TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

I briefed the press as an analyst and interrogator for the CIA, circulating disinformation to influence public opinion. I targeted influential journalists like Robert Chaplin and Kais Beach, planting false information to support US interests in Vietnam. I would also mislead reporters by briefing diplomats to provide false confirmation. Despite my involvement, I now oppose these propaganda tactics, believing they serve no purpose for the CIA.

President Eisenhower warned us against the emerging military industrial complex that would turn us into an imperium. My uncle's thousand days in office were a constant fight to keep the country out of war. They tried to trick him into the Bay of Pigs invasion, but he refused to send in the military. He realized he'd been tricked and later fired those involved in the deception. They tried to get him to invade Laos, Cuba, and Berlin, but he wouldn't. In Vietnam, he only sent advisors, but when he found out about the casualties, he ordered everyone home. Thirty days after signing that order, he was murdered. Johnson then reversed the order and sent in troops. These traumas, including my uncle's death, pushed us down the road Eisenhower warned against. Today, we are the military industrial complex, and nobody believes their voices are heard in Washington. To go back to our original idealism, we must look at the original trauma and expose what happened to my uncle.

The documentary presents a sweeping narrative that the modern era’s wars and security state are driven by deliberate, government-sponsored manipulation—false flag operations and orchestrated crises designed to terrify populations, justify expanded power, and secure global hegemony. It threads together historical examples, contemporary incidents, and testimonies to argue that the public has been misled by official narratives and that truth is being hidden behind “specters of fear.” False flag origins and early precedents - The program defines false flag operations as covert actions designed to appear as if carried out by other actors, with a long focus on the use of terror as a pretext for political ends. - Adolf Hitler’s regime is cited as a classic example: Reichstag fire in 1933, with a patsy framed for the blaze, enabling new laws that consolidated power. The film emphasizes the crisis as a vehicle to drift toward dictatorship and aggression. - The 1953 Iran coup is described as a CIA-MI6 operation (Operation Ajax) that overthrew Mohammad Mossaddegh after his nationalization of oil, with Western intelligence allegedly admitting to terror attacks and propaganda against Mossaddegh. The narrative stresses the role of MI6 and the CIA in orchestrating fear and regime change, and the long-term consequences of SAVAK and imperial influence. - Operation Gladio is presented as an umbrella for Western intelligence-led bombings in Europe (Italy, NATO states) designed to be blamed on leftists; Bologna’s 1980 bombing is highlighted as an instance where officials later spoke of Gladio’s civilian targeting. - The Gulf of Tonkin incident is recounted as a staged pretext to escalate U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia, with declassified accounts and tapes cited to show manipulated intelligence and the subsequent Tonkin Resolution enabling mass casualties. Cold War and postwar covert operations - The film cites Northwoods, a proposed plan to hijack aircraft and blame others to justify war with Cuba; it notes that President Johnson pursued some operational concepts in that vein, linking them to defense planning in the era. - The USS Liberty incident is recounted with claims of an Israeli attack that was allowed to proceed despite clear identification of the ship, and subsequent suppression of details. The narrative includes interviews with figures who allege political orders to sink the ship and to blame it on Egypt. - The 1964 Tonkin incident, the 1967-1968 war moves, and covert operations across the globe are woven into a larger claim that Western powers have repeatedly manufactured or exploited external threats to justify expansion and intervention. 7/7 and London: a modern false flag argument - The film pivots to the July 7, 2005 London bombings, arguing MI6 involvement and suggesting that Al Qaeda links were contrived or manipulated. It points to Madrid’s 2004 bombings as a precursor, noting that officials later admitted Al Qaeda had limited or no connection in some cases. - It presents testimony about MI6 involvement with operatives associated with or acting as assets, including claims about a mastermind linked to MI6 and the protection of a suspect (Aswat) by British intelligence. - The documentary emphasizes anomalies in the official narrative: a single bus diverted to Tavistock Square, eyewitness inconsistencies about the bomber, and post-event claims about surveillance footage and MO incongruities. It asserts evidence of cover-ups, whistleblowers, and political calculations aimed at maintaining fear and martial-law-like measures. - It frames the London attacks as a tool to bolster Tony Blair’s political standing, allow the passage of restrictive laws, and justify overseas military campaigns, while alleging a broader pattern of Western governments staging terror to secure interests. 9/11 and the “inside job” thesis - The centerpiece is a claim that 9/11 was an inside job, with expert and lay testimonies questioning the collapse of the World Trade Center towers, Building 7, and the presence of alternative explanations (thermite, controlled demolition). - The film cites declassified and public materials (Northwoods-like concepts; cited White House memos about luring Saddam into a war through staged actions; investigations into the Pentagon frames) to argue that the government manipulated intelligence and public opinion to justify the Iraq War. - It features a roster of notable figures—former MI5/MI6 whistleblowers, CIA veterans, and academics—who challenge the official 9/11 account, including references to Operation Northwoods, the PNAC document, and analyses suggesting a “false flag” justification for imperial aims. - Charlie Sheen’s public remarks are highlighted as a turning point in mainstream attention to alternative theories, followed by media coverage of new 9/11 footage and debates about Building 7, the Pentagon frames, and thermite evidence. - The documentary cites physicists and engineers who question official explanations, citing molten metal, traces of thermite, and expert analyses of the WTC collapse as signs of demolition rather than collapse from fire alone. Surveillance, civil liberties, and the information war - A recurring claim is that the modern battle is largely informational: psychological warfare, public relations, and control of the narrative are seen as the dominant form of warfare, with public opinion manipulation described as the real battlefield. - Edward Bernays is invoked as the architect of modern propaganda, with quotes about shaping masses and an “invisible government” pulling the strings—an “unseen mechanism” that governs democratic societies. - The film argues that fear and threats are used to erode civil liberties: expanded surveillance, identity cards, free-speech restrictions, and the use of homeland-security rhetoric to suppress dissent, including zones for demonstrations and media suppression in multiple democracies. - It mentions whistleblowers from MI5/MI6 who claim funding of extremist groups and complicity in covert actions, and it frames journalists and activists as agents of influence or targets of state pressure when challenging official narratives. Iraq, oil, and empire - Pentagon and White House documents are cited to claim that post-9/11 strategy sought to counter regional threats and secure access to oil resources, with basing and long-term occupation framed as part of a broader plan for permanent military presence and regional control. - The film argues that the “war on terror” is a pretext for a broader imperial project: redrawing borders, destabilizing regions to facilitate resource control, and exploiting crises to profit defense contractors. - It contends that the “new world order” seeks to keep populations under surveillance and compliance, with public narratives constructed around fear of terrorism and the need for security measures that erode cherished liberties. Closing call - The speakers urge viewers to uncover motive (qui bono), question official stories, and resist the expansion of government power through fear and manipulation. - They advocate for independent inquiry, whistleblowing, and public accountability to stop what they call an ongoing cycle of manufactured crises used to justify a global empire and a police-state governance model. Note: The summary mirrors the documentary’s asserted claims, statements, and testimonies as presented, without endorsing their veracity.

The CIA's main function is gathering intelligence, but it also engages in covert actions and propaganda. We disseminate propaganda to influence public opinion, sometimes working with journalists. This involves planting false stories, sometimes by using compromised journalists or even creating false narratives with fabricated evidence. This practice isn't limited to foreign countries; we've also planted false stories in the US press. For example, during the Angolan war, we used false stories about Cuban atrocities, including fake photos, which were then spread internationally. We've also sponsored the publication of numerous propaganda books in English, influencing public opinion about Vietnam. While the CIA admits to some propaganda efforts abroad, they deny similar activities within the United States. However, this is untrue, as we planted false stories in the Washington Post.

Thank you, Hillsdale, for having me. Today, I'll discuss the history of the intelligence state, starting in 1948, the "zero AD" of US intelligence. In 1948, George Kennan penned "Inauguration of Organized Political Warfare," advocating for overt and covert actions, including "black psychological warfare," to further US objectives. He lamented the public's "attachment to the concept of a basic difference between peace and war," hindering these efforts. NSC 10-2 followed, sanctioning covert operations with "plausible deniability," transforming intelligence agencies into "lie organizations." This led to an "empire of lies" both abroad and at home. Post-WWII, with hard power limited, the US shifted to a soft power empire, using agencies like the CIA for "democracy promotion," even through "dirty deeds." The State Department coordinates this, using the CIA for covert operations, as they lack "plausible deniability."

Checklist for summary approach: - Identify and isolate the two distinct claims made by the speakers. - Preserve the core, verbatim statements for the principal assertions. - Paraphrase surrounding context to enhance readability while keeping fidelity to the original meaning. - Exclude filler, repetition, and off-topic comments. - Do not add evaluative judgments about truth or bias; reproduce the claims as stated. - Translate any non-English elements (not needed here) to English. - Emphasize the two surprising or provocative points: the Afghanistan-money laundering claim and the media-lies argument. - Keep the final summary within 369–462 words. Speaker 0 argues that the goal is not to completely subjugate Afghanistan. The goal is to use Afghanistan to wash money out of the tax bases of The United States, out of the tax bases of European countries, through Afghanistan, and back into the hands of a transnational security alliance. That is the goal, I. E. The goal is to have an endless war, not a successful war. Speaker 1 contends that nearly every war that has started in the past fifty years has been a result of media lies. And the media could have stopped it if they had searched deep enough. If they hadn't, reprinted government propaganda, they could have stopped it. But what does that mean? Well that means basically populations don't like wars. And populations have to be fooled into wars. Populations don't willingly and with open eyes go into a war. So if we have a good media environment then we will also have a peaceful environment.

The United States government decides to send the CIA to Venezuela. They say the CIA will conduct operations against Venezuela, against the peace of Venezuela. This is claimed to be unprecedented; the speaker notes that never before has any government since the CIA’s existence publicly said it would order the CIA to kill, to derange, and to topple countries. A historian named Alejandro is invoked to support this claim. The speaker lists past Latin American coups, asserting that all involved the CIA and resulted in governments being overthrown and presidents assassinated, with documents allegedly published by the U.S. government that have since been declassified. Specific examples named are: 1974, Guatemala, Jacobo Arbenz; 1965, Dominican Republic, Juan Bosch; 1964, Brazil, Joao Goulart; 1973, Chile, Salvador Allende. The speaker says these are “a few” among many coups in Latin America, all documented through declassified U.S. government documents. Additionally, the case of Mosaddegh in Iran (1952) is cited as another example of a national leader toppled. The speaker asserts that, over time, the CIA apologized for overthrowing these presidents, stating the pretenses were that they were communists or terrorists, but later acknowledging the deception. The speaker uses the term “immorality” to describe those past actions and contrasts them with the present claim, stating that for the first time in history, a U.S. government says it has given authorization and issued orders to attack a country. The speaker concludes with a call to the Venezuelan people, saying their people are clear, united, highly conscious, with “1000000 of eyes and 1000000 of ears,” and that they possess the means to defeat this “open conspiracy” against the peace and stability of Venezuela. The ultimate aim asserted is to restore the peace and stability to which the people of Venezuela have a right, and to ensure they regain and sustain that peace and stability.

The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was based on false information about attacks that never happened. Only two members of Congress voted against it. Evidence from sailors and pilots contradicts the claims of attacks. The war in Vietnam was built on lies, as revealed in recently released White House tapes discussing plans for retaliation before the alleged attacks. The whole conflict was a fraud, causing immense damage to both the US and Vietnam.

Dr. Paul and the other speaker discuss a sequence of public claims and shifts regarding Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro, and the Cartel de los Soles. They begin by recalling a $50,000,000 bounty on President Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela, arguing that Maduro is the head of a narco-terrorist drug cartel called Cartel de los Soles. They note that Secretary of State-designate Marco Rubio stated in November that the State Department intends to designate Cartel de los Soles as a foreign terrorist organization headed by the illegitimate Nicolas Maduro, asserting that the group has corrupted Venezuela’s institutions and is responsible for terrorist violence conducted with other designated foreign terrorist organizations, as well as for trafficking drugs into the U.S. and Europe. The speakers claim that for weeks Americans were exposed to a narrative portraying foreign narco-terrorist cartels running the country and that this narrative influenced public opinion, making some believe it might be acceptable to take drastic actions, including attacking boats, on the premise that “they’re all terrorists.” They then point to a development that “dropped yesterday,” presenting a clip that, once Maduro was “in their grasp,” the Justice Department allegedly dropped the claim that Venezuela’s Cartel de los Soles is an actual group. They assert that after months of hype intended to drum up support for invading Venezuela, the claim was retracted, with the implication that the government figures had misrepresented the situation. The speakers compare this sequence to the Iraq WMD narrative, asserting that officials “swore up and down for years” about WMDs, and when the invasion occurred they were shown joking about the existence of WMDs. They recall President George W. Bush joking about WMDs at a White House Correspondents’ Dinner, looking under the couch and the coffee table, asking “Where’s those WMDs?” They conclude by likening the Cartel de los Soles to the WMDs of their operation, arguing that the construct is already completely falling apart. The overarching claim is that the Cartel de los Soles was used as a justification for aggressive action, and that the narrative surrounding the cartel has been exposed as unreliable or false.

The speaker describes “true fifth generation warfare” as a scenario where you do not know who your opponent is. As an example, they ask who is responsible for the puppet master behind the COVID crisis, suggesting potential names like Klaus Schwab, Joe Biden, and Tony Fauci, but stating that “these are surrogates” and that you don’t really know who is managing the message being propagated—the essence of fifth generation warfare. They claim that over the last three years, governments, nongovernmental organizations, transnational organizations, pharmaceutical industry corporations, media, and financial corporations have cooperated via public private partnerships, which the speaker asserts is a euphemism for fascism, to deploy the most massive, globally harmonized psychological and propaganda operation in history. The speaker asserts that, during this period, people have been subjected to the most massive, harmonized, globally coordinated propaganda campaign in the history of the Western world. They state that governments of many Western nation states have turned military grade psychological operations strategies, tactics, technologies, and capabilities—developed for modern military combat—against their own citizens. They conclude by labeling these as inconvenient facts and claim that the world many people believed in no longer exists, if it ever did.

In 1962, the US military proposed Operation Northwoods, a plan to create fake attacks on American targets and blame them on Cuba to justify an invasion. The plan included blowing up a US ship, conducting a terror campaign on American soil, and even shooting down a civilian airliner. However, President JFK rejected the plan. The military's desperation to remove Castro from power and solve the "Cuba problem" is evident in their reckless proposal. This episode highlights the potential abuse of power and the need for checks and balances in government. The US was just one person away from a full-scale invasion, raising concerns about the government's actions and motives.

The speakers discuss false flag operations, such as the Gulf of Tonkin, where they claim attacks were faked to initiate war. They mention Operation Northwoods, allegedly designed to provoke war with Cuba, but stopped by Kennedy. The Bay of Pigs is cited as a turning point where Kennedy realized he couldn't rely on the intelligence community and wanted to dismantle and rebuild it. Eisenhower had warned Kennedy to watch out for the CIA. Eisenhower's farewell address cautioned against the military-industrial complex, claiming that making war profitable leads to more war, a departure from America's traditionally defensive military. One speaker states that profit is where the devil does his best work.

Checklist for summary approach: - Identify and preserve the core events and timeline related to the Gulf of Tonkin claims. - Capture each speaker’s key statements without adding interpretation or judgments. - Retain dates, specific actions, and named entities (LBJ, Maddox, Gulf Of Tonkin Resolution, McNamara, NSA). - Include both the initial incident claims and the later counterclaims or refutations as presented. - Exclude repetition and filler, focusing on essential facts and conclusions. - Translate if needed and present all claims as stated, without evaluative commentary. On August 4, 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson reported renewed hostile actions against United States ships on the high seas in the Gulf of Tonkin and said he was ordering the military forces of the United States to take action in reply. He cited the initial attack on the destroyer Maddox on August 2, and stated it was repeated today by a number of hostile vessels attacking two US destroyers with torpedoes. These two alleged attacks on US destroyers with torpedoes on August 4, 1964 were the reason that LBJ ordered the military to take action in reply and led him to signing the Gulf Of Tonkin Resolution. America had officially entered the Vietnam War. In August '64, it was alleged, that Americans were attacked in the Gulf Of Tonkin, in Vietnam, which led not only to much heavier funding of Vietnam War, but also fueled the reelection of Lyndon Johnson. In his memoirs, secretary of defense Robert McNamara, decades later, would admit that that was entirely false. It was just confusion, and events afterwards showed that our judgment that we've been attacked that day was wrong. United States officials had lied about The NSA released over 200 declassified documents and tapes in the early 2000s, which proved that there were no attacks on 08/04/1964.

We spoke to someone with access to hidden CIA documents about their involvement in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The response was clear: yes, the CIA was involved. This revelation suggests that there are powerful forces within the U.S. government that operate beyond democratic control, capable of influencing elections and concealing their actions, including the murder of a president. This undermines the very concept of democracy. Trust in the government has declined since Kennedy's assassination, and those in the know, including every CIA director since 1963, have been aware of this troubling reality.

Throughout history, leaders and generals have used distraction, deception, untruths, and a mix of truth in military campaigns. According to Speaker 1, the government is capable of disinformation campaigns, psychological operations, and information warfare. Speaker 1 claims to have participated in information warfare campaigns against Al Qaeda and ISIS, involving deception, lies, misinformation, and disinformation to sway the audience. Speaker 1 believes QAnon is a well-executed SIOP (Single Integrated Operational Plan) directed against the American people.

In 1962, the US military proposed Operation Northwoods, a plan to create fake attacks on American targets and blame them on Cuba to justify an invasion. The plan included blowing up a US ship, conducting a terror campaign on American soil, and even shooting down a civilian airliner. However, President JFK rejected the plan. The military's desperation to remove Castro from power and solve the "Cuba problem" is evident in their reckless proposal. This episode highlights the potential abuse of power and the need for checks and balances in the government. The US was just one person away from executing this operation, raising concerns about the government's ability to repeat such actions if the circumstances align.

Good evening. After Jack Ruby shot Lee Harvey Oswald, many Americans questioned the official narrative of the Kennedy assassination. The Warren Commission concluded that both acted alone, but doubts persisted. The term "conspiracy theory" emerged in 1964 as skepticism grew. Psychiatrist Louis Joylan West, who assessed Ruby, was a CIA contractor involved in mind control programs, raising further questions about his motives. A 1976 House committee suggested a conspiracy in Kennedy's murder, with the CIA as a prime suspect. Despite laws mandating document disclosure, recent administrations have withheld thousands of pages. A source with access to these documents claimed the CIA was involved in the assassination. This suggests a powerful, unaccountable force within the government, undermining democratic control. Trust in government has eroded since Kennedy's death, and many key figures have been aware of this troubling reality.

Speaker 0: Wikipedia is a propaganda operation, and one of its founders told me that the CIA or the American intel community is heavily involved in shaping the message, on Wikipedia. Did you come across evidence of that? Speaker 1: On the weaponization working group, as it's described by attorney general Bondi and the president's direction, intelligence community is one of the groups who was weaponized against the people, obviously. It's obvious. The question is, how are we gonna get to the bottom of it? Right? How are gonna get to the bottom of some of the weaponization of the government intelligence community against the citizens? And that's what I that's where I'm going now.

Checklist for summary approach: - Identify and preserve central claim: Operation Northwoods as a 1962 plan by top U.S. military leaders to stage terrorist acts in the U.S. - List the specific proposed actions exactly as described: shoot down planes, drown refugees, bomb Miami, attack Washington, remote-controlled aircraft, fake passenger lists. - Note the stated purpose: to justify invading Cuba and to maximize emotional impact on the American public. - Highlight key decision point and outcome: Kennedy refused to sign; one signature stood between approval and mass murder by the U.S. government. - Mention declassification detail: documents remained buried for forty years before revealing how close the U.S. came to state-sponsored terrorism. - Maintain factual sequence and avoid evaluative or opinionated language. - Translate any non-English elements (not applicable here). Summary: In 1962, America's top generals approved Operation Northwoods, a classified CIA proposal that would stage fake terrorist attacks across the United States. The plan, described as something the Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on “every horrific detail,” envisioned a series of provocations intended to be laid at the feet of Cuba. The scope included shooting down passenger planes filled with innocent Americans and then blaming Cuba for the massacres, with the aim of generating public outrage that could be used to justify a U.S. invasion. The proposed targets spanned major locations and events: Miami would be bombed; Washington, D.C. would face coordinated terrorist strikes; and Cuban refugees fleeing to America would be deliberately drowned at sea, their deaths used as propaganda to sway opinion. The plan also called for remote-controlled aircraft to crash into buildings, while fake passenger lists would be released to the press to lend credibility to the staged events. In addition to these acts, the military calculated exactly how many civilians would need to die to justify invading Cuba, with each attack designed for maximum emotional impact on the American public. The overarching intent was to manufacture a pretext for intervention through carefully orchestrated acts of terror on U.S. soil. President John F. Kennedy read the proposal and refused to sign it, with “one signature” standing between approval and the mass murder of American citizens by their own government. The documents stayed buried for forty years until declassification revealed how close the United States came to state-sponsored terrorism.

Speaker 0 argues that conspiracy theories have been made to look like lunacy, noting that the Kennedy assassination popularized the term “conspiracy theorist.” He says it wasn’t widely used before Kennedy, but afterward it became a label for “kooks,” and he’s repeatedly been called that. Speaker 1 acknowledges this dynamic. He and Speaker 0 discuss what a conspiracy is—“more people working together to do something nefarious?”—and Speaker 0 asserts that conspiracies have always happened. He disputes the view that most conspiracies are due to ineptitude, insisting that when there is profit, power, control, and resources involved, most conspiracies, in fact, turn out to be true. He adds that the deeper you dig, the more you realize there’s a concerted effort to make conspiracies seem ridiculous so people won’t be seen as fools. Speaker 1 remarks on the ridicule as well, and Speaker 0 reiterates his own self-description: “I am a conspiracy theorist,” a “foolish person,” and “a professional clown.” He mocks the idea that being labeled foolish is a barrier, and reflects on how others perceive him. Speaker 0 then provides specific, provocative examples of conspiracies he believes are real: Gulf of Tonkin was faked to justify U.S. entry into Vietnam; production of heroin ramped up to 94% of the world’s supply once the U.S. occupied Afghanistan; and the CIA, in the United States, allegedly sold heroin or cocaine in Los Angeles ghettos to fund the Contras versus the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. He states clearly that these claims are real and asserts that there are conspiracy theorists who are “fucking real.” Speaker 1 pushes back on reputation and judgment, and Speaker 0 reaffirms his self-identification as a conspiracy theorist who faces mockery. Speaker 1 suggests that this stance might give him a “superpower.”

The speaker finds government conspiracy theories interesting but angering, citing MK Ultra and Agent Orange as examples. Researching DARPA's history led to the realization that they were involved in "bad stuff," specifically during the Vietnam War with chemical companies like Dow Chemical and DuPont creating agents blue, purple, and orange. The speaker notes that more American soldiers got sick than killed in that conflict. The speaker dedicated the episode to their father-in-law, who suffered injuries from Agent Orange. The government denied responsibility for years but finally agreed to a settlement in 1981. The speaker's father-in-law applied for and eventually received his settlement forty years later.

The speaker claims the CIA popularized the term "conspiracy theorist" to discredit those questioning the JFK assassination. A leaked 1970s document, "Countering Criticisms of the Warren Report," allegedly detailed tactics to discredit truth speakers, including portraying them as obsessed conspiracists or linking them to communist propaganda. The speaker asserts these tactics are still used today, labeling people "foreign propagandists" and "conspiracy theorists" to discredit them. Negative labels like "racist," "xenophobic," and "antisemitic" are used to discourage association. The speaker says that "they" manufacture boogeymen and create caricatures, then associate people like Candace Owens and Ian Carroll with them to discredit them. The speaker concludes that these tactics were perfected after JFK's assassination and promotes Classicallearner.com, which helps parents teach their kids about information control, the history of fake news, the banking system, the corrupted food system, and morality.

Secrecy is repugnant in a free society. The assassination of President Kennedy occurred at 1 PM CST. We must overcome societal divisions – racial, economic, etc. – and work together. The assassinations of both Kennedy brothers are acknowledged. The dangers of excessive concealment outweigh the justifications for it. We must not let the need for security be used to expand censorship. The CIA’s purpose was creating constant wars for the military-industrial complex. Many Americans distrust the Warren Commission report. We must protect our freedoms; they are coming after us. No official should use my words as an excuse to censor, stifle dissent, or withhold facts. Some media push personal agendas, threatening our democracy. We seek a true peace, not one enforced by American weapons; we all share this planet and our children’s future.

"The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. This is an American think tank out of Washington DC. It was established in 1985, and it says the mission statement of the institute, quote, is to advance a balanced and realistic understanding of American interests in The Middle East and to promote the policies that secure them. Not about what's right and wrong over there. It's just whatever secures the American interests over in The Middle East, and we all know what those interests are. You've got Henry Kissinger, Richard Pearl, Condoleezza Rice, George Shultz, James Woolsey. It's a fun crowd. And it doesn't matter which president you think you're voting for. It's gonna change everything. People that have been part of this particular think tank have served senior positions in the administrations of every president this country has had since George h w Bush. Some of you may have seen this video, but again, considering the things that are going on right now, it's very it's more relevant now than it's ever been. So we're gonna go ahead and watch this, and I just wanna say upfront, you're gonna wanna have to make yourself resist the urge to punch your screen because you're gonna wanna punch this guy." "crisis initiation is really tough, and it's very hard for me to see how The United States, president can get us to war with Iran." "He just said that. You aren't hearing things he literally said. Crisis initiation's tough, and how's The United States president gonna get to war with Iran? Because wars don't just happen. They make the war." "The traditional way that America goes to war is what's best for the interests." "Some people might think that mister Roosevelt wanted to get us into World War two, as David mentioned. You may recall we had to wait for Pearl Harbor. False flag." "Some people might think that mister Wilson wanted to get us into World War one. You may recall he had to wait for the Lusitania episode. False flag." "Some people might think that mister Johnson wanted to send troops to Vietnam. You may recall he had to wait for the Gulf Of Tonkin episode. Total false flag." "We didn't go to war with Spain until the USS until the Maine exploded. Probably also a false flag." "May I point out that mister Lincoln did not feel he could call out the federal army until Fort Sumter was attacked, which is why he ordered the commander of Fort Sumter to do exactly that thing which the South Carolinians had said would cause an attack. Also a false flag." "Do you see a pattern here?" "So if in fact the Iranians aren't gonna compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war." "Period." "If the Iranians don't compromise, it would be best if someone started this war because that is how America goes to war." "One can combine other means of pressure with sanctions. I mentioned that explosion on August 17. We could step up the pressure." "We are in the game of using covert means against the Iranians. We we could get nastier with that." "This is how America goes to war. You don't know when World War three is gonna break out, but when it does, you'll know why."