reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0 argues that while global focus is on Venezuela, Mexico, Cuba, and Colombia, Donald Trump quietly put Canada in the hot seat, presenting the Venezuelan operation as an opening salvo against the British empire. He frames Trump’s actions as not about Maduro alone but as a broader assault on imperial structures. Speaker 1 discusses the perceived death toll from drugs and asserts a real number of 300,000, noting drugs entering primarily through the southern border and also through Canada, implying this is part of a wider systemic issue. Speaker 0 notes that mainstream headlines focus on familiar targets, while the Toronto Globe and Mail editorially warns that Venezuela’s fate is a warning to Canada. The New York Times is described as framing this as another regime change operation from the Bush era that will split the MAGA movement, with Marjorie Taylor Greene contributing to that narrative. The Democratic Party is said to be shrieking about Trump’s actions, with some calling for impeachment. Former British MI6 head John Bolton is cited as recognizing that the operation is not a regime change. Speaker 0 and others present the view that this is a surgical strike against the British empire’s irregular warfare and the nexus of narcotics trafficking, terrorism, and the London-centered banking system. Susan Kokinda introduces herself as someone who has tracked offshore banking since the 1970s and claims this is the first time someone is taking on that system, namely Donald Trump, urging viewers to engage with Promethean Action for deeper analysis. Speaker 2 clarifies the big picture: there is not a war against Venezuela, but a war against drug trafficking organizations, arguing that the largest oil reserves are controlled by adversaries of the United States and misappropriated by oligarchs, including in Venezuela. The speaker emphasizes that the target is oligarchs and drug trafficking organizations, not socialism or communism. Speaker 0 connects oligarchs and drug trafficking with the British empire, describing Canada as run by the empire’s central bankers (notably Mark Carney) and as a major political outpost in North America used for drug trafficking, illegal immigration, and terrorism. This frame contrasts Trump’s actions with the cartels and highlights Canada’s role as part of the broader imperial apparatus. Speaker 3 (Sir John Soros) cautions against calling it regime change, noting Maduro has been abducted and taken to the U.S. to stand trial, but saying the army remains in power and the regime’s legal structures persist. He acknowledges the operation is not the same as Iraq’s regime change and notes Trump’s reluctance to deploy large-scale ground forces. John Bolton adds that Maduro has been removed from power, but the regime remains, and there is ambiguity about Trump’s thinking regarding Machado. Speaker 0 reiterates that this is not regime change but irregular warfare, with the United States pushing back against the empire’s rules-based order. The narrative argues that Trump is targeting the offshore banking system that finances terrorism, cartels, and the destruction of sovereign nations, including the London-centered financial network and its secrecy jurisdictions established in the 1960s. Prominent voices, including Tom Luongo and Crypto Rich, are cited to support the view that the British empire’s financial system and the rules-based order have long protected nonstate actors, NGOs, and cartels, and that Trump’s actions represent breaking those rules to defeat the imperial system. The piece frames the operation as the United States taking on irregular warfare and challenging the offshore financial framework that underpins global illicit activities, including narcotics trafficking and terrorism. Bottom line presented: Trump has launched a major offensive against the city of London’s offshore banking system and has targeted Canada as part of this broader strategy, signaling a shift from conventional regime-change thinking to irregular warfare against imperial financial and geopolitical structures.

The speakers discuss their concerns about the current state of Canada. They criticize the government's actions, such as labeling truckers as racist and misogynist and closing down bank accounts of those who donated to the trucker movement. They also mention the ban on accessing news outlets from outside of Canada and the potential impact on creators on social media platforms. They express worry that their podcast may not be available in Canada due to their criticism of the government. Overall, they feel that Canada is sliding towards communism and becoming like a dictatorship.

According to Speaker 0, Canada's new prime minister threatened to seize capital from companies not advancing Canada's climate agenda. Speaker 1 stated the goal is for every financial decision to consider climate change, backing companies that are part of the solution and taking capital away from those who are part of the problem. Speaker 0 claims the prime minister is a fan of censorship and threatened American social media platforms, referencing a statement by Speaker 1 that large American online platforms have become seas of hate and are being used by criminals to harm children, and that his government will act. Speaker 0 asserts there is no free speech in Canada and that the prime minister wants to ban social media platforms, shut down dissent, and use the climate crisis as an excuse to steal from businesses and control their means of production. Speaker 0 concludes that while the friendship between the US and Canada will continue, the "free ride" is over.

Watching Canadian propaganda from outside Canada is eye-opening. We're bombarded with government-owned media, making it hard to see the truth. It's wild to see Canadians, even conservatives, rallying behind Justin Trudeau after his ethics violations and the unconstitutional Emergencies Act. Now he's pushing for Canadians to unite under Canadian products and boycott the US, but it's failing. Nobody in the US cares about invading Canada; they see us as pathetic. Trudeau was supposed to resign but shut down the government instead. Mark Carney, who has a questionable background, is now the Liberal Party leader. They're already foreshadowing a Liberal win, signaling a potentially stolen election or Carney staying in power until 2026. In 2021, when we exposed the fifteen-minute cities agenda, the government labeled everyone Russian bots. Canada is being infiltrated by globalists, and people are voting against their own interests. Wake up and recognize the propaganda, or Canada will collapse within two years.

Speaker 1 asserts that Trudeau destroyed Canada economically, socially, and culturally, particularly through authoritarian COVID-19 measures and vaccine passports. Speaker 1 regrets not being vaccinated, calling it the best decision of their life. Speaker 0 suggests Trudeau systematically destroyed Canada, possibly on purpose, through actions like the MAIDS program. Speaker 1 claims Trudeau is a socialist and globalist who doubled Canada's debt in ten years, reaching $1.2 trillion. Mass immigration, combined with multiculturalism, has led to societal fragmentation and a decline in GDP per capita. Speaker 0 questions why Trudeau isn't in jail for these actions. Speaker 1 advocates for an inquiry into COVID-19 policies and a moratorium on immigration and mRNA vaccines. They criticize current political leaders for pandering to ethnic communities and supporting policies detrimental to Canadians. Speaker 1 states that Canada's democratic system does not produce democratic results. They claim globalists are destroying western countries like Canada by pushing mass immigration. Speaker 1 criticizes both Trudeau's Liberal party and the Conservative party leader, Pierre Polyyev, for similar policies on tariffs, immigration, and climate change. They accuse them of prioritizing foreign interests over Canadian citizens. Speaker 1 expresses concern over Chinese interference in Canadian elections and the presence of disloyal members of parliament. They advocate for a moratorium on immigration, citing strains on infrastructure and the economy. Speaker 1 says Canada has no gold reserves.

Speaker 0 describes a situation where the Canadian government reportedly went onto a private property and rounded up 300 ostriches, killing them. He claims the birds lived mostly under 30 years old and that they slaughtered them for no reason, labeling them dangerous. He asserts the danger lies in their eggs and the antibodies in the eggs, noting that research began when it was realized ostrich eggs could literally cure coronavirus and that a family offered their ostriches for study, hoping the eggs could help humanity. He states the eggs were found to be powerful, capable of curing cancer and tumors, challenging big pharma profits, and suggests there is deliberate obstruction to prevent enough research or widespread cure discovery so people remain reliant on big pharma. Speaker 1 counters by saying the birds are healthy and that their eggs hold a cure for children and grandparents, claiming the birds are being shot slowly and suffering. He asserts the birds are not killed by gunshot to the head but shot on rails, causing slow death, and he implies this is happening to push people to order ostrich eggs. Speaker 0 continues by alleging a broader conspiracy, saying the ostriches were intended to go extinct along with values people hold dear, and complains about foreign government influence, specifically blaming Israel for alleged domination. He asserts that Israel is the root cause of evil globally and claims Israel has no allegiance to any country, arriving, exploiting hosts, feigning victimhood, and draining resources like a parasite. He argues that in the world, only China, Russia, and Iran have stood up against Western manipulation, claiming they ban U.S. citizens from traveling to their countries without permits or a certified tour guide, and that these countries restrict foreign influence and control their governance. Speaker 0 elaborates that in the United States, foreigners are allowed to come and influence politics, leading to the current subordinate treatment of Americans. He references President Trump as once seen as a savior but now claims Trump is working for “them” and taking away freedoms, asserting he is the antichrist due to actions after the public mandate and multiple terms. He states the Canadian government would not have acted this way under Trump, and asserts that Trump would have prevented such actions. He ends by telling the audience to leave Canada, move their wealth to a country like El Salvador, and offers a blessing to the audience.

The speaker asserts that the Canadian government has committed an atrocity, stating, "That's your Canadian government right there... The government has committed their own fucking atrocity at this Canadian government." They recount having served in Bosnia, Somalia, and Afghanistan, and declare, "I did not fucking serve my country for this bullshit that's fucking in front of us." The speaker emphasizes that the government is responsible for the current situation.

I used to live in Canada, but I don't go there anymore. I disagree with what they're doing, like the trucker rally, Trudeau's gun policies, and internet censorship. I think the government needs a complete overhaul because they're heading towards communism, which is concerning.

Speaker 0 argued that Maduro was not democratically elected and was not cracking down on drug trafficking to the U.S. and other countries, contrasting this with Honduras’ crackdown on drug trafficking supported by agencies like the DEA and Southcom, which earned praise for the Honduran government. The discussion then turned to U.S. policy. Speaker 0 asked whether the interviewee supports what the Trump administration did, or believes there is a line that should not be crossed. They noted that the U.S. military action against Maduro—bombing the country, entering, capturing Maduro, killing members of his government, and taking him to jail—was seen by some as positive, with Maduro described as a criminal who destroyed the country and economy. Speaker 1 responded by focusing on the human impact in Venezuela and other Latin American countries. They stated that a large portion of the population has suffered, with a notable number of people migrating from Venezuela and Honduras. They asserted that elections in Venezuela were stolen by Maduro’s regime, stating that the opposition’s poll results were stored in the cloud and the government did not want to see them because they knew they would lose. They described this as not democracy. They added that, since Hondurans left the country due to trafficking, vessels by sea and illegal flights were bringing jobs to Honduras, but also causing deaths and bloodshed. They argued that if the Trump administration framed Drug Trafficking as terrorism, it was warranted because the drug flow to the United States harmed not only U.S. citizens but also Honduras, which faced the highest death toll in fifteen years due to drugs coming through its borders, largely from Venezuela, and that nothing was done about this by prior administrations. Speaker 0 then asked for the stance on U.S. intervention in general: should intervention be allowed only in certain cases (e.g., Maduro), or should there be no U.S. intervention in Latin America under any president? Speaker 1 shared a Venezuelan friend’s view that there are no options to change Venezuela and that intervention might be necessary if there is no other way to save Venezuela. From a Honduran perspective, they believed Trump’s actions helped not only Honduras but also other Central American and regional countries along the drug-trafficking routes, by reducing corruption, bloodshed, and deaths. They argued that the political machinery Chavez created and used to stall elections in other Latin American countries had previously gone unchecked by the U.S., and that Trump faced Maduro with a confrontation. They concluded that many people in the world do not know what has been happening in Venezuela and its impact on the region. They stated that Trump confronted Maduro, who now has a chance to defend himself in a trial, and emphasized the issue of sovereignty for every country.

Speaker: The speaker argues that a “plan of pedophiles” aims to end democracy in Colombia, stating that despite the harsh reality, they would not allow themselves to be silenced or betrayed by invading neighbors. They claim people would not applaud invading a brother country or a neighbor, emphasizing that the Colombian people are not the enemy, and that invading Venezuela would be traitorous. Speaker: They reject the idea of Venezuela as a villain and say they do not mock the Venezuelan people or trap them in an invasion driven only by oil greed and violence. They warn that such actions would turn this corner of South America into a place like Syria, Iraq, or Libya, filled with slavery and slave trading, and would degrade the region. Speaker: They criticize those “friends of STEIN” who do not want the list to appear in the United States and assert that these friends want to use violence to force the United States to ignore its own government, fueling xenophobia, racism, and ideas of racial superiority to distract from domestic issues. Speaker: They state that the Colombian president has long denunciated narcotraffickers, but note that the narcotraffickers who have been denounced have always been in power in Colombia, in the State. Speaker: The speaker reiterates a stance against betraying bloodlines or supporting invasions of brother countries, condemning any move by the Colombian president to seize lands for invasion from Colombia into a neighboring country. They denounce the president as “maldito” (damned) for generations to come for such a betrayal. Speaker: They emphasize that they do not belong to those who wanted to kill Bolívar, defending Bolívar’s legacy and the dignity of the region, while criticizing external powers’ influence and urging a stance against internal complicity with narcotrafficking and imperialist motives. Overall: The speaker frames a narrative of political betrayal, invasion threats, and manipulation by external actors framed as defending democracy and regional unity, while opposing violence against neighboring peoples, denouncing narcotrafficking within Colombia, and calling out alleged foreign influence and manipulation aimed at destabilizing the region.

The speaker condemns the Canadian government, saying, "That's your Canadian government right there that just did this." They note, "I went to Bosnia, Somalia, and Afghanistan, and I did not fucking serve my country for this bullshit that's fucking in front of us." They add, "Right? The government has committed their own."

The speaker discusses Canada becoming interesting in January and February due to protesters in Ottawa. The job of reporters, according to the speaker, is to go out and ask protesters why they are on the streets, why they are there with their kids, and why there is a bouncy castle in the middle of Ottawa, to discover the story. The speaker claims the Government did not want that and that the Prime Minister decided in advance that the protesters were all the modern excommunications—Nazis, white supremacists, anti-Semites, probably homophobes, misogynists, probably transphobes, etc.—and then he brings in the Emergency Powers Act. The speaker asks what the mainstream media would do at such a time, and asserts they would question it, but claims the Canadian mainstream media did not and instead acted as an Amen Chorus of the government. Several examples are provided. A CBC host described the Freedom Convoy as a feral mob. A Toronto Star columnist said, “sorry for the language, it's a homegrown hate farm that was then jet fueled by an American right funded rat fucking operation.” The speaker notes that CBC claimed two indigenous women who were scared to go outside in Ottawa because of racist violence did not bother to mention that indigenous drummers had led the truckers in an 0 Canada rendition. The National Observer allegedly stated that many black and indigenous freedom convoy supporters were, in fact, duped by the truckers. A Globe and Mail reporter claimed, “My 13 year old son told me to tell protesters I'm not a Jew” out of fear of antisemitic violence, without mentioning that one of the convoy leaders was Jewish. The speaker argues this demonstrably rancid and corrupt behavior is rooted in a system where in Canada, the media is funded by the government. It is stated that in 2018, election year, there was a coincidence with the government funding; the Canadian media allegedly received $595,000,000 over five years, and the Toronto Star estimated it was going to be getting $3,000,000 from the Government in the first half of the year. The government is described as able to tell banks to shut down people’s bank accounts, and able to tell the media what to do, with the media then doing the bidding of the government camp. The speaker concludes that this is not a free society’s media.

The speaker asks, why are we doing this and why are we so opposed to Nicolas Maduro. On the street, most people would say they don’t know who Nicolas Maduro is. But in places like South Florida, where people recognize Maduro and can identify Venezuela on a map, the typical answer shifts: because he’s a communist or a socialist. The speaker asserts that this is true: Nicolas Maduro and his government are very left wing on economics. The speaker notes an interesting distinction: this left-wing stance is economic, not social. In Venezuela, gay marriage is banned, abortion is banned, and sex changes for transgender individuals are banned. The speaker describes Venezuela as one of the very few countries in the entire hemisphere with those social policies, emphasizing that these policies are conservative socially. The speaker adds that Venezuela is one of the very few nations in the region with those social policies, specifying that it is on social policy, not defending the regime. The speaker mentions that only El Salvador comes close in conservatism, though El Salvador is much smaller. Additionally, the speaker brings up a political point: the US-backed opposition leader who would take Maduro’s place, if Maduro were removed, is described as eager to implement gay marriage in Venezuela. This is presented as a counterpoint to the idea that the opposition is globally liberal or that the regime is uniquely opposed to liberal social policies. The speaker references the notion of a “global homo” project and implies that the reality is different from that belief, labeling the project as not crazy after all. The overall argument ties Maduro’s economic leftism to social policy conservatism, and contrasts Venezuelan social policy with potential shifts under the opposition, while noting public recognition differences about Maduro.

A Venezuelan American speaker describes the impact of the regime on their family and millions of others. Their family lost everything—work, savings, investments—wiped out by a narco dictatorship that has held Venezuela in a death grip for over twenty-five years. The Venezuelan exodus is described as the second largest displacement crisis on Earth after Syria, a humanitarian disaster and not just tragedy. The regime has jailed hundreds of political prisoners and thousands have been murdered for speaking out. More than a third of the population has fled, not for opportunity or the American dream, but to survive because staying often means death. The speaker contends Venezuela is not merely a collapsed state but an occupied one, with territory, natural resources, and institutions overrun by hostile foreign powers: Iranian militias, Chinese corporations, Russian intelligence, all exploiting the country with impunity. Venezuela, they argue, is no longer a local crisis but a geopolitical threat endangering the Western Hemisphere, a launchpad for authoritarian expansion in the Americas. Amid this, Maria Corina Machado is highlighted as a leader who dared to push for freedom. In 2024, she supposedly led a peaceful democratic uprising that won the election. Her team allegedly smuggled physical voting receipts out of the country—hard proof of victory the regime attempted to bury. The speaker says her courage has sparked belief among millions of Venezuelans that change is possible. Some people have questioned Machado’s decision to dedicate her Nobel Prize to Donald Trump. The speaker accepts the criticism but argues it was a brilliant strategic move on the global political stage. Machado is portrayed as understanding Trump’s character, his campaign for the prize, and the symbolic, personal value of the recognition to him. The claim is that this gesture might keep Trump’s attention focused on Venezuela at a time when U.S. presence and pressure in the Caribbean is rising. The dedication is described not as flattery or optics, but as a strategic act to protect and preserve a form of power that could shift history, grounded in the belief that the ultimate aim is freedom. The speaker emphasizes that Machado is not asking for a U.S. invasion or war; Venezuela is already invaded and held hostage by a narco state with foreign agents and enemies of democracy—Russians, Iranians, Chinese—operating freely to expand influence across Latin America. Machado is calling for the support of the only military capable of countering that threat, framed as liberation rather than imperialism. The argument is that the fight is for Venezuela’s life, not theory or politics, and that the world should recognize what’s at stake. The fight for Venezuela is a fight for freedom, democracy, and continental stability, and if liberty, human dignity, and peace in the Americas matter, Venezuela’s fight must matter to all.

A speaker claimed that only a handful of apartment complexes in America have been taken over by Venezuelan gangs and that Donald Trump is the solution, not Kamala Harris's open border policies. The speaker asserted that Americans are fed up and have a right to be. The speaker expressed concern over apartment complexes being taken over by violent gangs and emphasized the need to make American communities safe again. The speaker stated that letting millions of unvetted people into the country leads to problems. They blamed Kamala Harris's executive orders for undoing Donald Trump's border policies, leading to the current consequences. The speaker believes the situation will only improve if Donald Trump continues to call out these issues.

The speaker argues that Venezuela has already been invaded, naming Russian agents, Iranian agents, and terrorist groups such as Hizbola and Hamas operating freely in alignment with the regime. They also point to the Colombian guerrilla and drug cartels as factors that have taken over 60% of the population, not only in drug trafficking but also in human trafficking and networks of prostitution. This, the speaker says, has transformed Venezuela into the criminal hub of The Americas. The regime’s sustainability, according to the speaker, relies on a powerful and heavily funded repression system. The speaker asks where this funding comes from, answering with multiple illicit streams: drug trafficking, the black market of oil, arms trafficking, and human trafficking. They assert that these flows must be cut, arguing that once repression is weakened, “it's over” because violence and terror are all the regime has left. The speaker urges the international community to cut these sources of funding and support. They claim that the other regimes that back Maduro and the criminal structure are active and have turned Venezuela into a safe haven for their operations, extending their influence into the rest of Latin America.

Look at those streets, it's like a war zone, a dead city. This is Havana, or what's left of it. There's no prosperity, no path, no future. People are living like zombies, surviving rather than truly living. It's sad to see a nation drowning in hunger and need. This is what Fidel Castro wanted for Latin America, what they want for Venezuela, Colombia, and Mexico. This is communism, folks. Don't let it reach your country.

The conversation centers on Venezuela and regional concerns. Speaker 0 notes that there were voices suggesting Venezuela isn’t so bad and that Latin America isn’t either, but they remain unconvinced. They ask Abe for good reasons not to be convinced. Abe responds that there are good reasons: Venezuela is getting worse, little by little, as long as oil money continues to flow. Speaker 0 then relays information from experts: Venezuela, apart from Iran, is the only government that propagates anti-Semitism around the world. The claim is that it’s already formalized, first within the country and then outside. The discussion moves to what actions might be taken. Speaker 0 asks whether there is any pressing effort underway. They say they’ve talked to Jesse Jackson, noting the relationship, but it’s not for Kenra; there are other plans, which will be discussed in a moment.

Speaker: I have a message for the Canadian people. Don't vote for this guy. Real and Mark Carney is the most elite of elitists out there. This guy is not a man of the people at all. He's the ultimate elitist, and be careful because he put out a message, and he conflated, you know, hey, Trump is the biggest threat to we've had, you know, in his lifetime. Thinking about all the things that have threatened humankind in in his lifetime. So it's hyperbolic. But then he started bragging about the economy, you know, the liberal economy. I have all these charts. Mean, it's just and they're all heartbreaking if you're a Canadian. The standard of living has imploded. You look at the investments, right, or where the jobs are. Almost all of it, public sector, little private sector, and self employment, none. There's no real business opportunities there. OECD predicts the worst economies for 2020 to 2030 at the end of all 36 countries, Canada. I mean, careful. You're right. You've got to right. It's not bad. It's horrific. It's horrific. This country needs a reboot, right? Which means Canada's vulnerable. It's extraordinarily vulnerable. They're to a major power like America taking them on. Sure. They I mean and we're friends. Again, this is reciprocal. This is like, hey. Okay. You wanna protect your dairy farmers and they for whatever reason, they supersede everyone else? Negotiate with the Trump team. But this sort of saber rattling but I will say this. They do have a friend in the American media. And my emails this morning, get one from Fortune, and it says America's war in Canada. We didn't declare war. The article, you can't find that anywhere in the article, but that's where they headline it. Maybe it makes you open an email, but again, this is the kind of stuff that's happening out there. It's really it's really this is a heartfelt message to to Canada and and and people up there. It's time to turn your country around. I don't know. Time to make Canada great again.

The speaker says the United States is becoming like Venezuela. At a local HEB in San Antonio, Texas, the speaker observed a majority of people who appeared to be Venezuelan. They were speaking a Spanish dialect different from Mexican Spanish and wearing jerseys with "Venezuela" on them. The speaker observed them taking up all the aisles, not moving for others, and loading up on beer. The speaker feels big changes are coming to the United States.

Speaker 1 discusses the human toll of Venezuelan and regional instability, noting widespread Venezuelan suffering and massive migration from the region, including Honduras and other countries, driven by the situation in Venezuela. He contends that elections in Venezuela were stolen by Maduro’s regime, insisting that the opposition’s poll results were stored on cloud and the government refused to view them because they knew they had lost, labeling this as not a democracy. He adds that the drug trade through Honduras caused significant bloodshed and deaths, attributing much of this violence to shipments that originated in Venezuela and stating that the U.S. had not acted on that flow, which has cost Hondurans many lives. Speaker 0 then asks about the stance on U.S. intervention, whether intervention is sometimes warranted, such as against Maduro, or whether there should be no U.S. intervention in Latin America at all, across different administrations. Speaker 1 responds by recounting a Venezuelan friend’s view that options to change Venezuela are limited and that intervention might be necessary if there is no other way to save Venezuela. From the Honduran perspective, he says Trump’s actions helped Honduras and other Central American countries by addressing drug trafficking routes that harmed regional security, corruption, and lives. He asserts that Maduro created a political machine used to stall elections in regional countries, a tactic previously overlooked by the Obama-era U.S. administration but confronted by the Trump administration. He believes Trump’s administration provided options to Maduro, who did not accept them, leaving Maduro to defend himself in his upcoming trial. Speaker 1 emphasizes the sovereignty of countries and argues that many people worldwide do not understand what has happened in Venezuela and how it affects both Venezuelans and neighboring nations. He states that Maduro is going to have a chance to defend himself in court, and reiterates that intervention has implications for sovereignty and regional stability, implying that the situation has prompted broader regional consequences and debates about the legitimacy of elections and governance in Venezuela.

Speaker 1 asserts that Trudeau destroyed Canada economically, socially, and culturally, particularly through authoritarian COVID-19 measures and vaccine passports. Speaker 1 regrets not being vaccinated, while Speaker 0 agrees. Speaker 0 claims Trudeau systematically destroyed Canada, possibly on purpose, citing the MAIDS program. Speaker 1 accuses Trudeau of being a socialist, globalist, and follower of the World Economic Forum, doubling Canada's debt in ten years. Speaker 1 blames mass immigration, promoted by Trudeau's multiculturalism policies, for declining GDP per capita and societal fragmentation. Speaker 0 questions why Trudeau isn't in jail for his actions. Speaker 1 calls for an inquiry into COVID-19 policies and a moratorium on immigration and mRNA vaccines. Speaker 1 criticizes current political leaders for pandering to ethnic communities and supporting mass immigration, echoing the "replacement doc theory." Speaker 1 claims the democratic system isn't producing democratic results and that the mainstream media cancels opposing viewpoints. Speaker 1 says globalists are anti-western, targeting majority white Christian countries. Speaker 1 accuses Carney and Polyyev of prioritizing foreigners over Canadians, and says they love power. Speaker 1 says Canada has Chinese interference in elections, with some MPs not loyal to the country. Speaker 1 says immigrants bring internal conflicts to Canada. Speaker 1 says Polyyev and Carney want to impose a carbon tax. Speaker 1 says Canada has no gold reserves.

The speaker draws a parallel between the current situation and what happened in Zimbabwe. They mention the demonization of white people, similar to what occurred in Zimbabwe before its collapse. The collapse was triggered by scapegoating white farmers who were the main producers in the agricultural industry. The government's corruption and mismanagement led to poverty and discontent among the people. Instead of taking responsibility, the government shifted blame to the white farmers, accusing them of taking land and causing problems. This rhetoric didn't exist before.

Speaker 0: Have you considered talking to the president of Colombia who you called a drop leader? Speaker 1: No. I haven't really thought too much about him. He's been fairly hostile to The United States, and I haven't given him a lot of thought. He's he's gonna have himself some big problems if he doesn't wise up. Speaker 2: Did you say Colombia is producing a lot of drugs. Have cocaine factories that they make cocaine, as you know, and they sell it right into The United States. So he better wise up or he'll be next. He'll be next too. I hope he's listening. Speaker 0: So was this operation a message that you're sending to Mexico, to Claudia Scheinbaum, president there? Speaker 2: Well, it wasn't meant to be. We're very friendly with her. She's a good woman, but the cartels are running Mexico. She's not running Mexico. The cartels are running Mexico. We could be politically correct and be nice and say, oh, yes. Is no. No. She's very, you know, she's very frightened of the cartels that are running Mexico. And I've asked her numerous times, would you like us to take out the cartels? No. No. No, mister president. No. No, no, please. So we have to do something because we lost the real number is 300,000 people, in my opinion. You know, they like to say a 100,000. A 100,000 is a lot of people, but the real number is 300,000 people. And we lost it to drugs, and they come in through the southern border, mostly the southern border. A lot plenty come in through Canada too, by the way, in case you don't know. But but they come in through the southern border, and something's gonna have to be done with Mexico. Cuban government, the Trump administration's next target, mister secretary, very quickly. Speaker 3: Well, the Cuban government is a is a huge problem. Yeah. The the the the Cuban government is a huge problem for Speaker 2: some So is that a yes? Speaker 3: Cuba. But I don't think people fully appreciate. I think they're in a lot of trouble. Yes. I'm not gonna talk talk to you about what our future steps are gonna be and our policies are gonna be right now in this regard, but I don't think it's any mystery that we are not big fans of the Cuban regime, who, by the way, are the ones that were propping up Maduro. His entire, like, internal security force, his internal security opera apparatus is entirely controlled by Cubans. One of the untold stories here is how, in essence, you talk about colonization because I think you said Dulce Rodriguez mentioned that, the ones who have sort of colonized, at least inside the regime, are Cubans. It was Cubans that guarded Maduro. He was not guarded by Venezuelan bodyguards. He had Cuban bodyguards. In terms of their internal intelligence, who spies on who inside to make sure there are no traitors, those are all Cubans. Speaker 0: He felt very strongly. We we needed for nationals. We need Greenland for national security, not for minerals. We had some we have so many sites for minerals and oil and everything. We have more oil than any other country in the world. We need Greenland for national security.