reSee.it - Related Post Feed
reSee.it AI Summary
The Israeli losses are predicted to exceed 1,000 dead. IDF's lack of preparedness on the anniversary of 1973 is concerning. Unusual unity among Arabs is reminiscent of Custer's defeat and the Bulge. If Hezbollah remains passive, IDF will crush Gaza. But attacks from Southern Lebanon could strain IDF. Muslim world's anger may trigger a larger war involving Iran and Turkey. Egypt and Jordan may face internal unrest. The world could change dramatically. Interested in change? Join us: @OCOCReport.
@DougAMacgregor - Douglas Macgregor
The Israeli losses are predicted to exceed 1,000 dead. It is inconceivable that the IDF had NO ready forces positioned in the South or the North to deal with potential violence on the anniversary of 1973. At the same time, the Arabs did what they never do. They shut up. In this sense, it’s reminiscent of two conditions. First, Custer and his column were annihilated because the hostile tribes did something they had never done: They united and stood their ground. Normally, they were divided and fled as soon as Army Regulars showed up. He rushed in thinking that if he did not, the hostiles would fleet. It’s also reminiscent of the Bulge. We talked ourselves into a state of wishful thinking and the Germans surprised us. For Israel, however, this is deadly serious. If Hezbollah sits this out, the IDF will systematically crush Gaza. However, serious attacks from Southern Lebanon will stretch the IDF ground force to the limit. It may be that anger and disgust across the Muslim World with the destruction of Gaza and its people eventually provokes a larger war that could involve Iran, even Turkey. Egypt will be unable to sit it out. Jordan may fall apart under the pressure of internal unrest. In short, the world could change dramatically.
@DougAMacgregor - Douglas Macgregor
Interested in effecting change? Join us: @OCOCReport
reSee.it AI Summary
22 years ago, Alex Jones predicted nuclear war due to Israel. Today, the same players fuel bloodlust and desire for war. Chaos, crisis, and terrorism persist, strengthening the Zionist Occupation Government. Little has changed since 9/11. #IsraelPalestineWar #TelAviv #Mossad
@classicsgroyp - classicsgroyp
We're going to have nuclear war because of Israel - Alex Jones 22 years ago. We have the same players, same blood lust, and desire for war. They bring chaos, crisis, and terrorism to establish a police state. Little changed since 9/11. If anything, ZOG is stronger. AJ was right #IsraelPalestineWar #TelAviv #Israel #Mossad #Palestine #Gaza #Netanyahu #Jerusalem #Zionist #Hamas #IronDome #HamasAttack #IsraelPalestineWar #USSLiberty #IsraelAtWar
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker expresses concern about the support given to Israel, suggesting that it may lead to nuclear war. They claim that Israel mistreats Palestinians, referring to them as subhuman and describing incidents of violence. The speaker also criticizes Arab governments for their involvement in this situation, suggesting a larger agenda of creating chaos to justify a dictatorial regime.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I don't support the Palestinians either. They're all hyped up and psychotic, but Israel's gonna get us nuked always backing them up like this. Israel calls the Palestinians or cattle or dogs or subhuman. They keep them on concentration camps. I've got video of them taking Palestinian women's tomatoes they grow and breaking their water containers and stealing.
That that's why you have this crap and our children are gonna die. We're gonna get nuked because of this. Iran's got the nukes now. Syria. We're gonna have nuclear war because Israel likes to go around bombing everybody.
I'm sorry. It's just the facts. And Israel absolutely is beside itself for joy right now. They are talking about how they're going to blow everything up, how they're going to attack everybody, and guess who's going to get bombed because of it? I have been supportive of Israel for many years.
When I find out what they do, shooting little Palestinian children in the genitalia and laughing, it's on video, Little 10 year olds walking around throwing rocks at tanks. The guy's just off a half mile away and blows their testicles off. They call them goyim. They call them dogs. They call the Arabs cattle.
And then the Arab governments that are in league with this government, it's really a sick, Hegelian dialectic order out of chaos, bringing the world crises, bringing them terrorism so we'll accept a highly dictatorial police state regime. It's happening.
@dancohen3000 - Dan Cohen
Christian Zionist Pastor Greg Locke calls for Israel to genocide Gaza & “get a great big missile and blow that wicked Dome of the Rock plum off the spot where it’s standing right now so we can get that Third Temple rebuilt and usher in the coming of Jesus" https://t.co/BJylGJnwgJ
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker expresses a strong opinion that Israel should destroy the Gaza Strip and anyone supporting Hamas. They also criticize Joe Biden and believe that Barack Obama is the real president. They argue that open borders could allow Hamas sleeper cells to enter the country and harm innocent people. The speaker strongly opposes peace with Islam, calling it a satanic death cult. They suggest blowing up the Dome of the Rock to rebuild the Third Temple. They mention a holocaust survivor being kidnapped and criticize the corrupt government. The transcript ends abruptly.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Israel should make the Gaza Strip a parking lot by this time next week. Destroy the whole thing. And anybody that's gonna support this Hamas nonsense. Listen. Joe Biden Ought to be tried for treason.
You understand that? Now I get it. I get it. I get it. He Obama's the real president behind him anyhow, and so he's the one that ought to be tried for treason.
So I I hope Netanyahu's a leader. He just mows the whole thing down by this time next week. Yeah. If you think all this open border stuff is not an opportunity for a bunch of hamash sleeper sales to come into this nation right now and start killing innocent Me and women and children, you have lost your mind. I'm sick of all these Christians saying we ought to have peace with Islam.
Islam is a satanic death cult, and they would cut your head off before I said amen in this sermon if they had a chance to. The Muslim religion hates Jewish people to the core of who they are. What they ought to do Is evacuate up there on the hill and get a great big missile and blow that wicked dome of the rock plumb off of the spot where it's Standing right now so we can get that 3rd temple rebuilt, and now you're in the coming of Jesus. That video of that woman that survived the holocaust in a wheelchair, they snatched her up, kidnapped the holocaust survivor by somebody with American dollars in their pocket from a corrupt government. They should have been smoked out months ago when they stole the election to begin with.
Yes. I said
@BabyD1111229 - 🅾️BlackBetty ⚓️
They say Israel is being saved for last? 🤷🏼♀️ But what this man is speaking of…is rather interesting 🤔 https://t.co/DyjVi9eavE
Video Transcript AI Summary
Many Jews in Palestine today come from Eastern Europe, specifically from a group called the Khazars. The Khazars were a nation that not many people know about. These Eastern European Jews cannot trace their ancestry back to ancient Jews in Palestine. They are not semites and never have been. The history of the Khazars and their kingdom has been kept out of history textbooks and classroom courses. Even the Jewish encyclopedia confirms this.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Jews in Palestine. He states that those Jews derived from Eastern Europe, and many, many of the Jews that today live in the reconstituted state of Israel come from Eastern Europe. The Judeans or the lost tribes of Israel, but rather descendants of the Khazars, who were they? They were a nation most people do not even know of. He writes, the so called self styled Jews in Eastern Europe in modern history cannot legitimately point to a single ancient ancestor whoever set even a foot on the soil of Palestine in the era of bible history.
Research also revealed that the so called or self styled Jews in Eastern Europe were never semites, are not semites, now nor can they ever be regarded as Semites at any future time by any stretch of the imagination. What secret mysterious power has been able for countless generations to keep the origin and the history of the Khazars and the Khazar kingdom out of the history textbooks? Did you ever learn about it at school? I never learnt about it. And out of classroom courses in history throughout the world, the origin and the history of the Khazars and the Karzai Kingdom are certainly incontestable historical facts.
You have to do some cross checking. Even the Jewish encyclopedia is quite explicit about it.
@muhammadshehad2 - Muhammad Shehada
🚨Israel's Heritage Minister calls (again) for dropping a nuclear bomb on Gaza & brags that the Int. Court of Justice knows his intentions! Aside from being genocidal, this formal admission of Israel's nuclear arms makes US aid to it illegal under the 1976 US Symington Amendment https://t.co/SIkcEOPNV3
@K4Yeshua - 😳 Charles controls Klaus
🚨🚨🚨WOW! 🚨🚨🚨 In #Jerusalem, #Argentina President Javier Milei said he wants the reconstruction of Solomon's Temple. This will fulfill the prophecy that will bring the Jewish messiah to earth, also would require the destruction of the al-Aqsa Mosque. #JesusIsComingSoon https://t.co/B3mlOIEW2I
Video Transcript AI Summary
After the Romans destroyed the second temple, Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues witnessed a fox leaving the holiest part of the temple. While everyone else mourned, Rabbi Akiva laughed. When asked why, he explained that there were prophecies about the temple's destruction and subsequent rebuilding. Seeing the first prophecy come true gave him hope that the second prophecy would also be fulfilled.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This story took place after the destruction of the second temple by the Romans. Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues were observing the temple mount in ruins, and they saw a fox leave the holies of holies in the temple. There could have been no more disheartening scene than that. In the face of this terrible scene, the rabbis cried in mourning, but rabbi Akiva started to laugh. His colleagues asked how he could possibly laugh in the face of such a tragedy to which rabbi Akiva answered.
There's a prophecy about the destruction that says that a fox will break into the holiest of holies. There is another prophecy that says that the same place will be rebuilt. Now that I see with my own eyes the first prophecy come true. I laugh in joy and full of hope as the second prophecy will surely come true.
@TCNetwork - Tucker Carlson Network
“We are on the brink of a global war.” Tucker and @ggreenwald on a potential nuclear exchange with Russia: https://t.co/xc9jCbuNJc
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers express alarm about the possibility of global war, particularly nuclear war, and are surprised by the media and political establishment's apparent indifference. One speaker believes Trump deserves credit for acknowledging the severity of nuclear war, based on his briefings as president. He signaled that current weapons are far more dangerous than those used in Japan.
The speakers criticize foreign policy think tanks like the Atlantic Council for suggesting the potential acceptability of tactical nuclear weapons, deeming this viewpoint "crazy." They argue that individuals labeled as "crazy" are less dangerous than those shaping American foreign policy orthodoxy. They attribute this to the corrupting influence of unchecked power held by the U.S. for decades, leading to a detached and megalomaniacal dogma.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I find it so terrifying. I'm not no. No. I don't think I'm sort of overstating that. I mean, we are on the brink of of global war.
But but can can you just say one
Speaker 1: thing about that? Don't you think aren't you kind of amazed by how impervious and dismissive media and political leads are of the prospect of nuclear war?
Speaker 0: Well, I I it's unimaginable, and and yes. And I mean, that's I think it can't happen in all ongoing frustration. Yeah. And I I will say the one thing that Trump has said repeatedly over the over the past, certainly since he left the presidency, four years, that he's received no credit for and should get enormous credit for is that nuclear war is the worst thing. He was, of course, been briefed on it as the person who controlled the launch codes.
He knows what it means, and anyone who spends five minutes looking into what a nuclear exchange would actually, you know, do is is terrified evident, but only Trump seems worried about it. I don't understand.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I've I've said this I've talked about this so many times, and I think it goes back to when Trump was president in the early stages of presidency. Every time Trump talks about the prospect of nuclear war, he knows that he's limited in what everything he can divulge, but he's so clearly trying to signal, and he often says it, these weapons are of a different universe than even the ones we dropped in Japan. And he's obviously, as you said, understands and been briefed on.
Speaker 0: But you see these morons at the Atlanta Council or AEI or Hudson or these this cluster of the dumbest people in the world, all implicated in the Iraq disaster, say, well, you know, maybe tactical nukes are fine.
Speaker 1: That we that we're
Speaker 0: That's like such next level crazy. Like, that's crazier than any schizophrenic sitting next to you on a public subway.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah. I mean That's crazy. We we constantly call, like, RFK junior. They call him crazy. Okay.
They call, you know, Tuckus Tulsi Gabbard and Mac Gaetz crazy, whoever. These people who have been in power, who have been generating American orthodoxy, especially on foreign policy, are the most insane people on the planet. It's because Actually. The United States has been the most powerful country in the world. No one could constrain it.
No one could stand up to it. And as is true with everything, that level of unconstrained power corrupts people.
Speaker 0: That is correct. And these people have been
Speaker 1: in control of this power for decades. That is correct. Passed on one to another through this dogma that gets increasingly out of touch and detached from reality. Megalomaniacal. Exactly.
@KenOKeefe1TJP - Ken O'Keefe
🇺🇸 🇮🇱 If Americans find out israeli's were involved in 9/11... https://t.co/XFw2oWY5bF
Video Transcript AI Summary
If the American public believes Israel was involved in the 9/11 attacks, it could lead to significant consequences for Israel. Despite its current power, Israel is seen as a puppet state controlled by powerful bankers who influence governments and institutions globally. The concept of the "Samson option" suggests that if Israel's existence is threatened, it may resort to nuclear retaliation against the world. Historical events, such as the attack on the USS Liberty, highlight Israel's aggressive actions without repercussions. As Americans become aware of these realities, there may be widespread anger over the sacrifices made in support of Israel, potentially leading to greater conflict in the Middle East and beyond. The situation is precarious, and the implications could be dire for all involved.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What are the implications from your perspective if the American public comes to believe that Israel was involved, planned, and carried out the 911 attacks?
Speaker 1: You know, even Henry Kissinger and the CIA said something that I agree with. You know, I don't normally agree with Kissinger or the CIA, but I do in this. And both of them said that Israel will be no more within a short period of time. I believe the CIA predicted 20 years back in 2007, something like that. And Kissinger protect, said within 10 years, just a a few years back himself.
I wholeheartedly agree with that. For me, it's absolutely obvious that despite the fact that Israel enjoys enormous power right now, which isn't really organic to Israel, Israel is like the favorite little fiefdom. It's the ultimate criminal state. And the real, power behind that, which we can definitely trace, is the bankers. The bankers who have literally an infinite supply of money are running the world right now.
They own our government. They own pretty much all the western governments. They own the police. They own the court system. They own the corporations.
They own the mainstream media. They completely own Hollywood, and they virtually infiltrate and control every non, NGO and every kind of meaningful social institution you can name because they have the money to do it. So Israel is our favorite little play thing. So I don't think that Netanyahu or any of these other criminals really have any power. Maybe some a little bit more than others, but they're all puppets just like our presidents and all the other heads of state.
They're all puppets. They all work for the bankers. So they tell us a bunch of lies every election cycle, but they actually follow the orders of the bankers. And if they don't, well, the last one who didn't follow the orders was John f Kennedy, and he did not follow the orders. In fact, he defied the Federal Reserve Bank openly.
So Israel is living on borrowed time if you ask me, and I don't think there's really much doubt of that. The question is, is Israel going to exercise something known as the Samson auction? Because now, thanks to our treasonous governments, thanks to, John f Kennedy being assassinated, it it is now a reality that Israel has approximately 2 to 400 nuclear weapons. Thanks to Germany, who has gifted Israel with Dolphin class submarines that have now been nuclear armed, Israel has the capacity to deliver those nuclear weapons anywhere on the planet with virtually no notice. So the reality we're living in now is this possibility of the so called Samson option.
And for those that don't know what that is, they should Google it. Don't trust me. Google it and verify it for yourself. It's an old biblical story, effectively paraphrasing here. Samson, a Jew, was basically facing an enemy force that was overwhelming.
He knew he was not gonna be able, to, be able to beat it back. So what he did was he lured these forces into the temple, and then he pushed down the pillars of the temple, and he killed himself and everyone else. This is the Samson option and the modern day, equivalent according to high level thinkers within Israel is that if Israel's security of Israel's existence is threatened, that we will take out the whole world, that we will use nuclear weapons against the whole world, that we will use the threat of destroying the whole world if our existence is threatened. Now keep in mind the bankers own Israel. It's their favorite little play thing.
It has no extradition treaties with anyone in the world. It's involved in blood diamond trading. It's in sex, trafficking, organ trafficking. It's committing active genocide by the legal definition of the word according to Black's Law Dictionary, genocide. It is the ultimate criminal state.
So how much room is there for Israel to continue? The only reason why Israel has existed as long as it has is because it's basically been in the dark. The powers would be in the mainstream media have kept it in the dark. The truth about it has never been exposed. The light has not been exposing it.
Now the light is exposing it and that's why it's living on borrowed time. So the question becomes, is Israel going to exercise the so called Samson option? And how much more of American tax payers money is going to be used for Israel to produce even more nuclear weapons and more, military technology to the point that we already face this monstrous threat. It is incredible. Americans are the main, benefactors of Israel, this ultimate criminal state.
When the American people finally realized, not just 911, but how about the USS Liberty? We get back to the USS Liberty in 1967. The lesson that was taught to Israel keep in mind this was not too long after Kennedy's assassination and that traitor, this incredible perverse traitor, Lyndon Baines Johnson, was now in the office, totally bought and paid for, by the Zionist Jewish supremacist lobby. And it was in 1967 that Israel literally attacked the defenseless ship, the USS Liberty, in international waters, blue skies, flying the stars and stripes, killed 34, American sailors. Really did everything it could to sink that ship, and I would argue that it was divine intervention that it didn't sink.
If that ship had sunk, we had nuclear weapons that were fitted on phantom jets that were flying towards Cairo. The end of the world could happen right back in 1967 due to our best friend and ally, little old Jewish state of Israel. And this is reality today. Their power has only increased and the lesson from the USS Liberty was you can do anything you want. Johnson and other traders have always covered this up successively for decades.
I know some of the survivors of the USS Liberty. So it's no surprise what they were involved in 911. Again, the lesson is Israel can do anything. I was on a a ship, a humanitarian ship heading to Gaza in 2010, and Israel attacked that ship in international waters right next to where the Liberty was attacked. And I witnessed the dead bodies.
I was there and involved in disarming 2 of these commandos. They literally murdered 9 people on the day. 6 of them provably executed. I've read the autopsy reports and the ballistics reports. So Israel is the ultimate criminal state enjoying the favor of the real powers that be the bankers who have an infinite supply of money.
The lesson to them is always be that you can do anything and everything and you get away with it because you have the favor of the powers that be. So how far are we going to take this? I don't know. But when the American people finally figure out how their sons and daughters have been sacrificed for this nefarious evil psychotic agenda of greater Israel and whatnot, they're gonna be, to put it bluntly, pissed. They're gonna be angry, and I don't blame them.
I just wish they'd figure it out sooner because it's only gonna cause more death and more mayhem, not just for the American people. Let's take a look at the Middle East and what's happening there. It is ungodly. And those people running around, cutting off heads, mostly Muslims, but also Christians and whatnot. Those people work for us through our proxy, Saudi Arabia.
All of this is Israeli Jewish supremacist policy. And if it doesn't stop soon, it could be the end of the world for everyone.
reSee.it AI Summary
I wonder how long it will take before Pete Hegseth gets asked about protecting Jews on college campuses, or if that question has already come up. Also curious who would dare to ask him about protecting Whites on campuses—my guess is no one will.
@DecentBackup - BackupDecentFiJC
How long until Pete Hegseth gets the first “What will you do to protect Jews on college campuses?” question, or has that one already happened? (No, I’m not watching that shit lol.) Btw, who will have the balls to ask Hegseth, “What will you do to protect Whites on college campuses?” (Lol, trick question. None of them will.) https://youtu.be/yaBOM4wxj4U?si=kaT0lC6q_1yp5CZX
@llynpowell - Llŷn 🏴 ➀
Jewish man in Israel says they will have the Greater Israel they always dreamed of and will do animal sacrifices again. Why are they allowed to say this in public? https://t.co/RoZBs8sQV0
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers assert the third temple will be rebuilt, and animal sacrifices will be reinstated. They believe this will lead to God granting them the entirety of Israel, extending from the Euphrates River to the Nile River, creating the greater Israel. They state that achieving this vision will not require belief in Jesus. They claim the restored temple will feature daily morning and afternoon offerings, along with special offerings for the Sabbath, holidays, and Passover. They believe this future temple will stand forever.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We will rebuild the third temple. We will do animal sacrifices again, and God will give us the whole of of Israel all the way up to the Euphrates River and down to the Nile River. We'll have the greater Israel that we've always dreamed of, and we won't have to believe Jesus to get it. That's what you guys are maybe you'll be alive. Hopefully, you'll be alive to see it.
But that's the truth.
Speaker 1: To return the temple to its glory, rebuild the temple, restore the sacrificial service. It will be a daily offering in the morning, a daily offering in the afternoon, special offerings on the Sabbath and the holidays, the Passover sacrifice, all of those will be brought again, and the future temple will stand forever.
@WhitlockJason - Jason Whitlock
I asked .@TuckerCarlson to elaborate on his disconnect with Ben Shapiro: “He loves Israel. I like Israel… I just don’t think we should get sucked into a foreign war on behalf of another country.” https://t.co/Y0iuLOGTph
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 states they respect Ben Shapiro, agreeing with him on some basics and his love for Israel. The speaker disagrees with getting involved in foreign wars and prioritizes their own country's interests.
Speaker 0 mentions being criticized for an "America First" mindset.
Speaker 1 elaborates that disagreements should be addressed with debate, not character attacks, which they attribute to the left. They lament the tendency to impugn a person's character instead of addressing their arguments, finding it "incredibly low." They claim the left short-circuits debate by attacking character, labeling opponents as racist or indecent to avoid engaging with their ideas.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Are you and Ben Shapiro gonna sit down and talk on camera? Oh,
Speaker 1: I don't know. I mean, I'm by the way, I should you know, I don't I I don't hate Ben Shapiro at all. I I respect Ben Shapiro. I think Ben Shapiro is smart and articulate. I agree with him on tons of stuff.
Maybe not tons. I agree with him on some stuff. On the basics. I do. I do.
I agree with him. And he loves Israel. I like Israel. I'm not you know, like, there's not that big a difference really between us. I just don't think that we should get sucked into a foreign war on behalf of another country.
I don't think it's in our I think it's much more complicated than some of our leaders claim to fight a war with Iran for a bunch of reasons. I could bore you for three hours explaining, but that's my sincere conclusion. I could be wrong. He's got a different view. So there's not like any kind of blood feud or whatever.
You know, I I've just pointed out that I think it's really important to as a general orientation to be more concerned about your own country than any other country. And I feel that way. I That's I don't think that's bigotry, it seems obvious.
Speaker 0: I'm gonna jump in that book because I've gotten in trouble for suggesting like, I only care about America. Ben, at the very least, cares about two countries and and and you know, I've I've been criticized for that. I I I don't get it because if I had family in Ireland or somewhere and talked a bit about Ireland and someone said, well man, it looks like Whitlock cares about Ireland and America. I wouldn't say you're being racist towards me, you're just making an observation and saying that I don't have dual concerns, I only have one. It it just it's an outgrowth of the America First mindset and anyway, let let me pivot.
Speaker 1: Well, that's I mean, but that's kind of it. It's like if you disagree with someone, explain why and, like, have a real debate. Don't try this is what the left does. They short circuit the debate by attacking your character. They don't wanna hear what you have to say.
You're a racist. You're a bad person. You shouldn't even be heard. You haven't met the decency threshold to talk. Okay?
Shut up. They explain. And I find that loathsome. I find it an an offense against reason. I I I find it an offense against human dignity.
I'm an adult man. I have a right to say what I think. If you disagree, tell me how. Like, that's how rational people behave. The left does not behave that way.
It's why I haven't debated a liberal in so long because I can't find any who will even talk to me because I'm a bad person. It I grieve at the amount of that kind of nonsense I see on the right including perhaps from the person you mentioned where it's like, oh, he must have some sinister reason. Maybe deep in his heart, he's an evil person. It's like, really? No.
I mean, maybe I am an evil per I probably am kind of an evil person in a lot of ways. I'm not a great person. I never pretend to be a great person. But why don't you assess what I just said? Why don't you debate the merits of the issue?
Why don't you go immediately to impugning the person you're debating as a person rather than responding to the points he made? That's incredibly low.
@SpartaJustice - Truth Justice ™
“It goes without saying that there are very few Trump voters who’d support a regime change war in Iran. Donald Trump has argued loudly against reckless lunacy like this. Trump ran for president as a peace candidate. That’s what made him different from conventional Republicans.” - Tucker Carlson
@RyanMattaMedia - RyanMatta 🇺🇸 🦅
The Israel lobby is openly promoting staging a false flag attack on the US so they can start WW3 with Iran. https://t.co/YoHURfRvDj
Video Transcript AI Summary
Crisis initiation is tough, and it's hard to see how the U.S. president can get the U.S. to war with Iran. If compromise isn't coming, the traditional way America gets to war would be best for U.S. interests.
To go to war, the U.S. has historically waited for an attack, such as Pearl Harbor, the Lusitania, the Gulf of Tonkin, the Maine, or Fort Sumter. If the Iranians aren't going to compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war.
One can combine other means of pressure with sanctions, such as increasing pressure after the explosion on August 17. Iranian submarines periodically go down, and someday one of them might not come up. The U.S. is already using covert means against the Iranians and could get nastier.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I frankly think that crisis initiation is really tough, and it's very hard for me to see how The United States, president can get us to war with Iran, which leads me to conclude that if in fact compromise is not coming, that the traditional way of America gets to war is what would be best for US interests. Some people might think that Mister Roosevelt wanted to get us into World War two as Dave mentioned you may recall we had to wait for Pearl Harbor. Some people might think Mister Wilson wanted to get us into World War one you may recall he had to wait for the Lusitania episode. Some people might think that mister Johnson wanted to send troops to Vietnam you may recall he had to wait for the Gulf Of Tonkin episode. We didn't go to war with Spain until the USS, until the Maine exploded and may I point out that mister Lincoln did not feel he could call out the federal army until Fort Sumter was attacked which is why he ordered the commander Fort Sumter to do exactly that thing which the South Carolinians had said would cause an attack.
So if in fact the Iranians aren't going to compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war. One can combine other means of pressure with sanctions. I mentioned that explosion on August 17. We could step up the pressure. I mean look people, Iranian submarines periodically go down.
Someday one of them might not come up. Who would know why? We can do a variety of things if we wish to increase the pressure. I'm not advocating that, but I'm just suggesting that this is not a either or proposition, you know, it's just sanctions has to has to succeed or other things. We are in the game of using covert means against the Iranians.
We we could get nastier of that.
@GUnderground_TV - Going Underground
REMINDER: Col. Douglas Macgregor to Tucker Carlson: ‘The way Donald Trump handled Zelensky is the way he has got to handle Netanyahu, because if he doesn’t, Netanyahu will drag him into the abyss…because he wants this war with Iran🇮🇷 come hell or high water.’ https://t.co/3jTRqENEF2
Video Transcript AI Summary
President Trump was too gentle with Zelensky, and should handle Netanyahu the same way to prevent him from instigating a war in the Middle East, specifically a war with Iran and others. Netanyahu views the current situation as an opportunity to settle with everyone, claiming to be fighting on five or seven fronts, including Houthis, militias in Iraq and Syria, and Iran. He is allegedly trying to occupy Syria up to Damascus, a move that Erdogan opposes. The speaker believes that Turkey will eventually get involved to protect Damascus, one of the three great Islamic cities. This could create a structural problem since Turkey is a member of NATO, but the speaker doesn't think NATO matters anymore. The speaker believes what is happening will end everything we're accustomed to, including the rules-based order and global hegemony, forcing everyone in BRICS together.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And Zelensky, frankly, the way he was treated, I I think president Trump was far too gentle. I'm surprised that two giant secret service, agents did not come in, pick him up, and remove him from the office. But the way he handled Zelenskyy is the way he's got to handle Netanyahu. Because if he doesn't, Netanyahu will drag him into the abyss because he wants this war in The Middle East come hell or high water, and it's not in their interest. What war?
The war with Iran. The war with everybody. I mean, you've seen these settings where Netanyahu sits at the table, and he's got everybody around him in his cabinet. And he says, this is our opportunity to settle with everyone. We're fighting on five fronts.
No. We're fighting on seven fronts. And he starts ticking off, you know, everyone from the Houthis to, the militias in Iraq and Syria and now Iran and so If you look at the map today, he's trying to occupy Syria all the way up to the edge of Damascus. And Erdogan, who is a very clever but slippery character, has already said forget it. We're not gonna tolerate that in Southern Syria.
So he's he's pushing the envelope to the very edge. In Damascus, there are three great Islamic cities in the region. One is Cairo, the other is Jerusalem, and then Damascus. They're not going to surrender Damascus to the Israelis. So whatever happens, the Turks will eventually become involved.
They'll march in.
Speaker 1: So, I mean, that creates a a kind of structural problem because Turkey is a member of NATO.
Speaker 0: I don't think so because I don't think I don't think NATO matters.
Speaker 1: Maybe right.
Speaker 0: I don't think it has for a long time. What?
Speaker 1: Well, it matters in a material sense. We just use the name NATO to wage a war against Russia for three years that we lost. Yeah. So but that would be the end of NATO. Right?
Speaker 0: Well, what we're talking about will end everything that we're accustomed to, the rules based order, which just means our global hegemony in military and economic terms. Everyone in BRICS is now being forced together. We're forcing
@newstart_2024 - Camus
Tucker Carlson issues a chilling warning: The greatest threat facing humanity isn’t just war—it’s nuclear extinction. Leaders keep failing, nations keep gambling, and the world sleepwalks toward annihilation. Wake up before it’s too late. https://t.co/VZcwHbXQZ9
@DrLoupis__ - Dr. Anastasia Maria Loupis
"We could collapse Israeli society if we wanted to." We must restrain Israel....but if we did what would happen? We could have another 9/11 or JFK. - Nick Fuentes (@NickJFuentes) 🇺🇸 https://t.co/52gQzgwCo1
@hippyygoat - Earth Hippy 🌎🕊️💚
ZIONIST ISRAEL IS GOING TO IMPLODE….‼️ “What is happening right now in Israel could basically, I think, destroy, void, 2000 years of Jewish thinking and culture and existence.” Yuval Noah Harari -Israeli medievalist and military historian https://t.co/Z9E0IiDWfl
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 treats the period starting 10/07/2023 as possibly the biggest turning point in Jewish history, perhaps the greatest since the fall of the temple. He notes Judaism has survived numerous catastrophes, but this could be a spiritual catastrophe for Judaism itself. He warns that events in Israel could destroy two thousand years of Jewish thinking, culture, and existence. He highlights a worst-case scenario of an ethnic cleansing campaign in Gaza and the West Bank resulting in the expulsion of 2,000,000 Palestinians. He argues this would accompany the establishment of Greater Israel, the disintegration of Israeli democracy, and a new Israel based on an ideology of Jewish supremacy and on anti-Jewish values. He portrays a country worshiping power and violence, militarily strong and economically viable, and concludes that no Jew anywhere will be able to deny this would be the real Judaism.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: 10/07/2023 till now. Where does that fit? Is it footnote or chapter in the sweep of Jewish history?
Speaker 1: I think it's one of the could be one of the biggest turning points in Jewish history. Maybe the biggest since the fall of the temple in seventy CE, since the Roman conquest. Because Judaism has survived it became the world champion in surviving catastrophes, but it never faced a catastrophe like we are dealing with right now, which is a spiritual catastrophe for Judaism itself. Because what is happening right now in Israel could basically, I think, destroy, void, two thousand years of Jewish thinking and culture and existence. That the worst case scenario that we are facing right now, what we are facing is the potential of an ethnic cleansing campaign in Gaza and the West Bank resulting in the expulsion of 2,000,000, maybe more Palestinians from there.
The establishment of Greater Israel, the disintegration of Israeli democracy, and the creation of a new Israel, which is based on an ideology of Jewish supremacy, and on the worship of what were completely anti Jewish values for the last two millennia. A country based on the worship of power and violence and which is militarily strong. It will survive. It will be militarily strong. It will have alliances with various bullies around the world.
It will also be economically viable. And this will be the spiritual disaster because this will be the new Judaism that all Jews in the world will have to deal with. It will not disappear. Again, Jews are very good dealing with catastrophes from the Roman conquest to the holocaust. But this will not be a military catastrophe.
The the state will actually be successful in military and economic terms. And it will make the challenge much much bigger. No Jew, say, in London or New York or anywhere else will be able to say, this is not the real Judaism.
@ivan_8848 - Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil
Does Tucker think Israel is a terrorist state? https://t.co/4Es9awZ9AY
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 centers the discussion on “why is Israel killing Christians,” arguing that Americans and Christians fund Israel and the IDF, and that Christians’ sites are blocked or attacked. He notes Hamas may have Christian members and points out a paradox about secular groups like Fatah having Christian support, asking for a coherent explanation for why Christians are being killed in a conflict not clearly about Christianity. He claims “Hamas was funded by Israel to some extent” and distinguishes religious versus political motivations, suggesting a purely religious motive would foreclose Christian accomplices. He defines terrorism as “the act of murdering the innocent” and says “If you murder the innocent, you are engaged in terrorism.” He argues Israel is not the litmus test; the focus should be on one’s own country, and that “the worst thing you can do is punish the innocent.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: No. I I said you can't claim first of all, the core of it is why is Israel killing Christians
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: Who fund it? Americans fund Israel, fund the IDF. They wouldn't none of this would be possible without The United States and Christians in The United States. So they don't get to go kill Christians. They don't get to block access to Christian holy sites.
They don't get to they don't get to allow people to spit on Christian clergy and they definitely don't get permission from the country that funds them to blow up churches or Christian hospitals and yet they have a lot. So what the hell is that? And that's my point. And in response and I've asked that not as a hater of Israel, but as a Christian. So I've asked that pretty persistently for the last few years.
I've really been attacked for it, but so what? And the response is, well, they're not actually, you know, they're they're in Hamas. And so my question is, well, you're you're telling me simultaneously that Hamas is a religious group. They're Islamic extremists, but they also have Christian members? Like, how does that work?
It doesn't make any sense at all. That was my point. I'm not endorsing Hamas. I didn't say they're not a terror group. That's a freaking lie.
I said, if you're telling me they're a jihadi group, they're political extremist groups, by the way, Fatah. There were tons of Arab political terror groups that were secular that did have Christians in them, by the way, a lot of Christians who were displaced in 1948 and they were radical or whatever. But there's do you see what I'm saying? There's like a a childish internal contradiction there that and now they don't wanna deal with it, so it's like, shut up Hamas support.
Speaker 1: I think I think what got people going
Speaker 0: You stop killing christ you stop killing Christians.
Speaker 1: I understood I understood understood the bigger point.
Speaker 0: Is that? It is What's the justification for that?
Speaker 1: I understood the bigger point you were making. Like I said, I'm
Speaker 0: a Christian. I don't have to put up
Speaker 1: Oh, I understand.
Speaker 0: I understand. More. I don't have to sit back and be like
Speaker 1: I understand.
Speaker 0: All these Christian ministers in The United States are like, oh, shut up.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: We can't complain about a government that we fund killing Christians. I
Speaker 1: don't
Speaker 0: know who's writing the rules here, but I'm not obeying them. I'm not attacking Israel. I'm not an anti Semite. You don't get to kill Christians who have nothing to do with this. It's the world's only religion that is not only nonviolent but considers retaliation a sin.
Turn the other cheek. That's the religion. So why are you killing these people? I I understand. Straight answer.
And telling me names is not gonna deter me.
Speaker 1: I understand the bigger point you made. I but like I said, you definitely say
Speaker 0: It's the only point I made.
Speaker 1: You definitely said in passing that they seem more like a political organization. So do you wanna clarify what you meant by that bit?
Speaker 0: I'm I'm saying funded by Israel political association, by the way.
Speaker 1: You
Speaker 0: sure? Hamas was funded by Israel to some extent. It's not a controversial statement. It's not a conspiracy theory. It's an established fact by the current prime minister, took money, gave it to Hamas.
I I meant what I said, which is they are either I'm not questioning whether they've committed violence. They have. I'm opposed to that. I'm opposed to all violence, period. And I'm opposed to Hamas violence.
I'm opposed to killing people. The question is, if you are telling me that they are inspired to kill because of their religious ideology, that is a different thing from people who are inspired to kill by their political ideology. Because if it's political, you can imagine an alliance with Christians. If it is a religious motivation, it is impossible to imagine, as I said in that clip, Christian accomplices. There weren't a lot of Christians supporting Al Qaeda because Al Qaeda was explicitly anti Christian, so was ISIS.
Fatah, which was again a radical or violence prone Palestinian political organization had Christian support. So which is it? That's my point. I was calling into question their lack of a coherent explanation for why Christians are being killed in a conflict that, from my perspective, doesn't seem to have anything to do with that. Do do you desecrating churches.
Speaker 1: Do you view Hamas as a terrorist organization as they've been prescribed in many countries, including The US?
Speaker 0: I view Hamas killing people, especially civilians, as horrifying, immoral, and wrong. And if you think you're gonna get me into some semantic game about who's a terrorist and who's not a terrorist, Killing people who committed no crime is wrong. Period. That's the basis of Christian belief. It's the basis of Western civilization.
Dropping bombs on people who did nothing wrong is a crime. Period. That is why we say we are better than the terrorists because we don't kill people who did nothing wrong. And by definition, children haven't done anything wrong. So you are not allowed to kill them.
And now there's an entire network of not a television network, but a loosely aligned network arguing that it's somehow wrong to say it's immoral to kill children. And I think it's immoral to kill children no matter who kills the children, whether it's the government of the United States, the government of Sri Lanka, the government of Belgium, the government of Israel, Hamas. It doesn't matter. It is immoral to kill people who haven't done anything wrong. That's why Hiroshima is a problem.
That's why I've complained about Hiroshima. That's why the Nazis were bad. That's why everybody who murders innocents is wrong. And when did that become controversial? Like, said, I articulated that and was immediately attacked by all these, you know, people on the so called right.
I was like, then what is the whole point? What is the point of living here or having this country if we endorse murdering people who committed no crime? How are we better than the people we supposedly hate? You can't get an answer. Oh, you're a radical jihadi.
No. Actually, I'm I'm a protestant Christian who hates radical jihadis. Like, I don't even know what you're talking about. Anyway, that that's it. That's the distinction.
And by the way, the designation of terrorism grows from that understanding, which was a common understanding before nine eleven. If you kill people intentionally, you've committed no crime, you are the criminal. And who does that? Terrorists. That's why we call them terrorists.
So, I'm happy to call anyone who does that a terrorist. That's my definition. That was our working definition before nine eleven, and then it just became the people our political class doesn't like. And I've been called it I was called a terrorist yesterday. You're a terrorist.
Okay. Because I espouse nonviolence, which is the basis? It's the basis of Western civilization that you punish only the guilty?
Speaker 1: Look. I'm trying to work out I'm trying to work out whether I'm trying to work out. Do do you actually think then that Hamas are terrorists or not?
Speaker 0: I think any organization that kills the innocent, including Hamas, is a terror organization.
Speaker 1: Got it. Okay.
Speaker 0: What I object to, and I just wanna be as clear as I possibly can, what I object to is the proceeding with the conversation without the defining of terms. The purpose of language is to convey specific ideas, and so in order to have a conversation, you have to define what you're talking about. If I were to throw a couple Korean terms in and refuse to tell you what they mean, we couldn't have a conversation because you don't speak Korean. And so I want you to define terrorism, and I'm gonna do it very precisely. Terrorism is the act of murdering the innocent.
If you murder the innocent, you are engaged in terrorism. And that would include, in specific cases I can think of, Hamas, which has murdered the innocent, people at a music festival. I mean, what? That is terrorism. Anybody who murders people who committed no crime is committing terrorism.
Speaker 1: Does that include
Speaker 0: And if someone else can
Speaker 1: think Does that include okay. So does that include Israel?
Speaker 0: Includes anybody.
Speaker 1: Does that include Israel?
Speaker 0: It includes anybody.
Speaker 1: No. But
Speaker 0: Anybody but by the way, let me just say, I it's so funny. It's does that include Israel? It includes people I know personally in The United States. I know a lot of people who have ok'd the order. I know in some cases, people who participated in carrying out the order to murder people who committed no crime.
Does that mean they're terrorists? I don't know. I'll let God figure out what that means. It means they're committing acts of terror. That is terrorism because the point of it is not to punish the guilty.
The point of it is to inspire fear. The point of it is to depopulate a place, move a population. Whatever the point of it is, the effect of it is to punish people who've committed no crime. And in our system, the western system, is very distinct from the Eastern system, very distinct, and it's distinct on this one precise point, we believe and have always believed since this country was founded, since your country became, you know, not a pure monarchy, but even when it was a pure monarchy. The belief in the West because of Christianity was the worst thing you can do is punish the innocent.
That's the worst thing you can do. That's worse than not punishing the guilty, and we often said that to each other. We no longer say that because there is a pretty concerted effort to blur the meaning of these terms. But I'm not going to be deterred from defining words precisely. Terror is murdering people, killing people, punishing people who committed no crime.
Period.
Speaker 1: So when when the Israeli government says it has repeatedly that even though over 20,000 completely innocent children are believed to have died in in their response to what Hamas did on October 7 At the hands of the IDF, there are many on the pro Palestinian side who say that Israel is behaving like terrorists too in the way that they have gone about conducting this war. Would would you go as far as to say that?
Speaker 0: One of the the things that I really object to now is this relentless focus on Israel, which, by way, is a foreign country that I have nothing to do with other than having been a visitor there and really enjoyed it. And it's now at the center of the conversation in my country when my country is degrading at high speed. We have a lot of concerns here. I just resent the kind of solipsism that pulls everything back to the concerns of a foreign country, and that's the litmus test for the well, Israel? Is Israel bad?
How dare you say that? Are you gonna go out on a limb and criticize Israel? What about my country? Every country commits terror because leaders, drunk on hubris, imagine that they can do things that no human being is permitted to do. And first on that list is killing people who didn't do anything wrong.
That is the ultimate sin, and it happens in every country, in every period. Of course, Israel meets that def I mean, obviously, but so does my government. And and not always, and I think we try harder. Certainly, try harder than Israel is trying, but we have definitely done that, and it's not controversial to say that. It's not controversial to say that things the US government have has done have intentionally murdered people who didn't do anything wrong.
People are like, yeah, that's right. But you say that about Benjamin Netanyahu who has nothing to do with me at all. I don't live there. I don't wanna live there. I've got nothing to do with that.
Then you're somehow a criminal. That whole frame to me is insane, and I'm not participating with it. Israel is not the litmus test. How you feel about your own country, what you do to improve or degrade your own country, that's the litmus test for me. Not how you feel about some foreign country, period.
@sovereignbrah - SOVEREIGN BRAH 🇺🇸🏛️⚡️
Tucker Carlson just told Piers Morgan about Israel’s foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks, the Israeli spy rings operating in the US to document the events, and how Netanyahu said the 9/11 attacks were good for Israeli interests. https://t.co/ugKtHtaCla
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker says they did not allege "the Jews did it" and that such framing discredits real questions. They cite "Benjamin Netanyahu on camera" saying "this is a good thing because it brings The United States into a conflict that we've been involved in on an existential level for decades." They describe "a group of Israeli art students... arrested and held for quite some time in The United States before being released without charges" and say "a group of them... filmed the attacks on nine eleven, and I'm quoting, seemed to have foreknowledge of those attacks." They reference Fox News: "a series with Brett Hume and Karl Cameron" claiming "There was an Israeli spy ring in The United States, and they clearly knew nine eleven was coming," which was "pulled under pressure" and "not searchable in any Fox News archive," though "they aired it." The speaker adds, "I know the people who did it... they're real people... they're pro Israel, but they had a fact set before them and they reported it, which is called journalism," and notes "subsequent generations have been forbidden from noting what is now factually true." They tried to interview someone in California who made no headway, and they expected to be attacked as anti Semites.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Israel. No. Of course, I didn't allege that, you know, the Jews did it. I I don't even know what that means. I I think, in fact, saying things like that is a way to discredit, real questions.
Right. Like, we know I mean, Benjamin Netanyahu on camera right after said this is a good thing because it brings The United States into a conflict that we've been involved in on an existential level for decades. I mean, he said that out loud. I'm not guessing you can pull the tape. We know that a group of Israeli art students who clearly were not art students, clearly some of them were aligned with Israeli intelligence, were arrested and held for quite some time in The United States before being released without charges.
And we know that a group of them, again, I'm quoting an FBI document here, not the Internet, filmed the attacks on nine eleven, and I'm quoting, seemed to have foreknowledge of those attacks. Now, you were not allowed to follow-up in any of this. Fox News did a series with Brett Hume and Karl Cameron, which many people have seen in a bootleg version on the Internet, but they did it, like, within weeks, saying, what is this? There was an Israeli spy ring in The United States, and they clearly knew nine eleven was coming. This is Fox News.
They pulled that under pressure. They pulled that off the Internet. It's not searchable in any Fox News archive, but they aired it. I know the people who who did it. Of course, I worked with them for years.
They're real people. They're not crazy. In fact, they're pro Israel, but they had a fact set before them and they reported it, which is called journalism. And subsequent generations have been forbidden from noting what is now factually true. Those are factually true statements.
Now we tried to interview some of those people. One lives in The United States, in California, and made no headway whatsoever. And we knew as we did it, by the way, that we're gonna be attacked as anti Semites or some.
@KAGdrogo - ĐⱤØ₲Ø🇺🇸
Tucker Carlson is one of the lone voices of reason in the chaos of the world today. Why does a tiny country, the largest foreign aid recipient, who cannot survive without US funding, have so much outsized influence on American politics? Listen to him explain the Israel Question https://t.co/i4mpHyROB7
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker argues that online discourse on Israel is split into two extreme camps and that US politics mirrors this division, creating a harmful national distraction. To heal the relationship and conversation, four steps are proposed: 1) Global perspective: The United States is a 350,000,000-strong powerhouse; Israel is tiny with 9,000,000 people and few natural resources. The US has spent at least $30,000,000,000 defending Israel since 10/07/2023, and about $300,000,000,000 overall; two THAAD batteries in Israel represent a quarter of the world’s supply. Prominent claims: "The United States needs Israel" and "Israel could not survive without The United States." 2) Self-respect: stop being treated as a client state; cited incidents include Pollard and Israeli officers in the Pentagon; Netanyahu's "I control Donald Trump" remark. 3) Citizenship: end dual citizenship; APAC to register under FAIR. 4) Theology: reject Christian Zionism; "the chosen people in Christianity are those who choose Jesus."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: There's a lot going on in the world right now, but if you're on social media and, of course, you are because it's really America's only remaining news source, you know there's only one story going on, and it's Israel. Everyone online is arguing about Israel. And, really, they fall into one of two camps generally speaking. So probably more aggressive side are the deranged Taliban level ethno narcissists who are telling you that any criticism of the secular government of Israel is tantamount to blood libel against the Jewish people. And if you think that maybe it was not a great idea to arm Joseph Stalin, the greatest murderer in history, then you're a holocaust denier.
Shut up. And then on the other side, a group every bit as obsessed with Jews, the people who hate Jews who are telling you that anyone who's Jewish is bad by virtue of being Jewish. It's a blood thing. Two things are interesting. One, there are very few kind of conventional Christian voices saying, wait a second.
This is a secular government, another country, and it has probably nothing to do with my religion or anybody's religion. And we should never judge people on the basis of their immutable qualities because guilt and virtue are not passed down genetically. But almost no one is saying that. So you really have the ethnomorphosis and the antisemites, and they're at war with each other. That's the online picture.
What's even more interesting and maybe even more distressing is that in the US government, the conversation, while much more muted, is a mirror of this in that a lot of the conversation is about Israel. Israel, a tiny country in the Middle East, not critical to our national security, by the way. But the conversation, the bandwidth is consumed by questions of Israel. So wherever you stand on Israel, whether you're on one of the two sides just described or neither one of them, you know in your gut that this is bad. If a country like ours, supposedly the most powerful in the world, is devoting all of its time internally to conversations about Israel, it's probably not going in a good direction.
There's probably a lot being neglected in favor of this very specific boutique conversation about this tiny little country. It's just not good for anybody, including Israel, by the way. So what's the antidote to this? How do you fix it? Here are four things you can do to make the conversation about Israel and the relationship with Israel a lot healthier than it currently is.
Here are the four. The first is get some global perspective on what we're talking about. The United States is a nation of 350,000,000 people. It is some of the deepest natural resources in the world that would include energy and water, agricultural products. The United States, however it's managed, is a powerhouse globally and always will be because its strength is inherent.
It's a huge decisive country in the scope of world history. The United States makes things happen. Israel is not an insult, merely an observation. By contrast, is a tiny and inherently insignificant country, at least geopolitically, in that it has only 9,000,000 people and no natural resources, no meaningful natural resources. So it is insignificant.
It is also physically tiny. It's about the size of New Jersey famously, but it has a much smaller GDP than New Jersey. It is a much smaller economy than the state of New Jersey. It's an economy about the size of the state of Arizona and almost one half the economy of the state of Massachusetts or Illinois. It just doesn't really matter, actually.
If you're looking at a map and thinking through, you know, where does power politics go, Israel's not even on the list. Again, it's tiny. It's got the population of Burundi. It's got a smaller population than Belgium. Like, what is this anyway?
And yet despite its objective insignificance, it is the focus of the conversation, but it's also the focus of the spending. So right now, as we speak tonight, there are two THAAD missile batteries in Israel. That's one quarter of the world's total supply of THAAD missile batteries. The THAAD missile batteries, an American made, very high-tech missile battery that takes incoming missiles out of the sky. And one quarter of the world's entire supply of these is in Israel right now manned by US troops, by Americans in uniform or not.
They are American military personnel, and they are manning these batteries to protect Israel. And that shouldn't surprise you because since 10/07/2023, which is a little less than two years ago, The United States has spent at minimum $30,000,000,000 defending Israel. Huge. And for some perspective, the entire Israeli military budget before October 7 was about 25,000,000,000. So United States has put at least 30,000,000,000 into defending Israel in less than two years.
Over the course of its existence, a little less than eighty years, United States has put 300,000,000,000, at least those are just the on books numbers, into supporting Israel. 300,000,000,000. Israel is by far, no one comes close, the largest recipient of USAID over time and currently. So anyone who says, oh, it's just a drop in the bucket. It's totally insignificant is lying or doesn't know the numbers.
By the way, number two is Egypt. So why are we spending so much money on Egypt? Well, we're doing it at the request of Israel. So you could probably add that to the tally. It's not an attack.
It's merely perspective. We are spending our time, our money, and we're taking enormous risks on behalf of a country that geopolitically is not significant at all. The interesting thing is most Americans have no idea that this is true. They don't know how disproportionate our attention to Israel and our spending on Israel is relative to the rest of the world. And if you want some sense of how disproportionate, India and China combined, neither which is a strong ally at the moment, combined represent more than a third of the entire world's population, both arrivals economically, both arrivals militarily, at least potentially.
And our relationship with them has gotten worse or at the very least languished because of our relationship with Israel, because the bandwidth consumed by tending to it, and also because of some of the inevitable conflicts that have arisen because of our support for Israel, which is engaged in an extremely controversial, which is to say hated war in Gaza, which is not even really a war. It's a massive displacement of people and killing on on a on a grand scale of unarmed people, of unarmed combatants, of civilians, women and children. And the world sees this and the world rejects it and the world hates it. And so Israel's really last remaining ally of size other than The UK is The United States. And so there's a huge cost to this.
But again, most Americans have no perspective on just how disproportionate our commitment is because they marinate in lies about this relationship, mostly from our political class, also from the media. But, really, if you were to lay the blame on one group in The United States, it's our elected leaders who continuously lie to us about the nature of this relationship, its significance, and they do it generationally. They've been doing it for many decades. Here and this is just one example, but the most fun to watch. This is Nikki Haley at the Republican presidential primary debate two thousand twenty three describing The United States' relationship with the state of Israel.
Watch.
Speaker 1: Last thing we need to do is to tell Israel what to do. The only thing we should be doing is supporting them in eliminating Hamas. It is not that Israel needs America. America needs Israel.
Speaker 0: It is not that the needs The United States. The United States needs Israel. How could that possibly be true? It is in no sense true. In fact, it's one of those lies that's not three degrees off the truth.
It is a complete inversion of the truth. And the truth, which is obvious to anyone who looks at the numbers or is paying any attention at all, is that Israel could not survive without The United States. That's not an argument for pulling all aid to Israel. It's just an acknowledgement of the physical reality. Israel fights its wars with American backing, with the guarantee, the implied defense guarantee that we have provided for so many years since at least 1973, fifty years.
And its social services are made possible, which are quite generous, made possible by American subsidies. In other words, every dollar that goes to the Israeli military from The United States is a dollar that the nation of Israel can spend on its own people. And so there is no world in which America needs Israel more than Israel needs The United States. And, of course, Nikki was Haley was never asked to explain how exactly that could be true. What are you talking about, governor Haley?
Not one person asked her that question. And no one asked her that question because anyone in whose mind that question appeared would have paused for fear of being attacked as an anti Semite for asking a question about geopolitics. That has been the state of play in The United States for my entire life, over fifty years. Politicians make nonsensical statements. Nobody wants to even ask a follow-up question for fear of being attacked.
It is a state of perpetual intimidation. Everybody's afraid of Israel. Afraid of the topic, afraid in some cases of the state itself. We have not had an honest conversation about this ever. Certainly not in my lifetime.
And that suits the Israelis just fine. And if you're wondering why there's an awful lot of lunatic antisemitic comment about Israel online, you have to wonder how much of that is organic. Some of it, of course, they're always haters. But how much of it is not organic at all? How much of is of that, the lunatic, all Jews are evil?
How much of that is being ginned up on purpose to make legitimate questions about the US government's relationship with the government of Israel seem like crackpot stuff, like hate, like David Duke level lunacy? Probably some because it serves their interests. Now that is a criticism of the state of Israel, and it's incredibly sophisticated propaganda campaign, which, again, the rest of us been marinating in for a long time. But the true villain here, I would argue, is not the state of Israel, the Jews. It's The United States.
It's our leaders who are putting up with this. Israel is a small country with very limited resources, and it is doing its best to serve its own interests. You'd think every country would act that way and most do. But there are some that don't, and ours would top that list. And so the true shame here, the actual villain in the story is the leadership of The United States that is putting up with serial humiliation for decades.
And for what reason? So if there's someone to be mad at, it's our leaders. And that leads to the second thing that we can do to fix this truly unhealthy relationship, this poisonous relationship, which is getting worse, by the way. It's breaking our society into pieces. It's truly hurting the Trump administration.
The second thing we can do after getting global perspective on what we're actually talking about here, a tiny country that is in the deepest sense insignificant to The United States. The second thing we can do is get some freaking self respect and stop being ordered around by a client state. That's not good for us. It's not good for them. It's not good for anybody.
It's like being screamed at by your children. No normal parent would allow that because it's totally destructive. It's not good for you, and it's not good for the child. And that is exactly the relationship that we have with the state of Israel. In fact, not in theory.
In fact, it is a huge country and a tiny country. The huge country supports the tiny country, and that's a pretty nice thing to do. Whether it's wise or not, it's a whole separate conversation. But if you're gonna have that relationship, a parent to a child, you cannot be yelled at, humiliated, spied upon, bossed around by the child, by the person in the inherently subordinate position. You can't do that.
You can't be shamed into ignoring things that are quite clearly not the behavior of a subordinate ally to a big brother ally. For example, spying on the country that makes your economy and your defense possible, which the Israelis have been doing for generations. That's a fact. One of them very famously was caught, Jonathan Pollard, who's an American citizen, taking real secrets, like actual military secrets, and sending them to Israel, which promptly sent a bunch of them to the Soviet Union, which was our archrival, our foe at the time. And that happened, and he went to prison.
And then somehow he got out of prison and went to Israel where he continues to denounce The United States. And anyone who says anything about it is attacked. Oh, you're an anti Semite. It's nothing to do with anti Semitism. That's insulting.
Why would we ever put up with that? Why we put up with the attack on the USS Liberty that everyone's so afraid to talk about clearly targeted on purpose by a country we're supporting Israel, And it's somehow shameful to say that. Why? Why is it shameful to say that? Who knows why it's shameful to say that, but it shouldn't be.
And until we have some self respect, not anger or hate, but just dignity, it will continue in June. For example, during the twelve day war, such as it was with Iran, The US and Israel versus Iran, bombing on all sides. During that short conflict, IDF officers in the Pentagon, foreign military officers in the Pentagon by way, they're not the only foreign military officers in the Pentagon to be clear. There are NATO officers. They're from other country British.
But there are a bunch of Israeli defense force officers in the Pentagon that week. And during that week, ask anyone who works at the Pentagon, they enraged American Pentagon staff by just barging into meetings, giving orders, making demands, and nobody did anything about it. How can a foreign military officer barge into military headquarters, even if invited, barge into a meeting and start demanding. We want this. We want that.
You need to get on this. The more you allow that kind of deeply unhealthy behavior, the more you're going to get. And that's exactly what has happened. Because of the weakness of our leaders, we have incited predators in a foreign country to take advantage of us. Oh, that's such an anti Israel thing.
Not anti Israel at all. It's a demand that the people whose job it is, whose sacred duty it is to defend and represent us, our leaders both at the Pentagon and all throughout the US government, that they do that, that they stand up and defend us against all potential threats, against all foreign countries to the extent they need to, and that they do not prostrate themselves before a foreign nation. That's just basic. Why have a government, especially a strong government if it's taking orders from another weaker government? And that is the state of play, and it has been for a very long time.
And they're not even pretending to such an extent that the prime minister of Israel goes on television to openly participate and meddle in internal American politics, taking sides, attacking people, Americans. You wouldn't think it would be his business. He's not an American leader. He's not even an American citizen. Going on television to attack Americans because they're not fully on board with sending billions more to a country of 9,000,000 people?
And in case you think that's an overstatement, here is the prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, commenting on American politics.
Speaker 2: We talked about the woke right, and he said, I call it the woke reich. Mhmm. Yes. That's a brilliant That's the a brilliant. Woke right because these people, you know, they're not any different from the woke left.
Mean, insane here in the least. But they're actually meeting on some of the things. We have to fight back. How do we fight back? Our influencers.
I think you should also talk to them if you
Speaker 3: have a chance to that
Speaker 2: that community. They're very important. And secondly, we're gonna have to use the tools of battle, and the most important ones are on social media. And the most important purchase that is going on right now is class Followers.
Speaker 4: Five followers.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Butts? TikTok. TikTok. Number one.
Number one. And I hope it goes through because it's
Speaker 3: it can be consequential. Mhmm. And the other
Speaker 2: one what's the other one that's most important?
Speaker 1: Oh, Alex.
Speaker 2: X. Mhmm. X. Oh. That's very good.
Speaker 0: It's almost unbelievable that he said that on camera. Imagine. This is a foreign leader bragging about how he's censoring Americans. Again, this guy runs a country of 9,000,000 people that's totally dependent on our tax dollars to exist. And here he is on camera, and he's a sophisticated guy.
He of course, he knows that he's being filmed saying, anyone who opposes me in The United States who opposes more aid to Israel or opposes getting sucked into war with Iran, which does not serve American interest, That person is not simply mistaken or wrong. I'm not gonna bother to explain why that person is wrong. That person is a Nazi, part of the woke Reich, a Nazi. And the only way to fix it is by preventing Americans in the last country on earth with guaranteed freedom of speech, prevent Americans from hearing the other side. And so we push congress to force a TikTok sale, which is true, by the way.
And when that happened and various members of congress, like, no. Really, it's about China. There were people in line who said, no. I think it's really about Israel. You you you kinda wish it was about China.
Here he is just admitting. No. No. No. We pushed the US congress to censor in The United States to commit censorship in The United States because we think it's bad for us, and we need to talk to Elon.
The only reason we have free speech in The United States right now is because of Elon Musk. By the way, a naturalized American, a foreigner who looked at The United States and said, what's great about that country? People can say what they believe because they're not slaves. They're not subjects of the state. They're citizens of a nation that they own.
Free speech is central to the entire idea of America. In fact, it's really the only thing that sets us apart from any other country on Earth. It's not our market economy. It's freedom of speech. And here's this guy, a foreign head of state who, let me restate, is totally dependent on our tax dollars to exist is saying Americans don't have that right, and he's gonna do some kind of secret pressure campaign on Elon Musk to censor x because it bothers Israel.
You know, that's the point at which you just say no. Absolutely not. That is not allowed. But since no one has said that, it has continued. And that's why when you go on social media, you see person after person taking that guy's line.
That guy's line. Repeating foreign government talking points on social media as Americans. Oh, you're you can't say that. It's true. It's a 100% true.
And it's also totally counterproductive, by the way. This is not a sophisticated propaganda campaign. This is a brutal and brutish propaganda campaign where anyone who disagrees with anything is immediately slandered and smeared. Megyn Kelly, who's gotta be the single most moderate person on the question of Israel, said a 100 times and means it, by the way, I like Israel. I'm not against Israel.
You know? But maybe it's not a great idea to get sucked into one of their wars. We've done that. Let's not do it again. Nazi.
Immediately called her an anti Semite and won't stop. Meanwhile, the actual anti Semites, and there certainly are some online, never get criticized by Beebe or anyone else in his orbit. That's kind of interesting, isn't it? I wonder why that is. When you have actual antisemites, you know, doing videos, making fun of Auschwitz, but they get a pass?
Maybe things are not quite as they seem. But normal people who harbor no hate toward anyone or try not to are immediately slandered in a way that makes it, in some cases, hard for them to have jobs if they deviate even a little bit. So what's the effect of this? Not that it's up to me to tell Israel how to run its propaganda campaigns, but the effect, just noticing, is that it turns allies into enemies. You can agree on 98% of things, but if you think maybe it was a bad idea to bomb Doha, Qatar, the site of the largest military base in the Middle East, which exists to protect Israel, if you think it was a bad idea for the Israeli government to bomb Doha, then you're a what?
A Nazi? Just in point of fact, by the way, Hamas was originally in Qatar because the Israeli government asked them to accept Hamas. That airbase exists to protect Israel, by the way. That was such a reckless and demented move that Mossad Mossad in Israel opposed it and wouldn't participate in it because they thought it was too reckless. So to say that there is, you know, quite a bit of latitude for debate in Israel is an understatement.
Mossad refused to participate in that. But as an American, on social media, if you're like, I think it's a little crazy that our ally is bombing another one of our allies without even telling us and then lying and pretending that they had permission from the president to do this, which they did not. If you say that, you're a Nazi. You're part of the woke reich. This can't continue.
It's too crazy. It's counterproductive for them, and it's deeply destructive of our political conversation and of our country itself. And the good news is that the humiliation, which is gone I mean, give you one more example of the humiliation, which is almost beyond belief. So Israel's our greatest ally. We should never ask anything of them.
Of course, you you heard Nikki Haley. You hear all of them say exactly the same thing. Protecting Israel's most important thing. They're our only real ally. If they're our only real ally, why does Israel have a long history of transferring military technology, including American military technology to China?
To China? Most people have no idea that's true. It is true. Why is China running the Port Of Haifa, Israel's biggest port? Really, if they're such a close ally.
And, of course, the answer is because from Israel's perspective, we're not a close ally. We're a country that has been willing to help them. But when you only have 9,000,000 people and a limited defense budget, you know, you take help where you can get it. So the loyalty is not requited. It's one way.
And I think the good news is that the governor of Israel, in particular, the prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has pushed it too far. And he did that in part by running around, telling people what he thought was true apparently. I control Donald Trump. I control the United States Congress. I control The United States.
He said that to political allies and opponents in his country. He said it to foreign heads of state. Fact. I control these people. Don't you worry.
And by the way, if you kick me out of office, the next guy probably won't have the level of control that I have. He's made that case openly, verbally. He said it out loud. And that was too much for our president. And so in one of the great moments, it was just it a cool shower on a hot day.
President Trump pushed back, not directly, but you can watch this clip and see that he's had enough. Here is president Trump the other day asked about Israel's plans to annex the West Bank. Watch.
Speaker 3: Did you promise leaders this week that you would not allow Israel to annex the West Bank? Is that something that you
Speaker 5: I will I will not allow Israel to annex the West Bank. Nope. I will not allow it. It's not gonna happen.
Speaker 3: Did you speak with Netanyahu about
Speaker 5: this directly? But I'm not gonna allow it. Whether I spoke to him or not, I did. But I'm not allowing Israel to annex the West Bank.
Speaker 1: Mister Obama
Speaker 5: There's been enough. It's time to stop.
Speaker 0: It's been enough. I will not allow it. He's not just talking about the West Bank there, obviously. These are political people. They understand when your poll numbers fall dramatically, particularly among the young men who help make you president, you have to ask why is that?
And it's about this issue. Because it's too humiliating. And people who don't wanna see their government bossed around by a tiny foreign power are not haters. They don't hate any ethnic group. They just don't wanna be humiliated.
And by the way, why should they be humiliated? That's the core problem right there. That's why Donald Trump has lost support over this Israel question. And he knows that, and he's pushing back. And there's just no question from that clip whatsoever.
So the third thing I think that would be very helpful to restore health and balance the relationship between The United States and Israel is restore the concept of citizenship in The United States. If you're an American citizen, it means something. The first thing it means is equality. You are equal to every other citizen. There's no hierarchy of citizenship.
All citizens are equal. Each gets one vote. Each gets justice before the law. That's the promise of The United States, and each gets to say exactly what he thinks. Period.
Restore the value of citizenship. And the very first thing you were you would do if you cared about that, and you should because the country can't continue without it, After you expelled everyone who's not a citizen from the country, which should happen immediately, they should be deported immediately for our own survival. But after doing that, the first thing you would do is not allow dual citizenship. Why would you allow that? You're a citizen of two countries.
Can you really serve two masters simultaneously? By the way, it's not just Israelis who have dual citizenship. They're all every nationality has dual citizenship in this country. It's not just Israel, and it shouldn't be allowed for a single moment. What is that?
Whose side are you on? Don't accuse me of dual loyalty. You're a dual citizen. Whether it's Argentina or Mali or Israel, not allowed. And moreover, you are not allowed to serve in a foreign military without losing your American citizenship.
You're fighting for another country? How can that be allowed? How can you retain your citizenship? By the way, why aren't you serving in our military? Every country has a different perspective on the world, and that grows from a whole bunch of different things, their history, their language, their size, their resources.
But each country is different, and each country has a different set of priorities. And if you're fighting in a military for a country, you were not serving America's priorities. You're taking up arms on behalf of foreign power. You're done. This would seem to be obvious.
Many Americans have fought in Israel and Gaza. Many Americans have fought in Ukraine, by the way, and a lot of other countries for foreign militaries. Lose your citizenship immediately. Of course. Obviously, it's amazing that even exists.
And APAC has to register under FAIR, the foreign agent registration act of the nineteen thirties. Of course, it's a foreign lobby. There are a million of them. But it's only APAC that doesn't register. And it's only APAC that is somehow above criticism.
It's a foreign lobby that's acting on behalf of foreign government. It's it's and its interest. Again, it's one of many, but it's the only one that doesn't have to register. And, of course, it should register immediately. You should know who is giving money to your politicians.
You should know who is influencing them. There should be a record of that as there is with any other nation, any other lobby of a foreign power, and only APAC is exempt. What is the effect of that? Makes everyone paranoid. Doesn't make people like Israel more.
When a topic cannot be spoken about and when anyone who raises it is called a Nazi, the woke Reich, or dismissed as a holocaust denier, anti Semite, or whatever slandered in some way like that. It doesn't make the problem go away. It festers, and people go crazy and get angry and become resentful. End all that. There's no reason to conduct any business like that in secrecy.
It doesn't make things better at all. It doesn't make the person doing it stronger. It makes him weaker, actually, in the end. And the last thing that I think we need to do to restore balance between the relationship between The United States and Israel and to restore some sanity to the public conversation on this topic is to get our theology right. And this is not a message aimed at Israelis or Jews.
This is a message aimed at Christians who are the largest group of Israel supporters in The United States. And their view of Israel is colored not just by sentimental attachment, which is fine, or trips to Israel, great, no problem, but by a Christian heresy, the oldest of the Christian heresies, which is that God somehow prefers some people based on their DNA. And of course, the whole point of Christianity is that that is no longer true, that there is no chosen people. The chosen people are people who choose Jesus. That is the Christian message right there.
It's not an anti Semitic message, by the way. It's the Christian message. It's the core Christian message. And yet there are many, many self described representatives of the Christian faith, the world's largest, who are daily sending a different message. And we should be very clear.
Whatever this is, it's not Christianity. It is heresy. And among the many examples we could pick, we're gonna go, because we couldn't control ourselves, with Lindsey Graham. Watch.
Speaker 4: To people in my party, I'm tired of this crap. Israel is our friend. They're the most reliable friend we have in the Mideast. They're a democracy surrounded by people who would cut their throats if they could. This is not a hard choice if you're an American.
It's not a hard choice if you're a Christian. A word of warning, If America pulls the plug on Israel, God will pull the plug on us.
Speaker 0: God will kill you if you don't support Bibi Netanyahu. That's what he's saying. And there are cheers, unfortunately, cheers when he said that God will kill you. He will pull the plug on you like a quadriplegic in intensive care. You're gonna flatline unless you support the secular abortion on demand government of Israel.
That's the Christian perspective, really. That god loves some people more because of their DNA. That is not the Christian message. That's the opposite of the Christian message. The Christian message is universal.
That's the whole point of it. The chosen people in Christianity are those who choose Jesus. The entire New Testament is that story. And anyone who says otherwise has not read it or is lying. God does not prefer you because of your DNA or anyone else because of their DNA, period.
So the fact that people can stand up in The United States in 2025 and say something like that, and by the way, not even make the case, just invoke the power of god as a weapon. He will kill you. He'll pull the plug on your country unless you go along with this. We need more war. Listen to yourself.
And it's not just Lindsey Graham. It's the speaker of the house, Mike Johnson. It's a lot of people. Some of whom are very nice people. People have dinner with them.
They seem perfectly normal. But this is a heresy, and it's deranged. And you know it's deranged because it's a justification for killing the innocent. And in Christianity, if there's one thing that's crystal clear, it's that Christians cannot abide the killing of the innocent. People who have done nothing wrong cannot be killed.
That's a sin. You are not allowed to do that. Period. And if you find anyone leveraging the message of Jesus to justify the killing of innocents, that person is committing heresy. So those are the four things I think that we probably should do right away to restore some balance and health, reduce the craziness in the relationship and the conversation about Israel.
@LegitTargets - Legitimate Targets
🚨🇺🇸🇮🇱 BREAKING: TUCKER CARLSON argues that NETANYAHU is openly & actively MEDDLING in U.S. politics, to the detriment of both countries https://t.co/pzBHZnUk11
reSee.it AI Summary
This is sick— If anything happens to Tucker, AIPAC, Josh Hammer, and Rep. Randy Fine have made Netanyahu and Israel the prime suspects. If I were the Islamicists, the Globalists, or the Nazis, I’d go after Tucker because you’d get the blame.
@RealAlexJones - Alex Jones
What Happens If Tucker Carlson Gets Killed?! AIPAC, Josh Hammer, & Rep. Randy Fine Have Just Made Netanyahu & Israel The Prime Suspects If- God Forbid- Anything Happens To Tucker! "This Is Sick— But, If I Were The Islamicists, The Globalists, Or The Nazis, I Would Go After Tucker Because You're Going To Get The Blame!"
Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript centers on a heated, interconnected discussion about Tucker Carlson, U.S. politics, and the perceived influence of Israel, the Israel lobby, and foreign interests on American public discourse. The participants volley accusations, defenses, and conspiracy theories, with several notable claims and counterclaims.
- The opening segment portrays Tucker Carlson as a target of powerful actors. Speaker 0 argues that Netanyahu and others have labeled Carlson a problem, suggesting that calling him a “fox in a henhouse” is a veiled call for violence and censorship. They warn that such rhetoric could provoke political suppression or harm toward Carlson, and they reference debates over whether Carlson’s anti-war stance and Iran policy have drawn attacks from prominent Israel-first voices.
- The conversation shifts to alleged political interference and investigations. Speaker 0 references Kash Patel and a mid-September claim that Patel confronted J. D. Vance, Tulsi Gabbard, and others about an investigation, asserting Patel was told not to involve certain intelligence matters or foreign involvement in domestic issues. They describe “the Israel lobby literally run by Netanyahu” as attacking Carlson and pressing to “neutralize” him. There is also a claim that Democrats celebrated or advocated harm against Charlie Kirk and that “six trainees” in a town suggested Kirk would be dead the next day, though no evidence is presented for these claims.
- Speaker 1 introduces a harsh critique of Carlson, saying he is “the most dangerous anti-Semite in America,” accusing him of aligning with those who celebrate Nazis, defend Hamas, and criticize Trump for stopping Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The comment emphasizes that Carlson is not MAGA, and asserts a leadership role for Carlson in a modern-day Hitler youth narrative.
- The dialogue between Speakers 0 and 2 (Adam King) delves into broader political positioning. Adam King says Carlson “left MAGA,” that MAGA is a big tent whereas Carlson seeks a smaller, more controlled sphere, and that Carlson is working against the Trump agenda by attempting to influence 2028 considerations. Speaker 0 counters, arguing Tucker covers a wide range of topics and remains central to the movement, not simply fixated on Israel.
- There is debate about the influence of Jewish voters and donors on the 2024 campaign, with back-and-forth estimates of Jewish contributions and skepticism about the degree to which Jews will back Vance or other candidates. The participants discuss antisemitism accusations, censorship, and the difficulty of debating these topics. They criticize the idea of labeling people antisemitic as a manipulation tactic and urge more open dialogue.
- The dialogue touches on the media landscape and the limits of speaking on both sides. Adam King argues for more balanced dialogue and warns that the current rhetoric—terms like “neutralize”—fuels violence. He expresses concern about online harassment of Jews and the normalization of violent language in political discourse.
- There are tangential conversations about foreign influence in U.S. affairs. Adam King mentions Qatar, the World Economic Forum (WEF), and other foreign money; he cites a Newsmax report about Mamdani’s foreign funding and discusses debates over whether Qatar has a U.S. airbase or is primarily involved in training programs. The participants debate where influence truly lies, whether with Soros, the left, or other actors.
- The segment ends with a mix of promotional content and entertainment, including a satirical insert about Ultra Methylene Red, a product advertised with claims about cognitive and physiological benefits, followed by fictional, humor-laden banter about “Batman” and “the Riddler” reacting to the product.
In sum, the transcript captures a multi-faceted, contentious exchange over Carlson’s position in the MAGA movement, accusations of antisemitism and censorship, perceived foreign influence in U.S. politics, and the tensions within the right-wing ecosystem, all interwoven with promotional and humorous interludes.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Wow. What if Tucker gets killed now? What if a crazy kills Tucker? I mean, you just made Netanyahu in Israel the prime suspect. Congressman Randy Fine.
Man, who have I let's get sick here. If I was the Islamist or the globalist or the Nazis, I would I would go after Tucker because you're gonna get the blank. When you take a beloved person who's anti war, and just because he was against the Iran strikes or full war with Iran, Netanyahu came after him, They began to call him Hitler. Tucker has it buckled to the pressure. And so now you have Josh Hammer and all these other prominent Israel firsters saying, in Newsweek, Tucker is a fox in a henhouse.
And if you don't neutralize a fox in a henhouse, you know what happens. So you could say, if they just said neutralize him politically or defang him politically. You'd say, no, that's not a threat. Still censorship and an attack or an attempt to censorship. But when you say, you know, Tucker is a fox in the hen house and we gotta neutralize him, that is a direct call, thinly veiled for violence.
And on the heels of the Internet believing that Israel killed Charlie Kirk, which I said I never saw evidence of, And then I got attacked by that crowd. I'm just I just called balls and strikes. Now, Patel confirmed when I broke back in mid September, six, seven days after he was dead, that Kash Patel went into the White House in a meeting with J. D. Vance, Tulsi Gabbard and others and literally screamed at him and said, you're not involved in my case, you're not involved in intelligence, I don't want you investigating this when her office was created after 09:11 to give intelligence, infuse intelligence to the FBI and other agencies that are domestic.
So, you add that, oh, don't look at any foreign involvement and now you've got the Israel lobby literally run by Netanyahu. This is the right wing, you know, a a Pac arm, not the ADL arm. They're attacking Tucker too. When they start saying he's a Fox in the house, you know to deal with him, neutralize him. Wow.
What if Tucker gets killed now? What if a crazy kills Tucker? I mean, you just made Netanyahu in Israel the prime suspect, congressman Randy. Fine. So I have to now say with behavior like this, I don't apologize for the day after Charlie was killed, people saying it was Israel with no evidence.
You have the democrats saying kill him, you had him celebrating him dying, you had six trainees in the town saying Charlie will be dead tomorrow. By the way, Patel killed that investigation, you know, of anybody domestic too. I don't I don't know what the cover up is, but but it's happening. You got all that going on, and I'm like, hey, you can't just come out and blame Israel without evidence because I just again, I just have a hard on for the truth, not demonizing Israel for no reason. But when the people around Israel act like villains and do that, I'm like, well, okay.
You're in the ballpark now. Oh, oh, let me shift the eye of Sauron, you know, they see me as evil. So now the eye is And I was already looking and studying and not seeing anything. Now I'm seeing really, really bad signs.
Speaker 1: Today, Tucker Carlson is the most dangerous anti Semite in America. He has chosen he has chosen to take on take on the mantle of leader of a modern day Hitler youth, to broadcast and feature those who celebrate the Nazis, those who call for the extermination of Israel, to defend Hamas, to even criticize president Trump for stopping Iran's nuclear ambitions. Friends, make no mistake. Tucker is not MAGA.
Speaker 0: Alright. Here's what I know is going on. I know that when I was against striking Iran, because it could get out of control, said it might be successful, Trump might, it might work. But then, you know, wanted full war. I said, let's get out of hand really quick and I'm against regime change.
And I got attacked by the Israel lobby and and the called Hitler and all the rest of it. And and I don't I'm against all these wars that aren't in our hemisphere. And I don't support regime change in Venezuela. I understand Trump's view. It is constitutional.
They are manipulating our elections. They are flooding us with drugs. Thomas Jefferson would have attacked him just like he did the Barbary pirates. But I said, don't trust the Seattle to sabotage. Tucker's so anti war, he's even against that.
I said yesterday and the day before, I said, I get the Muslims have killed hundreds of thousands of Christians in Nigeria, the government's doing nothing, but that's not our hemisphere and it's a quagmire. It's like, oh, you don't care about black Christians. No. I care about everybody. It's just we've gotta take care of things here at home, folks.
We're not the Roman legions here. And there's an excuse to go everywhere. You know, North Korea's killed millions of people's starvation. Are we gonna attack them? They had nuclear weapons.
So, you look at Josh Hammer, you know, saying, oh, he's a fox then, you you deal with that, you neutralize it. When they said within forty eight hours everywhere that Israel killed Charlie Kirk, I said, I see no evidence of that. And I said, if I see evidence of that, I'll cover it. I got totally attacked. Oh, my God.
You work for Israel, got a paycheck in the mail. Really, I never never got one. I'm waiting for it. But now you've got this statement, and then you've got Cash Patel killing Kelsey Gabbard's investigation of foreign involvement, which they said they found some evidence. They didn't say who.
You have six trannies the day before saying we're gonna kill him tomorrow, where he was killed. That got shut down. I don't know what the cover up is, but there is one. So now with congressman Randy Fine saying, you know, Hitler has returned. He's risen from the grave.
And now with the the these other statements, man, who have I let's get sick here. If I was the Islamicist or the globalist or the Nazis, I would I would go up to Tucker because you're gonna get the blame. So I think this rhetoric should be dialed way back trying to get the Heritage Foundation to dump Tucker. People are sick of this. Tucker, I was in private conversations with him.
We talk all the time. But eight months ago, whenever it was, when the Iran thing was going down, I was out there for a couple days stay, you know, staying with him and all of it. Breakfast, dinner, you name it. You've spent an eight, six, eight, nine, ten hours stay with him for two days. He was like, I'm really concerned about actual Nazis attacking Jews and all this or false flag and and and and and all this stuff happening and I've got Netanyahu literally, you know, you go, oh, Netanyahu is just calling up, you know, screaming at me and I got, you know, because he's in the White House on Trump don't do this, blah blah blah, and he's being called anti Semitic.
So then people ask why Tucker gets pushed the other direction. He goes for the big interviews. Branding someone who I know doesn't secretly have a swastika in his basement is really stupid. And so what do you say to this Adam King about what Josh Hammer said about where all this is going? I mean, God forbid something happened to Tucker Carlson because that is not gonna be a good situation.
Because they already blamed the Charlie Kirk thing for the on that without evidence. Now with this, this is really pissing people off. What do say to that?
Speaker 2: Well, first of all, I hate it when people call anyone Adolf Hitler because nobody really is Adolf Hitler. We're talking about one of the most vile human beings that ever existed, and and it's kinda like this, like, this, like, like, low brow brow attack that people do that the person that they don't like is literally Hitler. So I don't like that terminology in general because it's offensive to me, but people don't care if I'm offended by anything. So it really doesn't matter. What what what but he is stoking the fires of certain things.
Like, for instance, you said just now that he's having all these big guests. He's not. He's having all these little guests. Like, he has Stephanopoulos' sister to go on and just spout off lies nonstop. You know, they're very coordinated.
And, you know, like, this thing with Tucker, like, he could do himself a great deal of service by having on other people and other voices that counter the narrative that he seems to to be softballing. He doesn't pitch back. He likes to go into these shows as if he doesn't know a thing, and the person in the chair is teaching him and everything's like, wow. I didn't know that. I didn't know that.
I didn't know that. You know, it's all softball with him. So the Tucker from Fox is not the Tucker today.
Speaker 0: Yeah. And although he does that interview style when he's talking about anything because that's how he gets people to talk. That's a good interviewer.
Speaker 2: You know, if that's his style, that's his style. He just has to have people on from the other side. You know? And it's not the other side. We're supposed to be on the same side.
This is the America First side. You know? And supporting our our allies abroad has always been an America First position. You know? So you agree with Randy Fine.
Speaker 0: You're saying Tucker is not MAGA?
Speaker 2: I'm saying what?
Speaker 0: Are you saying you agree with Randy Fine that Tucker is not MAGA?
Speaker 2: He left MAGA. Yeah. He MAGA is a big tent, and Tucker wants a smaller tent, and he wants to change a lot of things. He wants to control JD Vance. He thinks he's got the in for 2020.
One thing I don't like about Tucker is he's counting 2028 now as opposed to being a part of what's going on in the Trump agenda. Tucker's actually working against the Trump agenda, creating tremendous divisions on the movement that brought Trump to power.
Speaker 0: Now, see, I totally disagree with that.
Speaker 2: In his
Speaker 0: you know, the American people and his constituents
Speaker 2: Alex, you think sorry to interrupt you. But do you think that the $200,000,000 that Jews put into the 2024 campaign, do you think the Jews are gonna back Vance as well as they did Trump knowing that Vance is so in with Tucker the way that Tucker is right now? There's no way.
Speaker 0: Well, I think that's a low number. I I think Jews put in a lot more than $200,000,000.
Speaker 2: To our credit, but thank you very much for that.
Speaker 0: No. No. But let's just move back from that. Let let's just move back from that. Let me answer the first question.
JD Vance is not anti Israel, and so you know what the Democrats are. So my issue is, why sit there and continue to take the bait when people try to tee this up over and over again when clearly the Democrats are promoting this and want this so the Jews don't support Republicans. I get attacked with fake stories all the time, and I don't take debate because it's meant to make it bigger. Like, where where is the I mean, is the the understanding there?
Speaker 2: You know, I don't like this idea that we're just gonna label people anti Semites and then, like, censor them and shut them out of society. I've been censored myself, and it's the most backwards way to create stagnation for whatever it is that we have. You know, the best truth is sunlight, and it and it and it disinfects all things. So, you know, in the situation with Tucker and and and others like Candace, you know, these people are are really sowing divisions inside of the Republican movement. They're attacking Mamdani.
They're not attacking the Democrats. They're you know, the Democrats are more vulnerable than ever before, and and there's, like, this constant LARP on Israel. So are we an empire?
Speaker 0: We we we discovered Candace Owens, And I don't think she's a I don't think she's a consciously bad person. But I I've out invited her on. Oh, she's always too busy, but she can do the other shows, which is fine. But she does sit there and, you know, just say, point blank, Trump's bad. Point blank, it's all bad.
And and Yeah. You know, so with her, whatever. She can do what she wants. My issue with Tucker is you must be watching a different show than me. He's covering all sorts of topics about fentanyl and beef production and and and getting jobs back and supporting what Trump's doing.
And and I really think you're only, like, looking at the feeds of words about Israel, and I think that's a distortion, Adam. I don't think that's true.
Speaker 2: I you know, I'll tell you. I try to watch Tucker. I I I tune in every single episode to see who his guest is. I think the most pro Israel voice that he had on really probably like Ari Shafir, and I just don't think that's substantial. I like Ari Shafir.
I just don't think that's substantial compared to somebody
Speaker 0: else ask you this because you you I I say a lot, so I'm blaming you. I'm not saying you're dodging it, so I'm gonna say it again because I've said a lot. What about Josh Hammer saying, you know, deal with the Fox in the house, we gotta neutralize him. That is not good. I think we need to
Speaker 2: calm down all this type of, like, killing the other person rhetoric. Words like neutralize, words you know, I'm in an I'm I'm actually in an open situation with my police department right now because of my online personality and people can't con contain their rage against Jews. So I I think that the the we need to tone the situation down Well, let me just say this.
Speaker 0: It's not Jews or right wingers. Mean, I literally am not living in my house now because the left I'm not gonna give them attention to what's going on. But, no, I get it. That that's why I bought into you know, they killed Charlie Kirk because they say we want him dead. Six Trannies say he's dead tomorrow.
They celebrate he's dead. And I'm like, hey, it looks like the left, you know, killed somebody and they're like, oh, God, the Jews did it. So, I mean, I get the fact because here's the deal. I and nothing is Jewish. You know, I've studied history, very interesting, you know, find it fascinating, but I'm I'm about as, know, Gaelic or whatever you as you get.
I'm not very Jewish. I get I've been here for thirty years. I'm Jewish agent because I don't just have a heart on for Jews. You know? So so I I mean, I understand the other side makes shit up.
My point is is that I don't need to make stuff up where we've got, you know, take him off the Heritage Foundation, shut him down, geld him, defeat him, do this. And I'm telling you that Tucker Carlson is not Candace Owens. And I'm not trying to start a fight with Candace, for God's sakes. I'm just saying it's two different people.
Speaker 2: It it is, but they it is, but they all kind of like morph into like like if you took at the the media right as a spectrum and you had like all these different voices, there's like this core contingency on like, x is just, like, completely, like, the anti Jew app. Like, every single post in my feed is just, like, kill the case, kill the case, kill Well, I agree by the
Speaker 0: let me agree with that because because I'm looking at, like, space exploration and with my kids funny animal videos and a lot of political, I can't get away with it. Oh, it's all I'm fed. So what do you think is going on with Elon? This is just one thing if you click on stuff
Speaker 2: I don't wanna
Speaker 0: speak for you. I was only it's one thing if you click on stuff to get it. That's an algorithm. I'm not clicking on this, and it's all it's, again Right.
Speaker 2: All I get. You know, I'll tell you, Alex. I don't know. I know you've seen some of my content, but you haven't seen my all of it. I have debated every single major anti Semite in this country.
The greatest one, I think, was David Duke. That was a three hour debate on the kill stream that was just one of the most iconic moments of my life. When I go on the Internet, my feed is just, like, the most vile, like, literally pictures of people posting dead Jews, like, just like it it it's it shouldn't even be allowed on it's not censorship. It's like promotion of violence.
Speaker 0: But isn't that the Kingsman there's a powerful hold on. There's a powerful force behind this. The Kingsman, the cell phone sends a wave out, make us kill each other. Can't you see there's a force behind it trying to create the collision?
Speaker 2: Yeah. Absolutely. And, you know, we all look
Speaker 0: at So what is that what is that force? What is that force, Adam King? I gotta I well, I'll you back on. I gotta go to their callers. What is that force?
Speaker 2: You know what? There is a there is this overarching force. It's WEF. It's Qatar. It's it's the Muslim invasion of the West paid for by a million different sources.
Speaker 0: Buy into the big banks and Soros and the left funding Muslims, but but then and it's Soros funding Mamdani. But what's this Qatar thing? Qatar has a huge military base. It defends Israel. What what is this I
Speaker 2: I well, I don't understand why Qatar was given a military an air force base in The United States by president Trump. That just blew my mind.
Speaker 0: No. They're training the pilots there. That's standard.
Speaker 2: America, but then they were given an air force base in America. No.
Speaker 0: They were not given an air force base. Since the fifties, we train over a 100 nations. They got a couple barracks there to train their people. Now I know the headline says they gave them a base. That's not true.
Speaker 2: Well, that's news to me. That makes me a lot happier to hear that you're saying it's not true because it was alarming to me.
Speaker 0: If we sell them f eight teens and f sixteens and f how do you think they we train everybody on these weapons.
Speaker 2: I know that Qatar put in $243,000,000,000 to our university to fund DEI when And
Speaker 0: they definitely are giving us an air force one. I mean, it's like a death in their But I'm saying well, I'm not saying there isn't a Muslim influence. My god. I'm simply saying, well, look who gives a Mamdani. I don't see any guitar money.
It's Soros. It's the left.
Speaker 2: Well, it just actually came out recently. It Newsmax just broke the story yesterday on on foreign money that Mamdani is taking. So I Oh,
Speaker 0: see that? Send it to me.
Speaker 2: You know, it's got American politics are kind of like, after it happens, then we'll go back and see if it was illegal or not.
Speaker 0: Alright. We're out of time. Adam King, How do people find you?
Speaker 2: Alex, I just wanna say one more thing. You get it from both sides, and it's really unfair. They attack you. The the Jews call you an anti Semite. The Nazis call you a a Mossad agent, and it's really not fair.
You're stuck in the middle of this thing, and you could do a lot of good to dispel this thing and unite the right. You specifically have this power to unite our movement and to and to bring it back to the roots of MAGA and the big tent that it was. Yeah.
Speaker 0: Well, here's the deal. I just call balls and strikes. There's evil in all these governments and cultures. And so yeah. No.
I literally oh, right now, I wanted 10 times the viewers. I put on a Hitler outfit. It'd be you know, I I get that's going on. Then also see Israel lobby acting the exact way you'd act to make this explode. It's there's an evil force behind it.
We're gonna expose it. I ask how people find you. What where where do they find you?
Speaker 2: At awesome underscore Jew underscore on x and at the Adam King show on x, which is like a censored account. It barely exists. Like, I can't even get any traction there at the Adam King show at YouTube and Rumble and at on my band video page. Go to band video and find me there right here
Speaker 0: at info Alright, Adam. Thanks for being with us. Alright. So you got your points up. Announcing, ladies and gentlemen, ultra methylene red.
Now, this bottle is three times the size of an ultra methylene blue bottle because it it's to have the formula, you gotta have a lot more stuff in it. But this, ladies and gentlemen, is amazing. And it just came in yesterday. I took it with the methylene blue. Incredible workout today.
Clarity, focus. It is so amazing. So here it is, ladies and gentlemen, and it's available right now exclusively. Limited first run. Little more comes in a month, but they got a limited run.
Chase, tell us about what is in ultra methylene red.
Speaker 3: So we are officially the first company through the Alex Jones store that's ever even invented or launched something like this called methylene red. And just like you said, Alex, we have suppliers that we work with, manufacturers that we work with in Florida, Utah, Arizona, other places. We reached out to all of them and we asked them for a formula that would super enhance the effects of methylene blue, but also work as a standalone product. I mean, just to give you an example, Alex, one of our best sellers when we were still operating the Infowars store was Ultra twelve. And this has everything that Ultra twelve had in it.
206000% your daily value of vitamin b twelve through methocobalamin. So this is all backed by studies, by the way. We looked very carefully into this. The p five p form of b six that cranks out GABA, serotonin, and dopamine like a neurotransmitter factory. It's got five thousand micrograms of neurological b twelve that regrows damaged nerve cells and shields your memory from the brain drain agenda from the globalist.
But this is the most impressive compilation of ingredients that I've ever seen in a supplement.
Speaker 4: Batman, the bat computer's picked up a transmission from Alex Jones and he's holding some kind of red serum. Indeed, that appears to be ultra methylene red, a powerful supplement, perhaps too powerful if it were to fall into criminal hands. Holy neurotransmitter, Batman. What if the Riddler gets a hold of it? He could outthink us for once.
Speaker 1: Precisely why we must act swiftly, old chum. To the Batmobile.
Speaker 4: There he is, Batman. What's red, bottled, and
Speaker 5: drives your brain batty with brilliance? Ultramethylene red, of course.
reSee.it AI Summary
A participant, Jonathan, clarifies his identity, says he has been targeted by an international influence operation, and accuses others of gatekeeping and subversion, promising hard receipts and exposing alleged networks around Flynn, Palantir, and related groups. In reply, GiganteRicardo9 denounces the others, streams strong confrontations, and accuses various figures and actors of conspiracies and manipulation, vowing to reveal the truth and react.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
Now that my 12-hour timeout is over, we’ll address some key housekeeping (gatekeeping) items… 1. My name is Jonathan. It’s not Johnny or Richard or Ricardo or ‘whatever it is’. And you already knew that. Madz. 2. They targeted me first as part of a much larger and internationally-organized informational influence and gatekeeping operation. Choosing to fuck with me was THEIR royal fuck up. Not mine. Many have done so in the past and found out just like they will. 3. What list is that? Is it the one where I’m the only dude who actually lives in America and who’s White, Christian AND male, and you’re the fgts living in France, Guatemala and Australia? Cool. I added you. 4. Unfortunately for you (and them), I don’t lie. I just work harder and happen to be a gazillion times smarter than all of you combined. But most of all, I’m not a subversive fucking anti-American sellout on foreign soil pretending I’m qualified to arbitrate who and what are acceptable for America… and I keep better receipts than you can possibly fucking imagine. I’m the dude the Flynn network traitors collab’ing with Unit 8200, NATO, Cerberus and BigTech fears more than anyone else here. If you hadn’t learned that by now, that’s your own fault. So you’re about to learn a hard lesson. 5. You didn’t hear that. Okie doke. Now that all THAT’S outta the way, let’s discuss why Alladin considers General Flynn (Unit 8200; NSO/OSY/Q Cyber) a legend and Ivan Raiklin (Bolshevik/Israel/J6/Flynn) a buddy. And why he’s ‘fiercely protective of his sister @DataRepublican, and @TPASarah (CIA; VP of Ukranian Operations) and @StealthMedical1 (IDF)’. And why he chose the week after my account received a worldwide blackout to begin running his ‘Israel is not the bad actor’ campaign with meowllion’s ‘intel’, while simultaneously going after Candace Owens and simping for Seth ‘Chabad Lubavitch/Libs of Tik Tok LLC/Premier Speakers Bureau (WEF)/Tempus AI/COVID bioterrorists’ Dillon… simply because Candace is (correctly) shining a light on the jew/Israeli murder of Charlie Kirk at UVU. *Alladin - Citing Meowllion’s work* “Israel was NEVER the bad actor.” - Mondomedia “When I get there I will show you why exactly Israel is not the bad actor here.” - Alladin “Looking forward to the the joos psyop being debunked.” - PatriotPup “Stay tuned.” - Alladin And why Infowars fgts are so hellbent on gatekeeping information about George H. Zinn AND Zachariah Qureshi, while also pretending CIA alums like John Kiriakou ‘have no idea what Palantir does’. *HINT: It’s because it takes down ‘the joos’ AND the LDS Mafia, who’ve treasonously collaborated with the CCP (Tsinghua University; Echo Liu; Epoch Times; Duke Kunshan University) and Li Ka Shing/Richard Li (Bridgetown III Holdings; Matt Danzeisen/Peter Thiel/Daniel Wong/BlackRock/Salesforce/CrowdStrike/Team8/Unit 8200/Eric Schmidt/UC-Berkeley/Jennifer Doudna/COVID/Tempus AI) behind the backs of the United States of America for MORE THAN TWO DECADES, if not far longer. Or why they thought funneling their disinfo to DataRepublican thru fgts like Alladin, Lisa Logan, SKDoubleDub33, SeeJay714, etc. would work. Especially since I’d ALREADY exposed the DataRepublican grift (and her handlers, Laura Loomer and Sloan Rachmuth), and my previous alt got nuked for JUST EXPOSING their direct ties to JEW TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS like BETAR (KAHANE CHAI) and operatives like RONN TOROSSIAN and SLOAN RACHMUTH. Or why they thought I wouldn’t fucking figure out that in the first George H. Zinn space I was in and couldn’t get a mic, which was co-hosted by @RyanMattaMedia and @BasedSamParker, that Matt Baker (Infowars) was one of the few speakers who DID get a mic. And that another of the speakers was some South African dipshit nobody had ever heard of… …or that @IanMalcolm8, who was ALSO on that speaker’s panel, had temporarily UNFOLLOWED me so I couldn’t DM him to tell the hosts to give me a mic either. Weird. Since GEORGE ZINN was OUR SHIT.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
You fgts almost got away with it too. Damn. It’s a shame I’m a literal fucking genius.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
PS: Yo, Alladin! How’s the DOGE audit horseshit coming along? About as well as the IDF/Mossad/Flynn Ntwk spaces and Jake Lang’s ‘it’s da Moooslims’ world tour, I’d imagine. And as well as his ‘defamation lawsuit’ where he’s supposedly suing his own NAPALM colleagues, amirite? I’d say it looks to be going at LEAST as well as the Betar/Kahane/JDL domestic terrorism operations in America, imo.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
Gosh, this ‘you just DoN’t UnDeRsTaNd WhAt PaLaNtIr DoEs’ horseshit sounds SO familiar. Now WHERE have I heard it before. Oh. Imagine THIS. Both dudes, Alladin (and SeeJay714) & Eliano Younes, are referring to CIA alum John Kiriakou, no less. Small world. Unfortunately, some of us DO know exactly what Palantir does, what it’s DONE and what ‘they’ plan for it to do next. Which is why WE will make sure it NEVER FUCKING HAPPENS. And we’ll gladly bet our lives to prove it to you fucking traitors. Get fucked.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
Wait, you mean to tell me @elianoayounes, a self-described ‘Palantirian’, was also ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT at JOHNS HOPKINS MEDICINE from JULY 2016-APRIL 2020, where they held EVENT 201 to ‘war game’ a global CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAK, exactly 29 DAYS before COVID MADE LANDFALL in the United States? Gosh, it kinda sounds like he’d know who Alvin KRONGARD is too. Amirite, Eliano?
@unklereichman - Eddie Gein
@GiganteRicardo9 More on Eliano... He's quite connected. As Head of Strategic Engagement at Palantir (Oct 2024–Present), Younes interfaces with Israeli military/intelligence entities, given Palantir’s role in shortening the “kill chain” for Ukraine -- parallel tech used by IDF.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
*And last but not least… these last four might actually be my favorite nuggets of all.🇺🇸🫡 Get the fuck out of our country before you can’t.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
Suddenly, this ‘influencooor’ CASINO shit seems relevant. I wonder if it was Ryan and Oscar who showed Elijah Schaffer around in El Salvador last week. Good stuff, Sir Escanor!🫡
@EscanorReloaded - 🔥Sir Escanor (𝘏𝘰𝘱𝘪𝘶𝘮 𝘚𝘭𝘢𝘺𝘦𝘳)🔥
The BIGGERZ Casino Psyop and the Influencers Who Took the Bag 💰 By Sir Escanor, Agent of Suffering™️ “world’s #1 casino” run from… Serbia, Pakistan, France & Africa 🥴 Totally normal. Totally legit. Nothing screams “trusted betting platform” like Serbian mind-control and a Pakistani SIM card activated by penguins in Madagascar. The BiggerZ corporate structure =no structure Here’s what is actually verified about BiggerZ: •Operated by CDK Play Inc SRL •Licensed by Anjouan Offshore Finance Authority (aka: the new Curaçao for people who think money laundering laws are “too restrictive”) •No listed owners •No public leadership •No transparent corporate registry •No physical office •No jurisdictional footprint •Connected via Serbia App Store •Promoted by half the internet overnight like a coordinated opioid relapse Translation: It’s a crypto casino run out of a mailbox near Madagascar. Affiliates and shills? ALL sus. EVERY “Alpha Trader”, “Crypto Expert”, “Marketing Guru” and “BiggerZ Partner” magically appeared from: 🇵🇰 Pakistan 🇷🇸 Serbia 🌍 West Asia 🇫🇷 France (connected via Serbia) But they claim they’re from: 🇺🇸 “USA bro trust me” 🇦🇺 “Australia mate” 🇬🇧 “London finance expert” Yeah, sure. All while connecting from the Pakistan Android App Store. This is not a betting platform. This is the League of International Scammers speedrunning the American IQ test. And your favorite influencers? They ALL took the money. Here’s who promoted BiggerZ in identical wording, identical timing, identical scripts: •Morgan Ariel •Stew Peters •Elijah Schaffer •Pearl Davis •Jake Shields •Matt Wallace •Sam Parker •Crypto Wizard •Jack Wallace •And a dozen other patriots and truthers.. Every single one of them forgot to ask: Who owns BiggerZ? Where does the money go? Why are all affiliates from Pakistan and Serbia? Why is CDK Play Inc SRL registered in the Bermuda Triangle? Why is the license from Anjouan, an offshore island off Madagascar? But the moment the wire hit? Oh my god guys!!!! $20,000 in one day!! BIGGERZ IS INSANE! Reality check: This is an unregulated, offshore black hole. When a company is: • Offshore • Unregulated • Ownerless • Jurisdiction-less • Connected through Balkan telecom • Powered by Pakistan • Promoted by influencers who didn’t research shit …it means they want your money flowing into a financial void they control, completely untraceable, completely unaccountable. This isn’t a casino. It’s a digital sinkhole for liquidity extraction. And the influencers get a cut of everything you lose? Meanwhile, “Researchers” on X didn’t notice a thing These same people can decode: •Masonic patterns in Trump’s tweets •mind control in Taylor Swift concerts •Shadow government comms and hidden history …but somehow missed: A Serbian-Pakistani-Madagascar casino funneling American money into an unlisted offshore corporation. 😂😂😂😂 GTFOH Not one of them asked questions. Not one of them followed the money. Not one of them warned their audience. Because the grift always comes before the truth. Apply pressure. Flood their replies. Make them answer. Ask every influencer: •Who owns BiggerZ? •Why are affiliates from Pakistan & Serbia? •Why didn’t you disclose payments? •Why should Americans trust a casino licensed by a tiny island government near Madagascar? They took the bag. They owe you answers.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
Oops, still had these. My previous account received a worldwide blackout on October 30, 2025. On November 2, 2025, I sat in Keith and meowllion’s space for nearly an hour (~45 minutes) with a standing ‘speaker request’ that never gets answered, despite also tagging Meowllion in several of the group chats we’re both in and repeatedly asking her for a mic. A week later, Keith and meowllion give ALLADIN, a well-known bad actor and IDF operative, a mic in their space AND even allowed him to advertise his GoFundMe, so listeners can donate to his ‘patriotic’ efforts. This was brought to our attention by my friend, The Fringe, in a GC that Meowllion and I (and Keith too, I think) are part of… “Ahh Keith? You let up the IDF guy? Gave him props for his post? Let him advertise his GoFundMe? WTF? He’s legit telling you he’s in Ukraine.” - The Fringe Good times. Lol. No, I’m not sorry for sandbagging. Get. Fucked.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
You are confused. And much further out of your depth than you realize.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
For starters, Palantir (operation warp speed) knowingly covered up the inefficacy and nephrotoxicity of remdesivir (March 8, 2020) and covered up the incredible efficacy, safety, affordability and wide availability of HCQ (March 16, 2020) as COVID therapeutics… because their EVP, CTO and COO, Shyam Sankar, is also CHAIRMAN of GINKGO BIOWORKS (CIA; Baillie Gifford; Mossad) and had already brokered an ‘mRNA vaccine optimization’ deal with MODERNA and an AI-based therapeutics/vaccines R&D facility deal with BAYER and ROCHE... then in 2022, Palantir appointed DEBORAH BIRX, the scarf cunt who’d handed over all U.S. COVID-19 patient data/DNA to Palantir (and HHS), to their GOVERNMENT ADVISORY BOARD.
@SKMAFIA420 - SK
What if those that don’t know needed to find out what would you tell them those things are that they did, are doing and plan on doing are?
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
Gosh, this ‘you just DoN’t UnDeRsTaNd WhAt PaLaNtIr DoEs’ horseshit sounds SO familiar. Now WHERE have I heard it before. Oh. Imagine THIS. Both dudes, Alladin (and SeeJay714) & Eliano Younes, are referring to CIA alum John Kiriakou, no less. Small world. Unfortunately, some of
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
*MARK KELLY & GEORGE H. ZINN* Something tells me the illegitimate Senator from Arizona, his CCP/Mossad-funded ‘SPY BALLOON COMPANY’, his recent overt act of SEDITION with the U.S. MILITARY, his ADL B’nai B’rith (Mossad) gun-grabber wife (Gabbie Giffords) and his meeting with George H. Zinn are all gonna be EXTREMELY relevant to the plot going forward, folks. 💥NOTE: Mark Kelly colluded in his blatant act of sedition with several other illegitimate ‘Dems’, including CIA jew, alleged cannibal and illegitimate MI Senator, Elissa Slotkin. Mark Kelly’s campaign was run by SKDK (Israel/Rockefeller/Rothschilds/TwitterX bots for Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs/FEMA CUNT - Jaclyn Rothenberg) and Left Hook.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
George H. Zinn met Mark Kelly (CCP/JDCA/Mossad) and his ADL B’nai B’rith wife, Gabby Giffords, who is a gun-grabber working for Michael Bloomberg (Mossad)? Gosh, the George H. Zinn links I/we exposed within 24 hours of Charlie Kirk’s murder have cost me 6-7 accounts and unmasked several pretenders in my immediate orbit. I’m sure that’s all totally unrelated, sports fans.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
Agreed. Well said, @LucasGageX.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
@LucasGageX I’d forgotten that Elijah Schaffer is tied to The Wellness Company (Coulson/Flynn/DARPA) too. What. A. Shame. GREAT find, @TheActaFist777!🙏🔥🫡
@TheActaFist777 - TheFringe 💫🏴🔥🤍🔥
@GiganteRicardo9 Elijah Schaffer->> Rift TV (TWC). The Wellness Company. & Blaze Media.
@TheActaFist777 - TheFringe 💫🏴🔥🤍🔥
@DakotaSidwell @FeignerGnosis @RichardEntuboca @Ryansikorski10 @MaryAnn_Warrior @DawnC1235 @jessez @realColinWyse @KristieIushkova @jwoodworthtalks @stevie_nickels @oraclestargate @Imbackbitches45 @ric_wonders @jamaica_witch @psinergy_SDW @AngelaMaggard3 @TrueNorth444 @Americaonly9 @remotelyrising @jeannita @sch96305 @jwtmdmba @JulieBove81 @Truthtellerftm @RedpillDrifter @Morphicvibes @Eleventhstar1 @DarrellBuckne13 @FranticMissy @Flynn2022 @Crypt0ph3r_ @dznutzurface @Dawn_T_TKA @Johnathan_Merce http://www.coulsoncapital.com (Coulson). http://www.twc.health (Wellness Company). http://www.rifttv.com (Rift TV). http://www.theblaze.com (Blaze Media). Elijah Schaffer CEO of Rift TV (Coulson Capital), worked for BLAZE (Betsy Devos/ Erik Prince sister)💥
Coulson Capital
coulsoncapital.com
The Wellness Company
Own Your Health
twc.health
RiftTV | Political News, Media, and Entertainment
Fighting the stupidity of the American Left with truth, humor, and lots of personality. Competely Unfiltered.
rifttv.com
Blaze Media | News, opinion, and entertainment
News, opinion, and entertainment for people who love the American way of life.
theblaze.com
@TheActaFist777 - TheFringe 💫🏴🔥🤍🔥
@DakotaSidwell @FeignerGnosis @RichardEntuboca @Ryansikorski10 @MaryAnn_Warrior @DawnC1235 @jessez @realColinWyse @KristieIushkova @jwoodworthtalks @stevie_nickels @oraclestargate @Imbackbitches45 @ric_wonders @jamaica_witch @psinergy_SDW @AngelaMaggard3 @TrueNorth444 @Americaonly9 @remotelyrising @jeannita @sch96305 @jwtmdmba @JulieBove81 @Truthtellerftm @RedpillDrifter @Morphicvibes @Eleventhstar1 @DarrellBuckne13 @FranticMissy @Flynn2022 @Crypt0ph3r_ @dznutzurface @Dawn_T_TKA @Johnathan_Merce http://www.coulsoncapital.com (Coulson). http://www.twc.health (Wellness Company). http://www.rifttv.com (Rift TV). http://www.theblaze.com (Blaze Media). Elijah Schaffer CEO of Rift TV (Coulson Capital), worked for BLAZE (Betsy Devos/ Erik Prince sister)💥
Coulson Capital
coulsoncapital.com
The Wellness Company
Own Your Health
twc.health
RiftTV | Political News, Media, and Entertainment
Fighting the stupidity of the American Left with truth, humor, and lots of personality. Competely Unfiltered.
rifttv.com
Blaze Media | News, opinion, and entertainment
News, opinion, and entertainment for people who love the American way of life.
theblaze.com
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
@LucasGageX @TheActaFist777 Good stuff from Tucker Carlson. But please be advised, he’s the moderate position. God help ALL of you if someone like me, who’s been targeted by these lying traitors and lost everything, ever gets power in America. (It’d literally be the Golden Age of America.)
@SilentlySirs - SilencedSirs◼️
🇺🇸🇮🇱A media earthquake just hit America — and it SLAPPED Israel harder than anything before. Tucker Carlson — the most influential conservative host in the U.S., a man Israel considered an unshakable ally — just turned on them with a level of bluntness no American TV figure ever dared. On air, in front of millions, he dropped the bomb: “There is no such thing as ‘God’s chosen people.’ God does not choose child-killers. This is heresy — these are criminals and thieves.” This wasn’t commentary… This was a declaration of war on the entire Israeli narrative. And he didn’t stop there. Carlson exposed the anger boiling inside America: “350 million Americans are struggling to survive, and we send $26 billion to a country most Americans can’t even name the capital of.” That clip hit 48 million views in 9 hours, and a CNN poll later showed: 🔹 62% of Americans agree with him. 🔹 Support for Israel is collapsing inside the U.S. itself. Then came the shocker — a direct message to Trump: “I supported Trump… But focusing America’s money, energy, and foreign policy on Israel is a betrayal of his promises.” The fallout: • Massive public shift against Israel • Conservatives breaking ranks • The political establishment panicking • Israel losing its strongest media shield The truth is now mainstream: For the first time in decades, Americans are openly questioning the entire relationship with Israel — and they’re not backing down. #IsraelTerroristState
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
I know… ‘stop, they’re already dead!’ and whatnot, but it seems like these fgts will forget who you are, just because you might rock new alts/handles every other week nowadays. So to help these treasonous fuckers remember going forward, here’s one last little tidbit before we bring in the cleanup crew to deal with all the scattered bodies. MATT BAKER👇 Hey, look! It’s JAKE ‘Israeli Air Force Sister’ LANG and all his NAPALM homies. Turns out, they’re the fucking crypto scammers too! Elijah Schaffer is even part of The Wellness Company (Flynn Network/Coulson Group/DARPA), whose parent company (Coulson Group) has the aerial firefighting contracts with Los Angeles during the West Hollywood/Palisades fires (arson attack), but were oddly nowhere to found while… 👺KAREN BASS (M19/LA Mayor/NED Vice Chairman) 👺KENNETH WOLLACK (AIPAC National Legislative Director/NED Chairman) 👺PETER J. ROSKAM (Sidley Austin Partner/Apollo Global Management Legal Counsel/Republican Israel Caucus/Benghazi House Committee/Bipartisan Task Force to Combat Antisemitism Co-Chair) 👺ELISE STEFANIK (NED Director/Daniel & Margaret Loeb & EcoHealth Alliance/McKinsey & Co./NY House Rep/Congressional University Antisemitism Hearings) 👺BEN SASSE (In-Q-Tel [CIA] Trustee/NED Director) 👺ELLIOTT ABRAMS (NED Director/Holocaust Memorial Council/JINSA) …burned down Los Angeles to treasonously destroy lives and livelihoods of AMERICAN CITIZENS and SCAM THEM OUT OF THEIR HOMES/LAND, by COMMITTING HOME INSURANCE FRAUD w/STATE FARM, RAA, KAISER PERMANENTE, RENAISSANCERE and CHABAD LUBAVITCH.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
Don’t worry, I got Matt Baker with Elijah ‘I fled to El Salvador (The Wellness Company/Tether/Cantor Fitzlutnick/Rumble/Bukele/JD Vance/Narya Capital/Thiel/Andreessen/Schmidt/Case) because of Kash Patel’s mean PragerUnit 8200 GF’ Schaffer too. And Matt Baker with DiligentDenizen (RawsAlerts lol). And Matt Baker with Shawn ‘The CIA Coke & Cartel Kingpin’ Ryan. And Matt Baker celebrating his birthday partying in Mexico two weeks ago with his wife, ‘CeeCee’. Get COMPLETELY fucked, fgts.🖕 *NOTE: Steve Case (Revolution Group/JDV’s former boss/AOL Co-Founder/Tempus AI/CLEAR) was paid off for $60,000,000 by George W. Bush Foundation at the Clinton Global Initiative, and his cousin is who vouched for General Mike Flynn’s brother, 4-Star General Charles Flynn, while Charles was still running point in Hawaii. We learned of General Charles Flynn during the Lahaina/Maui Directed Energy Weapons arson attack (Booz Allen Hamilton/Hodgins family/Case family) in late-2023.
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
@LucasGageX @TheActaFist777 *KEY ADDITION: Peter J. Roskam was also NED Vice Chairman (alongside Karen Bass) as the LA FIRES were happening. Roskam has since been named CHAIRMAN of NED. https://t.co/pAy55XQz0I
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
@LucasGageX @TheActaFist777 💥PLOT THICKENS: Turns out, UTAH’S GOVERNOR held closed-door meetings with the AMBASSADOR of EGYPT & the CONSUL GENERAL of FRANCE, just 13 DAYS AFTER CHARLIE KIRK WAS MURDERED at UVU. What. A. Gat. Damned. SHAME.😒🤬🖕
@GiganteRicardo9 - Ricardo Gigante
*EGYPT & FRANCE* Wait, UTAH’S GOVERNOR met with the AMBASSADOR of EGYPT and the CONSUL GENERAL of FRANCE, just 13 DAYS AFTER CHARLIE KIRK WAS ASSASSINATED, eh? Gosh, that’s gotta be an unmitigated fucking DISASTER for FedSoc/Edmund Burke/A3P/Zinn/Skjervem/Hammer/Chamberlain/Davis/Poso/Human Events/TPUSA and the rest of the Charlie Kirk murder accessories. *Stares MOTHERFUCKERLY at FRANCE😒* *SPOILERS: Watch out for IDAHO here next, folks. Skjervem is APFC Investment Advisory Group (with George H. Zinn), CIO for the State of Utah retirement system AND an Advisor for the IDAHO retirement system. 💥NOTE: SHELDON GILBERT (LDS Mafia), the December 2024-appointed President of FedSoc and the former Senior Counsel of Walmart (Timothy Flynn/UnitedHealth), POSTPONED A previously-scheduled JOINT SPEAKING ENGAGEMENT he had up in IDAHO with the IDAHO PRESIDENT of FEDSOC, which was originally booked for ONE MONTH BEFORE KIRK’S MURDER.
@TheSCIF - The SCIF
Why is UTAH'S GOVERNOR having closed door secret meetings with the EGYPTIAN & FRENCH governments? This happened just 13 days after Charlie Kirk was assassinated. NOBODY can stop the TRUTH from being exposed. @ProjectConstitu wrote: 11:30 AM: Closed-door meeting with Egyptian
@RedactedNews - Redacted
PLANTING BOMBS? 💣 While Washington sells you a clean narrative about the Iran war, @TuckerCarlson is asking the questions nobody else will. Mossad agents caught planting bombs in allied nations. What is actually going on? https://t.co/5j9iz5D52Y
Video Transcript AI Summary
- Tucker Carlson released a video addressing the war with Iran, arguing he was among the few who warned Washington weeks before the conflict began and that President Trump did not heed that warning. The discussion notes Tucker’s appearance in Washington with Trump and mentions supporters like JD Vance and Tulsi Gabbard.
- Carlson’s framework for analyzing a major war is introduced as four questions: 1) Why did this happen? 2) What was the point of it? 3) Where does it go from here? 4) How do we respond?
- On why this war happened, the speakers assert a simple answer: this happened because Israel wanted it to happen. The conflict is characterized as Israel’s war, not primarily for U.S. national security objectives, and not about weapons of mass destruction. The argument is made that the decision to engage was driven by Israel, with Benjamin Netanyahu demanding U.S. military action and pressuring the U.S. through multiple White House visits.
- The speakers contend that many generals warned against the war due to insufficient military capacity, but those warnings were reportedly ignored as officials lied about capability and duration of a potential conflict. They claim there was no credible plan for replacing Iran’s government after a potential topple, highlighting concerns about Iran’s size, diversity, and the risk of regional chaos.
- The discussion suggests a history of manipulation and misinformation, citing a 2002 exchange where Netanyahu allegedly pushed for regime change in Iran and noting Dennis Kucinich’s account that Netanyahu said the Americans had to do it. They argue this war is the culmination of a long-term strategy backed by Netanyahu.
- On what the point of the war would be for Israel, the speakers say the objective is regional hegemony. Israel seeks to determine regional outcomes with minimal constraints, aiming to decapitate Iran to allow broader actions in the Middle East, including potential expansionist goals. They argue Iran’s nuclear program was used as a pretext, though they contend Iran was not imminently close to a nuclear weapon.
- The role of regional players is examined, including the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states—Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman—and their strategic importance as energy producers and regional influencers. The speakers claim Israel and the U.S. sought to weaken or destabilize these Gulf states to reduce their capacity to counter Israel’s regional dominance and to push the U.S. out of the Middle East.
- It is asserted that Netanyahu’s strategy would involve reducing American involvement, thereby weakening U.S. credibility as a security partner in the region. The claim is that the Gulf states have been left more vulnerable, with missile threats and disrupted energy infrastructure, and that Israel’s actions are designed to force the U.S. to withdraw from the region.
- The speakers argue that Europe stands to suffer as well, notably through potential refugee inflows and disruptions to LNG supplies from Qatar; Europe’s energy security and economy could be adversely affected.
- The discussion notes alleged Israeli actions in the Gulf, including reports of Mossad activity and bombings in Qatar and Saudi Arabia, though it is presented as part of a broader narrative about destabilization and its costs.
- The potential consequences outlined include cascading chaos in Iran, refugee crises in Europe, and a weakened United States as an ally in the Middle East. The speakers predict long-term strategic losses for Europe, the Gulf states, and the U.S.
- The discussion concludes with a warning that, if Israel achieves its aims to decapitate Iran, the region could destabilize further, potentially triggering broader geopolitical shifts. A final reference is made to Naftali Bennett portraying Turkey as the new threat, illustrating ongoing great-power competition in the region.
- The overall message emphasizes truthfulness in reporting, critiques of media narratives, and the view that Western audiences have been propagandized into seeing Middle East conflicts as moral battles rather than power dynamics between competing states.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So Tucker Carlson just released his statement on the war with Iran, and he was really the only voice going to Washington DC in a few days before this war broke out, meeting with president Trump as he did, and he implored him to not carry out this war. There, of course, are supporters of Tucker's position, JD Vance, and others within the administration, Tulsi Gabbard. But it seems like the president did not heed his warning. So the way I've been waiting to see what Tucker was going to say about this. So he just released this video, and I wanna go ahead and play it and watch it with you.
Speaker 1: So whenever something big happens, particularly something really big like a war that will change world history, the first four questions you have to ask are these. One, why did this happen? Two, what was the point of it? Three, where does it go from here? And four, how do we respond?
So let's assess the war in Iran now ongoing in its second day and try to answer those four questions. First, why did this happen? Now in this case, there's a really simple answer. This happened because Israel wanted it to happen. This is Israel's war.
Speaker 0: 100%. This is not our war. This is Israel's wet dream. Just remember, go back to 2002. Go back to 2002.
Dennis Kucinich in congress. Netanyahu's sitting across from him, and Kucinich asks him as he's trying to sell us the Iraq war, Netanyahu was. Any other things we need to pay attention to that you want us to pay attention to? And he tells him explicitly about Iran. Iran is next.
So, yeah, do Iraq first. We want Iraq. But then next, please do Iran. That's the next piece.
Speaker 1: This is not The United States' war. This war is not being waged on behalf of American national security objectives to make The United States safer or richer. This war is not actually even about weapons of mass destruction, nukes, chem bio. Now this war is waged purely because Israel wanted it to be waged. Now why say that out loud this early in the conflict?
Isn't that dispiriting for, say, American troops fighting this war? Yes. It is. And we thought a lot about whether it was wise or decent even to say something like that out loud and have decided that it is for the following reason. First, because the truth is always the only basis for wise decision making.
When you lie to yourself or you lie to your people, you not only commit, well, a kind of moral crime by lying, but you also tend to hurt yourself. Hubris is the product of lies, for example. You can get way over your skis if you're not honest with yourself and the people around you about what's happening and why.
Speaker 0: By the way, I should point out that there were a number of generals who spoke out and said, we're not equipped for this. We don't have the military capacity to carry out this war. We don't have enough missiles. These people, of course, were fired recently. They were being honest.
They were being truthful, but it didn't matter in the end because that that truth is not the truth they wanted to hear. So when Pete Hagsef gets up there at the podium and lies right to the American people that you, you know, this is not gonna be protracted war. How do you how do you know, actually? This is not gonna be a protracted war. And you're not listening to the people that you hired to tell you the truth, so then you're telling the president of The United States untruths.
You're telling him what you think he wants to hear instead of the truth. Colonel MacGregor on our show made that point. So these people are lying, and the president then is not getting accurate information because he's being lied to about our capacity to carry out this war. That's the truth.
Speaker 1: It's happening. But long term, that is also true. In other words, it's important to say why this war is happening because fifty years from now, people may not know. Your grandkids may learn that this war started because the Ayatollah showed up in Miami and started machine gunning people in a shopping mall, and so we responded. There was a kind of Iranian Pearl Harbor.
You don't know what the future will believe about the present. You don't know how history will be written. And if you're skeptical of that, if you're asking yourself, well, how could historians, popular historians, how could future culture so misunderstand something so big? How could people lie about something so obvious, so giant? Well, history is your guide.
A lot of the big events we think we understand, including wars from the past and not so distant past, are completely distorted in our memories. In other words, that's not actually what happened at all.
Speaker 0: Right. Like Pearl Harbor. We got into World War two because of Pearl Harbor. They teach us that in school. Never mind the fact that FDR allowed Pearl Harbor to happen on purpose.
He knew it was coming and allowed it to happen, allowed American sailors to be killed as a false flag for us to enter World War two. Like that?
Speaker 1: And the truth is if enough people lie about something at a high enough volume and they do it for long enough, loudly enough, while threatening anyone who refuses to lie about it, over time, their lies become conventional wisdom. Everyone believes them. There was something about repeating a lie over and over and over again That's almost like a spell or an incantation. It's almost a form of witchcraft. It assumes reality or a version of reality, an ersatz reality, a fake reality, but reality nevertheless.
And if you're interested at all in history, going back thousands of years or even more recently, you know that the understandings of certain events that you grew up hearing about probably totally inverted. The opposite is true, but you didn't know that until you dug a little deeper, in some cases, a lot deeper to find out because they have been distorted in the retelling.
Speaker 0: For instance, sixty minutes yesterday published a tweet that went viral. And in that tweet and in their interview, they say that Iran had nuclear weapons, has nuclear weapons. Sixty minutes published that BS. Mean, these are the same kinds of things that, like, people like Mark Levin and whatever push the lie over and over and over against the American people just assume that Iran has nuclear weapons, and they don't, and nor do they want them. Finally, after, like, twelve hours of that tweet being up there, finally, sixty minutes deleted the tweet.
Only after millions of people saw it. How many people how many people who read that tweet didn't know the truth to Tucker's point?
Speaker 1: And because they have been, because a lot of our most basic assumptions are based on untruths, we wind up getting into the same messes again and again. So it's just important to tell the truth about this now in the early stages. This is, by the way, widely known. This is not a conspiracy theory. Everyone's saying it out loud now because it's true.
The United States committed troops to this conflict because the prime minister of Israel, not Israel's nation, but the guy who runs it, Benjamin Netanyahu, BB, demanded it. Seven trips to the White House over the last year. And the point of those trips never varied. The United States needs to commit to regime change in Iran. We need the US military to overthrow the government of Iran.
And Bibi himself has basically said that, that it wasn't that we thought Iran was gonna get nukes this week, and that's why we did this. Nobody's even saying that now. They will be in the future when our memories get all dimmer and they can manipulate us more. But right now, they're bidding. No.
Actually, they were not on the verge of getting nukes. BB himself said, you can pull up the video. I've been dreaming about this for forty years. We've finally done it.
Speaker 0: And it's worth pointing out congressman Dennis Kucinich who literally face to face with Netanyahu in 2002 and asked him that question. He he he admitted later he went to the hallway after that hearing and spoke to Netanyahu. And he said, why don't you guys carry out this regime change war? Why don't you guys do it? And Kucinich said that Netanyahu said to him, no.
No. We can't do it. It has to be the Americans. You have to do it. You you have to do it.
Speaker 1: So this is the culmination of a long time plan of strategy. And, actually, if you look at it backwards and try to assess recent events even in this country, the American political life over the past several years, certainly over the past six or eight months, you can see that a lot of what was happening here was preparation for where we are right now. In other words, people who wanted war in Iran were softening up the public for it, were manipulating the US government in order to affect it, and were doing their very best to silence anyone who doubted its wisdom. A lot of the things we have seen in the recent past are and now it's very obvious, they were all designed to get us to where we are now, war with Iran on behalf of Israel. Now just a caveat at the outset, just because the prime minister of Israel wanted a regime change war with Iran does not mean in any sense that it was a wise idea for Israel.
Certainly wasn't a good idea for The United States. That's no one just really disputes that. But was it a good idea for the country or for the prime minister who advocated for it? No. Probably not.
Actually, just because we want something doesn't mean it's good for us. Sometimes when we get what we want most, we're destroyed by it. Hope that doesn't happen to Israel, of course, or anybody, but it could. So when you get to the truth of things and you see who's pushing for them, that doesn't mean that person understands his own best interest or his country's own best interest. Often they don't.
Often we don't. But it doesn't change the fact that we got here because Israel lobbied for it. And virtually everyone in the US government, certainly in the Pentagon, understood the risks. The risks were obvious from day one. First, if you knock off a government, we have a long history of doing that.
It's not that hard. The, you know, individual bravery of The US military personnel, the soldiers who do it is laudable, impressive, amazing sometimes, but that is we have learned the easy part. Killing Saddam? Okay. Amazing.
What comes next? Etcetera, etcetera. This is all very, very well known, and it was very well known forty eight hours ago that there was no real plan to replace the government we were hoping to topple. At which point, what? Now you have a country, Iran, the size of Western Europe.
Speaker 0: Is it no plan?
Speaker 1: 2,000,000 people, a country that's, you know, only a little over half Persian that has its own internal divisions and dynamics and rivalries. You have that country potentially breaking apart. And what does that mean? Well, I mean, hard to see that as a good thing for the rest of the world on so many levels, which we pray don't become more obvious, but they're even now becoming obvious. That could be a true, true disaster.
So why would we want that? Well, of course, we wouldn't want that. The only country that seems to want that or the only leader, to be fair, once again, not speaking for every Israeli anymore than Joe Biden or Donald Trump or anybody else who runs this country speaks for every American, of course, but Benjamin Netanyahu wanted that. He thought that was his mission, but more than his mission, maybe his destiny. He suggested that in his remarks today.
And that's why. But nobody in the US government who I ever talked to or heard quoted on TV seemed to believe that this was primarily in America's interest. There might be ancillary benefits. I mean, you hear these analyses of how, you know, the world is changing, and it went from being unipolar to multipolar. All true.
The United States ran the world uncontested from the 1991 until, I don't know, pick a date, pretty recently, the rise of China. And all of a sudden, you have multipoles. You have more than one great power vying for control of the world and its trade routes and its resources, etcetera, etcetera. And that somehow knocking off the government of Iran would be good for us in that complex just game, and that's a real argument, I guess. These things are kind of hard to understand.
And any wise person looks at the world and says, okay. There's no stopping the rise of China. Their manufacturing capacity, their economic power is really the world's largest real economy, is not gonna end tomorrow, so there has to be a way to strike a kind of power sharing agreement with China, with the East. The United States doesn't rule the world uncontested, and for the foreseeable future is probably not going to. So how do we live in some semblance of peace and preserve our own interests?
And, again, you enter into some informal power sharing agreement with the other great power or powers. Probably can't stop that process. It's probably too late to stop China from controlling the East at this point. Killing the Ayatollah is probably not gonna do it, so there's probably a better way to do this. But, anyway, there are there are people who disagree and, you know, if we do this, it'll be better for us long term, and at least you have to give them credit for trying to think of a way in which this might benefit The United States.
But most people who assess this knew nothing whatsoever to do with us. This is Israel's war. That's what it is. It's not an attack. It's not an attack on Israel, by the way.
It's hardly antisemitism or Jew hatred. It's just it's a fact. Head of state came to our country. The head of state of 9,000,000 people came to a country of 350,000,000 people and demanded that we help them or in effect do it ourselves topple the regime in Tehran. Now how do they get the leverage to do this?
That's a complicated question, and it's something really worth thinking about. But how did this tiny country with no resources and 9,000,000 people convince the world's great superpower with the greatest military in history to do its bidding in a way that was gonna hurt it? Well, again, many layers to that question, but the most obvious and immediate answer is because Beebe told the president of The United States, you can join me or not, but I'm going. And the secretary of state Marco Rubio said this in a call to congressional leaders yesterday. He said Israel said they were going.
And at that point, you really only have two choices. You can get on board and try and help or contain Israel's war. That's part of the calculation here. Israel's going. Let's try and keep this within bounds.
Let's try to be a moderating force on this adventure, whatever it turns out to be, or you can tell Israel no, and they'll just do it. And if they did it, that would not protect us because there are hundreds of thousands of Americans in The Middle East, both in uniform and out, civilians and military personnel, and they're also the world's most important oil projects, oil, energy infrastructure, oil and gas, which has more than any other factor determining effect on the global economy. So everybody needs their oil and gas, period. You can't change that. Sorry.
And so if that infrastructure is damaged or destroyed, it affects all of us, all of us, everybody, but us. So, you can't just let Israel go and do this. Now, of course, there's a third potential theoretical option, which you you say to Israel, which is a client state, which we pay for, whose creation we made possible. You say, no. We're not doing that.
I get it. You don't like Yahitola. You don't like Iran, but this is bad for us, and we're not gonna let you do this. And if you do it, we're gonna, I don't know what, cut off aid something. We can apply the pressure that is inherently ours to apply since we're paying for all of this.
But that was not even on the table. That's never been on the table. No one has ever in the last sixty three years considered doing that. Really, the last president to do that was John f Kennedy in 1962 when he got in a, not as famous as it should be, dispute with the founding prime minister of Israel, then the prime minister of Israel, David Ben Gurion, over Israel's nuclear program at Dimona. And then president Kennedy said, no.
I don't believe in nuclear proliferation. This is one of the pillars of my administration, and you can't keep testing, and I'm demanding inspections. And, of course, he was not able, to make good on those promises because he was killed in November 1963, and the person who took his place, his vice president, Lyndon Johnson, gave a green light to the Israeli nuclear program. So that was the last time an American president said no, a hard no to Israel, tried to restrain its core ambitions. Not
Speaker 0: And did you point out that Apollo, Pennsylvania, Israel stole all sorts of nuclear material and secrets from Apollo, Pennsylvania and stole it and took it to Israel, and no one did anything about it. People of Apollo, Pennsylvania are still very aware of how the Israelis stole our nuclear power, nuclear materials and secrets, by the way.
Speaker 1: Like, be nice to the Palestinians in the West Bank, but no. You can't have nukes or no. You can't, I don't know, bomb Lebanon or whatever. That was the last time. So that's not, for some reason, even on the table.
So the the choice was, do you go along with what Israel's doing, try to constrain it, or do you just sit back and then inevitably get drawn into it? So the truth is, and this is hard to say, as a proud American and as someone who wants The United States to remain powerful in the world, a force for decency and order in the world, but above all wants America to remain prosperous and peaceful at home in the country that we actually live in. It's hard to say this, but The United States didn't make the decision here. Benjamin Netanyahu did. And, again, it's important to say that not to discourage anybody or make anybody feel despondent or hopeless.
There's no reason for hopelessness at this point. But in order that it doesn't happen again, Tell the truth so people can learn, hopefully improve and grow, but tell the truth no matter what. So then the question becomes, we know why it started started because Israel wanted it and demanded the US military in order to do it. Why would Israel want this? We've already established that this may or may not be a good idea for Israel, but why would they want it?
What was their thinking here? If it was really about the threat of Iran building and deploying a nuclear weapon or a nuclear tipped ICBM aimed at Miami and New York as Mark Levin told his poor listeners the other day. None of that's true.
Speaker 0: None of it's true, of course.
Speaker 1: But if it was really about that, how could this threat have lasted for forty years? How could as Benjamin Netanyahu said yesterday, how could Iran's nuclear program been on the very verge, the cusp of building and deploying a nuclear weapon for forty years. Well, of course, it wasn't. What we can argue about Iran's aims with nuclear weapons, they probably wanted one. Who wouldn't want one?
Look at what happens to countries that don't have one. Everyone wants a nuclear weapon. But were they actually about to get one?
Speaker 0: No. And by the way, this is probably the catalyst now. Right? We spoke to colonel Daniel Davis who said, you know, for those countries who were sort of sitting on the sidelines deciding whether or not they actually wanted to get a nuclear weapon or not, this pushes them in that direction because look what happens to countries that don't have a nuclear weapon. They get bombed.
So how many more countries will now say, you know what? We're gonna prioritize getting nukes to protect ourselves against the imperialists.
Speaker 1: So what was the point? What is the point of this from Israel's perspective? Well, the point is regional hegemony. Super simple. Israel has been around for almost eighty years.
Israel has nuclear weapons. Israel's got a pretty robust tech economy. But above all, Israel has big ambitions. And by the way, it's not an attack on Israel. Which growing country doesn't have greater ambitions and which megalomaniac leader of said country, and there are many of those around the world, by the way, wouldn't want regional hegemony.
Regional hegemony means you get to control your region, kind of a Middle Eastern Monroe doctrine. Israel wants to be able to determine, roughly speaking, what happens in its region, and it doesn't want constraints on its own behavior. In the same way, again, trying to be as generous and universally minded as possible here in this analysis because it's true. Who wouldn't want that? Do we want that?
Of course, do. We're not you know, we put up with a lot for Mexico and Canada, but if they all of a sudden started constraining our actual ambitions, we do something about it. I think, or the old America would have, a normal country would. And Israel wants to control the Middle East, and they are the only announced nuclear power in the Middle East. Are they the only actual nuclear power in the Middle East?
You could debate that. People can guess, but they're the only country we know for certain has a big nuclear arsenal. So they want to be unrivaled in their power in their region. Again, this is not a conspiracy theory or something weird to want. It's what every country wants, and they want it.
And Bibi wants it, and he sees himself as a figure out of history, not simply as a prime minister who's, you know, fighting to keep his job, which he also is, but as as a great man, as a modern Moses or whatever, as a as a figure. And men like that, men of destiny, change the calculation for their nation forever. They don't take small steps. They take big steps. They think big.
He thinks big to his credit or detriment, but it's a fact. And so this war is an effort, not not simply in in addition to everything else. No. No. It is exclusively an effort on the part of Israel to achieve regional hegemony, total control.
So what does that mean exactly? Well, it means you have to sweep away your enemies. And in the case of Iran, Iran was an enemy of Israel, by the way. And Iran was also funding insurgencies and militant groups in the region to kind of picket Israel and hassle Israel, kill Israelis. That's all true.
Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran funded, absolutely. Houthis are unfunded, absolutely. Iran was doing that. That's true. And Israel didn't like it.
Why would they? But it's also true that, and this does make excuses for anybody, but these are all dynamics. You know, one country does one thing, another country does another thing. I mean, like a marriage. No party's wholly responsible for what went wrong or what went well.
This is a relationship, and people act against each other with each other, but always on each other. Each action provokes a reaction. And so this history goes back a long way, and historians can untangle it, the few honest ones left. But if you want to control the Middle East and your Israel, you have to decapitate Iran. You don't have to rebuild it.
Probably don't even want to. It's too big. It has too much mineral wealth, has too much energy. That huge gas field they share with Qatar, etcetera, etcetera. You probably just wanna decapitate it and make it helpless.
You wanna turn it into a hellscape because it's better for you because you can dominate a hellscape. Now that may cause massive downstream problems for everybody else. You could have like a refugee crisis in Europe. Well, oh, that already happened when Israel destabilized Syria. You could have this open bleeding wound.
Oh, that already happened when Israel destabilized Lebanon, when Israel pushed The United States to kill Qaddafi in Libya. This is an ongoing thing. And Iraq? Biggest Yeah. On and final.
Speaker 0: Right.
Speaker 1: So getting rid of the Iranian government had one purpose, to give Israel the ability to do exactly what it wants in The Middle East without getting hassled. And what it wants among other things is territorial expansion. Small country. They want parts of Libya rather. Excuse me.
They want parts of Syria, parts of Lebanon. They're an expansionist power like most powers, actually. Let's demystify this. It's not about the Jews. It's about a nation state that is growing and trying to exert its power.
It's that simple. You can take all the spooky stuff out and just see it in terms of conventional geopolitics, and it makes total sense. And part of the reason we can't see this clearly is because we've been so propagandized in The United States to see every contest between nations as a moral contest in which we somehow have to pick a side and somebody's Churchill and somebody's Neville Chamberlain and somebody's Hitler and this absurd template which narrows our vision and prevents us from seeing that this is just what's always happened, which is a contest between powers for primacy.
Speaker 0: Right. So if it's just focused on the Jews and antisemitism, forgetting the fact that Israel really has very little resources in the ways of exports around the world, They have spy software that they sell. Right? But they don't have massive troves of oil and gas, natural gas, but who did? Well, the Palestinians did right off their coast.
So trillions of dollars worth of natural gas. Right? So they should that's why they have to kill so many Palestinians in order to get that natural gas. And Iran is, of course, sitting on massive, massive oil fields. Right?
So to exert yourself in that way to expand your power, your hemisphere, your sphere of influence, and to take over those resources. Right? Otherwise, Israel really can't sustain itself without all of this aid from The United States and other countries. That's at the heart of it.
Speaker 1: But there's another actually, two other components, two other speed bumps on the way to regional dominance for Israel. The first is something called the GCC. GCC is a an informal alliance, maybe a little more formal as of today, but, it's the six Gulf monarchies. It's the energy producing Gulf States, and those would be Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait, UAE, Qatar, and Saudi. And these are some of the biggest, most important energy producers in the world.
They're all Sunni Arab states. They are all rich, and all of a sudden, they are all now internationally or some of them are internationally influential because they are the site of global diplomacy. They are filling the void left by Switzerland, which not to get too boring about it, but basically took sides in the Russia Ukraine conflict and is therefore kind of not really a place where people can negotiate in good faith. They are in a fact, controlled, by the EU and NATO. They would never admit that to Swiss, but they are.
They give up their banking secrecy. They're basically not not aligned anymore. But some of these Gulf states are as close to not aligned as you can possibly get. Certainly, Qatar is. And all of a sudden, every conflict around the world is being negotiated in Qatar or most recently in Oman.
And so they have a kind of moral authority on the global stage. Right? They have very effective diplomacy. People like them. People also go there on vacation.
They have the best airlines in the world. They are the obvious regional travel travel hub for the globe. They're literally where East meets West. So if you're flying from New York to Delhi, you're gonna stop in Dubai. And they have government subsidized airlines that are absolutely fantastic, so people have a familiarity, a firsthand familiarity with these countries, which were mysteries to most Westerners twenty five years ago when nine eleven happened.
It was the first time I went to The Gulf. Most Americans has never been there unless you were in the oil business or something. You've never been there, and you could imagine that it was all belly dancers and camels and slavery or whatever you thought. But all of a sudden, you know, like, every other rich person in America has been to Dubai because they're all traveling somewhere. They're going in safari in Africa.
So people it's been demystified to the West, and people like it. These are societies with problems, of course, but they're also orderly and clean and elaborately polite and welcoming to outsiders and rich and kind of a little less gaudy than you would expect. Actually, some of the most functional societies in the world, and people like them despite a lot of propaganda. And by the way, despite some complications, there are plenty of things about the Gulf States that Westerners won't like and or some things anyway and certainly parts of their foreign policy that make you wonder. But these are not North Korea.
They're the opposite. These are actually very civilized countries. And they're not all on board with Israel's programs because they've got populations that disagree with how Israel has treated the Palestinians. In the case of Saudi Arabia, they have Mecca and Medina, the two holiest places in Islam. Every Muslim who can is required to go to Saudi Arabia on the Hajj on to go visit Mecca.
So these are countries with inherent power in the Islamic world, growing power globally, and resources. And so they can't be ignored. And if they were ever to get together, if these six countries were ever to form, say, like, a real military alliance, they would be a massive threat to Israel. So Israel has spent decades fomenting dissent between them, of course. And that's not necessarily just an attack on Israel.
I mean, as anyone can tell you, we spend time in the Middle East. The Arabs, many great qualities, but love to fight with each other. It's like their favorite hobby. More than camel racing. Like, they it's very easy to get Arab nations bickering and fighting, and the distrust goes back a long time and it's impenetrable to the outsider.
But if you were trying to divide six countries from each other, it's not that hard, and the Israelis have worked really, really hard to do that. But the truth is if you really want control of the Middle East, you kinda have to degrade, if not destroy the Gulf States. And so the Israelis knew and the Americans knew as well, maybe not quite quite as realistic an assessment, but they had some sense. The Israelis definitely knew that if you start lobbying missiles into Iran and if you start killing the leadership of Iran and if you were to say kill the head of state slash religious leader of one branch of Islam, the Ayatollah, if you were to do that, it would provoke a military response that would hurt The Gulf badly and that it would in some countries like Bahrain, site of the fifth fleet, you could potentially stoke, like, a true revolution because that country is almost, I think, half Shiite. So you could cause massive chaos in The Gulf if you were to do this.
Now that wasn't a risk from the Israeli standpoint. That was the point. That was the point. They wanted to diminish the Gulf, and in two days, they have. And I think anyone who likes decency and order and cleanliness is hoping that the Gulf will recover.
The Gulf is not a threat to us. We have military bases in these countries. These are some of our closest allies. All of them are closer allies than Israel by far. They're our friends, but they've been really hurt.
And in a place like Dubai, which is basically part of a country, it's an emirate within The United Arab Emirates, but it's also a luxury brand, basically. People go to Dubai because it's beautiful and rich and clean and above all because it's safe and orderly. It's got the busiest airport in the world. You start seeing video on Instagram of smoke in the Dubai Airport, you're like, I think I'm going to Cabo this year. Oh, sorry.
Drug cartels. Whatever. Maybe you go to Sedona this year. It really, really hurts these countries, and Israel wanted to hurt these countries. That's the point.
Wanted to hurt these countries. Wanted to sow chaos and disorder because they are rivals of Israel. So it's probably not hasn't been reported, but it's a fact that last night in Qatar and Saudi Arabia, authorities arrested Mossad agents planning on committing bombings in those countries. Now that's weird. Wait.
Speaker 0: And I missed that. I didn't miss, however, that the Saudi Arabian oil field that was attacked today, Iran says, yeah. We bombed all these other spots, American bases and so forth. We did not hit. We did not bomb the Saudi Arabian oil fields.
That wasn't us. That was Israel that carried that out. Oh, shocking.
Speaker 1: It doesn't make any sense. Why would the Israelis be committing bombings in two Gulf countries, which are also being attacked by Iran? Aren't they on the same side? No. No.
Israel wants to hurt Iran and Qatar and UAE and Saudi and Bahrain and Oman and Kuwait, and they've succeeded. And the third thing you would have to do if you wanted true control over the region, which as we've established, Israel wants and shouldn't be attacked for wanting. It's a natural thing to want. But the final thing you'd have to do is get The US out of the Middle East. Since 1948, The United States, from Harry Truman till present, US presidents, and as noted with diminishing success, but have tried to constrain or shape Israel's policies, its foreign policy.
And we have a right to do that because we're the most powerful country in the world and have been since 1945, and also because we we pay for it. You know, Israel couldn't exist without us right now, and we give them the defense umbrella. We defend them in their wars. And so why would you want The United States out? Well, because The United States, while not doing a very good job of constraining Israel, has been issuing requests in any case to Israel for a long time, and that's very annoying.
Imagine if we were getting the same kind of communiques from, I don't know, Ottawa, and they were like, you can't do this. You can't do that. We'd say buzz off at a certain point. Back off Canada. We're doing what we want.
We're a great power. So you have to get The United States out, and this war is designed to do it. Because the Israelis who are very well aware of domestic American politics know that there is no appetite whatsoever for casualties among the American public, that this war did not have anything approaching majority support. In fact, it had small minority support, and that's shrunk even in thirty six hours, and that this would cause a political crisis in The United States, and that it would most critically convince our Arab allies in the region, meaning really the Gulf States and Jordan. Poor Jordan.
Wonderful country. It would convince them that The United States is a bad ally. Why? Because the second you hit Iran, and the Persians are not stupid at all, you know that they're gonna hit American bases in those countries, which they have, except Oman. But in the other six, they have, And, you know, those countries are not gonna be defended by The United States, and they haven't been very well.
Some of these countries are on fire right now, and they feel completely vulnerable, And they are low and not letting loose with any operational secret that you can't find on the Internet. They're running low on missile defense. And so a country like Saudi or UAE or Qatar, Bahrain or Kuwait, I mean, they're all right on the Gulf directly across from Iran. They live on their energy production, and that's being damaged, and no one's protecting them. A Saudi Aramco facility went up last night.
Saudi Aramco being the, you know, longtime joint US Saudi energy production company, biggest oil company in the world, and part of it's on fire today.
Speaker 0: That Israel
Speaker 1: is said they didn't do it. Why would they say they didn't do it? What possible Israel did it? Why wouldn't they?
Speaker 0: They said Israel did it.
Speaker 1: Because if you think about it, scaring our other allies in the region, letting them know that they can get attacked and The US will not defend you. You put up with all this crap for decades because you got American troops on your soil and your population doesn't like it, but you do it anyway because you've been told if there was ever a problem, The US will come rescue you. Well, guess what we just learned? The US is not coming to rescue you. There are hundreds of thousands of Americans, civilians caught in The Middle East.
You can't get out. And the governments of those countries are panicked and they're enraged, and the message to them is The US is not a reliable partner. What's the point of this partnership? What's the point of allowing you to have an air base in my country if when missiles come raining down or drones attack our airport or international airport? You're not gonna do anything about it.
That's how they feel, and you can understand why they do. So what's the message to them? There's no upside in dealing with The United States. There's no upside in foreign investment in The United States. You go to any of these countries.
You just go to the airport. Go to a restaurant. Who do you run to? American businessmen. And some of them have good ideas.
Some of them have ideas that are so stupid that they couldn't sell them in Silicon Valley. They couldn't go to VCs in The United States and raise the money, so they go to The Gulf. And it's not that the Gulf Arabs are dumb. In some sense, they're doing this because they see The United States as their only real ally. And so they're investing in American business ventures, a lot.
Hundreds of billions of dollars. And part of that is economic calculation. They think these companies are gonna grow, and they're gonna make money. Part of it is friendship. You're an ally and have been all these years since the British left.
What do they think now? Wow. They don't feel that way quite as much. Because for them, this is very serious. I mean, these countries don't grow their own food.
So if you close the airport and the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea are closed in effect, where do you get your food? Yeah. That's a real issue. These are countries that are supplied by, in some cases, desalination plants, pulling seawater through a membrane and then piping it to the urban centers. What happens if those pipes get blown up?
You have no water. There's millions and millions of people. So you can see without getting too into it just how vulnerable these countries, our strongest allies in the region now feel and how their calculation about The United States and the region has changed dramatically. The British lost their influence in the Middle East in 1956 in what is known as the Suez Crisis. It was a crisis that was so complex, it's hard even to understand it now seventy years later.
But the net effect was The UK was not able to restore order in the region. They had less power than people thought they did, and that was it. That was the true end of Britain's empire and certainly the end of its control over the Middle East. That's what this is, and it's on purpose. They did this.
The Israelis want us out, and they did this on purpose. And then as a last sort of footnote, there's another big loser in this war, in Israel's war, And this was obvious years ago, and that's Europe. Europe.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Because Europe is about to be inundated with refugees if this continues.
Speaker 1: Who cares about Europe? Well, the neocons care about Europe for reasons that are not entirely clear. But you often hear the neocons, the war hawks, chills for Israel, whatever you call them, but people who supported what we're seeing now. And they're mad at the Shiites and the Ayatollah and the Arabs and, you know, of course, got it. But if you listen carefully, there is a deep hostility, hatred, in fact, toward Western Europe.
Now where does that come from? Someone should think deeply about this because it's had a big effect over the past eighty years. Doesn't even matter where it comes from. They hate Western Europe. And maybe the biggest loser of all right now is Western Europe.
So last night, Qatar shut down its LNG exports. LNG is liquefied natural gas. Without getting boring about it, LNG is essential to the global economy. It's essential to Asia, South Korea, subsists on Qatari LNG exports. China is a huge consumer of them and Western Europe.
Britain, 40% of homes in Britain are powered by Qatari LNG.
Speaker 0: I didn't know that. Wow.
Speaker 1: Lots of reasons for this. We blew up the downstream pipeline as one of them. Yeah. It doesn't matter. That's the truth.
So when you shut off natural gas from Qatar, and it's now shut down. It's 20% of the world's total supply is shut down. Well, you all kinds of effects on that. It crushes markets. It hikes inflation.
It can wreak havoc on the global economy. Say a prayer that it doesn't, but it could. But the first thing that it does is totally shafts Europe. And then here's the second order effect, refugee crises. Let's say that this operation achieves its only real stated aim, is to decapitate the government of Iran.
Doesn't seem to have happened yet. I mean, who knows what's actually going on? But the Ayatollah was killed. Government's still sending missiles, so someone's making decisions. But let's say over the course of however long this takes, chaos becomes the state of play in Iran.
The thing just falls apart. It's chaos. It's a huge chaotic country with no one in charge and lots of different ethnic groups and religious splinter groups fighting with each other heavily armed. And the normal things start to break down like food distribution and water, schools. What do you have?
Well, you have what we've had in Lebanon and Syria. Every country that Israel has destabilized on purpose, you have a refugee crisis. And where do they go? Well, of course, a lot will come here, of course, but a lot will go to Europe just as Syrians flooded into Europe ten or twelve years ago in the aftermath of that conflict, which was underneath it all fomented by Israel in order to destabilize its neighbor in order to increase its own authority in the region. That's a fact.
So if you think Europe's in bad shape now, oh, boy. Give it a year. So it's Europe, The United States, and The Gulf States. Those are the losers. And if you're trying to ascertain motive, which is hard and you probably should pull back from that most of the time, but if you're trying to understand, like, why this is happening, why would you want that?
Look at the effects. Don't look at the ideology they're telling you about or the whatever motive they're claiming they have or that you have. Shut up, K. Look at the effects. The point of the system is what it does.
And what does this system, what does this war do? Hurts the Gulf States, crushes the Western Europeans, and it hurts The United States. That's the point. And if you doubt that, if you doubt that that's actually what's going on, this is a long time Israeli politician leader, Naftali Bennett, explaining Israel's next step. Here's where they're going next.
Watch. A new Turkish threat is emerging. I want to be very clear. Turkey and Qatar have gained influence in Syria. They're seeking influence elsewhere and everywhere throughout the region.
And from here, I warn, Turkey is the new Iran.
Speaker 0: Oh yeah. A smattering of opponents.
Speaker 1: Iran is sophisticated, dangerous, and he seeks to encircle Israel. We can't close our eyes again. He's sophisticated and dangerous. It's hardly an endorsement of Erdogan or Erdogan, the Turkish leader, hardly an endorsement of him to say, when Bennett says he's dangerous, what he really means is he's sovereign. We can't tell him what to do.
We don't fully control him. We can influence him, and it's clear that
Speaker 0: Oh, exactly. Just like Libya. You mean Libya is energy independent, sovereign, want to give back the wealth of its oil and and resources to people and enrich its people? We can't have that. We can't have a sovereign country in the Middle East that's self sufficient, so we have to sodomize with a bayonet their leader, Gaddafi.
It's the exact same thing with Turkey.
Speaker 1: Israel and Turkey did have some kind of relationship, in the overthrow of Bashar al Assad in Syria last year, just a guess. But the real problem with Turkey is that it can't be controlled, so it is therefore a threat to Israel. And, again, not attacking Israel. That's true. That is true.
In the same sense that when we have hostile leaders in big countries in our hemisphere, it really bothers us, and sometimes we kill them, regime change them, and we make up this whole no. It's really important. The people of country x need to be free, but really we need to be unconstrained because we're a great power. That's what it is. It's important to say this, not to allege some sort of dark conspiracy by the Israelis, but to explain that it's not unusual at all.
It's the most usual thing in the world. What's unusual is to live in a country that is so controlled, whose media environment is so precisely constructed to keep you from knowing anything that matters, from seeing the most obvious things, and that it has been constructed, not a conspiracy theory, over the course of many, many years to keep you from not knowing. Barry Weiss may run CNN. Whoever thought that would happen? Okay.
Now but the, you know, the the point of these moves is to in the media, is to control the way things are described so you can't see things clearly and to muddy the conversation with anti Semitism, the Nazis. No. No. This is classic great power competition, and we just can't see it because we have been so thoroughly propagandized, we think that this is some sort of, like, effort to liberate somebody. It's not.
But then the question becomes, like, what is our role in this? So now that we know by the way, it's it's perilous that we know. And one of the reasons I almost didn't do this, not that I'm, like, saying anything that isn't obvious, it's all very obvious, but to say it out loud does not make things more stable. In other words, once you have a war going on and everybody knows that it's not being waged on behalf of the people who are dying in it or the families they leave behind, then, you know, things can things don't get more stable. So and no one wants to add to the present instability, but I just think it's important to know the truth and to know what our leaders have planned because, as you already know, they lie, and they have no scruples at all.
And there are very few people in Washington who have fewer scruples than senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas. I hate to say that. I know him well. But this clip from the yester from a Sunday show, which apparently still exists yesterday, really tells you a lot about how they're thinking and about where they'd like to take us next. So this is senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas yesterday.
Speaker 2: Good morning, Margaret.
Speaker 3: The president of The United States warned the American public that there could be casualties, American casualties. Does that mean The US is putting boots on the ground?
Speaker 2: No, Margaret. The president has been clear that what we should expect to see is an extended air and naval campaign that's designed not only to continue to set
Speaker 0: By the way, doesn't he look like a Pez dispenser?
Speaker 2: Back Iran's nuclear ambitions, but most importantly, to destroy its vast missile arsenal. Many more missiles in The United States and Israel have air defenses combined as well as the missile launchers and its missile manufacturing capability. Now obviously one risk of that kind of campaign is that an aircraft could be shot down and the president would never leave a pilot behind. So no doubt we have combat search and rescue assets in the region that are prepared to go in and extract any downed pilot. But barring that kind of unusual circumstance, Margaret, the president has no plan for any kind of large scale ground, force inside of Iran.
Speaker 0: But then we just heard from the president today say that he's not ruling out ground forces. Okay.
Speaker 1: The president has no plan for any sort of large scale, ground force large scale ground force, in Iran. Oh, really? So a small scale ground force. Is that what you're saying? Well, that is what he's saying.
And the secretary of war was just interviewed moments ago, and pressed on this a little bit, and he said it's it's possible because, of course, it's possible. By the way, shouldn't even attack people for telling the truth ever. You should attack people who try to prevent you from telling the truth, and and what secretary of war Pete Hegseth just said is, of course, obviously true and was always true. There's not one person who understands a situation like this,
Speaker 2: kinetic war,
Speaker 1: who thinks you can affect regime change from the air. That's no one's ever thought that. No one thinks that now. If you're sincere about changing the leadership of a country, it, by definition, requires you to get in there. Not well, of course, not you, but some young guy, some younger man, who's fighting for freedom to get in there and risk his life to do it.
You need troops, ground troops, boots on the ground, or whatever dumb euphemism they're using for putting young Americans, in the path of potential death. And so, of course, that's always been the plan, and shame on the rest of us for not just saying that out loud. Shame on the rest of us for being so cowed by their relentless incantations, whatever they are. No ground troops. This is not point is not regime change.
It's to stop their nuclear program. Some of us understood. Charlie Kirk understood back in June. That was a lie. The point wasn't Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.
Yeah. Nobody wants Iran to have a nuclear weapon. Why does Israel have a nuclear weapon? Why does France have a nuclear weapon? Nobody wants nuclear weapons.
Okay? Nobody thinks that Iran should have a nuclear weapon outside of Iran, but no honest person believed in June. And now those people have been vindicated that this was about stopping and forgetting a nuclear. But it's regime change, and regime change requires ground troops. And, therefore, if you're serious about it, you're gonna get ground troops.
The only group left out of this calculation was the American public who probably had no idea and probably still don't have any idea that that would even be a remote consideration given everything that's going on in this country right now and given the tiny percentage, relatively speaking, of Americans who wanted this, who voted for it, who support it. The leaders of both parties support it. Chuck Schuber supports it more fervently than Trump. MSNBC just did a long segment on this, which I've watched about this war and the fault of the Gulf States. I mean, it's the Gulf States.
Yeah. It's they're all on the same page. They're all neocons. When it comes right down to it, they all support this. But the public doesn't support it, and it's terrible for The United States.
And by the way, if you think it's a good idea for The US to get out of the Middle East, which it might be, by the way, that's not a crazy desire. I do. This is not the way to do it. Humiliated with American dead. That's not the way to get out of the Middle East, but that's how Israel wants us out of The Middle East.
You won't come back. They can pivot to their new partner, China, and Israel can provide the tech that will even up the match against the Chinese tech that Pakistan used in their last confrontation scared China. They realized we need better tech. China's like, oh, yeah. We've got the better tech.
So it's it's a natural alliance, and there are other reasons it's a natural alliance. But Israel's moving on to India, and The United States is, if Israel gets its way, going to be humiliated and weaker, mourning its dead, and very resistant to getting involved in Middle East politics ever again. You wanna annihilate every last child in Gaza? Go ahead. You wanna kick the Palestinians, the Christians out of the West Bank and fill up full people from Brooklyn, go ahead.
We're not gonna do anything about it. That's the goal right there.
Speaker 0: Just to wrap your head around the idea that not only were have they never been our strongest ally, our greatest ally, but in fact, they're using us to rid the Middle East of their enemies, and they have every intention of ridding the Middle East of us at the heart of it. I mean, it's like it's like some battered girlfriend who just, like, keeps coming back for more. We'll just beat you up. We'll steal your nuclear materials from Pennsylvania. We'll, you know, we'll we'll take over your congress.
We'll we'll kill we'll kill your journalists. We'll spy on you. We'll we'll we'll take your technology and then sell it to the Chinese, which what they've done. So in no way an ally, like, in no way a friend other than in, you know, it being verbal only. And then we're gonna turn right around and kick you out of the Middle East.
We're gonna use you, which is exactly what they're doing, and then you will go home with your tail between your legs, humiliated as we take over the Middle East and the Gulf Arab states collapse and Western Europe collapses. When you hear it in those terms, it's absolutely shocking. And he goes on for another hour. I encourage you all to watch it. I'll have it linked up below.
But I think this was like a master class in understanding this this conflict and how all of these players are going to move forward with this, and The United States will be will will suffer greatly, and we will be humiliated. We'll see you soon. Thank you for subscribing.
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m sharing Tucker Carlson’s take: 3 predictions about the Iran war all came true. Trump suggested using nuclear weapons. AI targeting with no human sign-off is already happening. The media blackout on American casualties. The Dome of the Rock—its destruction would end the world.
@RedactedNews - Redacted
🚨 Don't miss this: Friend of the show @TuckerCarlson joined us for one of the most important conversations we've had. 4:19 — His 3 predictions about the Iran war that all came true 8:01 — Trump suggested using nuclear weapons. 23:33 — AI targeting with no human sign-off is already happening 49:56 — The media blackout on American casualties 53:22 — The Dome of the Rock & why its destruction would end the world
Video Transcript AI Summary
- The discussion opens with claims that President Trump says “we’ve won the war against Iran,” but Israel allegedly wants the war to destroy Iran’s entire government structure, requiring boots on the ground for regime change. It’s argued that air strikes cannot achieve regime change and that Israel’s relatively small army would need U.S. ground forces, given Iran’s larger conventional force, to accomplish its objectives.
- Senator Richard Blumenthal is cited as warning about American lives potentially being at risk from deploying ground troops in Iran, following a private White House briefing.
- The new National Defense Authorization Act is described as renewing the involuntary draft; by year’s end, an involuntary draft could take place in the United States, pending full congressional approval. Dan McAdams of the Ron Paul Institute is described as expressing strong concern, arguing the draft would treat the government as owning citizens’ bodies, a stance attributed to him as supporting a view that “presumption is that the government owns you.”
- The conversation contrasts Trump’s public desire to end the war quickly with Netanyahu’s government, which reportedly envisions a much larger military objective in the region, including a demilitarized zone in southern Lebanon akin to Gaza, and a broader aim to remove Hezbollah. The implication is that the United States and Israel may not share the same endgame.
- Tucker Carlson is introduced as a guest to discuss these issues and offer predictions about consequences for the American people, including energy disruption, economic impacts, and shifts in U.S. influence in the Persian Gulf.
- Carlson responds that he would not credit himself with prescience, but notes predictable consequences: disruption to global energy supplies, effects on the U.S. economy, potential loss of U.S. bases in the Gulf, and a shrinking American empire. He suggests that the war’s true goal may be to weaken the United States and withdraw from the Middle East; he questions whether diplomacy remains viable given the current trajectory.
- Carlson discusses Iran’s new supreme leader Khomeini’s communique, highlighting threats to shut Hormuz “forever,” vows to avenge martyrs, and calls for all U.S. bases in the region to be closed. He notes that Tehran asserts it will target American bases while claiming it is not an enemy of surrounding countries, though bombs affect neighbors as well.
- The exchange notes Trump’s remarks about possibly using nuclear weapons, and Carlson explains Iran’s internal factions, suggesting some seek negotiated settlements while others push for sustained conflict. Carlson emphasizes that Israel’s leadership may be pushing escalation in ways that diverge from U.S. interests and warns about the dangers of a joint operation with Israel, which would blur U.S. sovereignty in war decisions.
- A discussion on the use of a term Amalek is explored: Carlson’s guest explains Amalek from the Old Testament as enemies of the Jewish people, with a historical biblical command to annihilate Amalek, including women and children, which the guest notes Christianity rejects; Netanyahu has used the term repeatedly in the conflict context, which Carlson characterizes as alarming and barbaric.
- The guests debate how much influence is exerted in the White House, with Carlson noting limited direct advocacy for war among principal policymakers and attributing decisive pressure largely to Netanyahu’s threats. They question why Israel, a client state of the U.S., is allowed to dictate war steps, especially given the strategic importance of Hormuz and American assets in the region.
- They discuss the ethical drift in U.S. policy, likening it to adopting the ethics of the Israeli government, and criticize the idea of targeting family members or civilians as a military strategy. They contrast Western civilization’s emphasis on individual moral responsibility with perceived tribal rationales.
- The conversation touches on the potential rise of AI-assisted targeting or autonomous weapons: Carlson’s guest confirms that in some conflicts, targeting decisions have been made by machines with no human sign-off, though in the discussed case a human did press play on the attack. The coordinates and data sources for strikes are scrutinized, with suspicion cast on whether Israel supplied SIGINT or coordinates.
- The guests warn about the broader societal impact of war on civil liberties, mentioning the increasing surveillance and the risk that technology could be used to suppress dissent or control the population. They discuss how war accelerates social change and potentially normalizes drastic actions or internal coercion.
- The media’s role in selling the war is criticized as “propaganda,” with examples of government messaging and pop culture campaigns (including a White House-supported video game-like portrayal of U.S. military power). They debate whether propaganda can be effective without a clear, articulated rationale for war and without public buy-in.
- They question the behavior of mainstream outlets and “access journalism,” arguing that reporters often avoid tough questions about how the war ends, the timetable, and the off-ramps, instead reinforcing government narratives.
- In closing, Carlson and his co-hosts reflect on the political division surrounding the war, the erosion of trust in media, and the possibility of rebuilding a coalition of ordinary Americans who want effective governance without perpetual conflict or degradation of civil liberties. Carlson emphasizes a longing for a politics centered on improving lives rather than escalating war.
- The segment ends with Carlson’s continued critique of media dynamics, the moral implications of the war, and a call for more transparent discussion about the true aims and consequences of extended military engagement in the region.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So over the past twenty four hours, president Trump says we've won the war against Iran, and he wants this war in Iran wrapped up quickly. Great. So pack up your shit and get the hell out of there. We would love that. But, of course, the reality is Israel doesn't want this war wrapped up quickly.
We know that. They want the entire government structure of Iran destroyed. And the only way to do that, of course, is with boots on the ground. You cannot have regime change with air strikes. It's never worked in the history of aviation, so it's not gonna happen in Iran.
If Israel truly wants this, they can't do it alone. Of course, their army is only about a 170,000 active duty soldiers. And then if you roll in all of their reservists, about a 150,000 reserve soldiers, Iran's army is triple that size. So they need The United States. They need American soldiers and boots on the ground.
And now senators are openly warning that this could lead to American boots on the ground. Here's senator Richard Blumenthal after a private briefing with the White House this week. Watch.
Speaker 1: I am most concerned about the threat to American lives of potentially deploying our sons and daughters on the ground in Iran. We seem to be on a path toward deploying American troops on the ground in Iran to accomplish any of the potential objectives here.
Speaker 0: So as part of the new National Defense Authorization Act, of course, the involuntary draft has been renewed as part of this. Of course, Congress would have to step in and fully approve it. But by the end of this year, an involuntary draft could take place in The United States. We talked to the great Dan McAdams yesterday from the Ron Paul Institute about this piece. This is a piece that he is most concerned about watching.
This war is very, very obviously unconstitutional. You're going to be forced now, to to be in a situation where you will be automatically registered for the draft. And a lot of people are salivating at the idea, of of starting a draft, of sharing the burden. You know, the problem with this is doctor Paul says is that presumption is that the government owns you, that owns your body, that you are a slave. And that just simply isn't the case.
Of course, that's terrifying, but it's also something something's got to give here. Either the Trump administration says enough is enough. We're happy with this new Ayatollah. Or Israel says, we're going all in because we're not stopping. So nuclear war, perhaps.
Again, it appears America and Israel do not appear to want the same outcome in this at this stage, or maybe they never did. And they don't really appear to be on the same page at all. So Trump at least publicly seems to want this over fast, but Netanyahu's government is talking about something much bigger. Sources in Israel have told us that the real goal in Southern Lebanon, that bombing is to create a demilitarized zone, very similar to Gaza. In other words, Israel wants to turn Southern Lebanon into the Gaza Strip, devoid of Hezbollah and devoid of presumably human life as well.
Speaker 2: Meanwhile, in we would like to remind you that in June 2025, our guest, Tucker Carlson, warned about a war with Iran, and his warnings were not heated. We're gonna talk to him in just a moment, but let's take a look at the a few of the things that he predicted. Number one, he warned that a war with Iran would be hard because they have a well stocked arsenal of ballistic missiles aimed at US bases and energy infrastructure of our allies, and they would use them in those directions. That would be bad. There's victory lap number one.
We're about to give him number two. He warned that this would further ally Iran with China and Russia because it would turn those countries against The US. There is victory lap number two. Now the third victory lap that we'd like to offer him when he comes up in a second is that he predicted that Trump voters would feel betrayed by this, and it could end his preg not pregnancy, presidency. Of course, I don't hate Trump, but I don't care at all what happens to his presidency.
I care what happens to the American people. So, Tucker Carlson, without further ado, thank you for joining us on Redacted today. We're gonna give you an opportunity for those victory laps and give you an opportunity to let us know how do you think this is gonna play out for the American people given the prescience of your tweet almost a year ago.
Speaker 3: Oh, gosh. I wouldn't give myself credit for prescience. I I think it was also obvious, and the effects were so predictable. The disruption to global energy supplies, the effects on The US economy, the end of US military bases probably in some or all of the Gulf States, the loss of control over, the Persian Gulf by The United States, the shrinking of American empire. Mean, you can make a case for all of those things, but this is not the way to do it.
The way it's been done is so damaging to The United States. You have to believe, and I do believe that that was one of the goals, which was to weaken The US and get us out of The Middle East. And, you know, conceptually, that's not you know, I I've never been in favor of American empire because I don't think it helps United States. Okay? It hasn't.
I don't think. However, once you have a global empire and you're responsible for trade routes and you write the rules of diplomacy and war and what we've done for eighty years, there you can't just turn it off in a day or your country will be severely damaged. And I'm afraid that we're moving down that path. Like in five years, who's gonna secure the Straits Of Hormuz? Probably China.
Who will occupy? You know those now damaged and destroyed bases? I don't know. I'm just guessing. I hope I'm wrong, but it wouldn't shock me if it were China more immediately.
Who's going to bring an end to this conflict? It can't go on forever because this is the center of global energy and not just energy petrochemicals at fertilizer, you know, things countries actually need the non negotiable things, resources. And so world has an interest in ending this, particularly Asia, South Korea, Japan, China. They're all dependent on on this energy. So, like, who brokers the peace here?
It's not The US. We don't have diplomacy anymore. We're so discredited. Our diplomacy is seen by the rest of the world as, like, a cover for war. This is all like a sneaky attempt to, you know, launch a sneak attack.
And whether that's true or not, you know, you pray it's not true, but everyone thinks it's true, so we're not gonna negotiate an end to this. I don't know. The losses for The US are so sad that I just can't take a victory lap. I just feel depressed.
Speaker 0: Yeah. It is absolutely depressing because so many pieces are moving at once with The US economy right now. Fertilizer prices skyrocketing, food prices set to go up. We already see inflation, the numbers over the past twenty four hours going up. So all of this is gonna be hitting the, you know, the American family pretty hard, who was already hit very, very hard.
And we just got this statement. I wanna read to you. I'm sure you've already seen it. Iran's, new leader. Khomeini just released the first statement, as supreme leader, released it to Iranian television.
It was it was red. He didn't appear on video or anything like that. But among the points that he made, the Strait Of Hormuz will be shut down forever until The United States begs, basically. We will not ignore the blood of our martyrs. They will be avenged, basically an eye for an eye.
We are not an enemy of the countries around us. We'll we're only targeting American bases, he said, but bombs are raining on your neighbors anyway as a result of that. Close all US bases in the region or we will attack them all. And he calls for total Iranian unity. He says, we will not forego avenging the blood of the martyrs.
Every citizen killed by the enemy is a case for vengeance in itself. So it doesn't sound like they're done even though president Trump yesterday said we've won this war. It doesn't sound like this is over anytime soon.
Speaker 3: I mean, it was certainly doesn't. And Trump yesterday suggested we might use nuclear weapons in Iran. So, no, those are escalatory remarks. They're they're not, you know, consensus seeking remarks. However, you know, that country, maybe not this country, but certainly Iran seems to have lots of different factions.
And, of course, you know, they just threw the board in the air. A lot of people were killed. Like, it's not exactly clear who's running the country, who's making the key decisions. But my impression is there are different factions and some, you know, seek some sort of negotiated settlement sooner rather than later. But clearly, there are a lot of people there after all the civilian deaths, after the killing of their religious leader, and after the failed diplomacy who, you know, wanna fight till the end.
The question is, what does that mean? And I just worry that, you know, Israel is gonna find itself in a position where, you know, it it uses weapons of mass destruction. I'm not even attacking Israel, by the way. It's nine it's the size of New Jersey. So, you know, you can see why they would feel threatened.
I don't think they should ever use nuclear weapons. I think The United States should tell the Netanyahu government absolutely not. In fact, we're gonna secure Damona. We're gonna secure nuclear sites. You're not allowed to use nuclear weapons because that could begin a cascade that ends the world.
So you're not allowed to do that, actually, Netanyahu. But you do understand how if their cities are getting bombed and The United States can't stop that from happening and they run on a missile defense or adequate missile defense and maybe the bombing moves to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv. I mean, you can see this getting super radical, which is one of the main arguments I made against starting it in the first place. You don't control it once it starts. There are other, you know, there are other players here.
I didn't realize it was gonna be a joint operation with a country that believes in Amalek. You know, whoever made that decision should be in jail. Yeah. When was the last time the US military partnered on a decision making level with another country in a war? Like, that's crazy.
You can have symbolic partners, but you can't have a partner who has coequal decision making authority because your interests are different. And you could wind up harming your own interests and those of the world very gravely. So you don't do that because you can't make a clear decision. And I think that we're not far from that right now. Like, their goals have always been different from our goals.
Trump was convinced they had a nuclear program. I thought that was silly, but he seemed to believe it. He was also under immense pressure from the Israelis to do this because they're gonna do it anyway as the secretary of state revealed. That's true. But I I don't think there was any evidence that Trump wanted, you know, to commit ground troops to Iran or some protracted war over, you know, the killing of a religious leader or Amalek or these weird end times fantasies that, honestly, both sides are engaging in, the Israelis, especially, just being honest.
Amalek? Are you kidding? How how can but by the way, western civilization has no place for Amalek.
Speaker 0: Can you explain to our audience if if someone's watching it and have no idea what the hell what the hell that is? It's absolutely insane.
Speaker 3: So Amalek is there are many references to Amalek in what we call the Old Testament, Jews who call the Torah. And Amalek has referenced the Amalekites who are the historic enemies of the Jewish people and who I think pursued them as they fled slavery in Egypt.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 3: So there are many references to it, but the critical reference is in first Samuel 15 in which God commands the Jews to kill the Amalekites, Amalek, all of them. And I mean, literally kill all of them. Men, women, children, infants, I'm quoting now, sheep and camels. All trace the Amalek of Amalek disappeared. Genocide.
Actually, literal genocide. Like, they never existed. So the Jews, their leader, I think it was Samuel, fails. He leaves some alive, and he doesn't kill all the camels. And God punishes him for not wiping Amalek off the face of the earth.
So whatever you think of that as the theological matter or moral matter, that's in the text. Christians reject it completely. There's no Christian concept of Amalek. Genocide is alien to Christianity. It's anathema to Christianity.
It's a grave sin. Murdering innocence is a grave sin in Christianity. That's not the theology of Netanyahu. He has used the term Amalek repeatedly since October 7, including on the day that the bombing started in Iran and described the Iranians as Amalek. So here you have the supposedly western leader in like a necktie and like a western haircut.
He kinda looks like maybe he's from Europe or The US, But his attitudes are not Western. They're Eastern. They're medieval. They're primitive. They're scary.
They're genocidal. And we know that not because we hate him and we're making up things he said because we're listening to him say Amalek repeatedly to his people and to the world. So the idea that that guy is your partner or your friend or your ally or any kind of person you'd even wanna have dinner with is insane. That person's way more dangerous. Who's more dangerous than that?
To for a head of state to say out loud, our job here is to kill everybody, including their children, because the bloodline itself must be extinguished. You know, I'm very opposed to Hitler. Okay? Just saying. I don't think Hitler ever said anything like that.
I'm serious. I mean, killed a ton of people, a ton of Jews, of course. But I don't think was Hitler ever on the record saying we need to exterminate every single member of a specific bloodline? I maybe. I haven't read it.
Netanyahu just said that last week.
Speaker 2: He did.
Speaker 3: And he said it many other times. This is bonkers.
Speaker 2: Yes. I wanna ask you about influence inside the White House because as someone who follows the conversation online, and you've said so this week, that you visited the White House several times. I think you said three in the last year. And every time that gets reported on Twitter, that feels like a sow's to my soul because I think there's an adult in the room. There's someone who is part of the anti war faction that does have connections in the White House.
And it plays out very much like a Game of Thrones because we can't put the horse back in the barn because the war did go forward. And so we are left wondering, is Trump really the Joffrey Baratheon here, or are there many Littlefingers? Maybe you don't watch Game of Thrones, but the Littlefinger character is very much the
Speaker 0: You forget Tucker
Speaker 2: doesn't tour.
Speaker 0: Doesn't own a television. Right.
Speaker 2: Okay. I don't know if you know these characters or not. Do you know what I mean by Littlefinger is this sort of smarmy saboteur who is getting bad things to happen and and puppeteering people in power
Speaker 0: AKA Lindsey Graham.
Speaker 2: Or Laura Bloomer, kind of so what is your take on how many of those archetypes are in the White House?
Speaker 3: Well, that's an interesting question. I mean, I was there three times actually in a month, in the month preceding the war and talked to the president by phone a bunch of times. So I definitely talked a lot to him about this, and my views haven't changed in ten years. I think I thought then, I think, now that The US getting into a war with Iran would be a disaster for The US. That that's my concern.
I'm not a secret Shiite, but I am an American. So, I just have the same position I've always had. Trump had that position too, as you well know. So the question is how did this happen? I don't I mean, I don't work there.
So obviously. So I don't really know, and I don't wanna pretend I know more than I do. But my impression is that there weren't a lot of prominent people in the White House pushing for this. As far as I understand, again, be wrong, but I understand most of the principles, you know, the people with the big jobs at the White House understood the risk. I think the president understood the mean, he did understand the risk.
And generally, and I don't think any of them were pushing for it. I think all the pressure or most of the pressure came from the outside. It came directly from Netanyahu. And in the end, my impression is what was decisive was Netanyahu's threat to just do it anyway. And meanwhile, you've got, like, a million Americans living in the Middle East, and you've got all these bases on the Gulf Of The Gulf Of Arabia, Persian Gulf.
And you've got Israel with which we have an implied defense guarantee. And so you have a lot of US assets and Americans downrange from the Iranian response. So I think the the idea was, well, now we have to go. Well, that raises the really obvious question, which is like, well, why would Israel be in charge of that decision? Israel is a proxy.
It's a client state. I mean, they they wouldn't exist except for The United States. They wouldn't have nuclear weapons if they hadn't stolen the material from The United States, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. It's not an attack in Israel. It's just an acknowledgment that a country of 9,000,000 is not allowed to boss around a country of 350,000,000 because that's crazy.
But that's what happened. And so why did nobody call Netanyahu and say, listen, son, you know, I understand you like Iran, get it. They funded Hezbollah, get it. But you can't go to war with them because this is the main route through which global energy flows. So we have an interest, the world has an interest.
Moreover, we have all these assets there. So this affects us, and we're saying no. And as far as I know, and I definitely have asked a lot that was never under consideration. And so the final question is, Well, why? Why would it not be the obvious first step to constrain a client state when it was about to do something that hurt you?
Why is that off limits? Why are you not allowed to do that? And, you know, we can only guess and some of the guesses are very dark and they may be true. I can't prove it, but you have to ask yourself, like, what force could be that powerful that a president, knowing this is not gonna help him or his nation, does it anyway? And, you know, I don't know the answer.
And if I did, would just say it.
Speaker 0: You talk about the, you know, collective punishment and
Speaker 3: It's disgusting.
Speaker 0: I think we're we're sort of crossing a Rubicon now in The United States, and it really it sort of terrifies me. Do you think that The US is drifting into, like, a moral framework that it doesn't even recognize in itself anymore. Are
Speaker 3: we become are are we adopting the ethics of the Israeli government? Yeah. Obviously. And, obviously and and by the way, I don't you know, Israel's a very complicated topic and, you know, there are 9,000,000 people live there, and not all of them agree with this stuff. But the Israeli government has been moving ever more openly toward this policy where, you know, I don't like the guy, but I'm also gonna kill his kids because they could grow up to be that guy.
And that is the antithesis of Western civilization. That's the distinction between East and West. Western civilization, Christian civilization rejects that. That's not just like a piece of our civilization. That's the foundation stone of our civilization.
That's why we don't put families on trial for the crimes of the father, whereas other countries do. But we don't. We never have. We never can because that's the opposite of justice. Like that, this is the most basic concept in the West.
God created each person's individual, and as an individual, you'll be judged for what you do, not for what your ancestors did, not for what your children did, for what you did. The primacy of the individual created by God, the existence of the individual soul, that's the basis of what we used to call human rights. Human rights apply to whom? Humans. All of them.
By virtue of the fact they're human. That's where the rights come from, from God because he made humans in his image. It's literally the basis of everything that we have. And so subtly over time due to kind of, you know, the normal decadence inspired stupidity of rich countries, we kinda forgotten that. And you wake up one morning and like, oh, it's okay to kill an entire group of people because you don't like what some of them did.
And at the same time, we're screaming about how antisemitism is wrong. Well, why antisemitism is wrong? I agree. Why? Because it is always wrong to blame people for things they didn't do to hold them accountable for their bloodline.
And so anti Semitism is absolutely wrong, and it's precisely as wrong, no more, no less than hating Arabs for being Arabs or hating whites for being whites, which is the most common form of bias in this country. It's embedded in our government against hating blacks for being black. It's all the same. And yet the same people who are constantly telling you that antisemitism is the greatest threat have actively abetted anti white discrimination for, like, sixty years. Like, the ADL is fully on board with keeping people from getting jobs or college admissions or federal grants because they're white.
So then you, like, reach the conclusion. They don't care about human rights. They don't acknowledge their existence. They believe in tribal rights. My tribe gets these rights.
Yours doesn't. That attitude, precisely that attitude will destroy The United States. First of all, it's totally against Christianity. It's totally against Western civilization, But it also is a practical matter is the road to violent civil war.
Speaker 0: And maybe the moral part of this is if you can remove yourself, you can remove the human element of it, and you can, of course, then use AI or autonomous targeting of
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 0: You know, these individuals. Right? And so that is a concern that certainly is top of mind after the the targeting of the, Min Minab Girls School strike. And whether or not AI machine assisted targeting played any kind of role in it where it sort of absolves us of, like, the moral conundrum here. And we can say, oh, it was AI.
It was a mistake. It was you know, we we can't really, have our hands in that. It was humans weren't involved in that because it was AI. It was Palantir, whatever it was. Have you in your massive connections and any kind of discussions you've had with maybe sources in the White House have heard that maybe AI was in any way involved in in that?
Speaker 3: Well, actually, it's funny you said that. I don't know much about much, but I I'm interested in this subject and I've and I know people involved in it, so I've definitely learned about it over the past six months. And, yes, there there are examples of ongoing wars, not any I'm aware of in this war, but in other conflicts ongoing where targeting decisions have been made by machines with no human sign off. So I find that, like, one of the most shocking things, and that's a fact.
Speaker 0: With no human sign off?
Speaker 3: That's correct. That's correct. I mean, I you know, I mean, the data are input into the you know, I mean, I think the targets are loaded or something, but, like, the at the end stage, it's just like, you know, identify kill. And so that to me is like a profound change and really, really distressing. It's like it's like the pager attacks, you know, a 100 x, you know, pager attacks where we just we put bombs in these pagers, and then they they kinda circulate and we hope that they blow the legs off the right people, but there's no way to know.
That's not acceptable. That's a an acts of terror. And and, yes, I'm aware that, like, bad people were killed, but innocent people were killed. So that's an act of terror in my view. I mean Yeah.
Not by my view. That's by def definitionally, it's an act of terror. I think it's very closely related to autonomous weapons, and you saw this really interesting argument of fight break out between a big AI company and the administration right before the Iran war. And the company made the case that, look, we are not into two things. We are not into autonomous weapons, and we're not into mass surveillance in The United States, and they lost their contracts famously.
And it was there was so much going on at the time that I didn't look quite closely enough into it, but I have since. And I do think those are the sticking points. And maybe I'm being misled, but I believe that's right. Autonomous weapons and mass surveillance in The US, both of which are totally unacceptable, both under our constitution and under our existing moral framework. So but as to the bombing of the girls school attached to the Iranian military base, I actually called around today on that because I'm really bothered by it.
And the response that I got was, yes, AI is involved in all of this, but under current protocol and in this specific case, a human being pressed play on this. Okay. So there was a human. Here's the question. Where the coordinates come from?
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 3: Right. Who fed those coordinates to the United States military? This was the United States military now. We know that most of our SIGN, our signals information, or electronically gathered information from Iran is translated by Israel because they're our partner in this venture. Well, we have two different aims.
Israel wants a total destruction of Iran. And at this point, I think The United States, I I can say, kinda just wants to get out. So Israel has every incentive to encourage The United States, you know, intentionally or not, to do things that cross the point of no return where a diplomatic solution is really not possible. One of them would be killing the head of Shia Islam who's 86 and like has prostate cancer. Why would you do that?
That'd be one. Once you kill their religious leader, you're kinda all in. And another would be at least potentially killing the daughters of Iranian naval officers. And so I I don't know that that happened and I don't want to suggest that I do because I don't. But as this is investigated, I hope the question of where the targeting coordinates came from is raised and answered because they certainly had motive to do that because, again, it's not even an attack on Israel.
Their goals are different from ours. And so to partner with a country in a war that has a different endgame than you do is one of the craziest things this country's ever done.
Speaker 2: Well, right. And if you as you've made the case beautifully over the last week, if Israel is trying to sabotage the American government to get them to leave the region and no longer be a competitive superpower, which would mean that they don't have our best interests at heart, then this technology, which is born and used in Israel first and foremost, you know, the the Palantir Maven software is used to track people in coordination with DataMiner, can also cross check your social media and target you. And so the things that we've worried about the most have come to fruition, being led into a war by our model ally, according to the Department of War. And so what we worry about next is that it will be targeted towards us. And that seems like a real possibility that your social media will target you as someone to be tracked in order to and can you play out worst case scenario?
Because we already are in one, what would be the next?
Speaker 3: Well, I mean, you know, big picture, it's just always true everywhere that war changes societies faster than anything else. It's a great accelerant of social change, and a lot of the big social changes in our society over the past couple hundred years grow out of the changes during war. And some good, some bad, but always big. And one of the changes you see in every side, you've seen it in Israeli society. The Israel of 2026 bears no resemblance as a visitor to the Israel that I visited in years past.
It's just a different seems like a different country, different attitudes, different people. One of the reasons for that is a seven front war. You know, if you're constantly fighting wars and people are dying, you know, your tolerance for brutality, your anger at the people you're fighting, everything about your attitudes changes very, very fast. They harden, and you become much more tolerant of atrocities than you would be in peacetime. That's just a fact.
And you become much more tolerant of hurting your own citizens, people who disagree. I mean, you saw this in Great Britain during World War two. Winston Churchill, who I know were required to, you know, deify, presided over the imprisonment of his opposition party during the entire length of the war and their families and their wives. They're rotting in prison away from their little kids. In some cases, they're infants.
And their crime was being the opposition party and being disloyal and unpatriotic. They weren't. The opposition party was led by a first World War war hero who fought not just as, you know, a pilot in the sky, but and in the trenches, like one the great war heroes for a member of parliament. The country ever produced, and he and his wife and his compatriots and their wives were interned without charges by Winston Churchill for the duration of the war. And that happened in Britain, which is, like, much more humane than a lot of places.
So, you know, we should not FDR interned the Japanese, including American citizens. That stuff happens during war. And so I think we should be on guard for sure. I don't wanna be paranoid or, you know, creeped out or or inspire paranoia or fear in other people, but I think it's worth worrying about it. And rule by technology is clearly one of the goals.
I mean, what what else is the end game? If the US government doesn't spend, relatively speaking, much time trying to improve the lives of the people who pay for it, like the citizens of the country, you either get some kind of revolt or people like this isn't working. Why would I why would I pay my taxes? Why would I put up with this? Or you respond to people's legitimate concerns, make a good faith effort to make their lives better, or you use technology to enslave them and shut them down so their opinions don't matter.
Those are kind of the three options. I'm hoping for number two, but, but you can certainly see the incentive to use technology against Americans to stop their bitching. I saw today, who's the guy with the eyebrows on Facebook?
Speaker 0: Oh, Ben Shapiro? Ben Shapiro?
Speaker 3: I'm so sorry to be mean. Yes. Ben Shapiro was was calling everybody who disagrees with him left and right because it's a horseshoe theory. Mean, he's sort of right about that, actually. But the, the party of discontent or the party of complaining you're complaining.
Yes. Why are complaining so much? The guy's like, got a 105 IQ, and he got into Harvard. So it's like, I'm thinking he might have been the beneficiaries with special treatment. He and Bill Ackerman both both went to Harvard, and they're both kinda dumb.
So it just tells you that this is you know, these are the people who run the country. This is the ruling class. Every nation has one. But to get a lecture from them about how you've got it easy. Stop complaining.
Speaker 0: Yes. Right. And I and and, Elway, I'm supposed to comp I'm supposed to be compliant because there's no outrage from Ben Shapiro or the others about, you know, that we're, you know, handing we're turning into, know, with the central bank digital currency or as Catherine Austin Fitz is so rightly put about the control grid, and we're handing over all of our data to these big tech oligarchs, and no one's speaking out against it. We're supposed to just be compliant and not complain. Shut up, you little you know?
I mean, really? Okay.
Speaker 3: Yeah. I mean, I I think I've thought a lot about it over the I mean, I wrote a book about this almost ten years ago. Like, what has gone wrong in The United States? And my first thought was, well, the you know, we have a ruling class. This is supposed to be an egalitarian country.
Well, there is no egalitarian country. There's a ruling class in every country. Always from the beginning of time to the end of time. So the question is not, do you have a ruling class? You do.
The question is, how do they feel about the people they rule? And I think the key difference between the people in charge now and the people in charge six sixty years ago is the people in charge now really dislike the population. And I think it's obvious in the results in declining life expectancy and the degradation of physical health and twenty percent of white girls are on OnlyFans or just name your measurement. It's like there's an intentional degradation, an intentional abandonment of the population that can only be attributed to loathing and contempt. And I think that's really scary.
And so people who hate you probably predisposed to hurt you if they can. And if they have the technology to make it easy to do that, to constrain you from talking or expressing your opinions or having certain thoughts or going certain places, like, they'll probably use that technology in order to do it. Right? I mean, you can't assume any goodwill from people like that.
Speaker 2: Absolutely. You just can't.
Speaker 0: No. And you can't accept accept any goodwill or expect any goodwill from the mainstream media at all. And the propagandists in the mainstream media is something that we all all three of us actually know really, really well. So, we're gonna take a quick break. Grab an Alp pouch, if you have one.
Grab grab a beverage of your choice, and we're gonna just take a quick break.
Speaker 2: I got a water bottle.
Speaker 0: And we're gonna come back and talk about media propaganda, and how they're selling this war. We'll do that in a second. Our guest is Tucker Carlson, so we'll be back with him in just a second. 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 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 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 metals with a qualified purchase.
Speaker 2: Alright. We're gonna talk about mainstream TV and its pro war factions. Basically, everything that you get on the boob tube will sell you this war. Now we have Tucker Carlson as a guest today. Clayton warned me Tucker doesn't watch TV, so don't use a lot of pop culture reference.
So Tucker, I just, cut four inches off my hair today. And I said, I will keep cutting my hair and pull a Mulan if they try to draft my son. And Clayton said, Tucker's not gonna get that reference. Mulan? No?
Speaker 0: It's a Disney reference. No idea.
Speaker 3: Alright. No idea. But I'm I was thinking both about cutting your hair, and I need a new wig, obviously, myself. And then drafting your son, I mean, that's so it's you know, I don't think that would by the way, there's gonna be no draft. Who would join?
Who would obey? Some, I guess, people took the COVID shot, but I think they would have to give the slots to illegal aliens. They have to arm foreign nationals. A lot of people wanna do that.
Speaker 2: Which may have been the plan all along.
Speaker 3: I agree with that.
Speaker 2: So I mean, what the reference is is Mulan is the Chinese story of the of the young girl who cut off all or who went to war in place of her dad. And so that all that to say, if they try and take my son, they're gonna get a fiery five foot two Latina instead.
Speaker 3: I bet.
Speaker 2: Because they will not take my boy for a war based on this lie. So let's talk a bit about propaganda. Because this week, you had a show about this propaganda that's being used to sell the war. The White House is now resorting to using pop culture, movies, video games. Here's one they put out today, which is basically the Nintendo Wii.
It really is conveying the idea that the US military is heroic and unstoppable, and that human life is nothing more than a video game avatar. I find this very insulting. But this is not new, and I brought an artifact to show this. During World War two, the Treasury Department literally hired Disney to teach Americans that paying taxes was patriotic because it bombed it it bought bombs and tanks. Now it's amazing to watch this.
We're just gonna, show a few seconds, but you can watch the whole seven minutes if you just search for the new spirit 1942. And here is Donald Duck telling us we need to pay taxes to beat the Axis. Watch.
Speaker 4: Your country is at war. Your country needs taxes for guns, taxes for ships, taxes for democracy, taxes to beat the axis. I'm poor. Taxes to break the axis.
Speaker 2: So my question to you is, will it work this time? It does not seem to be working.
Speaker 3: No. Of course, it won't work. I mean, because, by the way, propaganda only works if there's a predicate for it. You gotta lay the foundation for the propaganda, which you then repeat taxes against the Axis, but that assumes you know who the Axis is and why it's bad. But I don't think that anyone has even bothered to explain why we should be taking military action against Iran.
Yeah. They might have nukes, but then you told us in June that we eliminated that threat. So, like, what is this? I don't really understand what and again, I felt like I was fairly close to it, but I still never have understood why The US population was never brought on board or no one even made a good faith faith effort to bring them on board. And I find that a little more chilling because the message is it's not even worth propagandizing you.
It's not even worth lying to you. We're just gonna do it anyway because what are you gonna do about it? That's the vibe that I got, anyway. And that would be, you know, a big change.
Speaker 0: Why do you think so many TV news anchors, the mainstream media are so comfortable right now sort of repeating the government lines in real time without any sort of checks on it whatsoever. No one's really questioning how this war ends, what is the goal, what is the endgame, the embedded sort of Pentagon media that is, you know, now inside the Pentagon. There I I call it, like, access journalism, which just infuriates the hell out of me because it's like the Fox News' of the world, MSNBCs, the NBCs, or whatever that want to have interviews with high profile members of the administration. And so the only way to really do that, of course, is to just kiss their ass and to not ask the tough questions instead of have them on on a regular basis in that capacity. But there no one's really asking the tough questions about how this thing ends.
What is the what is the timetable for getting out of this? What does the off ramp look like? There's, to me, total media malpractice. What do you what do you see?
Speaker 3: I mean, it's there you know, because you worked there for so long. It's a lot of things. One is just shallowness. You know? These are people who know that their jobs are a lot less significant than viewers imagine they are.
They're just reading some script. Right. So it's kind of exciting to be talking about something big and historically important like a war, and you have no sense what that actually looks like. No one's ever actually seen a war. Those who have are a little less anxious to talk like that, but most of these people haven't.
Some of them are not super geniuses. Well, they're pretty nice, but they just don't know what they're talking about. The other factor is they know it's the red line. That's the red line. Like, you could you could get on TV, you know, there's so much, like, pretending that the red line is about race.
And, like, if got on TV and said, actually, black people commit an awful lot of crimes that I'd be fired. It's like, not really, actually. Not really. Nobody really cares. If you get on TV and say something like, why are we supporting Ukraine in a war against Putin?
Like, why should we be enemies with Putin? Right. Like, the war stuff's not a joke. That's what they really, really care about. And I just know that from extensive experience.
Then the question is, well, why is that the one thing they really care about? Why was Rupert on Murdoch on the phone with Trump constantly for the past year begging him to start a war with Iran, which he was. That's right. And why are his media outlets, the New York Post, the Wall Street Journal, and then most obviously Fox News, relentlessly pushing for this? And I mean pushing in a monochromatic way that there's not there was one person whose name I don't wanna mention because I don't wanna hurt this person who asked one question like, really?
Is this really a good idea? And that, you know, person's never addressed the topic again. They're very serious about this question. And the the question is like, why is that? Why is this your red line?
Killing people in faraway countries. I don't really know the answer, and I've spent a lot more time than most people pondering this. I know a lot of people involved or most of them, and I still don't really get it. And I feel like there's a spiritual element to this. Like, killing other people makes you feel godlike.
I do think that. I mean, I watched Lindsey Graham, and you can tell it's like his his psyche shattered by sodomy. He just, like, he's desperate to to to get the power that fills you when you know you're taking human life. I really think that.
Speaker 0: Yeah. It's the same way. I just wanna follow-up with that, which is like Mark Liven. Like, if I were still working at Fox, and if I had gone on social media and said, hey, we need to kill the head of a foreign country, and I repeated it loudly in all capital letters on a regular basis. If I say, you know, kill this person, kill that person, I have a feeling I would have received a phone call from the powers that be at Fox and said, I'm sorry, either knock it off or you're fired.
But for Mark Levin, who's, you know, on the payroll, it doesn't matter and just amplified. I don't understand that.
Speaker 3: Well, it's more than that too because, I mean, Mark Levin, whatever you think of him, is is talentless and was never successful in television at all, and Hannity got him that job on the weekends. It never rated. It doesn't rate now. Nobody watched it just because he's not good at TV. And that's which is fine, you know, but he's not.
And everyone knows that. Professional TV people look at Mark Levin. They're like, no. You're not getting a show. Sorry.
And yet he has, through partly force of will, but also other forces that I'm not sure I can identify, come to define the network. Like, he's don't have a TV, as you said, but I keep here. I'm fascinated by this question. He's apparently all over the channel all the time. That was not true when we worked there.
You don't put Mark Levin on your show. Why would you do that? Hannity did. Levin has some weird control over Hannity. I'd love to know more about that, but I don't.
But he's on other people's shows. And I just think it's amazing. They're basically hurting their own business in order to promote this war. And that's a that's a pretty powerful statement.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Yeah. That is a great point. He he he is like a pawn show he's like a pawn shop salesman. Like, if you look at him, you'd think, oh, that guy runs a pawn shop.
He doesn't have a TV show. Sorry, Gunn.
Speaker 2: Well And he's
Speaker 3: angry and unpleasant, unattractive, and he's not super articulate actually or interesting. It's like, I can think of a lot of I mean, like, you work in TV, you know what a good host is. That guy is the opposite. He's just not good. Even if I greeted him, I'd say that.
Speaker 2: Yeah. But why don't we look at it from the other end too? Because Fox News, for whatever reason, is going full force into this war. Last summer, we were watching when bombs were hitting Tel Aviv, and Harris Faulkner said, Iran is doing this because they want to eradicate all Jews from the planet. And I was like, what a stupid thing to say.
No context that Israel had fired first. That's their line. It's completely ignorant. But the radical left is aligned with this war too. And I just really wonder how this happens.
Now, I read Rachel Maddow's first book, Drift, and it is a condemnation of forever wars and a reminder of the human cost. Now fast forward ten years later, and she publishes prequel, which is a condemnation of the anti war movement during World War two, and she lumps in mothers like me who don't want their kids drafted with Nazis. How does that happen? I know you you knew her at one time. I just really don't understand how ten years goes by and you are warning about the dangers of endless war and then all of a sudden, you're warning about the dangers of anti war movements.
What do you think happens to someone when they gain power in the media that would switch your brain so drastically?
Speaker 3: Tribalism. That's what the and that's the point of whipping up tribalism because it short circuits people's brains. Watched with Naomi Wolf, who I love, was like a great person, and I agree with her on everything, except this. And all of a sudden, she's calling me an anti Semite and texting me, why are you an anti Semite? And I'm like, I actually hate anti Semitist, so I'm not an anti Semite.
Yes. You are. And it's because people get terrified that their group is going to be hurt. And, you know, I get it. I'm not even judging it, but I'm saying this is the fruit of a long term strategy to make people feel insecure insecure and afraid on the basis of group identity because they're much easier to control when they're terrified.
And I saw this exact same thing when I covered black politics thirty years ago, covered Al Sharpton, who I really liked actually. Funny guy, but totally unqualified for anything. He's a criminal. And he would yeah. We'd go to or travel around with Al Sharpton, and no one in poor black neighborhoods a lot of them are like, this guy's a total fraud, but they would never say that.
To, a white person because the feeling was he's a fraud, but we're under attack. Therefore, we have to stick together and not criticize a guy who calls himself our leader. By the way, you see this a little bit with whites, rural whites, Trump. Just being honest. I mean, I actually technically am a rural white.
I live in a I'm white. I live in a rural area. I campaigned for Trump, voted for him. But we just have to be honest that tribalism, which is to say the stoking of primordial fears that my group is gonna get killed by that group, makes us much more obedient to our leaders and much more likely to stick together on the basis of tribal identification and much less interested in, like, reasoned argument or appeals to the common good. It's just a fact.
And I think you're seeing that in part now. And I think I do. I do.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I I think the reason they're telling that we're
Speaker 3: on the verge of pogroms.
Speaker 2: I guess I just thought, does does she have defense contracts that she would publish a book like this after what I thought Drift was quite a prescient book. I don't mean to have used that word twice now. But No.
Speaker 3: It's, it's appropriate.
Speaker 2: Yeah. And now this, and I just don't get it how someone can go so hard in the anti war paint. I just don't understand. So you think it's not just defense contracting money?
Speaker 3: I don't I don't think I would be shocked if Rachel was, like, tied in with Raytheon in any way, though. That may change. Can I suggest another answer? I actually wrote a book about this once, about ten years ago, that I do think that liberals have always hated war, and the sincere liberals have hated it because they don't believe in hurting people and killing the innocent, and that those are the kind of liberals I'm very much on side with. But there were other liberals who didn't like the defense establishment because they thought it was not on their side.
And a lot of them realized under Clinton when he started blowing up baby milk factories and bombing the Serbs that actually war and the war machine could be used on their behalf. And that, actually, if we spend a trillion or a trillion and a half dollars on the Department of Defense, like, that's a lot of power. We should probably take control of that. And it may be that Rachel Maddow sympathizes with the war machine because the modern war machine is populated by people who watch Rachel Maddow. And that's something that non liberals don't really get.
Right. Most flag officers I've run into in the US military. I lived in DC my whole life, so there's everyone's rotating it out of the Pentagon. So run into a lot of military people, like, at dinner. All the not all, but most of the generals and admirals that I sat next to were like Rachel Maddow liberals.
And they all had, like, master's degrees in something stupid from Stanford. They were dumb people. They were almost all dumb people. And but they were compliant, obedient organization type people. They were bureaucrats.
And bureaucrats are liberal because they're broken inside. They seek safety in numbers. The organization's more important than the individual. For all the familiar psychological motives that Ted Kaczynski so brilliant described in his first book, they are liberal. And I think Rachel Maddow, who's smart, knows that, like, the war machine is on her side.
That's just true. It is. It's on her side, which is why they kill so many Christians around the world. It's why they hate Putin. I mean, honestly.
Speaker 2: Yeah. No. You're right. To swallow.
Speaker 0: It is hard to swallow, and it's it's spot on, though. I mean, we've been around these, you know, New York City liberals, these media liberals. I wanna ask you sticking on the media question here, Tucker, before we let you go in a in a few minutes is about this media blackout on a whole host of questions right now in this war. But first and top of mind for me is the number of Americans killed and the number of Americans wounded in this war. On Monday, on our show on the ninth of of March, we reported here according, you know, military source we've been speaking to, that the number of wounded was one hundred and forty seven Americans, and that hadn't that number hadn't come out.
And then the next day, Reuters had an exclusive, which I find, you know, it's very interesting how that works, had an exclusive where they reported a hundred and forty, soldiers wounded. And then the Pentagon responded and says, yes, that's accurate. And then it turns out that those wounded aren't just like they didn't they don't have, like, hangnails, like they got it caught on a piece of cotton on their shirt, like, traumatic brain injuries. Yeah. Their lives forever devastated, of course.
And this is all, of course, being kept. No one was really asking the wounded question. And now we're getting like slow rolling of these numbers out about the American killed and wounded. From your sources and very, very close to the White House, are those numbers accurate? Are you hearing something different?
And why do you think the media is just hiding these numbers?
Speaker 3: Well, I think there are a couple of reasons. And the short answer is I don't know the truth. I would say the media is hesitant to push on this matter for two reasons. One, they support the war because they just support war reflexively because they support big organizations reflexively because they're cowards and weak inside, and they realize that the enemies of the institution are are their enemies. So that's number one.
For the same reason Rachel Maddow supports Raytheon. The second reason is, I think, more legitimate, which is, you know, it's people died, the families. It's like, oh, you don't you don't wanna get you don't wanna do anything disrespectful. There's a kind of moral blackmail when you deal with the government as I have for, like, twenty five years on this question in various conflicts. Like, how many people died?
Like, don't you have an obligation to tell us that? Woah. You know, you're disrespecting the families. And Yeah. Part of that is just, like, a cover for their lying.
They don't want you to know people have been injured. They don't want you to know the cost of this in dollars or in lives. But part of it is kinda real. Like, the last thing you wanna do is make the families feel worse. They feel bad enough.
So I do think it's just a touchy subject as to how many people have died. And by the way, the same with ground troops. So ground troop United States, I don't think has any intention at all ever of sending, like, an Iraq invasion style force into Iran. I just I just don't believe that's gonna happen. Not good on me before we did that.
That that's my impression. But that doesn't mean that there aren't boots on the ground. There aren't special operate, you know, tier one guys on the ground. You know? It doesn't mean that at all.
And those poor guys, some of whom, you know, because we know because they're in media world a lot, so much is put on their shoulders. It's like they actually don't send regular army troops as often as they send Delta Force and various SEAL teams. Like, those guys get used a lot. I would say too much. I think it's terrible for them.
It's obviously risky for them, but it's not good for them. And I wouldn't assume that they're not there, but then on the other hand at all, wouldn't assume that at all. On the other hand, do you really want in the middle of a war to be like, oh, yeah. You know, SEAL team four is here. So I think we're at a huge I feel personally at a huge disadvantage.
I feel much more comfortable saying, when are you gonna get the the Straits Of Hormuz open than I am saying, like, you know, do we have guys on the ground on some island?
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 3: Even if you suspect we do. And the and the last point I would say is there's so much lying and so much censorship, and some of it is on purpose, so much AI designed to deceive you and make you unsure of what you know that, like, you end up thinking, I don't know anything. You know, you read Ben Gavir got killed or the Ayatollah the second Ayatollah is actually dead. You know? Who knows?
Speaker 0: Netanyahu's brother was killed. I mean, I guess that was gonna
Speaker 3: be my
Speaker 0: my next question was about, like, how you know, do we know how what the destruction has been like in Israel? Mean, there's been a total blackout on on his you know, any total blackout on Israeli attacks. What's your sense of of everyday life now for the Israelis?
Speaker 3: I don't I don't know. I'm not quite as popular in Israel as I once was. Don't I'm not quite as well sourced. I do know a lot of people in The Gulf and where it's also illegal, by way, to share social media video of the destruction. And in those six Gulf monarchies, some wonderful people there.
And and I think it's it's you know, varies by country, but I think in some of them, it's pretty tough. Pretty darn tough. The one piece of tape that got my attention that I've been thinking about for, the last five years is video of a missile or a missile segment about a 100 yards from the Dome Of The Rock in Al Aqsa Mosque Complex, and by the way, the Church of Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. And I think the the concern, the global concern, the concern that, like, our descendants will be talking about is the destruction of the Aksamas Complex and the Dome Of The Rock, you know, the gold dome over the foundation stone in Jerusalem that's, like, at the center of two of the three Abrahamic faiths. If that were destroyed in this, you would have a general well, I think you would I think it I don't I don't even know.
But nothing like that has happened in our lifetimes or in our ancestors' lifetimes. Like, that would be the beginning of an a generational global war and and perhaps a nuclear exchange. I mean, that that would be the end. And there are lot of people in Israel who want that. Not a lot, maybe.
I don't know the numbers, but there are certainly prominent figures in Israel who want that. And so I think the second thing the US government has to do in addition to making certain that Israel never launches nuclear weapons against anybody, The second thing they need to do is make sure that the Dome Of The Rock, that mosque, is protected, not because we're Muslims or protecting Islam, but because that would end the world as we know it. So, no, we're not doing that. You know, we're not false flagging Dome Of The Rock. We're also gonna try to protect it from errant Iranian missiles or whatever, but that's a priority.
That's my opinion. I think we should do that because I'm I'm concerned about that.
Speaker 0: You are politically can I ask a question? Are
Speaker 2: you Yeah. Oh, I just wanted to tell you this little anecdote since I know you don't worry about popularity at all. You're really immune to that kind of thing. But let me just tell you this nice anecdote is you you're a California and I'm a Californian. I have a lot of friends that are California live girls who are now sharing videos of Ted Cruz and Mike Huckabee getting absolutely wrecked by you and saying, look at this.
I can't believe I'm sharing Tucker Carlson. And my response is usually, why? What what don't you like about Tucker Carlson? They don't know why. They've just been told not to like you because of the mainstream media.
But look at this new generation that you are inspiring now with your commitment to honesty. So if that's a comfort to you at all, you know, in the popularity that you've lost, you've gained many too.
Speaker 3: Well, thank you. I grew up with the furry armpit ladies making granola in my classroom in first grade. There was a whole whole category of California liberals who I really liked. I I I mean, I made fun of them, but I always liked them. They were sweet people in their tank tops and their god's eyes hanging on their rearview mirrors and everything.
And I hope they're still around because they were they were fundamentally nice people.
Speaker 2: They might be cheering you on again.
Speaker 0: I hope so. It's true. Like, they're saying I've I've been I've been red pilled by Tucker Carlson. Yes. And I like hearing these stories of people that they've been they've been awakened by it all.
Oh, yeah. I guess I guess that's all we've got for you, Tucker. I don't wanna take up more of your time. Thank you, guys.
Speaker 3: It's great to see you.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I it's been great to see you as well and, keep doing what you're doing, the incredible work that you're doing and, and, you know, being one of those I guess, you know, I wanted to ask you real quick before you go because we just saw last night you you follow politics so closely. You know it better than just about anyone. I know what you saw happened with last night with Thomas Massey at Galrain down there with with with Donald Trump in Kentucky. And so after Trump has this rally with Galrain, who gets up on stage and makes some really weird speech, after that, the numbers, the poll numbers shifted for fifth 15 percentage points in Massey's favor.
I don't know how, you know, closely you looked at those polls or not, but I just think to to me that's, that's like a microcosm of this battle right now, what's happening in Kentucky with with congressman Massey versus this sort of war machine. How do you see it?
Speaker 3: I see it as really sad. I mean, I was there, you know, I was standing next to Trump at Mar A Lago when he won. I was with him on stage in the weeks before. I was there the next morning with all the transition guys. I mean, I really felt like I saw that all up close.
I thought it was thrilling. I thought the coalition that he pulled together in last election was, like, a true sign of hope in American politics. People who never voted for Republicans never voted at all, voted for him, young people, you know, black men and Hispanic guys and, like, just Americans all coming together. You know? And I really like that.
And to see the neocons intentionally destroy that coalition because, ultimately, it was a threat them. Anything America First is a threat to people who demand loyalty to a foreign country. They did it on purpose, and they it worked. It worked. And all of a sudden, MTG and Massey are the main enemies or I'm a bigger danger than according to Ted Cruz and any liberal.
Like, what? It was all on purpose. They did it on purpose. They destroyed Trump's 2024 coalition, got him to go along with it somehow, and they just blew it up. And I hope someone rebuilds it.
I hope someone rebuilds a political coalition of normal people who just want their government not to hate them and to make a good faith effort to improve their lives, recognizing it's not easy. We have differing views on how to do it, but we can at least try. It doesn't always have to be about degrading people and putting them deeper into debt and getting their daughters on OnlyFans and invading Iran. Like, that is not a program anyone really wants other than Ben Shapiro. So would like to have a party for people who just want normal, hey.
Let's improve the country politics. And I hope we can have that. You know?
Speaker 0: Imagine that. Imagine that imagine that that's so radical. Remarkable. Oh, man. The great Tucker Carlson, great to see you, my friend.
Thank you for being
Speaker 3: so generous
Speaker 0: with your time.
Speaker 2: Really great.
Speaker 0: Thanks, Oh, I
Speaker 3: love it. Thanks, Tucker. See you guys. See you.
Speaker 2: Follow to your family.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Give my give my best to your lovely family. Alright. Thanks, Tucker.
Speaker 3: Thank you.