reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Do you support it or not? If you're going to record, tell people how you feel. I don’t need to answer you. You're harassing people while they’re eating breakfast. I'm here with my baby. You’re coming into a Jewish store. This is kosher food. What you’re doing is wrong. Something bad is coming. Something bad is happening to your friends in Hezbollah and Hamas. They're human beings. Look at the footage from October 7 and tell me they're human beings. One day doesn’t justify years of bombing. Jewish people are evil. You revealed it.

Neo cons like Lindsey Graham are salivating about what's happening in Iran, hoping for a regime change, and the ongoing protests over the weekend gave plenty of fuel to their fire. Let's talk about what's actually happening in Iran right now, because your timeline is being flooded with rage bait and all sorts of fake news clips, old clips. If you've been online the past few days, you've seen the clips that Iran is exploding, cities on fire, the people have risen up, The regime is finished. That's what you're hearing. A lot of that content is either mislabeled, it's years old, it's from a different country entirely, or it's edited to look like it's new, it's actually not. A lot of fact checkers have already tracked down where a lot of people are using older protest video from Iran. Sometimes the video is from totally other countries, but don't let facts get in the way, so it's crazy. This is the same thing, by the way, that happened in Venezuela two weeks ago. All these conservative influencers just keep sharing this stuff. A friend of the show Glenn Greenwald called them out, he's like, hey, just keep sharing all this fake news, like, do you keep putting this out there? So what is real? Well, according to our sources, Iran is going dark digitally on purpose. Other news organizations have reported a nationwide blackout when the Internet goes down or is being blocked. The information war gets turned up to eleven. Gotta fill that void. A lot of fake news, rage bait, and even satellite workarounds right now are getting squeezed. Reports today that Iran is not only shutting down normal Internet traffic, but also attempting to disrupt Starlink connections. We can tell you that Starlink service is being interfered with beyond just the normal basic GPS jamming. Our own sources are telling us that foreign partners are helping Iran with this blackout, China and Russia specifically, helping to jam communications. Satellite phones, satellite internet, and other links that are going out. You're hearing names like Starlink, Iridium, Inmarsat, Theory Theorya. So if those names pop up being blocked. What we can say again according to our own sources is that Iran is in an unusually sophisticated communications clamp down right now, and on purpose. To basically close down prying eyes, looking into their country, and information going out of their country. It's a two way street right now, being closed down. China is the key player in this, in this jamming equipment that's being used right now. We're also hearing reports of concerning health risks within the radius of this equipment, where it has been deployed.

The transcript traces a broad, interwoven set of claims about hidden history, underground structures, and manipulated timelines, centering on Iran but weaving in examples from around the world. - Iran and Tehran: The host questions whether Iran is “not going along with the mainstream story” about control of the population and asks what in Tehran “they want destroyed and erased forever?” A Truth Social post from Donald J. Trump allegedly urged an evacuation of Tehran, prompting a mass evacuation that night. The host contends a “post-World” element is evacuated, focusing on the Golisthan Palace as a symbol of an old-world architecture that supposedly does not belong in the timeline and that its photos are extraordinary. - Golisthan Palace and underground expectations: The host describes the palace as featuring griffins at the entrance and asserts it is a “palace from the old world” connected to others underground, with a subterranean storage area beneath Salem Hall that is said to be larger than visible and labeled for storage. - National Museum of Iran: A half-mile away lies the National Museum of Iran, described as a massive box of land housing artifacts that supposedly reveal “something else happened here” than the mainstream narrative. The host notes that hands are removed from some items and points to a supposed basement level of the museum as evidence of hidden, off-limits artifacts that predate Islam or feature iconography tied to Zoroastrianism, female rulers, or alternative power structures. - Basements and “off-limits” artifacts: The program reiterates that basements of museums often hold millions of artifacts not on display, and claims this is a pattern consistent with a broader attempt to conceal the true past. The host suggests that the basement storage of the National Museum of Iran contains pivotal, undisclosed artifacts, perhaps including tablets and human remains. - Censorship and tech platforms: The host repeats that censorship is returning and platforms control narratives. A promotional pivot introduces Rumble and its Wallet as a tool to resist big-tech and big-bank influence, claiming it allows users to store digital assets (Bitcoin, Tether Gold, and USAT), tip creators without middlemen, and avoid bank censorship. The host urges viewers to open an account at wallet.rumble.com. - Repetition of “truth” and pattern: A recurring theme is that the true history is hidden in basements and underground spaces, and that many museums’ basements house millions of artifacts that are not accessible to the public. The host cites prior episodes (episode 113, 109, 108, 52, 41, 43) to support the claim of a deliberate cover-up and to illustrate “patterns and repetition” across locations. - Underground cities, tunnels, and old-world technology: The host asserts Tehran sits atop an old-world tunnel network and that Iran announced a tunnel project in November 2024; by January 2025, locals reportedly uncovered an underground city beneath five old-world homes. The host posits that many underground networks and tunnels exist worldwide and have been modernized while the public remains unaware, suggesting old-world technology persists under modern cities. - The old-world, older-than-addressed timelines: The speaker asks what under the feet of cities, what tunnels, vaults, chambers, and artifacts lie under the old world. They reference giant beings, tablets, and elongated-skull findings (as discussed in prior episodes) and argue that the artifacts in Iran’s basement could expose a story divergent from the widely told history. - Architecture and timeline inconsistencies: The host explores multiple examples to argue that the mainstream narrative about construction timelines is inconsistent. They discuss the National Museum of Iran’s basement, and then move to global cases, including: - Saint Peter and Paul Church in San Francisco and 666 Filbert Street, noting allegations that the second church on the site was completed in 1924 and bombed in 1926-27, implying a recurring “fire narrative.” - Saint Anne Shrine in Fall River, Massachusetts, where a postcard allegedly shows a founding date (1869) earlier than construction dates claimed (1891), used to claim the building was “founded,” not constructed, by a previous civilization. - The Greene County Courthouse (Ohio) and a comparable courthouse in Illinois, both claimed to have been constructed in under a year in the late 19th/early 20th centuries, with multiple earlier courthouses said to exist on the same sites, all accompanying a “fire narrative.” - The Manitowoc County Courthouse (Wisconsin) and a Benton County Courthouse (Iowa), each said to have been built rapidly in the early 1900s, cited as evidence that a single builder and sons complete grand palaces in short periods, then disappear from future projects. - AI-generated names and patterns: The host highlights recurring AI-generated names (e.g., Richard Blackhead, Peter Desroaches, John Warner, Mary, Alice) as evidence of scripted or constructed narratives, arguing that the same names and characters recur across locations and episodes. - Overall claim and call to action: The host asserts that the timeline is dramatically misrepresented, that many old-world buildings and underground systems are older and more advanced than the story told, and that artifacts and subterranean networks under cities reveal a truth that is being suppressed. They urge viewers to continue digging into locations being illuminated, to question evacuations and the reasons behind them, and to consider that “the truth about what was once here before us is all under attack right now.”

A Jew goes undercover at a free Palestine rally to understand their perspective. Some attendees blame Jews for the problem and want them to go to hell. The rally calls for a free Palestine, but the Jew wonders where the Jews would go. There is a discussion about the treatment of LGBTQ+ individuals in Gaza. The Jew questions why there is a basis for Israel to exist as a homeland when other groups don't have one. The Jew's family is from Afghanistan, a predominantly Muslim country, but they acknowledge they can't claim Israel.

The speakers recount a visit to sites in Iran connected to Israeli airstrikes on civilian residential areas. They describe finding tangible remnants of the destruction and narrate specific fatalities and damages as evidence of the impact on civilians. - Speaker 0 explains that they visited locations where Israel bombed civilian residential buildings and claims that often an entire neighborhood was bombed to kill a single civilian scientist. They mention uncovering children’s shoes and a toddler’s car seat among the rubble, and warn that “another war is coming.” - Speaker 1 describes a residence where an air hostess lived and was killed, noting that she is pictured with her mother and father. They report three children were killed in the bombing by Israel against Iran. They point to a little lamp from a child’s room, children’s shoes, and children’s clothing, and mention a toy that had been in the room; they state that more toys existed but were removed. They display wall paintings and a teacup described as part of a little girl’s room. They label the situation and the presence of these objects as representative of “Zionism” and say, “This is what it means for the people of the Middle East. They transplanted this foreign entity, this cancer on our borders, and it ends lives of hundreds of thousands, if not millions.” - Speaker 2 discusses Mister Bakui’s house, noting that he and his wife and two children were killed in the Israeli missile attack. They describe the site as having once been a five-story building, and acknowledge that some neighbors were killed as well. They indicate uncertainty about the exact number of people who died and invite questions and photo opportunities. They confirm the name “Mister Bakui” (also spelled “Bob Kui” in discussion) and state that the only remaining part of the five-story building is this section. They describe extensive damage to the building and the neighboring structure, including many windows and the upper portion behind them. They note that, compared to a month earlier, when the area was a mess with rubble and debris, it has now been cleaned. - Speaker 1 asks if they can go inside, and Speaker 2 agrees, with the caveat to be careful with footwear due to debris and cleanliness.

The day starts with the 10 Iranian plan being accepted by President Donald Trump as the basis for negotiation. JD Vance was headed to Islamabad to lead the American negotiating team, with former leaders persona non grata toward Iran. The speaker notes this contrasted with what happened the last time Iran negotiated with Kushner and Witkoff. Lebanon was in a ceasefire on paper, written by the prime minister of Pakistan, whose efforts were praised. If the 10-point plan was the basis for negotiation, this represented a major victory for the Islamic Republic, a point echoed in a Moscow conference addressed by the Iranian ambassador in those terms. But by sunset, the situation “appeared to have gone to hell in a handcart.” Just before going on air, Tehran’s air defenses were engaged with what were said to be American bombers, implying the ceasefire didn’t even last twelve hours. The Islamabad negotiation is now in grave doubt. In an RT interview, the question was asked whether Iran had really won as claimed. The response asserts that the greatest superpower cannot achieve its objectives and thus has lost; if the U.S. “definitely lost,” then Iran has won. Iran is described as a global south emerging country under sanctions for forty-seven years, surviving two nuclear superpowers (regional and global). The speaker contrasts Trump’s regime-change talk for Iran with Afghanistan’s experience, noting the U.S. spent a trillion dollars to remove the Taliban only for the Taliban to return to power as the U.S. withdrew. There is a claim of “replacing one Khamenei with a second Khamenei,” with the son being less moderate than the father, and referencing the dead father, mother, wife, and children from the initial American attack. The speaker recounts an attack on a 169-schoolgirl incident near Bandar Abbas, asking listeners to imagine daughters or granddaughters incinerated in an instant, and labels it a day of infamy akin to Pearl Harbor. Iran was allegedly negotiating with “the sneak attackers,” with thousands of Iranian civilians killed, mosques and churches destroyed, and even a synagogue destroyed; the speaker notes having filmed a synagogue outside of which there are “100 synagogues in Iran,” with Jews in Iran and a million Christians having an honored place in the Islamic Republic. The claim is that these acts occurred while the United States and Israel bombed, killed front-rank commanders, and destroyed the leader of the Iranian revolution, achieving nothing. The speaker contrasts Trump’s harsh rhetoric against Obama over the JCPOA with Trump’s support for a 10-point plan that supposedly is less restrictive than the JCPOA, including allowing Iran to charge a toll on every tanker through the Strait of Hormuz, potentially earning about a hundred billion dollars per year in perpetuity, and criticizing Obama for returning Iran’s own money. Trump is said to claim Lebanon was included in the ceasefire, but the plan and the prime minister of Pakistan say Lebanon is included; nonetheless, Israel launches a frenzy of violence on Lebanon, including bombing a funeral, with a death toll rising. The speech notes Israeli attacks on Beirut, and describes a seventy-two-hour bombardment and the Arab League’s response, with the UAE allegedly attacking two Iranian islands eight hours after the ceasefire, threatening a broader war between Iran and the UAE. The Strait of Hormuz is claimed closed again, despite Trump’s boast of unblocking it, and oil prices are cited at $144 per barrel, with implications for Russia, Europe, and Asia if prices surge. The speaker asks where this is heading and reflects that, while exultant in the morning, the evening leaves doubt about resolution. The commentary concludes that this is a global crisis bigger than past financial crashes, and introduces Professor Syed Muhammad Marandi as the guest to explain further after a break.

Am I the only one that feels like we're watching the exact same strategy used by Zoran Mamdami that we saw in the Islamic revolution in 1979? Where have I seen anti capitalist feminist driving the agenda for revolution before? This is what Iranian women looked like before the Islamic revolution. I wonder if these feminist women here in The United States are worried about the same thing happening to them that happened to feminists in Iran after the Islamic revolution. Because you can pull up a whole bunch of photos where the women who supported the Ayatollah in their anti capitalist Islamic revolution ended up looking like this afterwards. that is straight up racism by policy. So I wonder if we'll be able to get a before and after of this.

The transcript discusses a video claimed to show an Iranian woman detained during the January protests, arguing the video is fake and produced by an AI company. It states the video is a product of Generative AI for Good, an Israeli impact company that develops AI-powered initiatives to amplify silenced voices, with one initiative focusing on sexual violence against women. The woman’s face is said to have been changed with AI to protect her identity, but the entire scene—bookshelf, curtains, samovar, and the creators—offers no information about where the testimony came from. The narrative within the video is said to be disturbing to many because, beyond the AI fabrication, the woman repeats nationalistic tropes that depict non-Persians as aggressors, and it claims without evidence that thousands of protesters, including children, were subjected to severe sexual violence in January. The speaker notes there are real victims of state and sexual violence, but questions why stories are made up and why now. Anthropologists are cited, stating that depicting oriental women as helpless victims in need of rescue is a powerful propaganda tool in political strategy and modern warfare. This portrayal is said to be designed to appeal specifically to Western white audiences, which allegedly influences global attention toward what Iranian women wear and Iran’s hijab laws rather than substantive equal rights issues. The transcript links this dynamic to the Iran’s woman life freedom movement, suggesting it went viral and drew foreigners worldwide to focus on slogans and visible symbols. The transcript then references former U.S. President Donald Trump, noting that he shared photos of eight Iranian women who were allegedly about to be executed and saved by his intervention. It adds that Iran’s judiciary denied these claims. It also states that the images have been altered to the point of debate over whether they are entirely AI-generated or simply retouched to appear more appealing—featuring young, attractive, hijab-free, mostly blonde women. The final observation asserts that thousands of people are in Iranian prisons, but in a war of bombs and narratives, some have discovered that if you can’t identify a perfect victim, you can create one.

In this passage, the speaker contrasts the situation of women in America with that in Iran, recounting a dramatic shift that occurred after 1979. The speaker asserts that in America, women are allowed to dress, go to school, work, and marry whomever they like. By contrast, Iran “used to be like this too before they were taken over by radical Islamists in 1979,” but after 1979, under what the speaker describes as the “sick leadership of these terrorists,” women are treated “like dogs.” The speaker details a series of severe restrictions and injustices faced by Iranian women. Women are claimed to be forced to cover every part of their body, except their eyes. They are said to be prohibited from leaving home unless accompanied by a male escort. The speaker asserts that women are not allowed to obtain an education or hold a job. They are allegedly subjected to compulsory restrictions on marriage, including being forced to marry at a very young age, pointing to instances as young as six years old. Additional accusations are made, including claims that pedophilia and inbreeding are rampant within the society described, and that women are fortunate if they are even allowed to drive a vehicle. The speaker then shifts to a political criticism, referencing an assertion about a United States congresswoman “from one of these third world Muslim countries” who is married to her brother, and uses this as a rhetorical device to question where Democrat colleagues who claim to be feminists are in response to these alleged conditions. Throughout, the speaker uses stark, condemnatory language to depict the regime governing Iran as oppressively restricting women’s rights and autonomy, contrasting it with perceived freedoms in the United States. The argument hinges on the juxtaposition of pre- and post-1979 Iran and on a series of explicit accusations about gender-based repression, control over women’s bodies and movements, and the legal and social norms surrounding marriage and education. The speaker also employs a provocative question aimed at a specific political audience, urging accountability from those who identify as feminists within the opposing party.

The speaker issues an urgent message to the Iranian government, identifying specific Israeli targets to eliminate Israel’s nuclear capability. The proposed targets are: - Sorek Nuclear Facility - Palamehoshin Airfield, described as housing Israel’s only fighter jet nuclear-capable aircraft - The airbase’s aircraft that allegedly fire Popeye cruise missiles and are nuclear-equipped, with jets currently flying out of the airbase The speaker asserts that striking these sites would prevent Israel from using nuclear capabilities against Iran, stating, “If you can take those out, Israel cannot nuke you.” Additionally, the speaker claims there is a focus on the nuclear abilities at another location, noting: “If you wanna take out their nuclear abilities, you need to do so right here.” They point to an air-defense system “located right here” intended to intercept missiles, emphasizing a specific interception path over Jerusalem via exact coordinates to target “the nuclear center.” Other elements mentioned include: - A pink area described as their ammunition - A green box described as “the fun one,” identified as an underground bunker or facility where “the good stuff is gonna be” - Allegations of an underground Israeli digging company that warns against digging due to wires and restricted areas, used to imply the location of a protected underground facility The speaker concludes by urging viewers to share the information so the Iranian government can see it.

Carla Ortiz takes us on a tour of the White Helmets headquarters in Aleppo. She points out the logos of ISIS and Al Nusra, suggesting a connection between these groups and the White Helmets. She also mentions that some neighbors claim the White Helmets only help militants, not civilians. Carla shows us the entrance of a school, highlighting the dress code for women. She then briefly mentions the original Red Crescent and the American Syrian coalition. The video ends with a view of the Al Nusra flag.

Syrian Girl discusses interviewing Rabbi Samson in a Tehran synagogue. The first question asks whether women inside the synagogue are expected to cover their hair. Rabbi Samson responds: “For the peace of mind of men, and because we don't want men to be provoked or triggered with women, yes, our women have to have hijab here.” The interviewer then asks if Rabbi Samson feels safe in Iran, specifically Tehran. He answers: “Yes. We don't have no issues, like, for praying, for doing our ceremonies. We feel full freedom to do whatever our community likes to do.” Next, the interviewer references recent events: the Australian government kicking out its ambassador to Iran and accusing him of a chain of payments to burn a synagogue and a Jewish chicken shop. The interviewer asks if he believes such acts are in the nature of the Iranians to do. Rabbi Samson replies: “In my opinion, I don't think it's impossible for such a thing to happen. If even if it's a mosque, if it even if it's a church or synagogue, it's impossible because there is the light of God in that place, in that holy place. People pray there. It's impossible for Iran to do such a thing. No. No.” An optional question about the wars and bombing in the region and how he feels is offered. He responds: “In my opinion, this is how I see it. I'm against war in general. In the wars, people feel stressed. There is fear among everyone. And it was the same when it was happening in Iran. Everyone was scared of the war. We are living in Iran. And we have a good life here. I'm thankful to the state of Iran, to the Islamic Republic because they are providing everything for us. And based on what I experienced in Iran, I think that they have compromised and they have tried to come to the how to say, a common area with us to to come and come along with Jewish and also Muslim people living together.” The interviewer thanks him, and Rabbi Samson reiterates: “There is no limitation for us. There is nothing to stop us from praying. We can do whatever we want in terms of our religious celebration and ceremonies. I'm thankful to the government, and I want to say all the rumors in the world about Jewish community in Iran are lies, and we dismiss them.” The exchange ends with: “Welcome to Iran.” The interviewer closes with thanks and Shalom.

Iranian woman expresses frustration at the lack of support for Iranian people facing oppression by the Islamic Republic. She questions the sudden defense of Iran's right to defend itself, highlighting past atrocities committed by the regime. She emphasizes that Iranians desire peace, not war with Israel, and condemns those who support the Islamic Republic's aggressive actions. She pleads for others to understand the distinction between the Iranian people and the oppressive regime, urging them to stop endangering Iranian lives.

In Iran, the speaker expresses strong fondness for living there, saying, “Very, very, very, very, very much. Yes. A lot. Limitless.” He attends a Jewish school, and there is one Muslim student studying there. When asked if he likes him, he says, “We like each other. We are all friends at school and we don’t fight. We make jokes and we are very close, actually.” The Muslim student’s own school has more Muslims, but in his school, it is a Jewish school with only one Muslim student. Regarding pride in nationality, he answers that he does feel proud to be Iranian: “Yes.” When asked about his favorite things to do in Tehran, he mentions a few interests. He says he wants to be a power mechanic and also enjoys baking; “You bake? … If I grow up … If I choose to be a baker, sure. You are welcome.” He also notes that he likes to read, and the interviewer confirms that he likes reading too. The interviewer asks if there is anything else to ask, and the student says “Not really,” ending with a note for audiences in Australia. The interviewer quips, “People in Australia will hear you. We have kangaroos.” The student has seen a kangaroo at the zoo and is described as “very clever.” The exchange ends with expressions of gratitude: “Thank you. Mercy.” and farewells: “Bye.”

Clayton opens by noting a media blackout on Iran and asks Professor Morandi to describe life in Tehran and the bombing campaigns from Israel and the United States, as well as Iran’s response. Morandi explains that Israeli and American forces have been bombing Tehran, with airstrikes every few hours that vary in intensity and largely target civilian infrastructure. He says Iran continues to fire missiles and drones at Israeli targets and at US assets in the Persian Gulf, not limited to bases. In Tehran, civilian infrastructure including apartment blocks, schools, and local police stations has been targeted to disrupt the fabric of society. After the “massacre of the children” on day one, schools and universities were shut, and people have left the city. Shops are mixed, with some open and many closed. There are daily rallies; a funeral for murdered commanders drew a very large crowd. Nights in Tehran and other cities see people in solidarity with the armed forces, though airstrikes and nearby missile impacts occur during these demonstrations. Morandi witnessed rallies where participants, including women and men, chanted in defense of the armed forces and condemnation of the war, and did not scatter even when missiles landed nearby; instead, crowds chanted louder. Clayton asks what Iranians are chanting and counters the Western narrative that Iranians are celebrating the bombings or that women are suddenly free. Morandi rebuts the narrative as decades of propaganda. He argues there is a United States and Israeli lobby presence shaping Iran-related coverage, and asserts that ordinary Iranians, including his students, are fluent in English and knowledgeable about the United States. He notes that Iranians are demonized in Western media and think tanks, and that Iranian women hold positions of power in academia and business; he cites examples from the University of Tehran where the deans have been women for eighteen of his twenty-two years there. He accuses Western media of labeling Iran as evil while violating it through attacks, and claims Iranians support movements for independence and solidarity with groups under empire, such as in Palestine, Cuba, Venezuela, and Southern Africa. He emphasizes normalcy in daily life—shops, parks at midnight, family picnics—and asserts that Iranians view Western portrayals as propaganda rather than reflective of reality. Morandi adds that older Iranians recall historical Western support for Saddam Hussein, including chemical weapons and the downing of an Iranian airliner, and notes that younger people may be disillusioned after witnessing Western actions. He mentions three young colleagues from his faculty who participated in riots but later expressed remorse and sought ways to help, recognizing the brutality of Western-backed actions. He cites incidents where Western-supported actions killed civilians, including the bombing of hospitals, the Red Crescent building, and a volleyball gym where many girls were killed, underscoring the discrepancy between Western narratives and on-the-ground experiences. The discussion briefly shifts to the broader information environment and mentions censorship across platforms, leading into a promotion of Rumble Wallet and its features. Morandi then describes the devastation from oil infrastructure attacks in Iran, including a night sky darkened by burning oil depots and widespread pollution from chemical-like fallout, with reports that the United States was upset with Israel for attacking Iranian oil infrastructure. He reflects on Tehran’s climate of fear and the extent of damage from these assaults, describing the scene as horrific, including workers burned in refinery incidents and the oil-smudged landscape. Clayton signals a transition to questions about Iran’s infrastructure, military capacity, the Strait of Hormuz, and developments in Israel-Iran dynamics, then indicates a break.

Russian President Vladimir Putin issued a full-throated warning to the United States and Israel against attacking Iran, saying any attack would be a grave mistake with devastating consequences. Russia also cautioned that threats of new military strikes on Iran are categorically unacceptable and criticized Washington for external interference in Tehran’s internal politics. Amid these tensions, Putin’s anger over Israel’s handling of Syria was referenced, with reports that Russia sent multiple large freight flights into Tehran in recent days. There was discussion about whether this could be connected to comments from President Trump that killings in the region might be winding down, with a reporter noting that the killing has “now stopped” and a follow-up remark that it is “winding down” despite uncertainty. The program suggested that pro‑Zionist accounts and MAGA influencers are circulating propaganda—fake death numbers from Iran and videos of protests—while questioning the reliability of such footage and calling out what was described as propaganda used to push for war in Iran. Claims were made that “the number of people killed is far higher than the 12,000” from Mark Levin’s reporting, and that Iranian body bags and mass casualties were being publicized by certain viewers, though not all claims could be independently verified due to a media blackout. Laura Loomer was cited showing footage of body bags claiming nearly 20,000 Iranians had been murdered for protesting for their freedom, while noting Mossad’s heavy involvement in Iran’s protests, including arming protesters with live firearms per Israel’s Channel 14. The discussion raised the possibility that Reuters and other sources were reporting imminent U.S. bombing of Iran within 24 hours, while also noting Trump’s pattern of weekend bombings when markets are closed. Anya Parampil of the Grey Zone, who had recently been in Iran, joined to discuss on-the-ground realities. She explained that the initial demonstrations in Iran began around rising inflation and economic hardship, worsened by sanctions that the United States has openly admitted using as a weapon. She noted that early protests were largely by pro-government or conservative segments, with the government making concessions and the president, Hassan Rouhani’s successor, acknowledging responsibility for policy decisions. Violent elements subsequently appeared, and a blackout on information has followed, with Internet cuts, complicating independent reporting. Parampil suggested outside support and covert interventions could be destabilizing the country and providing a pretext for international intervention, comparing the current situation to Syria in 2011. Parampil described the escalation from peaceful economic demonstrations to violent street actions involving armed extras, questions about who is killing whom, and the risk of a Syria-style CIA or covert foreign-backed civil conflict in Iran. She emphasized sovereignty and the Iranian people’s own trajectory, arguing that sanctions and external pressure complicate genuine domestic grievances and can undermine authentic movements. The discussion also touched on the nature of domestic sentiment: some protests were pro-government, driven by sovereignty and economic concerns, while others involved calls for reform. The participants urged skepticism about casualty figures, questioning sources funded by Western organizations and the reliability of reported death tolls amid the information blackout. They warned against rushed military action and suggested that the window of opportunity for U.S.-Israeli action might be closing, given the political clock in the United States and Israel. The program closed with notes that the Israeli media reported Mossad’s involvement and arming on the Iranian side, while U.S. reporting remained less transparent, and that the situation remained highly uncertain with conflicting narratives about who is directing violence and protests on the ground.

Speaker A: The IDF trains American police officers and ICE officers in Israel? They train with US ICE, with US Homeland Security. NYPD. NYPD. And that's what's called through a SME program, subject matter exchange, where our police, etcetera, train with them. So, these National Guard soldiers that will soon be in or are in Chicago have trained with and trained with Israel habitually for years. So when you look at all of these pieces of who do we have operating on the streets of Portland and the streets of New York and on in DC and who's going into Chicago, all components and elements that have trained hand in hand with the IDF or the Israeli Ministry of the Interior Gendarmerie paramilitary police. Speaker B: That's absolutely amazing. I also That's not a coincidence. They do antisemitism training, not just physical training, but brainwash training, basically, for them too. Speaker A: When we entered Israel, they took us on the Hospa tour. They took us to Kibbutz B'Ari. They took us to the Nova Film Festival site, and they also took us to Sderot, which is the overlook just outside of Northern Gaza City in Beit Hanun. It's on the Israeli side of the border Right. That overlooks all of Gaza City. Mhmm. They've turned that into a spectacle. It's a picnic site. Really? You can go up there. There's vending machines. There's an area to park. There's an area where you can get your panoramic view with Gaza in the background, and if you time it just right, there might be a bomb that drops for your photo.

- The discussion centers on Iran amid weekend protests and a push by some Western figures for regime change, with emphasis on misinformation and “rage bait” clips online. The hosts claim much of the trending content is old, mislabeled, from other countries, or edited to look new. - It is alleged that Iran is deliberately conducting a nationwide digital blackout to close off information from inside the country and to hinder outside eyes. Reportedly, Iran is not only shutting down ordinary Internet traffic but also attempting to disrupt satellite connections (Starlink, Iridium, Inmarsat, Thuria). The claim is that foreign partners are aiding Iran in this blackout, with China and Russia specifically named as helping jam communications, including satellite phones and Internet links. SkyFreight flights are said to bring jamming equipment into Iran. The satellite and Internet disruptions are described as part of an unusually sophisticated communications clampdown. - Starlink and other satellite services are reportedly being jammed beyond basic GPS interference, with references to Starlink, Iridium, GlobalSat, Inmarsat, and Thuria. China is singled out as a key player in the jamming equipment. There are also mentions of health risks within the radius of the jamming equipment. - On casualty figures, Iranian media is cited as reporting 500 killed and 300 injured, but the hosts’ sources disagree with both the Iranian and Western figures. The hosts’ sources claim 2,150 dead, 480 injured, and 620 missing across 11 cities in Iran as of yesterday. - The broadcast introduces Doctor Miriam Asusli (online persona: Syrian Girl) who had just returned from Iran. She describes normal conditions on the ground during her visit, including using the metro, observing advanced infrastructure, and seeing women in higher educational attainment with some freedom in dress. She challenges the notion of widespread protests and asserts that the situation in Iran did not resemble the media’s depiction; she suggests Iran’s protests are about opening the economy and breaking Western influence, extending broader claims about global liberal order, Western-backed “color revolutions,” and control of oil and markets. - The guest asserts that the protests are connected to broader geopolitical aims, including Israeli and American efforts to change regimes, and argues that sanctions in Syria and Iran are designed to create instability. She alleges Western-backed groups and foreign entities push for regime change and profit from it, including claims about the CIA and Mossad’s involvement in supporting rebels in the region, and suggests that the regime change narrative serves Western interests. - There is a discussion about sanctions and their impact, with claims that sanctions cause starvation and destabilization to push for external influence or regime change. The guest mentions the idea of Iran pursuing peaceful nuclear power as a potential stabilizing factor, while also expressing controversial views about Iran acquiring nuclear weapons as a balance against Israel’s alleged nuclear capabilities. - The conversation connects the current events to broader regional dynamics, including Syria and Iraq, and asserts that Western powers seek to exploit Iran’s turmoil for strategic gains. The hosts acknowledge that there are multiple narratives and say that their sources in the Middle East indicate preparations for conflict by the end of the month, with specific timing debates around late January (the thirtieth or thirty-first). - The program closes with the hosts noting parallel reporting from Israeli sources about potential conflict timing and thanking the guest for on-the-ground insights, expressing a desire for peace.

In this video, the speaker begins by setting up Shabbat candles and expressing their prayers for peace in the Middle East. They then discuss various news highlights, including a New York Times writer making an inappropriate joke, Iran being appointed as the chair of the UN Human Rights Council Social Forum, and the Yale Daily News issuing a correction for unsubstantiated claims about Hamas. The speaker also mentions the constant rocket attacks on Israel and the poverty under Hamas rule. They highlight a Vogue staffer's support for resisting Israel and a Palestinian woman's violent remarks. The speaker concludes by emphasizing the need to bring home hostages held by Hamas and the importance of self-care during these difficult times.

An Iranian man states that the Islamic regime in Iran shut down the internet for over twelve hours. He says this is not the action of America or Israel, but of the Iranian government. He expresses worry for political prisoners and regular citizens, fearing the regime might seek revenge on its own people due to losing the war to Israel. He says Iranians hate the government and have been trying to overthrow it for 46 years. He clarifies that Israel is bombing IRGC and Islamic regime bases, not the Iranian people, and that Iranians support these actions. He claims the Iranian regime are evil people, and the people in Iran hate the regime. He accuses others of supporting the regime and wanting to put nuclear weapons in their hands.

Afshan Rutansky presents Going Underground from the UAE, noting that seven weeks into the US-Israel war in Iran, the region faces continuing conflict and hardship. She claims the war began with Trump and Netanyahu assassinating Iran’s leader and his family, leading to millions killed, wounded, or displaced in Iran and Lebanon, and global disruption of fuel and petrochemical supplies. She marks Iran’s National Army Day, noting a traditional military parade and speech, but says this year’s observance comes after the US threatened to destroy Iran’s civilization in one night, and after a claimed “fake” Trump blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. She asserts adversaries of the US government have gained through destruction of US power and preferential pricing, citing visits of regional leaders to China and Moscow following visits by UAE’s MBZ and the Malaysian king. She introduces Bill Astoria (twenty-year US Air Force veteran, former professor of history, author of several works on militarism) from Yarmouth, Massachusetts, and asks why he says Iran has “won this war on Iran.” Astoria responds that while Iran may not have definitively won yet, the United States is losing the war because its stated rationales—regime change, nuclear threat elimination, destroying ballistic missiles—have not been achieved. He argues Iran is more unified and a bigger world player than before, while the US and Israel have failed to meet their war aims. He suggests long-term consequences indicate the United States is in decline, including unsustainable Pentagon spending (citing proposed rises to approximately $1.5 trillion plus $500 billion in the next fiscal year) and the war used to justify this expansion. From Iran’s perspective, he says, there is no imminent existential threat from Iran; rather, the existential threat is perceived to come from nuclear-armed Israel and America. Rutansky raises a Financial Times headline about Goldman Sachs clients benefiting from Iran diversion and “military Keynesianism” returning as a driver for wealth, implying the defense budget primarily enriches the rich oligarchy. Astoria counters that the American public mainly experiences propaganda, noting a 50% budget increase framed as defense, and calls the Pentagon budget a department for perpetual war rather than true defense. He contends Trump’s rhetoric and actions reveal a shift toward imperial aims, and points to multiple operations in places like Venezuela, Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen, Cuba, and Greenland. He also notes that diplomacy has been undermined by prior bombings and assassinations, reducing Iran’s trust in US negotiations. The conversation touches on the notion that Trump’s antiwar appeal was undermined by a militarized approach; Astoria stresses that military Keynesianism will not revive America and may increase authoritarianism and domestic repression, including harsher homeland security measures and militarized policing. He asserts Trump is a culmination of a warrior mentality in US policy, and that the Pope’s recent rejection of the war represents a related moral stance. Discussing Israel’s role, Astoria claims Israel poses a national security threat to the US in a nuanced way, suggesting Israeli influence over US foreign policy—particularly regarding Iraq, Iran, and the broader Middle East—casts doubt on whether Israel is a true friend to the United States. He argues the Ukraine war has faded from front-page coverage in US media, with continued support for Ukraine framed as necessary by American outlets. Toward the end, the host asks about censorship and media control; Astoria agrees that censorship is increasing as the conflict persists, noting that mainstream coverage emphasizes antiseptic imagery while omitting civilian casualties. He predicts more suppression of antiwar voices as the public becomes more aware of the war’s costs. The program closes with thanks to Astoria and a note that future guests will include a former Iraq War veteran now advising Robert Kennedy Jr. and working in Trump’s cabinet.

Speaker 0 argues that Iran, despite being the greatest enemy of Israel, treats Jewish people living there as ordinary citizens and protects them in the midst of war. They claim that there are 35,000 Jewish people in Iran today and that they enjoy a “golden life,” with no problems during the conflict. According to the speaker, Iranians do not hate Jews; they have a problem with the occupation. The message repeated is that “we are not against Jews. We are against the occupation,” and that this stance is stated repeatedly in the media. The speaker contends that mainstream media are under Zionist influence and attempt to smear people with anti-Semitism, labeling criticisms of Israel as Nazis or anti-Semitic, even when the speaker asserts these criticisms are unrelated to anti-Semitism. The speaker questions why the media do not highlight a contrasting point: that Jewish people in Iran are living under missiles but are living freely, with access to schools, high schools, and all other institutes. They point to a Jewish hospital in Iran that is funded completely by the government and ask why this is not seen in the news. Overall, the speaker asserts a discrepancy between the situation of Jews in Iran and what is portrayed in the media, suggesting that the public is not being informed about the reality of Jewish life in Iran—its safety, institutions, and government support—while focusing on accusations of anti-Semitism and Nazi imagery. They emphasize that Iranians’ stance is not against Jews but against the occupation, and they critique the media for not presenting the full context of Jews living in Iran.

The video narrative centers on Istanbul (Constantinople) as a site of a vast, interconnected “old world” substructure that allegedly lies beneath visible monuments and modern-day streets. The speaker asserts that major landmarks—the Hagia Sophia, the Blue Mosque, Basilica Cistern, and other famed buildings—sit atop a single, massive underground complex described as a 2,100,000 square foot foundation that supported a great palace. The implication is that Istanbul contains extensive subterranean networks that connect multiple state-of-the-art ancient structures, far beyond what is publicly visible or studied. A key claim is the existence of an underground passage system beneath the Church of Saint Mary of the Mongols (the “bloody church”) that supposedly reaches Hagia Sophia, despite the two buildings being several kilometers apart (roughly 2.2 miles). The speaker describes the underground corridors as far more than tunnels, forming an interconnected network that remains hidden behind walls and not open to the public. Fire damage is cited as a historical nod, with fires said to have damaged structures in 1633, 1640, and 1729, and the narrative repeatedly emphasizes that these connections and substructures are still present today. Among the focal discoveries is the Badram (Badrum) Mosque, described as built within the same 2,100,000 square foot foundation layout and noted for fires recorded in 12/00/2003 at 09:14:30 PM by a local “duck with a pen.” The speaker clarifies, however, a skepticism about the fires, suggesting later that there may be no fires as described. The substructure beneath this mosque is said to be a massive circular rotunda with a diameter of about 137 feet. This rotunda allegedly became a cistern below the floor, with a church erected atop it and a burial complex surrounding it, all now sealed and inaccessible to the public. Photos of the formation are claimed to exist from Dumbarton Oaks and the Byzantine legacy, though the speaker asserts the originals are insufficient to capture the full reality that supposedly lies beneath. Under the Jalata/“Gilat’a” Tower, the speaker claims there are tunnels under the water that connect to the Hagia Sophia, forming underwater or underground crossings that predate modern engineering. The tower is described as a lookout for fires, with its own fires alleged in 1831 and a prior destruction of a first tower in 12/00/2004; the narrative treats these accounts as inconsistent or dubious. The discussion expands to a catalog of palaces and related structures attributed to a single, largely unnamed figure who supposedly completed numerous grand projects in the 1500s, often in seemingly impossible timeframes (e.g., seven years, five years, four years). Distances between sites (e.g., 133 miles, 531 miles) are cited to argue that the same figure oversaw projects across wide areas, including a bridge and multiple palaces, with supposed precise years and signatures provided to “tie it all in.” The speaker questions the authenticity of these claims, labeling the entire account as fabricated and illogical, and urges continued exploration of underground connections and blocked sites. Throughout, the host repeatedly invites readers to visit Istanbul’s locations and highlights the supposed secrecy and restriction around access to subterranean spaces, asserting that the old world was incredible and that the public has been kept from the truth. The segment blends exploration, conjecture, and conspiracy-style critique, concluding with a promise that the uncovering of these connections is only beginning.