already destroyed, so there were no homes there. There were there could not have been any Hezbollah weapons in those homes. The rest of the homes, we actually went inside the basements, and they were kind of ordinary people's homes. They had, you know, wood like firewood and ordinary ordinary domestic stuff that you would find in any basement in any city anywhere in the world. So what you're seeing now, and I think what's getting more global attention, is this whole scale destruction of of Southern Lebanon. But for for the people here, this isn't anything new. Now we speak about what's happening in in, in the South Of Lebanon. We call it Gaza two point zero. This is the kind of the scale of the destruction that you're seeing. There's whole settlements, whole villages, towns that have been that have been flattened, but this has been going on since, at the very least since November 2024. During that time, there was the ceasefire was declared, and Israel was supposed to withdraw from Lebanese sovereign territory, but it didn't do so. Now for parts of the South, that ceasefire was extended until February 2025. We were on the ground with villagers as they returned. But what was happening was that the Israelis were digging in, and as the villagers tried to return to their homes, the Israelis were opening fire. Now this happened to us as a group of journalists entering one of the border villages, a place called Hula, where the Israelis not only opened fire on journalists, they shot at paramedics. They kidnapped or held hostage around 20 people. But what they did also did was they shot a a teenage girl, Khadija Atwy, her name was, and they left her to die in a pool of blood, and they refused to allow the emergency services to attend to her body. She could have been saved. We don't know. But it required intervention from the United Nations in order to retrieve that body. She was left there dying alone for for at least twenty four hours. Her family were very close by, but they were unable to reach her. And the we'd like to say this was a a one off, but this is a scenario that's been played out time and time again over the past two years, and the targets have been school buildings. In Bingerville, they destroyed two of the the municipal school buildings there. They've targeted hospitals again in in Bingeville. They said again that this was harboring Hezbollah fighters and Hezbollah weapons. Again, we did a tour of the entire hospital when we found a fully functioning civilian hospital with doctors and medical staff treating ordinary patients. So, we, like I said, we call it like a Gaza two point zero. But what you're seeing in Lebanon now is, the escalation of this, the escalation of, of the destruction. And, it's we we're we're calling it like a Lebanon's Nakba. Of course, this is a reference to the forced displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians on the creation of the state of Israel. But this scenario is now being played out again here in Lebanon. 1,200,000 people are now displaced in Lebanon. And to think of the size of Lebanon, we're talking about 20% or so of the population of Lebanon have been displaced from the South. And Israel has said that it wants we we've heard the language from people like Smotrich, the the Israeli finance minister who spoke about Dahir, which is the southern suburb of Beirut. And he said he wants to turn that into Khan Yunis. And in in the South of Lebanon, Israel Katz, the defense minister has given the examples of Rafa and bait her noon. Just yesterday, he said that Hezbollah and the Lebanese government are playing with fire and that Lebanon and the cedars of Lebanon will burn. So, obviously, the cedar is the is the symbol of of Lebanon. So this was a hugely evocative statement, and he, you know, he said that he wants to destroy all of the what he calls the the frontline villages, all of these border villages. What Israel has done since the so called ceasefire came into effect on April 16 is create a Gaza style yellow zone. So that means that some 55 settlements, 55 towns, villages, and other settlements, are now in that zone. They're completely inaccessible to the people that live there, the people that the land belongs to. And anything in that area is now well, effectively, it's become a kill zone. This is according to a report in the Jerusalem Post that Israeli soldiers, are being instructed to open fire on anything within that zone, whether it's an unarmed civilian or a Hezbollah fighter. So anything that operates within that zone is now effectively a target. Now we saw almost to the a week ago, almost to the hour, the killing of a very dear friend and colleague journalist, Amal Khalil. Now, again, this is something your viewers may be aware of because there was global outrage at the killing. Israel was killed nine journalists at least so far so far this year, but the killing of Amal Khalil was particularly brutal. Now, Amal was very well known. She was very well loved by everybody. She was a daughter of of the South, and she'd been working in the field since 2006. So she was a very experienced journalist, but what she did was very special. It was very unique. She would go from village to village, from town to town, and she would speak to the locals there. And they would share with her their experiences of the brutality that's been meted out to them by by the Israelis. So she was a very, very powerful voice. Now she was somewhere very close to that so called yellow zone. Some say she was inside the yellow zone, but she was traveling in in a convoy. The vehicle in front of her was struck by the Israelis. The occupants, two occupants of that car were killed instantly. But her and her colleagues and at Farage, they managed to make their way to a building nearby, to take shelter. They thought they were safe in there. Amar was alive and well. She'd contacted her family and her news editors and the Lebanese army to alert them to the fact that they were trapped in this building and to calling for for emergency help. Now as the the Lebanese Red Cross and the civil defense workers and the Lebanese army tried to make their way to that house. They too came under under fire. The Lebanese, the Israeli soldiers, sorry, refused to allow them to access the building. Then a couple of hours, an hour and a half or so after they took shelter, Israel then struck that building. Now this was a three story building. It collapsed on top of them. It took seven hours for the, for the rescue effort to actually make its way to that building. Now there was, a lot of behind the scenes negotiations. The Lebanese president, Joseph Ohm, was effectively forced to beg the Israeli army to allow Lebanese emergency services to rescue Lebanese civilians. Now, Zena Farage, well, she was, she was pulled from the rubble alive, but seriously wounded. She was rushed to Tebnein Hospital, a hospital that is itself come under attack. While she was in the ambulance on the way to that hospital, that ambulance came under fire. And we've seen the images of that with the ambulance riddled with bullet marks. And then very sadly when they made their way to to Amal. Unfortunately, the sad news came through around eleven p. M. On Wednesday last week that she didn't survive. She didn't make it, but had the emergency services been allowed access to the site of the attack, it's you know, it could be a very different scenario, and Amal could still be with us today. So the situation is is pretty grim. We can't we can't talk about a ceasefire. It's it would be absurd to talk about a ceasefire. The attacks are relentless every single day, almost every hour. Somewhere in the South is being bombed. In the Lebanese capital Beirut. There's been a slight reprieve. I guess you could say, although we have had a number of occasions where Israel has flown drones over the city. This is part of that psychological warfare against the people here. And, just this afternoon, there was a fighter jet, that was roaring, over over the city. So, of course, this makes people incredibly nervous because it's only, two or three weeks ago now that the Lebanese capital was again subjected to this, Blitzkrieg attack. Israel launched something like a 100 airstrikes in the in the space of of of ten minutes, not just in not just in Beirut, also in in Beqarah and the South. But, again, I was sort of caught up in in the in the middle of this when they bombed outside of the target zone. Yes. You can see on your screen there now. This was an incredibly powerful blast. And, Israel, you know, claimed that it was striking Hezbollah positions, but I attended the scene of of many of these attacks, and these were ordinary civilian apartment blocks. So the the the destruction and in in amongst the rubble, you could see ordinary household items. You could see children's toys and this kind of things. And the majority of the victims of that of those strikes, more than 300 people, more than 350 now, I think that it's been revised upwards because many of the bodies were unidentified for for a very long time, more than 350 people killed. And the majority of those were civilians. And and this is a thing. Israel doesn't distinguish between Hezbollah fighters or civilians. And in fact, it doesn't care because it's been able to carry out all of these attacks, all of all of which are war crimes. The targeting of schools, targeting of hospitals, the targeting of civilian homes, the use of, white phosphorus, the spraying of of chemicals to destroy, the land there, to make it uninhabitable. Now one of your previous guests was talking about the Greater Israel Project, and that's part of what lies lies behind this. And, you know, not so long ago, the greater Israel project was written off as, you know, a conspiracy theory, but we know now that it isn't a conspiracy theory. It doesn't sit on the fringes of Israeli society either. It's not just confined to the likes of of Smotrich and and Ben Gavir who are part of the government, but also the prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Now you'll see with this the so called yellow zone. And this, I think, makes it very clear what the what this is what this is about. You see now that it extends not just to the land, but it extends outwards to into the sea to the Kano oil field. I think block nine blocks nine and block block 10 of this oil field off the coast of of Lebanon. This could be could have been hugely transformational for a country that let's face it, could really do with that money in terms of rebuilding the infrastructure, you know, on on the ground here. But now that is deemed by Israel to be part of this yellow zone. Now, again, the Greater Israel project is is what the Israelis are calling it. They talk about security buffer zones. But if you cast your mind back to August, The US envoy Tom Barak, He was in and out of Lebanon quite a lot. There was a flurry of diplomatic activity, but in August in a press conference, the the kind of the sound bite in the headlines from that came when he described Lebanese journalists as animalistic, which was obviously, incredibly, racist, incredibly offensive. But what lay behind that was this so called Trump Economic Zone, which he laid out. Now, we've seen this in various different guises over the years, but this was a plan funded by The United States and with golf money from Saudi Arabia and Qatar. It was branded as a regeneration project, but it's almost identical to Trump's project for Bourgaza. You know, they're seeing it this is, as prime as prime real estate. And what it entailed was the, what they called these villages and towns and settlements would be depopulated, which is a polite term for, ethnically cleansed, and they would be permanently, the people that that live there would be permanently displaced. These are people that have lived on that land for for generations. The land, you know, belongs, belongs to the people. It's not, you know, it's not theirs to sell off, but that that was, that was the plan. And now we're seeing this, you know, the the military assault by Israel, which is trying to take that land now by force. So the situation remains incredibly grim. The death toll continues to rise, and it's ordinary people, health workers, again, three killed in a a massacre yesterday that are bearing the brunt. Speaker 1: Gosh. You know, some of the ways that people justify this when you see the rhetoric online as well. Israel gives these notice of bombing raids. So, you know, that's why they that's why this is justified. Speaker 0: They send text messages. Speaker 1: They they drop leaflets. They send text messages. I wonder how you follow that logic because wouldn't Hezbollah be getting those messages too and just leave, in which case you don't have to destroy a whole city? That's one question. And then my second part of this question is, if Benjamin Netanyahu is going to put this destruction on his social media, what is the point of targeting journalists now that they're showing it to us? Can you follow this propaganda at all, or is it just propaganda that logical people should not give any creed to? Speaker 2: Well, just on the issue of the evacuation orders. During the war in 2024, we for the first three weeks, did we did some some work. We investigated and and and looked into the time between the evacuation orders being issued and the first strike taking place. Now you have to remember these evacuation orders at that time were issued in, built up civilian areas, and, these are areas that often have very poor Internet access, and that's how they're issued is is over Twitter, x as it's called now, obviously. And they were issued sometimes in the middle of the night. So people were being alerted to these evacuation orders by gunfire. But at that time, in the first three weeks of the twenty twenty four war, the shortest time between the evacuation order being issued and the the strike taking place was four minutes, and the maximum time was was twenty nine minutes. So that will tell you something about these the kind of evacuation orders that are issued by the most moral army in the world. Large numbers of the buildings that they issue evacuation orders for as well were empty. They would issue an evacuation order for an empty building. And as you quite rightly pointed out, if they're issuing an evacuation order and Hezbollah sees the evacuation order, then they're not gonna be there when the strike takes place in in the first place. So this was largely a propaganda exercise to say, look. We're you know, we we care for civilians. We don't we don't want to kill civilians. We're even telling them that we're going to blow up their buildings. But the reality is, in fact, very different. People either had very little time to get out of those buildings or as I said, the buildings that they struck were were empty. It's the buildings that they struck without warning where the most casualties took place. And as you said, Benjamin Nestinya, who is now openly sharing, footage on online of the destruction of Lebanon. But it's not just him. The, individual soldiers from the Israeli Defense Force have also shared these kind of videos, and they've shared them proudly, them detonating and blowing up buildings, going into people's homes, spraying graffiti over the walls, destroying what's inside. And we saw a week or so ago in in Debow, which is the one of the Christian villages that sits very close to the border. Now these there's a small number of of Christian towns and villages where the residents had stayed. They believed that they were going to be spared the the the Israeli aggression, but you'd have seen the video that went viral of an IDF soldier beheading a statue of of Jesus. Now, again, this provoked revulsion, and Benjamin Netanyahu responded and said, this doesn't sit, with the the values of the IDF, but, this is this is untrue. And, you know, I've worked Speaker 0: in exactly what the IDF values are. Yes. Yeah. Speaker 2: And it fits entirely with their values. It fits entirely with what they've been doing in the South Of Of Lebanon. They've destroyed for example, in 2024, they destroyed a church in a place called. Not only did they destroy the the church, they attacked the the the parish offices, killing eight people inside. In Yerun, they destroyed the church of, of Saint George. They also destroyed the Imam Ali Mosque, which is very close by. But, again, you've seen probably seen the footage of an IDF soldier, destroying the statue of, of Saint George. And perhaps the the the the the worst was the destruction of the site of Shimu Al Safar. Now this is a religious site for both Muslims and and Christians. Shimu Al Safar is known by Christians as Saint Peter, and he's believed by many Catholics to be the first pope, and it's believed that he's he's buried there. Now, the Israelis destroyed that during the twenty twenty four war. They also destroyed it again very recently. It'd been there'd been efforts made to rebuild it, but they went in and and they destroyed that. So this notion that the that the Israelis care about the the Christians in in Lebanon, well, it simply, simply isn't true. And, again, we saw in Qlaia, which is, again, one of the other, border villages, the assassination of the local priest there. Now, again, he was a priest that was that had stayed behind with his parishioners. There was an Israeli strike, and he went to, tend to his flock as as I believe the Christians, call their, their their their followers, and he went to attend to some of the members that are being caught up in that Israeli strike, and then, he was killed himself. So this is entirely fitting with the values of the IDF. And, again, we've seen that with the treatment of Palestinian, Christians, and and we've seen it with the Israelis spitting, Christians. I believe there was a church, somewhere in in the occupied territories where the church actually set up a camera, to film people as they walk past to just to kind of show, what they've been, subjected to. So this is, again, the the the, investigations apparently are are are taking place. The the IDF, in fact, in a propaganda piece said that they'd replaced the statue in in devil, the statue of the beheaded Jesus, when, in fact, the villagers rejected rejected the the Israelis offer, and it was Italian peacekeepers from from Uniphil that went and and restored that. So there was a lot of effort to face saving, but we keep hearing this time and time again when they're caught out and when there's kind of this global outrage at the actions of the IDF soldiers. We're told that there it doesn't fit with the with their values and that there's an investigation. Of course, we never hear the outcomes of those investigations, and I think that they try and bury it so that people forget about it. Speaker 0: Steve, we'll get you out of here. I know it's after midnight there in Beirut, so I wanna be respectful of your time. Just one more question here, and that is what the Cradle, has been reporting about food insecurity and, basically acute hunger that one fourth of Lebanon's population now is facing acute hunger because of The US backed Israeli war. Twenty five percent of the population is hit critical levels of food insecurity. Are have you noticed this at stores, food flowing in or food supplies? What are you seeing on the ground from your reporting? Speaker 2: Well, I mean, there there there are obviously huge difficulties, not just with food, but with medical supplies. And, you know, that situation has worsened because as I said at the beginning, there's 1,200,000 people internally displaced in in Lebanon. The large majority of those are in the capital, Beirut. And, of course, pressure is bearing down on the services that they would that they would usually use, the shelters, the municipal buildings that the government opens are now packed to capacity. And, of course, there are huge food shortages. And the the the difficulty is that Lebanon as a state is a barely functioning state in in in many ways. So a lot of the a lot of these services are not provided by the state itself, but by volunteers. So the people are being fed, of course, by by volunteers. There are NGOs and other organizations, which are doing this kind of outreach work and getting to people on the street. But, of course, coupled with this with with these shortages of of getting food, to the people, there's a huge rise in prices of, pretty much all goods. Food prices, have rocketed. The price of petrol has rocketed, which, of course, that has the knock on effect of, increase in transport costs and, the increase in in getting food, to the people. So there is this this growing humanitarian, crisis unfolding, here in Lebanon. The services are doing the best that they can to deal with it. But, of course, you know, there's only so much that that they can do. And as long as the Israeli bombardment continues, I mean, there's whole areas, particularly in the South Of Lebanon, are entirely cut off from everything. Israel bombed most of the bridges across the Natani River, which effectively separates the South Of Lebanon from from the rest of the country. It means that, aid humanitarian aid is unable to reach those places. So there are huge shortages, not just of food, but also, of water as well. The damage to the electricity supply also has an effect because, many of the, the villages, sometimes they don't have state electricity, so they rely on solar panels. And once those are destroyed, those are the kind of things that that they power the water supply and water pump. So the situation is pretty desperate right now. And with the continued Israeli bombardment and, of course, many of those services themselves come under attack by the by the Israelis as well. They accuse ambulances. They accuse humanitarian aid vehicles of of carrying Hezbollah fighters, Hezbollah weapons, and this kind of thing. So they all become legitimate targets. So the the situation now is, you know, it's bordering on on the brink of a humanitarian catastrophe. Speaker 0: Steve Sweeney joins us from Beirut, Lebanon with this incredibly eye opening report. I hope the world pays attention to this because it's being silenced. It's being suppressed about what's actually happening there as you describe it as Gaza two point o, specifically in Southern Lebanon. Steve, thank you for your incredible journalism and bravery and reporting. And we hope that we'll be able to connect with you again real soon. Thank you for staying up late with us there after midnight. We appreciate it. Thank you, Steve. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 1, 2026 at 11:54 PM

Saved - May 2, 2026 at 1:44 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🤯 Fertilizer that doesn't arrive by May won't be applied. Sudan is already on the edge. @Michael_Yon says the Strait of Malacca closes next, famine hits by 2027, and every single choke point is being shut down on purpose. https://t.co/eyKkn00XRj

Video Transcript AI Summary

The segment centers on what hosts and guests describe as a “great fertilizer shock” that could trigger a global food crisis or famine. They argue that data and events point to a looming famine, potentially guaranteed to occur from late 2026 to mid-2027 if strategic chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz remain closed. The discussion highlights that current visible food availability in U.S. stores masks deeper fragility abroad, noting that much food in shelves may be from last year’s harvest rather than current production. The guest, Michael Yon, a former U.S. Green Beret turned journalist, has been warning for years about global famine linked to disruptions in fertilizer supply and key shipping routes. He cites data and warnings from various observers, including a reference to Mike Adams of Natural News, who notes that countries like Sudan are highly exposed because more than half of their fertilizer comes from the Gulf, and that civil conflict compounds planting timelines (Sudan’s planting season runs June–July). Other nations cited as facing ticking time bombs include Ethiopia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. He also notes that even with buffers in India and Brazil, the systemic fragility remains, and the poorest smallholders in the Sahel may struggle to obtain an adequate diet. Yon explains that fertilizer disruption is part of a broader pattern of efforts to create famine to reduce the global population and control populations through various means, including AI and geoengineering. He argues that the “beast” is aiming to create famine and osmotic pressure that drives mass migration, which he connects to observed migration patterns across the Darién Gap, the U.S.–Mexico border, and elsewhere. He also discusses strategic chokepoints and potential war dynamics: closing the Strait of Malacca would be a critical blow to global trade, given its traffic, and he mentions that Indonesia is a focal point due to its leverage and regional politics with China and Israel. He suggests that closing Hormuz, Malacca, and Turkish and Danish straits could be moves to induce hunger and disrupt food flows, with Panama’s canal and interoceanic trade playing a pivotal role in these dynamics. He also references the Baltic region, the Arctic, and Denmark’s Maersk influence, implying a broad web of logistics and geopolitical maneuvering around food supply. The conversation weaves in the idea that various geopolitical actors—described as Zionist and Chinese/CCP factions, along with Russian and other oligarchic groups—are in conflict over control of resources and routes, and that these clashes manifest as attempts to degrade global food systems. They connect these tensions to depopulation theories and to specific incidents and alignments in places like Argentina and the Malvinas, suggesting long-running strategic competition over food security and shipping corridors. Note: The discussion includes speculative claims about geopolitical actors and depopulation strategies. Promotional content present in the original transcript (unrelated product advertising) has been omitted from this summary.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, it's being called the great fertilizer shock. Are we about to face a global food crisis and famine? Has it already started? And we're just now waking up to it. Thanks to the worst fertilizer crisis in modern history. If you look at American food shelves, it probably doesn't look that way. You can probably still run into your Kroger or whatever and see store shelves lined with all kinds of processed food. That's great. But that's grown that was food grown last year. Before this happened, packaged, put up in cans. We need to look deeper, and we need to look at what's happening in other parts of the world right now. And we simply need to look at the data, which is deeply disturbing, thanks to this war in Iran. Friend of the show Mike Adams over at Natural News just wrote this last night. Data is now showing a potential full blown famine guaranteed to take place from late twenty twenty six to mid twenty twenty seven if the Strait Of Hormuz isn't open soon. Sudan, the most exposed, more than half of its fertilizer comes from The Gulf. The country is in the grip of a civil war. Its planting season runs from June to July. This is a recipe for mass starvation. It's being treated as a secondary concern. Ethiopia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, each face their own ticking time bomb ticking clock. Fertilizer that doesn't arrive by May is fertilizer that won't be applied. The ripple effects will hit the lean season of 2027. Even countries like India, Brazil have some buffers throughout stockpiles or later planting windows, but that only masks the systemic fragility. The poorest smallholders in Bahar and Sahel have no such safety net. As one study notes below certain income levels, it may simply not be possible to obtain an adequate diet. And these are people who will die first, he writes. Now no one has traveled the world and studied these global movements more than our next guest. I'd I'd be willing to bet. I'd be willing to absolutely bet. Michael Yon is that person. He's a former US Green Beret turned journalist who spends his time going into the most remote regions on earth from location to location, studying mass migratory patterns, shipping trades, Gulf surveillance, all of these like choke points, Panama, the Strait Of Malacca, all of the Gulf countries. He's been warning for at least the past six years that this was coming. Here was a post from 2023 just as an example. The coming Giga famine will be the most severe famine in human history as he's targeting about all the 50 fertilizer production facilities closing all across Europe. Right now, it's 5AM in Japan. And Michael has been warning about this for a long time. He's been kind enough to join us, wake up early with us in Japan to talk all about this. Michael, welcome back to the show. Great to see you. Speaker 1: Thanks for having me on. And, I'm in Japan. As you just mentioned, this is not the ideal place to be in a global famine, which is something I've warned for years. In fact, I've warned the Japanese for years that if you see the Strait Of Hormuz and some other places get closed down, especially Hormuz for any extended time, you you should you should stock up on food and think about, you know, the how how how serious this can get. But, you know, at this point, Strait Of Malacca is on the chopping board for being closed. Now keep in mind, the reason that Masako and I have been so accurate on predicting so many things like the Groningen gas field would close in Netherlands, biggest gas field in Europe. We successfully predicted that. We were in Netherlands quite a bit researching that actually before it happened. And let's say Nord Stream, we were in Germany predicting that before Nord Stream was cut. We were publishing. We thought Nord Stream was gonna get cut. And and it did. Right? And and and so many other things like screw worms coming up from Panama back to The United States. We predicted that several, maybe three or four years in advance, maybe four. And in any case, how are we getting this? Because we know what the beast is up to. Because the beast says it and does these things, we can clearly see that they're trying to create global famine. That's obvious. Right? And so with global famine, you can do many things if you want to destroy the world as we know it. One is you can create a lot of hop, Human osmotic pressure. Human osmotic pressure is the push and pull of migration. So you see these years that we've spent in places like the Darien Gap and Panama or across the entire I've been across the entire US Southern Border watching the invasion. All of these things have set the table, set conditions. They've been shaping operations for what's now unfolding, which is famine and a huge amount of human osmotic pressure, which can put hundreds of millions to people, you know, flooding over borders into Europe. They've already done so, but also flooding over you know, increased flooding of people into The United States and other places. But at the end of the day, we can see that famine is is coming, and that's how I think that you're gonna be able to see other things that are gonna unfold, such as closing the Strait Of Malacca. Strait Of Malacca does maybe 7x more traffic than Panama Canal, and Panama Canal is absolutely vital to The United States. Now, I think you're going to see other wars unfold eventually. Okay, you've got up on the map there, Strait Of and the Singapore Strait. Right? So this is absolutely vital, and it's very easy to interrupt. You see Indonesia right there. The United States just just negotiated overflight terms over with for our military over all of Indonesia. Indonesia is a perfect place to close that down. Right? Now, Indonesia does not like China very much. They don't like Israel very much either, but they use us as a Israel uses us as a sort of a a surrogate there. Actually, Paul Wolfowitz used to be the ambassador to to Indonesia, and he used to invite me to dinner and that sort of thing. He was a deputy secretary of defense. Right? So Paul Wolfowitz is a super Zionist. He's in his eighties now. He was also the leader of the World Bank for a while until he lost his job there. But Paul Wolfowitz was said to be one of the main architects of the Iraq war. Right? So this is all related. This is not unrelated to each other. He used to tell me stories about Indonesia. I've been to in quite a lot, actually. I've been to Obama's school there in Jakarta. And, anyway, what I'm getting to is this is all related. These things are not separate. Right now, in the last about forty eight hours, seventy two hours, the, Chinese leadership, Singaporean leadership, and Thai leadership from Thailand have all been talking about Malacca and opening a a corridor over the Kra Isthmus. The Kra Isthmus is that area of Thailand that it's sort of like the elephant trunk that connects down there with Malaysia. And it's anyway, they've been thinking for three to four centuries about building a canal across the Crawl Isthmus. In fact, I just had a book come in a few days ago from Australia from 1881, and it's got maps in there about three three potential locations. That's the map. That's the book right there. It's written in French. And so that book, I just ordered that from Australia. It's from 1881. And you can see they've got it all charted out right there. So there's the cryosmith you see or that on the bottom the the line on the bottom is the Strait Of Malacca. But if you wanna bypass Strait Of Malacca, you can go across the Craisimas. But they haven't built have not built a canal over there or or any serious corridor yet because it's just well, they just haven't done it for political reasons and other reasons. Like, the British did not want that does not want a canal there for for, you know, a couple hundred years. They didn't want a canal there. And so but now, you know, the Chinese and the Thais and others, they want that they want that cry ismith open because China can be put into famine by doing what's happening right now. Cut the Strait Of Hormuz. I would also if I were trying to cause famine, I would cut the Turkish Straits as well. I would I would cut the Strait Of Malacca. I would straight up go for that. Also, control of Panama Canal is important because China gets a lot of their food from Brazil. I think you're gonna The United States. It's easy to cut The United States food. But but I I think you're gonna end up also, by the way, seeing eventually a war between Argentina and Brazil. And this is going to be related to the food and also the Interoceanic corridor, the bi oceanic corridor that's down there that goes through Brazil, Paraguay, Argentina, and Chile. Masako and I went down there just over a year ago, and we were up in Northern Argentina where that bi Oceanic corridor is being built. In fact, we were on one of the little trains up there. And so what I'm getting to with this is that is another area of contention. There's a huge fight going on between Zionists and Chinese, by the way. That's a sub fight and all well, it's pretty huge. But as I say, a sub fight, it's it's massive. But the but it's it's it's massive, but it's invisible to most people. It's not invisible to us because we're watching it unfold in real time in these locations. But what they're what are they trying to do right now? Create famine. They wanna create famine. They wanna reduce the global population. They wanna control the remnant using AI and that sort of thing. Weather manipulation, geoengineering is, you know, Dane Wiggington's always talking about is which is absolutely important. So there's many ways that they're attacking the food supply. Cutting off fertilizer is just one cutting off in which is incredibly important. Cutting off energy obviously is another, but just cutting off the Panama Canal has reached saturation point on the ships. There's ships waiting off in in the Pacific side and on the Caribbean side. They're waiting there, you know, for many days on end trying to get through. Keep in mind, the the food ships are the ones that wait the longest because they they're they're cargo is not as valuable as for instance, the energy cargo. So the so the ships that are carrying energy through the Panama Canal, they're able to pay more money and and skip the line. Right? And so, again but they're they're trying to create famine, and it's not difficult to do in the position that they're in. Speaker 0: Well, here's something that'll make you look at your rain jacket differently. Most waterproof jackets, the ones from those big outdoor brands, the ones you've been wearing for years, they're coated with something called PIFAS. Yeah. They call them forever chemicals because they don't break down, not in the environment, not on your body, not ever. PIFAS are what make the water beat up and roll off of your jacket. So that's that satisfying moment where the rain just hits the fabric, just slides right off. Yeah. That's a toxic chemical doing its job. And then doing its other job is poisoning you slowly. That's why I wanna tell you about the Bearskin Heavy Storm rain jacket. It's rated to 20,000 millimeter waterproof. That's expedition grade. That's the same rating that you'd find on serious mountain gear, but it uses zero PFAS, forever chemicals. None. None. No chemicals on the membrane, the coating, or the waterproof treatment. That's a 20,000 millimeter waterproof rating without the poison. That's a rain jacket innovation that you can try out for yourself. On top of that, it packs into its own pocket, so you can actually stash it in your bag, your truck, your golf bag. It's always there when the weather turns bad. It zips into the bearskin hoodie also. So right now in Colorado, we got a snowstorm here in the April. It's unbelievable. Snowing. I can't believe it. And so what did I do? I put this on top of my, bearskin hoodie. So I have full three in one warmness walking the dog this morning. Kept me dry because it's super wet heavy snow today. April. What the heck? And I stayed warm because the temperature plummeted down to, like, 20 degrees. So this thing is sealed zippers, taped seams, the works. Right now, Bearskin is running a 60% off the heavy storm rain jacket sale right now with free shipping. Here's what to do next. Text the word redacted to 36912. That's redacted to 36912, and they'll send you a link so you can grab one at 60% off. Stop wearing a jacket that poisons you while it protects you from the rain. Get a Bearskin heavy storm rain jacket today. Text the word redacted to 36912. That's 36912 and save 60%. Speaker 2: One of my first thoughts was, well, the hippies will have their way, the ones who don't want any fertilizer or pesticides, and we'll see what kind of world we really live in, the one that the environmentalists, and that means starvation for a lot of people because food won't be accessible. The picture you're painting is that once you see a lifeline to prosperity, Nord Stream pipeline, readily available foods, There's someone, some dark force there trying to thwart it. So you see this sort of play of light and dark. There are people who do want prosperity, and then there are people who are thwarting it. So can you explain who those forces are, the opposing forces? Speaker 1: The one there's there's many oligarchal groups. The big ones that are really fighting each other in sharp relief are, Zionist and, Chinese Communist Party, oligarchs and Russians, and there's others as well. There's quite a lot. There's not it's it's a jungle. There's a lot. But the main power force that's trying to create the depopulation, that's Zionist. That's open. That's death jabs. That's, knocking out the fertilizer, for instance. You know, Iran did not knock out Nord Stream. Right? Iran did not get, you know, Germany to blow up their nuclear plant. What was that? Maybe four or five months ago now down in Bavaria. They invited people to come and watch them blow out the cooling towers. I don't know if you saw that, but the, you know, so the people that are destroying their own water infrastructure across Europe, there's even a website that tracks water infrastructure being removed. So that that's actually Zionist, and they're really open about it. They don't hide it. So as soon as you say that, of course, they start with the accusations. But I'm just you're the one saying it. You know what I mean? You're saying it and physically doing it, for instance, with again, with the death jabs. And so it's not difficult when you're in that position, that level of power and the willingness to fight to the last American drop of blood, to and and and as many other people as possible to, for instance, close the Strait Of Malacca. You can do Strait Of Malacca Closing is easy, just like Hormuz. And again, I I published many times and said on many interviews well in advance that I thought The United States slash Zionist would close the Strait Of Hormuz and blame Iran. And that sounded completely like tinfoil hat stuff until they did it. Right? Speaker 0: Yeah. You were called a conspiracy theorist. There wait. The US is not gonna go to war with Israel against Iran, close the close the Strait Of Hormuz, and they'll blame it on Iran, of course. And that's exactly what happened. How bad is it right now with the Strait Of Hormuz being closed? Because you're talking about the Strait Of Malacca, which is still open at this hour. But the Strait Of Hormuz is closed, and we're talking about global famine without even Malacca being a part of the equation at the moment. Speaker 1: Right. I think, again, Turkish straight is on the menu. Suez, of course, Bob Omandeb, and Masako and I recently were up at the Danish straight, actually. I think that's a significant target. That's why we were just up there at the Baltic as well. We were up in Sweden, the Norway looking at this. Now keep in mind, The United States has recently made more than 40 basing agreement agreements up in in Finland and Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. Right? This is kind of under the radar, but that's why we just spent so much time up there. We just spent more than a month with Catherine Austin Fitz up in in Netherlands looking at Speaker 0: the same thing. Pay attention. I I honestly I just saw a friend of mine in a private email chain today say, watch the Baltic. Watch the Baltic and watch the Arctic. I mean, I trust these individuals implicitly and said, keep your eyes on this. No one's talking about it. We've been talking about the coming war that's coming to the Arctic for a while here on the show. No one's talking about it. And, again, I think it's absolutely coming. Speaker 1: Right. And that's why we were up in Denmark and at the Baltic, actually, after we left. You know, keep it in mind, Nord Stream, they got blown up, goes to the Baltic. Right? Baltic Sea. And now if you wanna really close off that area, you're gonna take out Denmark. And Denmark is that's the Danish straight right there. And keep in mind, Denmark is deeply involved in Panama too. Maersk. Right? So, you know, for instance, China owns a shipping company called Costco, but Maersk owns a country basically called Denmark. Right? I mean, Maersk is a huge logistic company deeply involved in Panama and global logistics. This is all entwined. Right? And so I I think that you're gonna see, for instance, places like Hamburg could be targeted. Places like Rotterdam and Antwerp could possibly be targeted as well. We were just up in Rotterdam. We spent almost two weeks up there. I'm sorry, in Hamburg looking at, you know, Hamburg is the biggest port in in Germany, right? It's the third largest in Europe. The biggest in Europe is Rotterdam there at Netherlands, and the second largest is Antwerp there in But these these all are potential targets as they try to create global famine, which they're working on. I think that you're gonna see at least some constraint under at Panama. Right? And, you know, and and and they're signaling this things these things. Right? And by the way, you see when you look at Panama, the big power structures in Panama are Zionist and Chinese. Full stop. I mean, when I say that again, they're like conspiracy theorists. I'm like, no, you just don't know what you're talking about. I mean, the same down in Argentina, Masacro and I went to a CPAC thing there. And when was November or December 2025? And they started off with Argentina, Viva Stados Unidos, and Viva Israel. Right? And who spoke there was like Ben Shapiro and that sort of thing. Right? And so and you've so you've got the Chinese and the Zionist going toe to toe down there in Argentina. And keep in mind, the president of Argentina, his last name is not Mele, it's Melevkovsky. And Netanyahu over in Israel, his last name was Melevkovsky. Right? So so both of those shared the last name, Melekovsky. Those names were changed. But Melekovsky from Argentina, also known as Mele, was just over in in Israel. Right? There It's clear that Argentina is probably gonna attack Malvinas, by the way. Speaker 0: Kissing the ring. Speaker 2: Okay. That's his prediction. Go ahead. Speaker 0: Yeah. No. No. I just you had a question, but I I just wanna lay out these predictions. We're talking about the Baltics. We're we're talking about the Arctic. We're talking about Argentina. We're talking about the Strait Of Malacca. Don't be surprised if all of these things come to pass. Did you have a question? Speaker 2: Oh, I'm just, you know, I'm thinking about it from a human livability perspective because Asia has experienced massive famines in the last two hundred years. And we see that their health and height has all recovered in a time of prosperity. And so what does that mean if we are going to return to I mean, this is called the secular trend in height phenomenon where, you know, Korean women grew almost eight centimeters in eight inches rather in a hundred years after recovering from famine. And that is usually related to other life expectancy immunity. It just general markers of good health. We will revert to that if the if the globe is returning to famine conditions. Speaker 1: High chance. You know, my wife Masako did a bunch of research on she's Japanese on Japanese famines. And she found evidence of 503 famines in the last fifteen hundred years here in Japan. Right? This place is, you know, this is Famine Ville. This is not the ideal place to be and and what's unfolding. And so but the, luckily, there haven't been many actually, this guy right here, his name is Kenjiro. This this guy is famous. You see he's walking, reading a book. I I have several of his statues around. But he's famous for saving many Japanese from famine in the eighteen hundreds because he saw famine coming. His name is Kenjiro. His statue is in all the Japanese schools. They're starting to take them out, actually. But Kenjiro saw famine coming in the eighteen hundreds for various reasons, like the eggplant tasted different, tasted like fall eggplant, like in the early summer, that sort of thing. He's he just saw certain signs, but he got his people, you know, prepared. And so none of the people in his area starved to death, but huge amounts of other Japanese starved to death during that famine. So he became famous for that. That's why his statue's all over the place. But, I mean, this place is absolutely, you know, Japan and other countries. But it's very clear that that the Zionists are trying to push China into famine, and it can be done. Speaker 0: Well, we're gonna we're gonna hold you to these predictions, Michael. I wanted to get you on to talk about what's going on with the Strait Of Malacca, what's happening with the Strait Of Hormuz and this global famine prediction that's coming. Thank you so much, Michael, for getting up early with us there in Japan at five in the morning. I'm sorry to drag you out of bed for that, but, you know, you've been there in whole Speaker 1: bunch at four. Speaker 0: You look better than I do, by the way. Michael, great to see you. Give my love to your wife, and thank you so much for your great work as always. Speaker 1: Thank you, Natalie. Thank you, Clayton. Speaker 0: You bet. Thanks, Michael. Great to see you. Thank you so much for watching Redacted. We'd love for you to subscribe to the channel. It's totally free if you wanna follow us or subscribe. And if we brought you any value at all, please consider sharing this video with a friend or a loved one on social media. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - May 1, 2026 at 12:44 PM

Saved - May 1, 2026 at 3:08 PM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

Putin warned Trump. The blockade is leaking. GCC allies are maxed on storage. Farmer bankruptcies up 46%. 13 dead. 400 wounded. And the Secretary of War is calling deployed troops liars. @DougAMacgregor says we are losing this war and the collapse is coming this year. https://t.co/reH91CWzDm

Video Transcript AI Summary

Speaker 0 argues that the Israeli war for the greater Israel project is the catalyst for the collapse of American power worldwide due to unconditional U.S. support. He says the United States is on a road to an economic crisis, a financial catastrophe not experienced since the 1930s, and that until it becomes that bad, people will not voice their views in Washington. He contends that the Senate, the House, and the White House are all firmly in the grip of the lobby. He predicts that when the collapse comes, which he expects sometime this year, it will be “god awful hell to pay for the Israelis, and it’s going to be the end of this administration, and probably the end for most of the people on the hill.” He describes a movement from abundance—oil, cash, and everything—to scarcity, forecasting that the living standard won’t be enjoyed for long and that the country will resemble Great Britain after World War II: hopelessly in debt, retreating forces abroad to cut expenses, and unable to recover. He warns of a larger war and asks how long a blockade will last before others force it to end, whether it could become a global event, noting that the secretary of war has stated there will be a global blockade. He cites General Kane discussing boarding ships and blockading vessels coming out of the Persian Gulf and heading into the Strait of Malacca, calling the idea “stupidity on stilts” and predicting it will turn a current conflict into a global phenomenon and likely a global war. He insists there will be no good outcomes for the United States or its people, and that he does not blame Americans for their complacency, acknowledging that Americans are human beings and will only respond when hurt immediately or when they see clear pains such as shortages. Speaker 1 agrees, saying many people are not intentionally burying their heads in the sand, but they will awaken when they notice changes on grocery shelves, at the gas pump, inflation rising, housing prices falling, mortgage rates increasing, and all the pressures tied to lack of food on the table. He hopes for waking up beforehand but does not anticipate it. He then shares a recent, disturbing note from Natalie: Benjamin Netanyahu posted on social media about Lebanon, showing bombs hitting infrastructure across Lebanon.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: I think that, this Israeli war for the greater Israel project is the catalyst for the collapse of American power around the world because we have unconditionally supported it. We're we're on a road to an economic crisis, a financial catastrophe, something that we really haven't experienced since the nineteen thirties. That's how bad it it's going to be. Until it gets that bad, people are not going to stand up. They're not going to go into the streets. They're not gonna make their views felt and understood in Washington. And right now, both the senate, the house, and the White House, all of these three institutions, are firmly in the grip of the lobby. So when this collapse comes, and I think it's coming sometime this year, it's gonna be god awful hell to pay for the Israelis, and it's going to be the end of this administration, and probably the end for most of the people on the hill. I think that's how serious it's going to get. It's hard for people to imagine because what we're really seeing happen right now is a movement from abundance, which we've had now for decades, an abundance of oil, an abundance of cash, an abundance of everything, to scarcity. We're suddenly not going to enjoy the living standard that we've enjoyed for so long. We're gonna look a lot like Great Britain after World War two, hopelessly debt written and busy extracting our forces from everywhere in the world to try and cut expenses and get back on our feet. And we all know, historically, Great Britain never got back on its feet. It was finished after World War two. I hope it's not gonna be that bad, but the way I see it right now, if if things happen as I anticipate, we're gonna have a larger war. Let's assume you just stick with the blockade initially. How long before others show up to force your blockade to end? Are we going to try and extend this blockade to becoming a global event? That's already been uttered by the secretary of war. He said we're going to have a global blockade. You've got general Kane who's talked about boarding ships and blockading ships that are coming out of the Persian Gulf and headed somewhere inside the Strait Of Malacca. I mean, talk talk about stupidity on stilts, taking something that should already be over and should have ended, and now turning it into a global phenomenon, it's going to lead to a global war of some kind. And I just don't see anything good happening for us, and I don't see the American people profiting in any way. And and I don't blame the American people for their complacency. Americans are human beings. If they're not hurt immediately, if they don't feel immediate pain, their tendency is, well, let's see how this turns out. This is not gonna turn out well. It's gonna turn out very badly. Speaker 1: Yeah. I think you're right. I think so many people, going about their lives, they're not intentionally burying their heads in the sand. But until they notice it on the grocery store shelves, or they see it at the gas tank in a much larger capacity, the, you know, inflation going up and housing prices coming down, and mortgage rates going back up, and all of these things that are tied to this, lack of food on the table, etcetera. That's when there's gonna be an awakening. And I hope that people wake up ahead of that, but I don't anticipate. Just a few minutes ago, Natalie just shared this with me. This is disgusting. But this is Benjamin Netanyahu just posting this on social media about Lebanon just a few minutes ago. Says Lebanon continuing and just sharing bombs just hitting infrastructure all throughout Lebanon.

@RedactedNews — Redacted

Posted - April 29, 2026 at 11:00 PM

Saved - May 1, 2026 at 2:32 AM

@RedactedNews - Redacted

🚨 WARNING: There's a Depression level economic collapse coming, and no one wants to talk about it. Professor @xueqinjiang is with us to discuss what we should all know. https://t.co/48euqHLLDB

Video Transcript AI Summary

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the global economy amid conflicts and energy disruptions. Christine Lagarde, head of the ECB, is cited as warning about food rationing and broader inflationary consequences from disruptions in fertilizer shipments through the Strait of Hormuz. Lagarde notes that the third of fertilizers pass through Hormuz, affecting the Southern Hemisphere where planting and fertilizer needs are urgent. She argues that if energy-related disruptions persist, inflation expectations could rise because people monitor food prices and gas prices closely. She identifies three indirect consequences: prolonged disruption could shift from price increases to rationing with different economic outcomes; higher prices would be inflationary, while shortages would directly hit output and growth. So far, there are limited signs of global supply-chain disruption, but local tensions exist: jet fuel prices have roughly doubled since the conflict began, with rationing at some European airports since April. The remark extends to Asia, where low-income economies are experiencing more severe hits and moving toward rationing. Speaker 0 highlights Lufthansa canceling hundreds of flights due to fuel shortages and reiterates Lagarde’s signals about Hormuz and fertilizer movements. Speaker 2 (Professor Jiang) interprets Lagarde’s message as forewarning a major catastrophe for the global economy, noting that one-third of the world’s fertilizer passes Hormuz and fertilizer sustains global food production for billions of people. He emphasizes global fragility and the just-in-time supply chain system, which lacks resilience and was designed for efficiency, not resilience. He predicts policymakers may use crises to expand control, including digital currency and digital IDs, arguing that rationing could lead to a control system. He connects these ideas to a broader narrative about an AI surveillance state and governance tools. Speaker 3 references U.S. policy movements: the Pentagon reportedly requested American carmakers like Ford and General Motors to shift toward weapon production, signaling a wartime footing under the Defense Production Act. He compares this to World War II-era rationing and Rosie the Riveter, and notes the notion of living under a wartime economy. Speaker 2 adds that a stock-market collapse or cyberattack could precipitate a depression, enabling a shift to a wartime economy and military production. The discussion expands into a broader control-theory framework. Speaker 2 outlines two major pieces of an AI control grid: an enforced mechanism such as ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) with a large budget, and Operation Stargate, which involves building data centers across the U.S. as part of a control grid. He asserts OpenAI and similar entities fit into this context. Speaker 0 and Speaker 2 debate how such a grid could be justified by food rationing, national security, or a selective service-based draft, with Palantir reportedly pushing for a return to the draft. Speaker 2 ties AI surveillance, the control grid, and mass mobilization to depopulation theories, arguing elites aim to preserve vast wealth while the majority bear the costs. The conversation then turns to energy infrastructure: many oil refineries, including BRICS-aligned nations, appear to be going offline, with a recent high-profile refinery fire in India just before inauguration of a new refinery. The causes are attributed to war, accidents from overcapacity, and sabotage, with examples like the Geelong refinery fire cited as suspicious. Towards the end, the participants discuss the space program’s role in societal narratives: NASA’s programs and the mystique around space exploration, the Optimus robot, and the possibility that space endeavors could serve as instruments of control or unity. They speculate about the potential for a fake alien invasion as a means to push through a control grid, though acknowledge this as a disturbing possibility. Professor Jiang concludes by urging a shift from materialism toward spirituality, community, and family to better weather the anticipated economic storms, while signaling concern about the depopulation agenda and the strategic use of crises to consolidate power.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Well, how are things sitting right now with the global economy? We keep hearing the horror stories about fertilizer disruptions, famine, food shortages, everything else that could become as a result of the closure of the Strait Of Hormuz and this global war. Christine Lagarde, head of the ECB, you know, she's not given to hyperbole. I mean, she's, of course, you know, in control of largest banks and the, you know, European banking structure. Remember, she's famous for telling us that, know, she wanted us to move away from cash. Of course, in my mind, this is all about control. But here is Christine Lagarde talking specifically about food rationing and what is coming. Listen. Speaker 1: Third, the third of the fertilizers is shipped through the Strait Of Hormuz. Now, that is also at risk. And it matters particularly in the Southern Hemisphere where the planting and therefore the fertilizers is badly needed now. I'm not saying that just out of interest for agriculture. Don't forget, I was minister of agriculture in France for a month and a half. But because it matters to me as a central banker now, because if the price of food increases significantly, it is not going to just be the price of food, it is going to be inflation expectations because we know that people are particularly attentive to two things, the price of food, processed and unprocessed, and the price of gas at the petrol station. So, here are three indirect consequences of what's happening in the energy world. So, if the disruption persists long enough, the adjustment shifts from prices, which we are putting up with now, to possibly rationing with very different economic consequences. Higher prices are primarily inflationary, shortages hit output directly and are worse for growth. Overall, there have been so far limited signs of supply chain disruption, both globally and in the Euro Area. But local tensions are visible. Jet fuel prices have roughly doubled since the outbreak of the conflict, and rationing has been imposed at some individual airports in Europe since early April. And I'm not talking about what's happening in the rest of the world. I'm just back from the IMF and the World Bank spring meetings, like many of you, and you might have bumped into colleagues from Asia, in particular some of the low income countries economies that are taking a much more severe hit than us and are moving into rationing? Speaker 0: Yeah. So Asia moving into food rationing, and fuel rationing. Lufthansa yesterday announcing the cancellation of hundreds of flights because they don't have the fuel for it. And then the fertilizer moving through the Strait Of Hormuz. Like, are people taking this seriously? And you hear just in her voice, I mean, as a central banker, she doesn't wanna scare people, but she's kind of you can hear it there. But they're all the signals. She's basically pointing out all of the signals. We're back with professor Jiang to talk about the global impact of this war in Iran. Professor, what do you make of Christine Lagarde's message there, and do you see a much bigger problem emerging? Speaker 2: Yeah. I think she is, forewarning a major catastrophe approaching the global economy that's gonna come very soon. She points out one third of the world's fertilizer passes through the Strait Of Hormuz. And most people don't appreciate this, but fertilizer is what feeds the world. So what fertilizer, the globe, the earth, could sustain one one or 2,000,000,000 people, 2,000,000,000 people, if you're optimistic. So basically, we're able to have 8,000,000,000 people on this planet because of fertilizer. Now if you take out fertilizer out of the equation, this means that a lot of people are going to starve. There's there's no way around it. So this bring brings up a much bigger point, which is people don't appreciate the fragility of the global economy. We use something called just in time supply chain system. So there's very little inventory. There's very little resilience. The system doesn't know how to cope with setbacks, with with delays. It's designed to be as quick and as efficient as possible in order to maximize benefit for the consumer. So this system was not designed to be resilient. It was designed to be efficient, and this is gonna cause a lot problems for the world. Another point that I will make is that these policymakers know that this catastrophe is coming. And the thing about policymakers is that they don't let a crisis ever go to waste. And policymakers are first and foremost concerned about how to create more control over people, how to create an AI surveillance state. And if you talk about rationing, well, what comes naturally with rationing is basically digital currency and digital ID. Right? Because it's of communism, think of Marxism. How how think think of a command economy where because there's so little food, because there's food scarcity, there's fuel scarcity, well, we have to ration this, so we have to basically give you coupons. We do that digitally through digital currency. And so think of more control, think of more financial repression, think of possibly economic collapse. Speaker 3: So, you know, I'm trying to extrapolate what this will be the lived experience for us because the Wall Street Journal recently reported that the Pentagon was approaching American companies like Ford and General Motors to shift factory capacity towards weapon making. You know, they can ask them nicely, but they also can use the Defense Production Act to require companies to prioritize and accept government contracts. And Secretary of War Pete Hechtsef had said, this is to put us on a wartime footing. So that doesn't mean live your lives, we're gonna go to war. You know, it's all good. It's you will live in a wartime footing. And so what was the lived experience during World War two for Americans is Rosie the Riveter, the woman goes to work, and food shortages and food rations, and it was not optional. So there is precedence for it for this. It's not hysterical to think that we are being pushed towards this. Right? Speaker 2: Yeah. No. I think history might repeat itself. So what led to World War two was, first of all, 1929 stock market crash where, you know, billions of savings were wiped out. We might see a similar situation where the stock market collapses, and possibly there is a cyber attack, a cyber false flag attack on the nation's financial data centers. So all that money you have in the bank might be wiped out, and you can blame the Iranians for that even though it may not be the Iranians. This will lead to a depression in America where people become desperate for jobs, where people become desperate for food. The more government will can now step in and create a command economy just like just like what they did nineteen thirties. Right? Roosevelt's Roosevelt's New Deal. And then the economy switches to a wartime economy where you are making drones, weapons, ammunitions for all these wars overseas that America has to fight in order to ensure it has control over the world's oceans and resources. Speaker 0: Mean, everything you're talking about is already coming to fruition. Right? I mean, a $1,500,000,000,000 wartime budget at the Pentagon under president Trump. The move towards digital currency, the house resolution that's now coming forward, we've covered it here on the show about this new digital ID that would be required to sign into the Internet. Basically, as an age verification, they tell us it's about safety, but it's all about control. This is the control grid that's coming right before our eyes. And we're just like walking blindly right into it right now in The United States. Speaker 2: Right. So there are two major pieces to this AI control grid. Right? The first is you you would need an enforced mechanism, and this would be ICE. You really need soldiers with machine guns in the streets to deport illegal immigrants? Obama was able to do so without without soldiers. He did it just through through cooperation with local law enforcement. Right? So I think the ICE, it's meant to be almost like a gestable, a part of a secret police in order to control the lives of people. Their budget is, like, I think, 90 projected projected to be $90,000,000,000. That's a lot of money for to get rid of illegal immigrants. So I think ICE is one piece of the puzzle. The other piece of the puzzle is Operation Stargate, where the government has dedicated $500,000,000,000 to building data centers all around America. Listen. These data centers are not for having a AI girlfriend or for helping you cheat on your homework. They are part of the control grid. Right? So look companies like OpenAI. They don't make money selling chat services to people. But so Aldman seems to be very confident that he'll be very successful. So I think he knows something that we don't know. Speaker 0: It's deeply, deeply troubling. You talked about also well, we've mentioned it before the show, which is the oil refineries. So, I mean, what what is going on here? And I don't know if you have the answer to it, but we're now seeing, I mean, dozens of oil refineries around the world, many of them in BRICS aligned nations. You saw in India, one of the inaugural you know, president Modi of India was about to have the inauguration of this brand new oil refinery, and the day before it goes up in flames. So all of the oil refining capacity is being taken offline. What is going on? Speaker 2: Right. So, I think there's a combination of war. So a lot a lot of the refineries that are being destroyed are because of war. Right? The Americans attacked the natural gas fields of Iran, and Iranians responded by attacking the natural gas fields of Qatar. So war is a factor. Another factor is just accidental malfunction. So because of energy shortages, these refineries are have to maximize output, and so it's possible they didn't neglect safety measures because they're at they're at capacity. That's the second factor. Now the third factor is the sabotage. Right? So if you look at the Australian Geelong refinery fire, that is deeply suspicious. They say it was an accident, but people locally said that this was probably sabotage. So these three factors going on. Right? War, accidents, and sabotage. One thing that I will say is that if you're trying to change your society, you really need to better control your people. And quite honestly, from the perspective of the elite, the peasants have become too arrogant. The peasants have have become too uppity. And so you need you need to make them much more anxious. You need to make them much more desperate. And so it's important to manufacture economic calamities in order to make them more obedient. Speaker 0: Well, that's what colonel Towner Watkins says, and she's brilliant. And she talks about she talks about this as the strategy of tension. And these left behind armies, these NATO leave behind armies that created this strategy of tension, you create this tension on purpose in order to agitate and control. It's all about control. Speaker 2: It's psychological warfare. They've been doing this for decades. And so so think of the color revolutions in The Middle East. Right? So they have this very good playbook, very effective playbook of using propaganda, of using spies, of using saboteurs, provocateurs in order to stir up discontent among the population and in order to better control the emotions of the population. So I think that we are moving towards a period of massive unrest. Speaker 3: Now, earlier off camera, you talked about the NASA program. And this seems to be something that's really irking people online. I see meme after meme of people saying, wait, you expect us to support a war in Iran. We don't have free health care. We have record debt. We will have to pay more for fuel, but you can use up all this jet fuel and send science experiments into the What the hell? And you're saying you think that is another part of the control mechanism. Speaker 2: Right. So if we just extend our logic, right, and just say, okay, during this war, in order to maintain the American empire, the population isn't gonna go with this war, so they need to create an economic catastrophe to make the population more obedient. And you wanna introduce an AI surveillance system. You want to have you you wanna have a control grid. Well, a possible strategy is to fake an alien invasion and make people so afraid that they basically obey the government. But, you know, from the perspective of the government, this this doesn't really have to succeed because, honestly, baby boomers will go with anything. Right? So but maybe it's just theater. So everyone knows a fake alien invasion, but that allows the government to actually impose the AI civilians grid on everyone. And the boomers will go with this. No one else will go with it, but no one really cares because they have eyes on the streets to to enforce obedience. Speaker 0: Well, and president Trump recently, of course, announced the shift of Space Force to its new location with its massive new infrastructure. And of course, billions of dollars and a new budget. It has its own spy program inside Space Force. For years on this show, we've been calling out how this is just one big massive boondoggle for the defense industry. And of course, yes, the fears you you're seeing it online now. This idea that we are about to face some sort of big disclosure, some sort of big alien invasion. You're hearing it from members of congress that disclosure is coming, and therefore to scare all of us into some sort of, control. And that I think this is just another big piece of the puzzle. Project Blue Bee. Speaker 2: Yeah. I wanna reach two questions about about the space program. So we know that after every major government expenditure, huge government project, We have massive innovation. Okay? So think of World War two and the government spent billions billions dollars on a Manhattan project. And in the nineteen fifties, we have this tremendous wave of innovation, right, including the transistor transistor, including the Internet, including, you know, semiconductors. So that's what happens when you have tremendous breakthroughs, technological breakthroughs. But the problem is this. 1969, America sent a man to the moon. What 10,000 breakthroughs do we have from that? In fact, if you talk to NASA, they they they tell you, oh, sorry. We lost all that technology. We lost all that, you know, data. We lost all that footage. Yeah. That's kinda weird. That's really weird. That's point one. Point two is that undergirding technological breakthroughs is all are synesthetic theories. Okay? So think of the Manhattan Project and how how, you know, before the Manhattan Project, there were all these strenuous breakthroughs in science, primarily Einstein's theory of great of relativity and quantum mechanics, which allows for the Manhattan Project. I'm completely confused as to what what physical breakthrough or what what what theory theoretical breakthrough allowed for the space program. And why is it that after the space program was so successful, we we don't have breakthroughs in our understanding of the universe? This is all really weird. Speaker 3: I guess Yeah. Don't you think we should know more by now? Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, like, we're literally excited about getting back to the moon. I mean, we we you know, it's like we've done this. We've done this, you know, nineteen sixties. We've done this. Like or did we? And now we're doing it all over again, and we're excited that we get some sort of four k iPhone video that's been going viral by one of the astronauts. Like, that's that's, like, arguably the most exciting thing that we've seen from this is an astronaut's iPhone video through the window of a sun or the the Earth the Earth rise or Earth sunset. It's it's very bizarre. Speaker 3: I wanna I'm gonna out Clayton a little bit. He was telling me earlier that, you know, he's fascinated by the Optimus robot, the Tesla Optimus robot, and we'll see Tesla earnings this afternoon. And he was saying, it's not just to, like, walk your dog and do your dishes. What they want them to do is go to Mars and build the colonies, that they will be built by the Optimus robots. And he's fascinated by that. There's no there's no shade in telling me right. Speaker 0: I mean, just years ahead years ahead of human beings going to Mars that will have this like, fleet of Optimus robots on on Mars. Speaker 3: Yeah. What do you think of that? Speaker 2: You know, it's it's entirely possible where they're looking for a new control mechanism. Right? And they understand the power of narrative, how World War two was this great unifying, galvanizing event for the American population, how the space race was also a great unifying event for the American people as well. So maybe people are in poverty. Maybe maybe there's wars going on. But if we're seeing all this footage of these autonomous robots going to Mars to go to colony, maybe this will make us, more appreciative of the government. Speaker 0: Okay. Yeah. I guess we'll we'll we'll just fall in line and just be happy with all of this control, and people are, you know, just walking into this control grid. Speaker 3: Or imagine I I'm thinking like a science fiction writer now. You you are in this control grid. You see these Optimus robots. You think they're actually building a colony where there is food and life, and you don't have to live in this dystopic life. But, oh, you can only get here because of this. And then we all think that we've earned it, line up to get on a machine, and we're blasted into death. This is the novel. Right? Speaker 2: It's a Hollywood movie. Yeah. Speaker 3: Do you like it? Yeah. Matrix. Speaker 0: I don't like this dystopic future. Speaker 3: It's macabre, but that's where my mind goes. Speaker 0: Yeah. Professor, any final thoughts on all of it? All of the things we talked about today? And I I mean, I just keep coming back to this economic, know, depression that we're facing, and I don't think people are prepared for it. Speaker 2: No. I I think, like, the greatest challenge is for people to to, like, switch their mindsets because people are so complacent nowadays. You know, I don't think Americans appreciate how great their country is, how lucky their lives have been in that they've never really experienced a war, in that they've never really experienced scarcity, poverty, deprivation. And quite honestly, what's gonna kill most people is this radical kind of dissonance when they move towards a world in which things feel hopeless. So so I think, you know, what's really important is for people to start to switch their mentalities from a focus on towards materialism to a to a much greater focus on spirituality, on community, on family. And if you do that, then I think you're much much more likely to weather the storm that's coming. Speaker 3: You know, one more question I wanna ask because a German politician recently said that they should raise the age of enlistment for reservists to 70. A 70 year old being enlisted in the army. I mean, if this shows no lack of respect for human life, I don't know what does. And so I think that, again, this shows sort of an expansion of slave labor and war footing. What do you what do you think of that? Speaker 2: Look. I think there's a depopulation agenda going on Yeah. Where the elite have known for decades that the population we have is unsustainable. This planet, its resources were really meant for only one or 2,000,000,000 people. Unfortunately, the elite don't wanna share. They wanna they wanna live the life of billionaires, and they want us to own nothing and be happy about it. So they recognize that if they are to maintain their privilege, then they need to get rid of most of And so, you know, never let a a good crisis go to waste. And so there is clearly a depopulation agenda at work here behind the scenes. Speaker 0: I guess I'll finally ask you about this Palantir big headline that came out about two days ago that they Palantir executives want to bring back the draft in The United States. They want to bring back the draft. It just as the selective service is now prepping for this, like, automatic registration in The United States, so you'll be automatically put in the selective service. What do you make of Palantir's push for a draft? Speaker 2: Look. If there's an AI surveillance state, that's coming, then Palantir will be the heart and center of that. So food rationing will allow for, will justify a control grid, but also the national draft, if you think about it, will also justify a control grid where you need to make sure that young men know their patriotic duty and they're willing to go and die in The Middle East. Speaker 0: Unbelievable. Professor Jiang, thank you so much for your deep analysis today. We really appreciate it. And and I and I hope you're not correct. I hope you're not correct. Look. Speaker 2: Look. I hope I'm wrong. Okay? People call me an Internet Internet super short. On the Internet, people call me an idiot. I hope I'm an idiot. Okay? But but I also think I also think it's important for us to consider all possibilities and to be emotionally and psychologically prepared for the worst case scenario. Speaker 0: Right. You've been right so far. So I I hope you are an idiot, and I hope that this is wrong, and that I hope we do not enter a forever war, with Iran. But you Speaker 3: Well, how many of us were idiots not seeing the pandemic coming and then weren't prepared for it. So okay, you guys, there's precedence. Speaker 0: Yeah. Professor, great to see you. Thank you so much. And I really appreciate you staying up late with us there in China. Thank you so much. Speaker 2: Okay. Thanks, guys. Thank you.