TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

In 1995, I predicted that if the West didn't recognize the danger of militant Islam, they would witness the World Trade Center being attacked. Democracies usually debate before going to war, but sometimes they need a wake-up call. Just like Pearl Harbor opened the eyes of Americans in World War II, the September 11 attacks opened our eyes to the conflict and danger we face. It's a call to action, as terrorists have the will to destroy America and its allies. Saddam Hussein is undoubtedly pursuing nuclear weapons, and removing him would have positive effects on the region. Benjamin Netanyahu has acknowledged that the September 11 attacks have benefited Israel and the American struggle in Iraq.

In the nineties, the speaker stated that the West doesn't understand militant Islam. In 1995, the speaker wrote a book predicting that if the West doesn't recognize the suicidal nature of militant Islam, militant Islam will bring down the World Trade Center.

If the Soviet Union and the PLO are removed, international terrorism would collapse. Removing Saddam's regime and pursuing regime changes in Iran and Iraq is crucial. Preemptive attacks on nations like Iraq, Iran, and Libya, which are seeking nuclear weapons, are recommended. The goal is to stop Iran's aggression and terror, with support for Israel being a common stance across political lines. Translation: Removing the Soviet Union and the PLO would end international terrorism. Changing regimes in Iraq and Iran is important, with preemptive attacks on nations seeking nuclear weapons like Libya suggested. The focus is on stopping Iran's aggression and terror, with support for Israel being universal.

Speaker recalls a 1995 book arguing that if the West doesn't wake up to the nature of militant Islam, the next thing you'll see is the militant Islam is bringing down the World Trade Center; that a clear connection between Saddam and September 11 must be established before we have a right to prevent the next September 11. "Well, I think not." The speaker then asserts: "There is no question whatsoever that Saddam is seeking and is working and is advancing towards the development of nuclear weapons. No question." The points underscore a predicted outcome of militant Islam, a claimed link between Saddam and 9/11, and a firm assertion about Saddam's nuclear ambitions.

"Proxy, the PLO, international terrorism would collapse. If you take out Saddam, Saddam's regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region." "Obviously, we like to see a regime change, at least I would, in Iran, just as I would like to see in Iraq." "The question now is a practical question. What is the best place to proceed?" "It's not a question of whether Iraq's regime should be taken out, but when should it be taken out?" "The answer is categorically yes." "The, the two nations that are vying competing with each other, who will be the first to achieve nuclear weapons, is Iraq and Iran." "But, a third nation, by the way, is Libya as well."

The biggest threat is not Iran, but Israel with its 200-400 nuclear weapons and the Samson option. The Samson option means Israel will destroy the world with its nukes if its existence is threatened. High-level Talmudic Jewish supremacist thinkers in Israel are ready to launch nukes and destroy Europe and the rest of the world if they feel their existence is threatened. Israel is living on borrowed time. The question is posed: Is Israel going to exercise the Samson option and blow up the world because the world refuses to accept this psychopathic criminal state? The real threat is Israel and the traders inside The United States.

We've targeted Iran's top nuclear scientists, comparing them to Hitler's nuclear team, as well as ballistic missile manufacturing facilities. Iran is allegedly targeting our population with one-ton bombs, while we are targeting military, nuclear, and ballistic missile sites to prevent them from possessing 20,000 such weapons. If we don't act now, it will be too late. We're protecting ourselves, our Arab neighbors, and the world from Iran's ballistic missiles that can reach Europe and soon the United States. This regime has caused death to Americans, and we don't want them to have nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. Today it's Tel Aviv, tomorrow it's New York. We're doing something in the service of mankind, a battle of good against evil. America stands with the good, and I appreciate President Trump's support.

If the Soviet Union and the PLO were removed, international terrorism would collapse. Removing Saddam's regime would have positive effects in the region. Iran and Libya are also concerning due to their nuclear ambitions. It's crucial to prevent Iran's aggression. We all support Israel. Translation: Removing the Soviet Union and the PLO would stop terrorism. Removing Saddam's regime would help the region. Iran, Iraq, and Libya are pursuing nuclear weapons. Stopping Iran's aggression is important. We all support Israel.

If the Soviet Union and the PLO were removed, international terrorism would collapse. Removing Saddam's regime would have positive effects on the region. Regime change is desired in both Iran and Iraq. The practical question is not if Iraq's regime should be removed, but when. When asked if the U.S. should launch preemptive attacks on other nations, the answer is yes. Iraq and Iran are competing to be the first to achieve nuclear weapons, and Libya is also rapidly trying to build an atomic bomb. These three nations must be stopped to halt Iran's conquest, subjugation, and terror. Everyone stands with Israel.

This extremist ideology was allegedly created by Jews and has been supported by British, American, and Israeli intelligence. The aim is to use these Muslim fanatics as a weapon against the West, generating sympathy for Israel while attacking us. The speaker predicts a high likelihood of terrorist attacks this year, as the current Israeli leadership may lose power soon and they want the West to fight their battles. The warning is for people in cities and towns to be aware of potential attacks.

The speaker discusses the logic behind Israel being attacked by Islamic forces due to their dislike of Western values. They claim that Israel is considered a part of the West, and therefore, the entire West is being targeted. They mention Menachem Begin, the father of terrorism, who founded Israel in 1948 and was unapologetic about his involvement in terrorism. The speaker also mentions the bombing of the King David Hotel and the Deir Yassin massacre, both carried out by Begin. They highlight Begin's creation of the Likud party and his expansionist ideology of a greater Israel. The speaker concludes by discussing the influence of Zev Jabotinsky and Bibi Netanyahu's upbringing in this ideology.

Terrorists worship death, not God. If we don't act against organized terror, violence will spread and generations will suffer. We must condemn this killing to avoid judgment from our people, history, and God. This battle isn't about different faiths or civilizations, but between barbaric criminals and decent people protecting life and their religion. The victims of terror are not defined by their religion. To defeat terrorism, nations must deny sanctuary to these evil foot soldiers. Every country in the region has a duty to ensure terrorists find no refuge on their soil.

If Hamas isn't defeated in Gaza, it will inspire groups worldwide. They'll see that a few thousand extremists can manipulate the international community and bring democracies to their knees. Many are watching and pleased with the world's response. They're satisfied to witness the confusion, fear, and anxiety. It's crucial for us to unite because if Israel fails in Gaza, we all will.

In Jerusalem, the speaker expresses gratitude to APAC: “Thank you APAC. Thank you for standing with Israel. Thank you for standing with the American Israeli alliance. And thank you for standing up for the truth.” He acknowledges the difficult environment, noting a “tsunami of lies, vilifications vituperations” reminiscent of the worst anti-Semitic attacks in history, and says Jewish communities, including the American Jewish community and others, have suffered slurs and murderous attacks—“so did we in Israel.” Regarding October 7, he states that the attack was “meant to destroy us, to wipe Israel off the map.” He identifies the Iran Axis as the aggressor, saying Iran’s proxies sought to annihilate the Jewish people and that Iran sought to annihilate the Jewish state. Over the past two years since October 7, he asserts that they have rolled back that threat, fighting a seven-front war against the axis of evil. With the courage of Israeli soldiers and with American help, he says they battered Hamas, hammered Hezbollah, helped bring down the murderous Assad regime, struck the Houthis, attacked pro-Iranian militias, and also attacked Iran itself. He credits American assistance for rolling back Iran’s nuclear bomb program and its ballistic missile threat, noting that the axis has been greatly weakened but is still there, “slicking its wounds.” He praises President Donald J. Trump for efforts to ensure that those threats against both countries do not reappear, stating, “We have never had a greater friend in the White House than President Donald J. Trump.” He emphasizes his value of support from Americans “from both sides of the aisle,” while acknowledging it has been difficult for some, and respecting their courage and honesty in standing up against colleagues who sometimes bow their head to anti-Semitism. In closing, he salutes those who stand against anti-Semitism and stands with APAC in acknowledging the ongoing alliance and shared truths between the United States and Israel.

Speaker argues that 9/11 and the war on terror are Israeli-driven. "The war on terror is an Israeli stratagem, a ploy pushed by Benjamin Netanyahu since 1979 to trick The United States into waging war against Israel's enemies." He says the operation involved "15 of the 19 Arabs lived here" with "multiple identities," and cites Wesley Clark’s claim: "seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and finishing off Iran." He asserts "Israel created the Islamic foe" and that "terrorism is theater." He notes "ICTS" controlled security at US airports on 9/11 and mentions "five dancing Israelis." He references the Yenon plan: "the Yenon plan, named after Oded Yenon" to Balkanize the Middle East, and implicates the Rothschilds and Rupert Murdoch in shaping the narrative. He calls the 9/11 Commission report a "myth" and cites "destruction of the evidence."

Taking out the Soviet Union/PLO and Saddam's regime would cause international terrorism to collapse and have enormous positive reverberations on the region, respectively. Regime change is desired in both Iran and Iraq. The question is not if Iraq's regime should be taken out, but when. Victories build upon each other; Afghanistan makes Iraq easier, and Iraq will make the next victory easier too. In the Middle East, Iran's axis of terror confronts America, Israel, and Arab friends. This is a clash between barbarism and civilization.

Saddam Hussein is actively pursuing the development of nuclear weapons, with support from Russia and other countries. He no longer needs large reactors, as he can produce the necessary materials in hidden centrifuges. Inspections will not uncover these portable manufacturing sites. While it is unclear when he will attack Israel, it is not difficult for him to deceive inspectors and hide his activities. The application of power is crucial in winning the war on terrorism, and the more victories we achieve, the easier the next one becomes. The choice to target Iraq is the right one, as Saddam's acquisition of nuclear weapons would have immediate and dangerous consequences.

There is a tremendous hatred of us in Islam, and we have to get to the bottom of it. There is an unbelievable hatred of us. You're gonna have to figure that out. There is a tremendous hatred, and we have to be very vigilant. We have to be very careful, and we can't allow people coming into this country who have this hatred of The United States and of people that are not Muslim. Is there a war between the West and radical Islam, or is there war between the West and Islam itself? Radical, but it's very hard to define. It's very hard to separate because you don't know who's who.

Iran is the main force behind various groups like the Houthis, Hezbollah, and Hamas. They pose a threat not only to us but also to the Middle East and the world. We must stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons to prevent them from conquering the region, collapsing regimes, and threatening global security. As the Prime Minister of Israel, I am committed to doing everything possible to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

Speaker 0 asks how to weed out Muslims in a country that despises you and means you harm without vilifying or persecuting those who are fine and part of the social fabric. Speaker 1 responds by highlighting that Arab states have taken a strong stance against the Muslim Brotherhood and asks why the West hasn’t. The Muslim Brotherhood has been banned in Egypt and in many Gulf states (not Qatar), and there is a reason: they know how dangerous this organization is, that it doesn’t represent peace-loving Muslims who simply want to practice their religion and not impose a perverted version of jihad. Speaker 1 asserts that the Muslim Brotherhood is not pro-Muslim; it is an organization providing cover for terrorism that disproportionately impacts Muslims, especially in the Arab world. He emphasizes that the biggest victims of terrorism are the people of the Middle East, the majority of whom are Muslims, and urges people to educate themselves about what’s really happening on this front before it’s too late. Speaker 0 then asks why Europe is failing and has massively open borders, taking people from regimes where terrorism is life-threatening. Speaker 1 answers with a single word: subversion. He claims this is most evident in the Israel-Palestinian conflict, stating that the way the war and the conflict are presented in international media is not an accurate reflection of what’s happening on the ground. He believes many Palestinians would share that sentiment. He contends that what’s happening in Gaza is not how it’s reported, because narratives are shaped to present a certain story, a process he attributes to Al Jazeera. He questions who runs Al Jazeera and asserts it is state-run by Qatar, and says they have been a chief sponsor of a “laundered ideology” presenting Palestinian victimhood even if some stories are fabricated. He claims Al Jazeera has falsified stories during the Gaza war. Speaker 1 concludes that when people push back against Islamism, they’re accused of conspiracy or exaggeration, but the speaker argues that there is a conspiracy to undermine the West. He acknowledges that it may seem crazy to say so, but asserts that such a conspiracy is exactly what is happening. He identifies this as the fundamental ideology of Qatar, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the Islamic Republic of Iran on the Shia side, and says this is something that must be spoken out against to educate the general public.

Attacking a nation like Iran would quickly teach them to acquire nuclear weapons to prevent future attacks. Israel, North Korea, France, the United States, and Russia all obtained nuclear weapons for this reason. The speaker references the United States killing 250,000,000 people in two days in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, stating that it was not a high moral moment for America. The speaker suggests that attacking Iran could push them to develop nuclear weapons.

The speaker argues that there has been an “unbelievable success in by, degrading Iran,” moving Iran from a first-rate power to a second- or third-rate power. Iran is described as “throwing their weight all over the place” and “exporting terrorism,” not only across the Middle East but also to Venezuela, where they are “in cahoots with the Maduro regime.” The claim extends to Iran exporting terrorism to America and to the American hemisphere, and to Hamas and Iran’s proxies attempting to get their guys into the United States. The speaker asserts that Hamas and Iran’s proxies are a threat not only to the United States but to Israel and to “all America’s allies in The Middle East,” and to America itself.

According to reports, Iran is said to shelter Al Qaeda fighters in Mashhad and Zebul. The speaker questions why Iraq was chosen as the first target for intervention instead of Syria or Iran. The other speaker argues that the connection lies in the fact that both Iraq and the Taliban harbor terrorists and support terrorism. They believe that the focus should be on preventing future attacks rather than directly linking Iraq to September 11th. The speaker suggests that Iran, with its satellite dishes and internet access, could be influenced through media exposure. They argue that removing Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq would have positive effects on the region, inspiring change in neighboring countries like Iran. The speaker believes that military force and winning victories are crucial in the war on terror.

There is no room for violence and terrorism in our world. Terrorists do not worship God, they worship death. If we don't take action against organized terror, it will continue to spread and destroy lives. This battle is not about different faiths or civilizations, but between good and evil. The victims of terrorism come from all backgrounds, and their deaths are an insult to all that is holy. We can only defeat this evil if we unite and fulfill our responsibilities. America is ready to support the Middle East, but ultimately, it is up to the nations themselves to decide their future. They must drive out the terrorists and extremists from their communities and holy places.

The speaker emphasizes that Israel is a key ally of the United Kingdom in the Middle East, noting a long-standing history and cooperation across security, defense, and trade. They assert that strengthening this relationship is in Britain’s interest. Reflecting on the recent region-wide turmoil, they describe the last two years as devastating and speak personally to the impact by having met with survivors, hostages, and their families from the October 7 attacks. The speaker notes the experiences of families whose loved ones were returned alive and those who were not, describing their pain and suffering as unimaginable. They explain that since these horrific terrorist attacks, Israel has faced prolonged attacks from Iranian-backed groups, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. The speaker identifies these groups as those who oppose the values held by democracies—namely democracy, freedom, and the right to expression. According to the speaker, the actions of these groups have brought immense suffering to countless innocent people. The speaker expresses a belief that the 20 police plan could lay the foundations for sustained peace in the region. They caution, however, that its success depends on allied action, specifically calling on the United Kingdom and other partners to come together to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure in Gaza, eliminate Hamas, and address the ongoing threats from Iran in order to deliver peace and stability. There is mention of ongoing engagement with political leaders in Israel about the peace plan, focusing on how it can be implemented and the role and contribution the United Kingdom could and should be making. The message concludes with a sense of urgency, stating that with so much at stake, now more than ever, there is a need to keep pushing for peace.