Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

FEARMONGERING, CYBERATTACKS, AND THE ROAD TO ANOTHER ESCALATION As public support for the war continues to erode, alarming reports are flooding the mainstream media: Iran-linked hackers targeting critical infrastructure and claims that China breached the Federal Reserve. Some threats may be real. But when attribution remains unclear, and evidence...

RedactedNews's profile picture

Redacted

304,502 subscribers

16,774 просмотров • 7 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

🚨 Senior U.S. officials are effecrively hoping Americans get killed in the event of Israel initiating an attack on Iran — just to manufacture public support for US war with Iran. I expose the chilling plan: “They want Israel to start a war against Iran, and we want Iran to retaliate and kill Americans… so that when Americans are dead” it’ll b politically easier to marshal US public support for more war “That is dastardly.” The lies are “paper thin” and happening in plain sight. 70% of Americans oppose this war — yet they are engineering a pretext anyway. This is beyond reckless. This is betrayal. Watch the full clip before it is too late → 👉 #IranWar #NoWarWithIran #DanielDavis
1:40

🚨 Senior U.S. officials are effecrively hoping Americans get killed in the event of Israel initiating an attack on Iran — just to manufacture public support for US war with Iran. I expose the chilling plan: “They want Israel to start a war against Iran, and we want Iran to retaliate and kill Americans… so that when Americans are dead” it’ll b politically easier to marshal US public support for more war “That is dastardly.” The lies are “paper thin” and happening in plain sight. 70% of Americans oppose this war — yet they are engineering a pretext anyway. This is beyond reckless. This is betrayal. Watch the full clip before it is too late → 👉 #IranWar #NoWarWithIran #DanielDavis

Daniel Davis Deep Dive

140,144 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

'The logic of this escalation gets us to a first-use nuclear strike," Tucker Carlson says. Joe Kent adds: Sanctions and limited bombing can't topple the regime, and a full ground invasion is not feasible, so a U.S. nuclear strike could be on the table. Joe Kent resigned from his role as director of counterterrorism center in protest of the Iran War and Israel's influence on U.S. foreign policy.
2:30

'The logic of this escalation gets us to a first-use nuclear strike," Tucker Carlson says. Joe Kent adds: Sanctions and limited bombing can't topple the regime, and a full ground invasion is not feasible, so a U.S. nuclear strike could be on the table. Joe Kent resigned from his role as director of counterterrorism center in protest of the Iran War and Israel's influence on U.S. foreign policy.

The American Conservative

15,749 просмотров • 6 дней назад

Ali Larijani, a few days before his death, warned about a scenario of a staged massacre within the USA, which could be used to persuade American society to wage war against Iran. Now, the former head of the US National Counterterrorism Center, Joe Kent, who resigned at the beginning of the war with Iran, warns in this video that Israel could organize a major terrorist attack against the USA under a false flag. He confirms that Israel is extremely interested in keeping Washington trapped in a war with Iran, and for this purpose, it may resort to serious manipulations and deception to force the US to continue the conflict.
1:08

Ali Larijani, a few days before his death, warned about a scenario of a staged massacre within the USA, which could be used to persuade American society to wage war against Iran. Now, the former head of the US National Counterterrorism Center, Joe Kent, who resigned at the beginning of the war with Iran, warns in this video that Israel could organize a major terrorist attack against the USA under a false flag. He confirms that Israel is extremely interested in keeping Washington trapped in a war with Iran, and for this purpose, it may resort to serious manipulations and deception to force the US to continue the conflict.

S p r i n t e r

16,806 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

ISRAEL IS CHEERING WHILE AMERICANS PAY IN BLOOD Every day, the U.S. is now moving deeper into the Iran conflict: bombs are being exchanged, critical infrastructure is being damaged, taxpayer dollars are disappearing, and now active-duty service members are being lost in the region. The war is no longer theoretical, and the price keeps rising. Israel is openly celebrating that trajectory, calling it the best possible outcome for its own interests. At the same time, the Pentagon is pushing for a new $95 billion budget to keep funding the war and Israel’s strategic goals, even as Americans are asked to absorb the cost with little honest debate. Col. Douglas Macgregor (Douglas Macgregor) joins me to break down where this war is headed, whether boots on the ground become inevitable, and how far the escalation could go, including the possibility of nuclear exchanges. The question now is not whether this conflict is growing; it’s how much bigger Washington is prepared to let it become.
16:02

ISRAEL IS CHEERING WHILE AMERICANS PAY IN BLOOD Every day, the U.S. is now moving deeper into the Iran conflict: bombs are being exchanged, critical infrastructure is being damaged, taxpayer dollars are disappearing, and now active-duty service members are being lost in the region. The war is no longer theoretical, and the price keeps rising. Israel is openly celebrating that trajectory, calling it the best possible outcome for its own interests. At the same time, the Pentagon is pushing for a new $95 billion budget to keep funding the war and Israel’s strategic goals, even as Americans are asked to absorb the cost with little honest debate. Col. Douglas Macgregor (Douglas Macgregor) joins me to break down where this war is headed, whether boots on the ground become inevitable, and how far the escalation could go, including the possibility of nuclear exchanges. The question now is not whether this conflict is growing; it’s how much bigger Washington is prepared to let it become.

Ben Swann

19,280 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🚨 Why would a satellite procurement official be targeted? Satellite communications, procurement networks, and technology transfers have become increasingly important to the Islamic Republic’s military, intelligence, and censorship infrastructure. While there is no public evidence linking this specific case to foreign programs, Iran has long relied on cooperation with countries such as China and Russia for advanced communications, surveillance, aerospace, and dual-use technologies. If the reports are accurate, the incident may point to a broader focus on the logistical, procurement, and technology networks that help sustain the regime’s strategic capabilities behind the scenes.
0:25

🚨 Why would a satellite procurement official be targeted? Satellite communications, procurement networks, and technology transfers have become increasingly important to the Islamic Republic’s military, intelligence, and censorship infrastructure. While there is no public evidence linking this specific case to foreign programs, Iran has long relied on cooperation with countries such as China and Russia for advanced communications, surveillance, aerospace, and dual-use technologies. If the reports are accurate, the incident may point to a broader focus on the logistical, procurement, and technology networks that help sustain the regime’s strategic capabilities behind the scenes.

The Iran Watcher 🇮🇷

63,941 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Professor Robert Pape warns Iran will not accept a “sucker deal”, arguing Washington has destroyed trust and pushed Tehran toward escalation. “We’ve shown them over and over: you can’t trust us.” He says the real question now is whether the US is prepared for another “forever war” and the casualties that could come with it. Full conversation on The Sanchez Effect.
1:08

Professor Robert Pape warns Iran will not accept a “sucker deal”, arguing Washington has destroyed trust and pushed Tehran toward escalation. “We’ve shown them over and over: you can’t trust us.” He says the real question now is whether the US is prepared for another “forever war” and the casualties that could come with it. Full conversation on The Sanchez Effect.

Rick Sanchez

22,746 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Americans started to understand that US is fighting not for Americans, but for Israel. A top Trump official just dropped a bombshell. National Counterterrorism Center Director Joseph Kent resigns, warning the Iran war is based on no imminent threat. Week two of the war — more to come? YouTube decided truth and alternative viewpoints are dangerous, so they taken down the channel. Find us now on BitChute:
1:10

Americans started to understand that US is fighting not for Americans, but for Israel. A top Trump official just dropped a bombshell. National Counterterrorism Center Director Joseph Kent resigns, warning the Iran war is based on no imminent threat. Week two of the war — more to come? YouTube decided truth and alternative viewpoints are dangerous, so they taken down the channel. Find us now on BitChute:

Rick Sanchez

15,025 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

🚨🇺🇸🇮🇱 THE SILENCED TRUTH: ISRAELI LOBBYING & THE ROAD TO WAR Why did the U.S. really start a war with Iran? The answer is often buried by the media, even when it comes from the administration’s own officials. Former NCTC director Joe Kent made it clear: the war began due to intense pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby. Matthew Hoh explains that this is the result of a decades-long "public relations" program designed to ensure American editors and reporters are too afraid to speak the truth. When the interests of a foreign government dictate American military policy, the first casualty is always the truth. Matthew Hoh
2:43

🚨🇺🇸🇮🇱 THE SILENCED TRUTH: ISRAELI LOBBYING & THE ROAD TO WAR Why did the U.S. really start a war with Iran? The answer is often buried by the media, even when it comes from the administration’s own officials. Former NCTC director Joe Kent made it clear: the war began due to intense pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby. Matthew Hoh explains that this is the result of a decades-long "public relations" program designed to ensure American editors and reporters are too afraid to speak the truth. When the interests of a foreign government dictate American military policy, the first casualty is always the truth. Matthew Hoh

Mario Nawfal

41,648 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Nuclear weapons are being discussed in Iran strategy meetings, and the path to that room is disturbingly short. Fmr. congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene says the discussions are real. Fmr. U.S. National Counterterrorism Center director Joe Kent says no inside sourcing is needed to see how Washington gets there, since bombing hasn't opened the strait and a ground invasion costs thousands of American lives: "This is essentially how we arrived at the conclusion to use nuclear weapons in the Second World War." Joe opposes it, which is exactly why he finds the logic so frightening. Joe Kent
2:13

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Nuclear weapons are being discussed in Iran strategy meetings, and the path to that room is disturbingly short. Fmr. congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene says the discussions are real. Fmr. U.S. National Counterterrorism Center director Joe Kent says no inside sourcing is needed to see how Washington gets there, since bombing hasn't opened the strait and a ground invasion costs thousands of American lives: "This is essentially how we arrived at the conclusion to use nuclear weapons in the Second World War." Joe opposes it, which is exactly why he finds the logic so frightening. Joe Kent

Mario Nawfal

71,641 просмотров • 16 дней назад

President Trump just slammed Joe Kent Joe Kent before taking off for Memphis, saying, “I’m not a fan of the guy.” Trump said Kent always agreed with him that Iran is a threat, and has been for the last 47 years… and then he said Kent’s social media posts randomly changed. Trump says he wanted to be nice to Kent when he lost his congressional races and after his wife died… so he gave him a job in the White House as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center. Trump says he regrets being nice to Joe Kent, because Kent never appreciated it and repaid Trump’s kindness with disloyalty and disrespect.
2:11

President Trump just slammed Joe Kent Joe Kent before taking off for Memphis, saying, “I’m not a fan of the guy.” Trump said Kent always agreed with him that Iran is a threat, and has been for the last 47 years… and then he said Kent’s social media posts randomly changed. Trump says he wanted to be nice to Kent when he lost his congressional races and after his wife died… so he gave him a job in the White House as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center. Trump says he regrets being nice to Joe Kent, because Kent never appreciated it and repaid Trump’s kindness with disloyalty and disrespect.

Laura Loomer

146,538 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

🇮🇷🇺🇦 What happens when a great power has no clear path to victory, but also no politically acceptable way to admit defeat? That may be the central problem facing Washington in Iran, according to Prof. Glenn Diesen. Diesen argues that Iran has effectively defeated the United States, but Tehran's demands for sanctions relief, unfrozen assets, reconstruction payments and an end to the wider regional wars create a dilemma for Washington: accepting those terms could be politically impossible, while refusing them risks trapping the U.S. in a war it has no obvious way to win. Trump may therefore try to declare victory and walk away, pointing to Iran's supposedly destroyed nuclear capabilities and arguing that the Strait of Hormuz is no longer strategically important. But Iran has leverage. Tehran can make an American withdrawal politically painful while maintaining enough pressure to prevent Washington from simply resetting the conflict and returning later. And this is where Diesen's warning matters. A great power pushed between humiliation and escalation may choose escalation. Iran therefore has to be careful not to push Trump so far that he concludes there is nothing left to lose. Meanwhile, the war is becoming harder to contain. Fighting is spreading through Yemen, with the Houthis striking Saudi-backed targets and reportedly hitting Saudi-linked shipping and infrastructure. Diesen argues that treating these groups simply as Iranian proxies misses the bigger problem: many have their own interests and conflicts that could continue even if Tehran wanted the war to end. The same applies to the emerging Middle Eastern security order. As confidence in permanent American protection declines, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Pakistan and potentially Egypt are moving toward a new regional security architecture. Diesen sees two possible futures: competing blocs, where states seek security against one another, or an inclusive system that eventually brings Iran, and perhaps even Israel, into the same framework. The first creates another cycle of escalation. The second attempts to make security indivisible, so one country's security does not require another country's permanent insecurity. And then there is Ukraine. Diesen argues that the battlefield is increasingly becoming a war of attrition that Russia is slowly winning. Ukraine faces worsening manpower and ammunition problems, while a shortage of interceptor missiles is allowing Russia to use more air power and increasingly devastating glide bombs. Russia is also expanding attacks against Ukrainian logistics, ports, bridges, warehouses and energy infrastructure, while Ukraine continues striking deeper inside Russia to create pressure for negotiations. But if Moscow sees NATO expansion and Ukraine's role as a Western frontline as an existential threat, hurting Russia may not convince it to compromise. It may convince Russia that it has even more reason to continue fighting. Diesen's conclusion is bleak: both sides want the war to end, but they fundamentally disagree over what ending it means. For Russia, that means Ukrainian neutrality, territorial concessions and a political settlement. For Ukraine and its European backers, an unconditional ceasefire risks freezing the battlefield and giving Kyiv time to rebuild. So the wars in Iran and Ukraine are beginning to reveal the same dangerous pattern. The longer a conflict continues, the harder it becomes to separate victory from survival, and the harder it becomes for either side to back down without believing it is surrendering something existential. When the off-ramp disappears, escalation starts looking less like a choice and more like the only road left. Diesen's final warning was almost an afterthought: let's hope the conflict doesn't spread to Japan. He may have been joking. But these are not particularly reassuring times. Glenn Diesen
33:45

🇮🇷🇺🇦 What happens when a great power has no clear path to victory, but also no politically acceptable way to admit defeat? That may be the central problem facing Washington in Iran, according to Prof. Glenn Diesen. Diesen argues that Iran has effectively defeated the United States, but Tehran's demands for sanctions relief, unfrozen assets, reconstruction payments and an end to the wider regional wars create a dilemma for Washington: accepting those terms could be politically impossible, while refusing them risks trapping the U.S. in a war it has no obvious way to win. Trump may therefore try to declare victory and walk away, pointing to Iran's supposedly destroyed nuclear capabilities and arguing that the Strait of Hormuz is no longer strategically important. But Iran has leverage. Tehran can make an American withdrawal politically painful while maintaining enough pressure to prevent Washington from simply resetting the conflict and returning later. And this is where Diesen's warning matters. A great power pushed between humiliation and escalation may choose escalation. Iran therefore has to be careful not to push Trump so far that he concludes there is nothing left to lose. Meanwhile, the war is becoming harder to contain. Fighting is spreading through Yemen, with the Houthis striking Saudi-backed targets and reportedly hitting Saudi-linked shipping and infrastructure. Diesen argues that treating these groups simply as Iranian proxies misses the bigger problem: many have their own interests and conflicts that could continue even if Tehran wanted the war to end. The same applies to the emerging Middle Eastern security order. As confidence in permanent American protection declines, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Pakistan and potentially Egypt are moving toward a new regional security architecture. Diesen sees two possible futures: competing blocs, where states seek security against one another, or an inclusive system that eventually brings Iran, and perhaps even Israel, into the same framework. The first creates another cycle of escalation. The second attempts to make security indivisible, so one country's security does not require another country's permanent insecurity. And then there is Ukraine. Diesen argues that the battlefield is increasingly becoming a war of attrition that Russia is slowly winning. Ukraine faces worsening manpower and ammunition problems, while a shortage of interceptor missiles is allowing Russia to use more air power and increasingly devastating glide bombs. Russia is also expanding attacks against Ukrainian logistics, ports, bridges, warehouses and energy infrastructure, while Ukraine continues striking deeper inside Russia to create pressure for negotiations. But if Moscow sees NATO expansion and Ukraine's role as a Western frontline as an existential threat, hurting Russia may not convince it to compromise. It may convince Russia that it has even more reason to continue fighting. Diesen's conclusion is bleak: both sides want the war to end, but they fundamentally disagree over what ending it means. For Russia, that means Ukrainian neutrality, territorial concessions and a political settlement. For Ukraine and its European backers, an unconditional ceasefire risks freezing the battlefield and giving Kyiv time to rebuild. So the wars in Iran and Ukraine are beginning to reveal the same dangerous pattern. The longer a conflict continues, the harder it becomes to separate victory from survival, and the harder it becomes for either side to back down without believing it is surrendering something existential. When the off-ramp disappears, escalation starts looking less like a choice and more like the only road left. Diesen's final warning was almost an afterthought: let's hope the conflict doesn't spread to Japan. He may have been joking. But these are not particularly reassuring times. Glenn Diesen

Mario Nawfal

244,431 просмотров • 20 дней назад

Welker: How can the public trust the results of this investigation if it doesn't include state and local officials, the people who are there on the ground? Homan: First of all, this is a federal crime. Welker: It happened in Minneapolis. Homan: When a federal officer is in a shooting, it falls under the FBI. Welker: It's one thing for the FBI to take the lead in an investigation, certainly, that is something that we are used to seeing, but for state and local officials to be cut out altogether, are you comfortable with that? Homan: That's a question for the FBI. I've never worked for doj
1:48

Welker: How can the public trust the results of this investigation if it doesn't include state and local officials, the people who are there on the ground? Homan: First of all, this is a federal crime. Welker: It happened in Minneapolis. Homan: When a federal officer is in a shooting, it falls under the FBI. Welker: It's one thing for the FBI to take the lead in an investigation, certainly, that is something that we are used to seeing, but for state and local officials to be cut out altogether, are you comfortable with that? Homan: That's a question for the FBI. I've never worked for doj

Acyn

158,153 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

For weeks leading up to the Iran war, the Epstein files dominated the public conversation, trending across X and driving widespread independent attention. Now, as war headlines take over, that focus has largely faded. At a time when trust in institutions is already low, revelations involving powerful figures being part of demonic rituals can further erode public confidence, especially when accountability is nowhere to be found. Has the public moved on, or has the conversation simply been overshadowed by an intentional war? I explore this, and more, with Owen Shroyer
4:27

For weeks leading up to the Iran war, the Epstein files dominated the public conversation, trending across X and driving widespread independent attention. Now, as war headlines take over, that focus has largely faded. At a time when trust in institutions is already low, revelations involving powerful figures being part of demonic rituals can further erode public confidence, especially when accountability is nowhere to be found. Has the public moved on, or has the conversation simply been overshadowed by an intentional war? I explore this, and more, with Owen Shroyer

Ben Swann

41,658 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Tucker Carlson calls for President Trump to be removed from office immediately for considering the possibility that nuclear weapons would ever be used. Joe Kent, formerly director of the National Counterterrorism Center, doesn’t necessarily disagree, but he says that the real problem is "the amount of influence the Israeli lobby has over our elected officials," and that there is only one party in Washington.
2:08

Tucker Carlson calls for President Trump to be removed from office immediately for considering the possibility that nuclear weapons would ever be used. Joe Kent, formerly director of the National Counterterrorism Center, doesn’t necessarily disagree, but he says that the real problem is "the amount of influence the Israeli lobby has over our elected officials," and that there is only one party in Washington.

Max 📟

40,846 просмотров • 6 дней назад

🚩 Whitney Webb on How a Cyberattack Could Help Manufacture Consent for Digital ID "What this public-private partnership at the WEF is pushing for is for every person's access to the Internet to be tied to a Digital ID...And the goal of that, of course, is if your ID is linked to your Internet access, intelligence agencies know exactly what media you are consuming in terms of what you read and also what you post online. That has been the goal for a very long time. People aren't necessarily going to consent to that unless they are made to believe that anonymity and privacy online are dangerous. So how exactly can you convince people that that needs to happen? Well, you have some sort of event where anonymous hackers do something online that causes major disruption globally, and then the consent can be manufactured through fear and panic, as is often done." Whitney Webb
5:30

🚩 Whitney Webb on How a Cyberattack Could Help Manufacture Consent for Digital ID "What this public-private partnership at the WEF is pushing for is for every person's access to the Internet to be tied to a Digital ID...And the goal of that, of course, is if your ID is linked to your Internet access, intelligence agencies know exactly what media you are consuming in terms of what you read and also what you post online. That has been the goal for a very long time. People aren't necessarily going to consent to that unless they are made to believe that anonymity and privacy online are dangerous. So how exactly can you convince people that that needs to happen? Well, you have some sort of event where anonymous hackers do something online that causes major disruption globally, and then the consent can be manufactured through fear and panic, as is often done." Whitney Webb

Chief Nerd

634,178 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Trump could have invoked the Insurrection Act at any moment. The reason for waiting is a matter of timing and public perception. Signing an order is the easy part. Convincing 340 million Americans that we are compromised from within and the US MIL need to secure our cities, THAT’S the hard part. Especially when the MSM are compromised and telling the public that Trump is literally Hitler and is going to unleash a military dictatorship. This had to be done delicately, as not to cause panic. The public must be psychologically prepared. That’s why Trump has been giving us soft disclosure about the Insurrection Act for a long time. They have been mentally preparing us for what they knew had to be done, by showing us why it needed to be done. Here he is back in September addressing all his Generals, and reminded them how Washington and Lincoln used the military to keep the peace. This was always the plan.
0:52

Trump could have invoked the Insurrection Act at any moment. The reason for waiting is a matter of timing and public perception. Signing an order is the easy part. Convincing 340 million Americans that we are compromised from within and the US MIL need to secure our cities, THAT’S the hard part. Especially when the MSM are compromised and telling the public that Trump is literally Hitler and is going to unleash a military dictatorship. This had to be done delicately, as not to cause panic. The public must be psychologically prepared. That’s why Trump has been giving us soft disclosure about the Insurrection Act for a long time. They have been mentally preparing us for what they knew had to be done, by showing us why it needed to be done. Here he is back in September addressing all his Generals, and reminded them how Washington and Lincoln used the military to keep the peace. This was always the plan.

Clandestine

230,856 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

🇺🇸 Joe Kent prefers economic pressure to another round of fighting, but worries the sanctions strategy could be designed to provoke an Iranian response that gives Washington an excuse to restart the war. “I think we’re basically begging for the Iranians to hit us back.” His alternative is blunt: pull U.S. forces and ships out of the region, remove the blockade, and make sanctions the only leverage on the table. Otherwise, Washington risks creating the very escalation it claims to be trying to avoid. Joe Kent
2:43

🇺🇸 Joe Kent prefers economic pressure to another round of fighting, but worries the sanctions strategy could be designed to provoke an Iranian response that gives Washington an excuse to restart the war. “I think we’re basically begging for the Iranians to hit us back.” His alternative is blunt: pull U.S. forces and ships out of the region, remove the blockade, and make sanctions the only leverage on the table. Otherwise, Washington risks creating the very escalation it claims to be trying to avoid. Joe Kent

Mario Nawfal

105,953 просмотров • 9 дней назад

The groundwork is being laid for what could become the biggest false flag event in American history—one that could permanently change life as we know it. Now Ted Cruz is warning that the risk of “terrorism” inside the U.S. is very high. If something happens, understand this: The event may be real… but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t allowed to happen. Manufactured crises have always been used to justify more control, more surveillance, and less freedom. Are we about to see the next step toward a full surveillance state?
0:55

The groundwork is being laid for what could become the biggest false flag event in American history—one that could permanently change life as we know it. Now Ted Cruz is warning that the risk of “terrorism” inside the U.S. is very high. If something happens, understand this: The event may be real… but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t allowed to happen. Manufactured crises have always been used to justify more control, more surveillance, and less freedom. Are we about to see the next step toward a full surveillance state?

FromConvict2Conservative

114,233 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Professor Jiang predicts on SNEAKO’s stream that the “most serious false flag” that could shock the world would involve Al-Aqsa Mosque. He warns that after recent closures and years of archaeological digging beneath the site, the fear is it could be destroyed and blamed on Iran to justify a wider war and pave the way for a Third Temple. 😳☪️
1:00

Professor Jiang predicts on SNEAKO’s stream that the “most serious false flag” that could shock the world would involve Al-Aqsa Mosque. He warns that after recent closures and years of archaeological digging beneath the site, the fear is it could be destroyed and blamed on Iran to justify a wider war and pave the way for a Third Temple. 😳☪️

SNEAKO UPDATES

31,956 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Trump's Fmr. Lawyer Robert Barnes says Trump thinks he's escalating to make Iran capitulate, but in reality, Tehran has learned how to play him. That is what makes this moment so dangerous. Trump appears to believe the war can still be ended quickly if he just applies a little more pressure and moves further up the escalation ladder. Then wait for Iran to surrender, but Robert says Iran is never going to give him that. For Trump, this is a war he wants to finish on favorable terms; for Iran, it's existential. That means Washington and Tehran are not operating with the same tolerance for pain, the same timeline, or the same definition of victory. And Tehran now understands the man across the table better than he understands himself. Iran has watched Trump repeatedly convince himself that another strike will finally produce the submission the previous strikes failed to achieve. Then, when the opposite happens, he becomes frustrated and escalates again. Iran appears to be exploiting that weakness with a disciplined tit-for-tat strategy rather than random escalation or total war. Each move raises the cost without immediately giving Trump the clean pretext he might want for unlimited escalation. Robert thinks Iran is studying his psychology and asking one question before every major action: Will this provoke him too early, or will it punish and humiliate him at exactly the right moment? That distinction is crucial because humiliation may be Trump’s greatest vulnerability. Robert Barnes
54:53

Trump's Fmr. Lawyer Robert Barnes says Trump thinks he's escalating to make Iran capitulate, but in reality, Tehran has learned how to play him. That is what makes this moment so dangerous. Trump appears to believe the war can still be ended quickly if he just applies a little more pressure and moves further up the escalation ladder. Then wait for Iran to surrender, but Robert says Iran is never going to give him that. For Trump, this is a war he wants to finish on favorable terms; for Iran, it's existential. That means Washington and Tehran are not operating with the same tolerance for pain, the same timeline, or the same definition of victory. And Tehran now understands the man across the table better than he understands himself. Iran has watched Trump repeatedly convince himself that another strike will finally produce the submission the previous strikes failed to achieve. Then, when the opposite happens, he becomes frustrated and escalates again. Iran appears to be exploiting that weakness with a disciplined tit-for-tat strategy rather than random escalation or total war. Each move raises the cost without immediately giving Trump the clean pretext he might want for unlimited escalation. Robert thinks Iran is studying his psychology and asking one question before every major action: Will this provoke him too early, or will it punish and humiliate him at exactly the right moment? That distinction is crucial because humiliation may be Trump’s greatest vulnerability. Robert Barnes

Mario Nawfal

374,241 просмотров • 1 месяц назад