TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

She's criticized US intelligence and promoted Russian propaganda. Debbie Wasserman Schultz referred to her as likely a Russian asset. Given our military backgrounds, what are your thoughts on her? I believe she's compromised. Her support for a brutal dictator in Syria raises concerns. Russian media has labeled her a Russian asset, which is alarming. The US intelligence community has noted her troubling relationships with adversaries. My concern is that she wouldn't pass a background check.

The deep state's open support for Al Qaeda and the Islamic State (ISIS) is shocking, especially given their role in the Syrian conflict. Despite claiming to oppose Al Qaeda, the U.S. has provided support to groups aligned with them in Syria, raising questions about the rationale behind such actions. There are concerns about backing the wrong factions, with evidence suggesting that U.S. weapons may have ended up with ISIS. Former officials have indicated that the Obama administration ignored warnings about ISIS's rise, and even John Kerry acknowledged the situation's escalation. Historical parallels are drawn to past U.S. support for Mujahideen in Afghanistan, highlighting the long-term consequences of such interventions. The narrative emphasizes the complexity and contradictions in U.S. foreign policy regarding jihadist groups.

Vladimir Putin is believed to be a war criminal assisting another war criminal in killing his own people. Russia's interference in the 2016 election was detailed in a report by the Republican Majority Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Marco Rubio. Partnering with Putin on cybersecurity is akin to partnering with Assad on chemical weapons. As long as Assad is in Syria, there will be radical elements. Countries that support Assad are accomplices in war crimes. As long as Assad is in power, radical elements will fight against him. Assad should be removed through a combination of Syrian alternatives, not foreign forces. Israel is a strategic ally, and Benjamin Netanyahu defends shared values. Some Democrats are criticized for boycotting Netanyahu's visit to Congress. The Obama administration's nuclear deal with Iran was a mistake. Putin is getting desperate and crushing information with censorship laws and press restrictions. Russia is recruiting fighters from Syria for urban combat in Ukraine, potentially escalating the conflict. Putin will double down and lock down, suppressing dissent. He views human nature manipulatively and aims to restore the Soviet Union. Ceasefires are opportunities for him to reload and pick more targets. Any man in Ukraine who picks up a rifle is now considered a military target.

Normally, a nominee to lead intelligence agencies would have relevant experience. Chelsea Gabbard has none. This is disqualifying, especially considering she's echoed Kremlin talking points on the Ukraine war, promoted Russian propaganda about US biolabs, and praised Bashar al-Assad despite intelligence showing he gassed his own people. Russia Today even calls her "our girl." Republican opposition to such unqualified nominees has, unfortunately, vanished, leaving these terrible choices headed for confirmation. This is disastrous for the country.

Defending Russia's invasion of Ukraine and meeting with figures like Bashar al Assad demonstrates poor judgment. Such actions undermine trust among allies, impacting intelligence sharing. A notable instance was when Donald Trump met with the Russian ambassador and potentially shared sensitive intelligence from a foreign source. This behavior can lead foreign intelligence agencies to withhold critical information, ultimately making Americans less safe. If allies lack trust in U.S. leadership, it poses a significant problem for national security.

The timing of recent events is suspicious, especially with Tulsi Gabbard's appointment as head of DNI. This signals to the deep state a push against Trump's and Gabbard's non-Obama policies. It appears there's an effort to implement a deep state CIA plan in Syria before Trump takes office. The timing is deliberate; significant powers, like Israel, have acted to undermine Assad by targeting military resources in Syria. This coordinated action ensures that Assad lacks the necessary means to respond effectively to these threats.

Senator Kelly questioned Colonel Gabbard about her past statements regarding U.S. support for terrorist groups in Syria, referencing her claims that the U.S. was aiding Al Qaeda while attempting to overthrow the Assad regime. Gabbard expressed her shock at learning about President Obama's programs that armed groups aligned with Al Qaeda, highlighting the consequences of regime change wars in the Middle East. She noted that, while she does not support the Assad regime, the current leadership in Syria consists of Islamist extremists who persecute religious minorities. Gabbard emphasized the importance of Americans knowing that their government was supporting Al Qaeda, asserting that this should be unacceptable.

I've looked into both Assad and the opposition, but the problem is we don't know who the opposition really is. They could be even worse than Assad. We supply them with weapons and resources, but we're essentially in the dark about who they are. Why are we involved in this conflict at all? Of course, getting rid of ISIS is important, but Assad seems like the lesser of two evils. We've backed the wrong side before, and it ended in disaster. Russia seems to support Assad, so maybe we should let them handle ISIS and let them fight it out.

Tulsi Gabbard has met with controversial figures and violated State Department guidelines by secretly visiting Syria to meet with Assad, who has used chemical weapons against his own people. Many view her as a potential Russian asset. Given her position, this raises serious concerns about her access to sensitive intelligence information, which could pose a risk to national security. The implications of her appointment are seen as highly irresponsible.

The Assad regime in Syria has fallen after 13 years of civil war, marking a historic opportunity for the Syrian people to build a better future. The United States will work with regional partners to manage the transition and ensure stability. Iran, Hezbollah, and Russia, previously Assad's main supporters, have weakened significantly due to recent conflicts, including the war in Ukraine and attacks on Israel. The U.S. will maintain its military presence to counter ISIS and support a political transition towards a sovereign Syria with a new government. Vigilance is necessary as some rebel groups have troubling histories. The U.S. remains committed to humanitarian relief and the safe return of American citizens, including Austin Tice. This moment presents both risks and opportunities for a more secure Middle East.

Tulsi Gabbard's potential access to national security information raises concerns, especially given her perceived support from Russia. Her nomination is seen as particularly damaging, more so than Matt Gaetz's. Despite her claims of being anti-war, Gabbard aligns with pro-war figures, particularly regarding Syria. Ultimately, her nomination is viewed as a pro-war stance on a global scale, similar to Donald Trump's presidency.

I was shocked to learn that President Obama had programs to overthrow the Syrian regime. The CIA's Timber Sycamore program armed Al Qaeda to start another regime change war in the Middle East. The DOD's train and equip program spent over half a billion dollars training "moderate rebels" who were actually aligned with Al Qaeda. Regime change wars in Syria, like in Iraq, Libya, and Egypt, risk the rise of Islamist extremists like Al Qaeda. We now have an Islamist extremist in charge of Syria who celebrated the 9/11 attack and is persecuting religious minorities like Christians. Every American deserves to know if our government supported our enemy, Al Qaeda.

There is a significant conflict between Donald Trump, his adviser Steve Bannon, and U.S. intelligence agencies, particularly the CIA. This tension centers on Syria, where the CIA has invested heavily in efforts to overthrow Bashar al-Assad. Trump's campaign policy suggested cooperation with Assad and Russia to combat ISIS, which contradicts the CIA's objectives. This creates challenges for the CIA, as many of its personnel have built careers and alliances with countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey to support the overthrow of Assad.

Wanna get on to Ukraine. But, given that Israel is signaling it doesn't like the, Al Qaeda operative, Jelani in Damascus, and we know Tulsi Gabbard is something of an expert on Syria because she exposed the lies and the, phony war in Syria when The United States was supporting the ISIS and Al Qaeda rebels there. How do you and Trump has been very brave arguably saying, he's not gonna, start sending loads of money like Britain is to Tchelani. There's still thousands of American troops, though, in Syria. What is American Syrian policy Syria policy? America's policy towards Syria is basically Israel's policy. And what The United States was bent on doing was wrecking Syria and keeping it wrecked. That's the Israeli objective here. This is what the Israelis wanna do with Iran. They don't simply wanna do away with Iran's nuclear capability. They surely do wanna do that, but they wanna wreck Iran. They wanna turn Iran into Syria. And what the Israelis are doing in Syria is going to great lengths to make sure that Syria remains, a dysfunctional state. They don't want Syria to become, a formidable adversary. They want it to remain broken. And, of course, The United States will support the Israelis in that regard. So, of course, the Israelis are not gonna allow the Americans to give huge amounts of aid to Jalani so that he can produce a viable Syrian state because that's not Israeli policy. Just look at what they're doing in Iran. I mean, excuse me, what they're doing in Lebanon. It's a similar situation.

In the conversation, Syed Mohammed Marandi, a professor at Tehran University and former adviser to Iran’s nuclear negotiation team, addresses multiple interwoven geopolitical issues, centering on Iran, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and the broader strategic rivalry with the United States and its allies. Syria and ISIS release - Marandi asserts that the Damascus regime, described as al-Qaeda/ISIS-aligned factions, would not tolerate Kurdish forces backed by the United States. He notes prior violence against Alawites, Christians, and Druze as context for the current disturbing images from Syria. - He argues the United States is not a reliable partner for its allies, pointing to past episodes such as Obama’s refusal to support Arbil when ISIS threatened the Kurdish government, and Soleimani’s rapid military response to save the city. - He states that ISIS prisoners have been released in Syria, implying that thousands of ISIS members are now free and could destabilize Syria and possibly Iraq. He emphasizes that both Jolani (an ISIS-linked figure) and the Kurdish groups in northeast Syria are allied to the United States, making it unclear who released the prisoners but suggesting that those actors are aligned with the U.S. - The broader implication is that the release increases instability in Syria and potentially across the region. Border security and spillover fears - The discussion turns to Iraq’s border with Syria, with Marandi weighing whether U.S.-backed jihadist forces might spill into Iraq or Lebanon. He suggests a likelihood that ISIS/Al-Qaeda remnants could be used to pressure Lebanon and Iraq to prevent closer Iranian influence. - He notes that Iran’s potential responses could include its missile and drone capabilities, should security worsen on a front involving its allies in Lebanon and Iraq; however, Iran currently refrains from large-scale involvement in Syria but would consider action if threats to Iran or its allies escalate. Regime change, fragmentation, and U.S.-Israel aims - The conversation shifts to Iran post-riots, with questions about U.S./Israel strategies for regime change. Marandi contends the plan is to destabilize and fragment Iran, not to establish a unified post-regime scenario. - He cites alleged Israeli and Western involvement in organizing riots as evidence of a broader conspiracy to create chaos and justify military action. He claims Mossad and other intelligence agencies were on the ground, and public statements from former CIA officials acknowledged Israeli involvement. - He describes the riot phase as highly organized, with foreign funding (including Bitcoin), online recruitment, and careful targeting of police and infrastructure. He portrays the protests as initially legitimate grievances that devolved into violent chaos fueled by external coordination, with widespread destruction and deaths, including the killing of police officers. - In contrast, he highlights large pro-government demonstrations, especially a national day of demonstrations that he says showed widespread popular support for the Islamic Republic and condemnation of rioters. He points to extensive media coverage highlighting peaceful protests, while arguing that the riot narrative dominated Western coverage. Internal Iranian dynamics and public opinion - Marandi emphasizes the fragmentation among Iranian opposition groups: MEK, monarchists, Takfiri remnants near the Pakistan border, and Kurdish separatists, all of whom he asserts lack credible popular support. - He argues that even if the regime were at risk, fragmentation would prevent any single faction from stabilizing the country post-regime change. He suggests this aligns with his view of broader Israeli aims to weaken and fragment Iran and neighboring states, as seen in Syria and Iraq. Military capability and deterrence - He asserts Iran’s substantial missile and drone capabilities and asserts that Iran could defend allies in Lebanon and Iraq if needed. He notes Iran’s long-term preparedness against U.S. threats, including underground bases and extensive drone/missile stocks. - He contends that if war occurred, it would have wide regional and global economic consequences, potentially destabilizing oil markets and prompting broader geopolitical upheaval. He argues that U.S. restraint may be influenced by the risk of a global economic meltdown. Russia, China, and Starlink - Regarding technological assistance for countering communications, he mentions rumors of Russian or Chinese involvement in aiding Iran's internet disruption and Starlink-related issues, acknowledging uncertainty but highlighting a growing trilateral closeness among Iran, Russia, and China in the face of U.S. pressure. media narratives and leadership - He criticizes Western media for portraying protests as peaceful, while Israeli claims and cyber/disinformation around the events are presented as demonstrations of foreign involvement. He maintains that internal Iranian unity—visible in large-scale demonstrations—contrasts with the portrayal of a fractured nation. - He closes by suggesting that while some European leaders may align with U.S. policies, the overall strategic outlook remains uncertain, with a warning that Trump’s approach could escalate tensions rather than yield stability.

The speaker claims intelligence failures by the Biden administration have led to "world war 4." According to the speaker, Maher Batar, head of intel programs in the National Security Council, prioritizes intelligence collection and once worked for Adam Schiff. A photo allegedly shows Batar wearing Palestinian garb and supporting "Jewish apartheid." Robert Malley, Biden's envoy to Iran, had his security clearance suspended by the FBI. Ariane Tabatabai, allegedly installed in the Department of Defense by Malley, is accused of emailing the Iranian foreign minister in 2014 to request permission to take a trip on behalf of the U.S. government. She is now assistant chief of staff to the Department of Defense's special operations office. The speaker questions why Malley's clearance was suspended and why Tabatabai is still employed by the DOD.

The Biden administration's intelligence priorities are allegedly being set by Maher Batar, head of intelligence programs in the National Security Council. He formerly worked for Adam Schiff and a photo shows him in Palestinian garb in front of a sign supporting Jewish apartheid. Robert Malley, Biden's envoy to Iran, had his security clearance suspended by the FBI. Arianne Tabatabai, who Malley installed in the Department of Defense as assistant chief of staff for special operations, allegedly emailed the Iranian foreign minister in 2014 asking for permission to take a trip on behalf of the U.S. government. These individuals are accused of having ties to the Iranian regime and influencing intelligence priorities away from American interests, potentially intentionally. House Intel has not investigated these matters.

The war in Syria originated not from Bashar Al Assad, but from a decision in Washington in 02/2011 to overthrow Assad, a desire originating from Jerusalem and the Israeli government for over 25 years, with Netanyahu aiming to reshape the Middle East in Israel's image by overthrowing opposing governments. This aligned with the CIA and the U.S. government, leading to Operation Timber Sycamore, a program where the U.S. and regional countries trained rebels, including jihadists, to overthrow the Syrian regime. This resulted in chaos and 600,000 deaths. The CIA's goal in 02/2011 was for a jihad group to take power in Syria after being armed by the U.S. Peace in the region requires real diplomacy, not CIA operations, and an end to Israel's militarization of the Middle East. The Syrian war is one of six wars Israel has promoted, including in Lebanon, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, and Sudan. In 02/2001, Wesley Clark was shown a Pentagon paper outlining a plan for seven wars in five years. The only war that hasn't occurred is a U.S. war with Iran.

Victoria Nuland is a long-term committed NeoCon with an agenda to garrison the entire world with US forces and forcibly convert it to a democracy they approve of. This agenda stems from a deep-rooted animosity towards Russia, which is not shared by most Americans. Wherever Nuland goes, conflict, crisis, and fighting seem to follow. The national security types, like Nuland, are often seen as crazy and filled with hatred due to their family's Holocaust experiences. They view the rest of the world as potential enemies who want to harm them. This is why people fear the deep state in the US. They are perceived as twisted individuals.

It makes me sad and angry to see Protestant Christian churches in the US ignoring the murder and oppression of Christians in the Middle East. It outrages me that US tax dollars might be used to harm Christians. I'm also concerned about the lack of understanding of the region; Syria isn't some remote place—it's strategically vital, right in the heart of everything. I'm against regime change in general, but if we're going to do it, we need to replace the old regime with something better and more stable. After all this, why was I supposed to hate Assad? Why did the media adopt a political strategy to hate him as a moral imperative? It felt like the media was doing the bidding of powerful groups, treating a political strategy as a moral obligation.

Iran has achieved unbelievable success in degrading itself from a first-rate power to a second- or third-rate power. It has been throwing its weight around, exporting terrorism not only across the Middle East but to Venezuela, and it’s in cahoots with the Maduro regime. They are exporting terrorism to America and to the American hemisphere, and they want these Hezbollah and Hamas operatives to get their people into the United States. Hamas and Iran’s proxies are a threat not only to us, but to Israel, all of America's allies in the Middle East, and to America itself.

In a leaked 2012 email, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated that the best way to help Israel is to use force in Syria to overthrow the government. The speaker questions why the American secretary of state would be willing to use American troops and money to overthrow the Syrian government, asserting there is no American interest in doing so. The speaker claims she is doing it to help Israel. The speaker believes this should be considered treason.

The speaker claims the war in Syria began with Obama tasking the CIA to overthrow the Syrian government four years before Russia intervened. They allege the New York Times rarely reported on Operation Timber Sycamore, which was the presidential order to the CIA to overthrow Bashar al Assad. Regarding the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the speaker states the US used phony pretenses and focus groups to sell the war to the American people. They claim Netanyahu wanted the war to topple governments supporting Hamas and Hezbollah, specifically Iraq, Syria, and Iran. The speaker accuses Netanyahu of pushing the US into endless wars and still trying to get the US to fight Iran. They conclude that the terms "democracy versus dictatorship" are not sensible.

If you're on Twitter, be warned: gruesome videos from Syria are circulating, a result of CIA intervention and tax dollars funding "moderate rebels." These rebels are now attacking minority communities that Bashar al-Assad used to protect. Figures like Barry Weiss, John Bolton, the Bushes, Obama, and Hillary Clinton bear responsibility, as this was their CIA project under the Obama administration, aimed at turning Syria into another Libya. They achieved their goal: a failed state with torture and human sacrifice. This could have been prevented, as past interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya failed. The situation worsened after Trump's election. Biden gave the green light before Trump took office. The CIA approached Trump in 2016 to overthrow Assad, but he refused. The corporate media and establishment are also culpable in this disaster.