reSee.it - Related Video Feed

John Kennedy believed the CIA's purpose was to create new wars. Eisenhower warned against the military-industrial complex. Two months into his presidency, the military and intelligence asked Kennedy to invade Cuba, claiming it would trigger a revolution. Kennedy refused to use the US military. When the invasion failed, they asked him to send in the military, but he refused again, realizing he was being tricked. Kennedy wanted to shatter the CIA into a thousand pieces. He resisted military and intelligence pressure to enter Laos and Vietnam, limiting involvement in Vietnam to 16,000 military advisors. In October 1963, after learning 75 Americans had died in Vietnam, Kennedy ordered a total troop withdrawal. A month later, he was killed.

The speaker researched false flag attacks, citing the Gulf of Tonkin, the USS Liberty incident, and Operation Ajax as examples. They claim to have seen preprogramming in the news about an impending attack by Bin Laden. The speaker claims to have predicted the specifics of 9/11, stating they said the CIA would fly planes into the World Trade Centers and blame it on Bin Laden. They allege that intelligence agencies were tracking the supposed hijackers, who were being trained in US military bases and funded by multiple governments. They add that Bin Laden was a CIA asset used to destabilize areas and act as a boogeyman. They cite the 1990s World Trade Center bombing attempt involving Ahmad Salam, and the structural issues of the World Trade Center as contributing factors. They also mention the Project for the New American Century document, which stated that a new Pearl Harbor event was needed to launch the Pax Americana. The speaker claims the document also mentioned race-specific bioweapons.

Former President Dwight D. Eisenhower delivers a farewell speech warning about the influence of the military-industrial complex. The speech was initially thought to be written by a speechwriter, but recently discovered documents reveal that Eisenhower's brother, Milton, played a significant role in drafting it. Eisenhower expresses concern about the growing power of the military and the arms industry, urging citizens to be vigilant and ensure the proper balance between defense and peaceful goals. The speech emphasizes the need for an informed and knowledgeable citizenry to prevent the combination of military and industrial power from endangering democracy and liberty. The video also discusses President Kennedy's assassination and former President Truman's call to abolish 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.

President Eisenhower warned about the military-industrial complex in his 1961 speech. He cautioned against the influence of the military and defense industry in shaping policies. An example of this influence was seen when President Kennedy ordered the withdrawal of military advisers from Vietnam in 1963, but after his assassination, President Johnson reversed the decision and escalated the war, benefiting the military financially. This led to the deployment of over 500,000 troops in Vietnam by 1968. The military profited greatly from the prolonged military presence in Vietnam, which was made possible by Kennedy's assassination.

In his 1961 farewell address, President Eisenhower warned against the undue influence of the military-industrial complex. John F. Kennedy's narrow 1960 election victory ushered in a new era, but he inherited the CIA's secret war in Cuba, culminating in the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion. The Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Amidst these crises, Kennedy's administration also grappled with conflicts in Laos and Vietnam. He publicly advocated for peace, urging a re-evaluation of relations with the Soviet Union, emphasizing our shared humanity and the need for a peace not enforced by American might.

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.

In this video, the speaker claims that all wars in the US have been fake, referring to the manipulation and strategizing that leads to war. He highlights the Washington Institute For Near East Policy, a think tank with influential members like Henry Kissinger and Condoleezza Rice, who have served in various presidential administrations. The speaker emphasizes that American interests in the Middle East, rather than spreading democracy or freedom, drive these wars. He discusses historical examples of false flag events that led to wars, such as Pearl Harbor and the Gulf of Tonkin incident. The speaker concludes that if Iran doesn't compromise, someone else should initiate the war, following the pattern of previous conflicts.

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 speaker lays out a narrative in which Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, is intricately connected to the CIA and to a longtime insider, James Angleton. The claim is that Mossad and Angleton formed an alliance “forever,” with Angleton described as “the mole” who was aligned with Mossad. In 1960, Angleton was the head of the CIA’s Directorate of Foreign Intelligence, and he is depicted as the person who was always searching for a Russian mole. The speaker asserts that Angleton was effectively the Russian mole because of his close friendship with Mossad, to the extent that he would share information with Mossad and Mossad would not relay it to Russia. The narrative then moves to 1963, referencing David Ben-Gurion, the Israeli prime minister, arguing that Israel decided to kill John F. Kennedy. The speaker quotes Ben-Gurion as saying that Kennedy’s threats of inspections of “demonic” (interpreted as a mispronunciation or coded term for dangerous issues) were unacceptable, and that Ben-Gurion said, “It’s none of his frigging business. I don’t wanna hear anymore from Kennedy. You kill him.” According to the speaker, Ben-Gurion issued this order to Mossad and then resigned so he could not be held responsible for it. The implication is that Mossad then went to Angleton, implying that the Kennedy assassination was not a CIA job, but was “greased by the CIA” because Angleton had his connections at Mossad. From there, the speaker claims that Corsican sharpshooters were hired by Mossad for the Kennedy assassination as part of a larger operation at Dealey Plaza, including the escape. The speaker asserts that public suspicion has misattributed the blame to the mob, Lyndon Johnson, or Castro, but maintains that it was Israel that carried it out. The stated motive is tied to Israel’s desire to avoid further inspections related to their nuclear program. The speaker claims this is connected to Israel’s nuclear and biological capabilities and asserts that plutonium was stolen from the United States to support their program. In summary, the speaker contends that the Kennedy assassination was orchestrated not by the CIA alone, but through a coordinated effort involving Mossad, James Angleton, and David Ben-Gurion, with Israel acting to prevent scrutiny of its nuclear activities by eliminating Kennedy, aided by Corsican shooters and a CIA-Mossad alliance.

Americans are being warned that they may be drawn into a war with Arabs, falsely believing that Muslims were responsible for a terrible event. However, the speaker claims that it was actually the Israeli Mossad, known for their cunning and ruthlessness, who orchestrated the attack and made it appear as though Arabs were to blame. This is referred to as a false flag operation. The speaker cites a US army report from the day before 9/11 as evidence of Israel's capabilities.

Speaker 0 describes a long, forty-year conflict described as a Third World War waged by the CIA and the U.S. National Security Complex against people of the Third World, not the Soviets. He states that at least six million people have been killed in this war. He emphasizes that these are not Soviets and notes no parachuting into the Soviet Union to kill since 1954, when the Soviets developed the capability of dropping atomic weapons on the United States. He references CIA, Marine Corps, and three CIA Secret Wars. He recalls his 1975 position as chief of the Angola task force within the National Security Council, describing it as the third CIA secret war he was part of. He mentions the National Security Act of 1947 creating the National Security Council, and the CIA being given a charter to perform duties and functions necessary to national security interests, with vague authority to protect sources and methods. He says, in the mid-80s, he coined the term the Third World War after realizing the U.S. was not attacking the Soviet Union but people in the Third World. He characterizes the Third World War as the third bloodiest war in history, with operations conducted globally and a license to kill, smuggle drugs, and violate international law and principles of nations working together for a healthier and more peaceful world. He alleges the U.S. legal system was being converted to give the CIA control of society. He notes there is massive documentation of CIA secret wars, citing the Church Committee investigation of 1975, which found 900 major operations and 3,000 minor operations in the fourteen years prior. Extrapolating over the forty-plus years of CIA activity, he claims 3,000 major operations and over 10,000 minor operations, all allegedly illegal and disruptive to other societies, with many bloody and gory. He asserts the CIA organized the overthrow of functioning constitutional democracies, created secret armies, and directed them to fight on multiple continents. He claims the agency encouraged ethnic minorities to rise up: the Mosquito Indians in Nicaragua, the Kurds in the Middle East, the Hmongs in Southeast Asia. He alleges death squads funded by the CIA, such as the Treasury Police in El Salvador, responsible for most of the 50,000 killed in the 1980s, and 70,000 before that. He describes orchestration by the CIA through secret teams and propaganda, leading to involvement in the Korean War and attacks on China from Quemoy and Matsu, Thailand, and Tibet. He notes drug trafficking, the Korean War resulting in about a million deaths, and the Vietnam War, with CIA involvement at every level, contributing to the creation of the Golden Triangle and the Golden Crescent, where heroin became a major outcome, with Air America aircraft shipping arms for allies and returning with heroin, and claims President Carter and Admiral Turner brag about the Afghanistan operation as the largest CIA secret war operation in history. He concludes that the Golden Crescent remains the largest source of heroin today. He summarizes that the Third World War, waged by the CIA, the U.S. National Security Complex, and the military, has resulted in widespread devastation, especially in the Third World, as opposed to Europe where there is no equivalent destructive capability. He notes that those regions rarely have the means to hurt the U.S., questioning the motive of targeting those who cannot defend themselves.

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.

I outline the speaker’s central claims about George Soros, the CIA, and global political influence. The speaker contends that George Soros has been one of the CIA’s most valuable private assets for over forty years, acting as the civilian, deniable funding arm of American regime-change operations worldwide. Because of this, Soros is not only allowed in the United States but protected there, enabling him to operate with impunity, which the speaker says explains his arrogance and continued influence. The speaker traces a pattern of Soros-backed “color revolutions” starting with Serbia in 2000, refined in Georgia in 2003, Ukraine in 2004, and the Arab Spring in 2011. They assert that logos for USAID, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and the Open Society Foundations appear in all these cases, framing Soros as central to these movements. According to the speaker, the Arab Spring served as a trial run for Europe’s migrant crisis. They claim that in 2011 the CIA and Soros turned that playbook on Libya and Syria. Gaddafi allegedly warned in March 2011 that removing him would unleash millions to flood Europe from Africa; eight months later, Gaddafi was dead, Libya descended into chaos, and migrant waves began as predicted. By 2015–2016, the speaker asserts, battle-hardened jihadists and economic migrants were crossing the Mediterranean with iPhones, prepaid cards, and Twitter guides written in Arabic, described as the same social media mobilization tactics used in Kyiv and Tahrir Square. Wayne Madsen is cited as having called this pattern out in 2015, described by the speaker as a deliberate CIA social-engineering operation to fracture Europe from within, applying the same playbook to new targets. The speaker then asserts that the United States has been subject to this strategy from 2020 to the present, pointing to the summer riots of 2020 as an example. The claim continues that Soros’s Open Society Foundations donated at least $33,000,000 to groups that organized and sustained the 2020 riots, and that Soros-backed NGOs provided lawyers, maps, and logistics for the southern border caravans, as well as funding to influence police departments and district attorneys in major cities, effectively helping to elect them. The speaker argues that Soros is implementing the color-revolution playbook “on us now,” with the target being ordinary Americans rather than foreign nations. A historical reference is made to JFK, who allegedly spoke of splintering the CIA after the Bay of Pigs betrayal, a chance JFK did not realize, leaving the world the speaker claims the CIA built. The speaker notes that Hungary, a country of 9 million, has passed Stop Soros laws and expelled his operations, asking why the United States cannot do the same, and suggests finishing what JFK started.

The speaker believes Israel's Mossad was involved in Kennedy's assassination. Oswald was supposed to die, with the focus shifting to Russia, but Jack Ruby intervened. The speaker asserts this was a false flag operation, now perfected. Oswald's death was necessary to prevent a trial, leading to conjecture, similar to 9/11. The absence of a trial was by design, explaining why Oswald died on national TV.

The speaker warns about false flag attacks, stating that they are used to start conflicts and are based on lies. They mention rumors of Victoria Nuland planning a false flag attack on a Ukrainian nuclear power plant. The speaker is contacted by a filmmaker who discusses the use of false flags by the US government. They mention an incident where commandos were offered money to blow up a nuclear power plant but refused. The speaker also talks about a potential false flag being set up on the southern border and criticizes Greg Abbott for calling for a civil war. They warn against falling into traps and emphasize that the government is out of control.

The transcript discusses Operation Northwoods, a proposed scheme in the early 1960s by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, led by L. O. Lemonser, to conduct false flag operations as a pretext for invading Cuba and waging war with the Soviet Union. The plan included hijacking jets by remote control, crashing them, and blaming Cuba, along with numerous other terrorist attacks to be carried out under the document. One scenario proposed the destruction of a US naval vessel to be blamed on a foreign power as a pretext for war with an agreed enemy. The narrative then shifts to 1967, when President Lyndon Baines Johnson allegedly operationalized Northwoods during the Six Day War. During that conflict, the USS Liberty, a clearly marked US intelligence ship, was sent by Johnson to collect electronic intelligence in the Eastern Mediterranean, approximately 14 miles off the coast of Israel in international waters. Speaker 1 describes the attack on the USS Liberty: three torpedo boats approached from the starboard quarter at high speed in an apparent torpedo launch attitude. Israeli surveillance aircraft flew low over the ship, clearly identifying it as American. At 2 PM that afternoon, the USS Liberty was attacked by three Mirage III fighter-bombers. The Mirages jammed US signals, and were unmarked, the only unmarked aircraft in Israel's arsenal. The fighter-bombers strafed the ship with their cannons, dropped conventional munitions and napalm from bow to stern. After the Mirages, the ship was hit by a medium bomber, Desalit? miseries, carrying napalm and other munitions such as white phosphorus. The USS Liberty was then attacked by three Israeli torpedo boats bearing Israeli flags. The torpedo gunboats opened fire with high-caliber machine guns and launched torpedoes. A single torpedo struck the ship, creating a 30-foot exit hole on both sides. The torpedo boats then strafed life rafts in the water in international waters. Throughout the engagement, the USS Liberty repeatedly called the Sixth Fleet nearby for air support or rescue. Two aircraft carriers and the Mediterranean fleet responded, but they were recalled by the White House. Rear Admiral Geist, commanding the carriers in the Sixth Fleet, called Washington to confirm the recall. Secretary of Defense McNamara came on the line, and then President Johnson allegedly told Geist, “I want that goddamn ship going to the bottom. No help. Recall the wings.” The report asserts that American forces were told to stand down despite the attack. A Russian spy ship reportedly witnessed part of the attack. After three hours, the Israelis withdrew, allowing the damaged USS Liberty to limp to safety. The narrator cites interviews with former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Thomas Moore, other admirals, and the head JAG officer of the Navy who allegedly was ordered to falsify reports and cover up what happened. An Israeli pilot is said to have publicly stated that he refused three times, over radio, to attack the ship, noting it was an American ship in international waters, but he was ordered to engage under threat of court-martial. The summary concludes with the claim that Johnson had personal control over the operation, positioning the ship in the Mediterranean and making a backroom deal with Israel to attack it and blame Egypt, aiming to draw the US into war and take over the Middle East. The captain and crew were allegedly told they would face life in prison or death if they disclosed what happened. Captain William L. McGonagall is said to have received the Congressional Medal of Honor in secret and was instructed not to reveal it.

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.

Uncle John Kennedy understood the CIA's purpose was to create new wars. Eisenhower warned against the military-industrial complex. Two months after his inauguration, the military and intelligence approached Kennedy about invading Cuba, but he refused, stating the U.S. shouldn't dictate other countries' governments. Despite Kennedy's refusal to use the U.S. military, the Bay of Pigs invasion proceeded. When the operation failed and military intervention was requested, Kennedy again refused, realizing he had been deceived. He then wanted to shatter the CIA into a thousand pieces. During his presidency, Kennedy resisted military and intelligence pressures to enter Laos and Vietnam. He sent military advisors to Vietnam but refused to deploy 250,000 combat troops. After learning that 75 Americans had died, Kennedy ordered all U.S. troops out of Vietnam in October 1963. A month later, he was killed.

"Here's something you're never taught in school. Here in the good old US Of A, all of your wars have been fake." The video centers on the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, an American think tank established in 1985, whose mission is "to advance a balanced and realistic understanding of American interests in The Middle East and to promote the policies that secure them." Its board includes Henry Kissinger, Richard Pearl, Condoleezza Rice, George Shultz, James Woolsey. The speaker notes: "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 adds: "The traditional way that America gets to war is what's best for US interests." He cites alleged false flags: "False flag." Pearl Harbor, Lusitania, Gulf Of Tonkin, Maine, Fort Sumter. "If the Iranians aren't gonna compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war." "This is how America goes to war." "One can combine other means of pressure with sanctions." "We could step up the pressure." "They're in the game of doing that to everybody." "We are in the game of using covert means against the Iranians." "We could get nastier with that." "you don't know when World War three is gonna break out, but when it does, you'll know why."

According to the speaker, Zionist control of the U.S. government began when Ben Gurion told Presidents Eisenhower and JFK that Jewish scientists helped build the atomic bomb and Israel wanted influence. While Eisenhower and JFK resisted, General Groves, who built the bomb secretly, pushed to drop it on Japan with Zionist support, even though it wasn't needed to end the war. Eisenhower and others were angry because Groves wanted to claim the bomb won the war. Eisenhower forced Groves out of the military in 1947, but Groves, influential with Zionists, helped replace Henry Wallace with Truman as president to install "Fabian, Zionist, and friendlies" in the new CIA. The speaker claims this was a mistake by Eisenhower and Truman. Groves transferred military brainpower to the CIA, led by George Kennan and Allen Dulles. Dulles's right-hand man, Richard Helms, later got rid of MK Ultra files and forced Jim Garrison to prosecute Clay Shaw for JFK's murder, denying Shaw's CIA ties until after Shaw's death.

Speaker 0 argues that Freemasons, the New World Order, Skull and Bones, the Bohemian Grove, the North American Union, martial law, military checkpoints, US concentration camps, and a one world government will come to Americans unless action is taken now. The time is here; act now, America, before it's too late. Speaker 1 defines false flag operations as a distract-and-unify tactic for the government to push a hidden agenda. Globalization, control of oil, and suspension of civil liberties are used to gain more control, with fear being the game. He urges liberals, conservatives, and independents to join together as Americans and make their voices heard. He claims attackers want people split and distracted, and warns of an escalated attempt by the administration to scare the public into thinking Iran is a threat. He cautions to look for another false flag operation to justify fighting Iran, and to check for other mock drills occurring during the same time as real events; citing the nine-eleven attacks and the London bombings as examples where similar exercises happened the day of the attacks. He asks questions, demands answers, and asks who benefits. He asserts there is no interest in creating a stable environment in Iraq. He states the Pentagon has lost track of guns and ammunition and questions whose hands they fall into, arguing that disorder and chaos are being sought as distractions, with the conflict expected to last years. He predicts continued bases in Iraq under the pretext of security and national interest, and repeats the question: who benefits? Speaker 2 notes that in 2005 ExxonMobil achieved a record profit of $35,000,000,000, and an economist estimated that $7,000,000,000 of that amount was due to market conditions created by the war. Speaker 1 continues that under the pretext of security and fear of being attacked, the government will suspend freedom of speech, the right to assemble, and protection from illegal searches and seizures; they will ask law-abiding citizens to turn in their guns and to bear arms; they will establish martial law with the army policing the citizens, which is described as illegal. Speaker 3 adds that fear of nuclear, biological, or chemical attacks on US territory might trigger drastic measures. NFL News 12 Jeff Bell reports that clergy would help the government with their biggest problem, which is "us." Speaker 1 repeats: remember, ask yourself, who benefits? Speaker 3 reiterates that their biggest problem is "us," not external enemies, and that those who follow the markets see increasing housing foreclosures and banks calling in loans. People who couldn’t afford loans would have houses bought back by those who built them for pennies on the dollar. This would allow a small elite to regain control, weaken the dollar, realize a North American union, and establish a broader global economy. The repeated question remains: who benefits? Speaker 2 concludes with the confession: “The truth is, I hope I'm wrong.”

Following the Bay of Pigs in 1961, JFK and the CIA were at war. JFK advisor Arthur Schlesinger wrote a memo detailing the CIA's covert actions and paramilitary warfare. Kennedy was preparing for a major shakeup of the CIA. JFK fired Alan Dulles, the head of the CIA. Kennedy also went after how the CIA financed their operations. The International Cooperation Administration (ICA) was the financial arm that funded foreign assistance and non-military security programs. It was accused of being a CIA cutout. The ICA was replaced by USAID. Questioning history is important, and one should always ask questions and question everything.

"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."