Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Mark Levin keeps repeating this exact phrase, and while I have long dreamed of the day Khamenei is dead and gone, it leads people to believe that the solution to the crisis in Iran is simply getting rid of Khamenei. Perhaps Mark needs to listen to his friend Hugh...

yashar's profile picture

Yashar Ali 🐘

712,337 subscribers

39,919 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

Haberler & PolitikaEğitim
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

The Anchormen on Israel using a nuclear weapon against Iran: GAETZ: “If Israel believes that this bombing campaign of the United States, that is relentless and effective at destroying infrastructure and military material, but not effective at regime change. If they don’t think that’s enough to send Iran into chaos, they may use the nuclear weapon we all know they have. I shudder to think that. I would like to believe that no country would do that again, and so I’m not of that ilk yet, but the argument was made.” SHARP: “What would the consequences be? Is the U.S. gonna bomb Israel? How is that gonna shake out? Who’s gonna hold them account for that? Not that I think Israel wouldn’t do it. They have their pathological hatred of Iran and they wanna take that region out, and they have the Greater Israel objective. From a philosophical standpoint, they wouldn’t have a problem with it, but God, what would the consequences be?” WATCH NOW:
1:14

The Anchormen on Israel using a nuclear weapon against Iran: GAETZ: “If Israel believes that this bombing campaign of the United States, that is relentless and effective at destroying infrastructure and military material, but not effective at regime change. If they don’t think that’s enough to send Iran into chaos, they may use the nuclear weapon we all know they have. I shudder to think that. I would like to believe that no country would do that again, and so I’m not of that ilk yet, but the argument was made.” SHARP: “What would the consequences be? Is the U.S. gonna bomb Israel? How is that gonna shake out? Who’s gonna hold them account for that? Not that I think Israel wouldn’t do it. They have their pathological hatred of Iran and they wanna take that region out, and they have the Greater Israel objective. From a philosophical standpoint, they wouldn’t have a problem with it, but God, what would the consequences be?” WATCH NOW:

Former Congressman Matt Gaetz

122,267 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

REPORTER: "There was a group of bishops that did put out a statement saying the Pope isn't merely exercising his opinion, he's preaching the Gospel. What do you say to people that do this?" PRESIDENT TRUMP: "I want him to preach the Gospel. I'm all about the Gospel. But I also know that you cannot let a certain country, which is a very mean-spirited country, have a nuclear weapon." "If they did, they would use it. And I think they use it quickly and they would kill many millions of people." "The Pope could disagree with me on that, but certainly we're allowed to have that. I'm all about the Gospel. I'm about it as much as anybody can be."
0:45

REPORTER: "There was a group of bishops that did put out a statement saying the Pope isn't merely exercising his opinion, he's preaching the Gospel. What do you say to people that do this?" PRESIDENT TRUMP: "I want him to preach the Gospel. I'm all about the Gospel. But I also know that you cannot let a certain country, which is a very mean-spirited country, have a nuclear weapon." "If they did, they would use it. And I think they use it quickly and they would kill many millions of people." "The Pope could disagree with me on that, but certainly we're allowed to have that. I'm all about the Gospel. I'm about it as much as anybody can be."

Fox News

872,949 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Here is an example of an IRGC missile malfunctioning and dropping in Iran. This could have easily been what hit that building of school girls. If the Regime has no problem slaughtering it's own civilians, do you think they would have a problem lying to you and I to get what they want? I think the obvious answer to that is no.
2:59

Here is an example of an IRGC missile malfunctioning and dropping in Iran. This could have easily been what hit that building of school girls. If the Regime has no problem slaughtering it's own civilians, do you think they would have a problem lying to you and I to get what they want? I think the obvious answer to that is no.

Jeffery Mead

141,066 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

German MEP Christine Anderson argues that governments "overplayed their cards" during the Covid era, setting in motion a mass awakening that can no longer be reversed. "The people stood up... And then they overplayed their cards. They came down even harder on the people to get them to do what they wanted them to do, and that woke more people up." "That was like a vicious cycle. The more people rebelled... the harder the state bashed down on them, the more people woke up." "And that's the situation we're in now. The genie is out of the bottle and they will not ever get it back in." "There is light at the end of the tunnel because a lot of people have woken up, and a lot of people will continue to wake up... in the months and years to come." "But I can tell you, buckle up. They're stepping up their game, so we have to do the same thing."
2:16

German MEP Christine Anderson argues that governments "overplayed their cards" during the Covid era, setting in motion a mass awakening that can no longer be reversed. "The people stood up... And then they overplayed their cards. They came down even harder on the people to get them to do what they wanted them to do, and that woke more people up." "That was like a vicious cycle. The more people rebelled... the harder the state bashed down on them, the more people woke up." "And that's the situation we're in now. The genie is out of the bottle and they will not ever get it back in." "There is light at the end of the tunnel because a lot of people have woken up, and a lot of people will continue to wake up... in the months and years to come." "But I can tell you, buckle up. They're stepping up their game, so we have to do the same thing."

Wide Awake Media

28,656 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

The scary part is that Stephen A Smith strong suit is supposed to be basketball. It’s just embarrassing. This is the guy you give all this money to and he doesn’t even know the basic facts about a team. ESPN can sit here all day and tell me his ratings. People are “hate watching”. Or even worse, they are watching to mock how bad it is. It’s akin to the later years of Mike Francesa at WFAN. Where people watched to hear the crank calls or to watch him falling asleep at the mic. It’s getting to that level of bad for ESPN when it comes to SAS. I don’t know anybody that watches him because they think they are getting anything substantive out of him. And that isn’t sustainable. I say it all the time. People don’t know what they like, they like what they know. Not. One. Person.
0:27

The scary part is that Stephen A Smith strong suit is supposed to be basketball. It’s just embarrassing. This is the guy you give all this money to and he doesn’t even know the basic facts about a team. ESPN can sit here all day and tell me his ratings. People are “hate watching”. Or even worse, they are watching to mock how bad it is. It’s akin to the later years of Mike Francesa at WFAN. Where people watched to hear the crank calls or to watch him falling asleep at the mic. It’s getting to that level of bad for ESPN when it comes to SAS. I don’t know anybody that watches him because they think they are getting anything substantive out of him. And that isn’t sustainable. I say it all the time. People don’t know what they like, they like what they know. Not. One. Person.

Jason Page

42,830 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

☢️Col. Lawrence Wilkerson: ‘IRAN HAS ALREADY WON…if they want nuclear weapons, they will make one.’ 'I think Iran is perched right now exactly where Haaretz said they were. All they have to do to win is not lose, and All the United States and Israel have to do is achieve a spectacular victory, and they aren't going to do that. So Iran’s already won. The question is, How much damage is Donald Trump and what’s left of the American military going to be done to in the interim? And How much damage is going to be done to that military, particularly its maritime elements? They have not unleashed anything significant yet on a US warship. They could and they might, and that's the end of that warship if they do. The carrier is holding off at least 1300 kilometres. Not just because of range. Because there are some missiles that can go that far. It's because the carrier is so capable of getting up to flight speed so fast that once it has a warning of a missile launch, it can itself defend fairly successfully without subsurface, surface, or airborne assets. If the carrier moves at the right moment, at the speed it's capable of achieving, it's going to be very hard to hit it in that terminal phase. But they would ultimately fail with a hypersonic missile. I take my experience from Kang Sok-Ju and Kye-Gwan in North Korea in October 2002, when we went to present them with an economic package the President and even the Vice President thought would be persuasive in getting them to back off their nuclear programme. Kye-Gwan looked right at us and said…we already have nuclear weapons. So I know how we were fooled by North Korea. I know North Korea in 2002 was working with Iran, not just on underground fortifications but also on nuclear weapons, how to match warhead to missile. So Ted, I think, is right. If the Iranians want a nuclear weapon, they'll make one.’ — Former Chief of Staff at the State Department, Col. Lawrence Wilkerson on the latest episode of New Order Watch the full interview in the quoted post below👇
2:55

☢️Col. Lawrence Wilkerson: ‘IRAN HAS ALREADY WON…if they want nuclear weapons, they will make one.’ 'I think Iran is perched right now exactly where Haaretz said they were. All they have to do to win is not lose, and All the United States and Israel have to do is achieve a spectacular victory, and they aren't going to do that. So Iran’s already won. The question is, How much damage is Donald Trump and what’s left of the American military going to be done to in the interim? And How much damage is going to be done to that military, particularly its maritime elements? They have not unleashed anything significant yet on a US warship. They could and they might, and that's the end of that warship if they do. The carrier is holding off at least 1300 kilometres. Not just because of range. Because there are some missiles that can go that far. It's because the carrier is so capable of getting up to flight speed so fast that once it has a warning of a missile launch, it can itself defend fairly successfully without subsurface, surface, or airborne assets. If the carrier moves at the right moment, at the speed it's capable of achieving, it's going to be very hard to hit it in that terminal phase. But they would ultimately fail with a hypersonic missile. I take my experience from Kang Sok-Ju and Kye-Gwan in North Korea in October 2002, when we went to present them with an economic package the President and even the Vice President thought would be persuasive in getting them to back off their nuclear programme. Kye-Gwan looked right at us and said…we already have nuclear weapons. So I know how we were fooled by North Korea. I know North Korea in 2002 was working with Iran, not just on underground fortifications but also on nuclear weapons, how to match warhead to missile. So Ted, I think, is right. If the Iranians want a nuclear weapon, they'll make one.’ — Former Chief of Staff at the State Department, Col. Lawrence Wilkerson on the latest episode of New Order Watch the full interview in the quoted post below👇

New Order with Afshin Rattansi

48,243 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

🚨President Trump announced that there might be a high-level meeting with Zelenskyy as early as this weekend, but didn’t specify if he would participate, and once again reiterated that UA should hold elections right now (note: it’s against the constitution to hold elections during the martial law, also it’s simply not safe, and UA society is widely opposed to the idea). TRUMP: “They would like us to go to a meeting over the weekend, in Europe, and we’ll make a determination depending on what they come back with. We don’t wanna be wasting time. Sometimes you have to let people fight it out, and sometimes you don’t. But the problem with letting people fight it out is you’re losing thousands of people a week. It’s ridiculous. The whole thing is ridiculous.” Q: “And when you say that the European leaders want to have a meeting over the weekend, are you talking about with Zelenskyy or with them?” TRUMP: “With Zelenskyy and us.” Q: “And you said in an interview yesterday that you think it’s time for Zelenskyy to start accepting things. What things are you talking about?” TRUMP: “Well, I think he has to be realistic. And I do wonder about how long is it gonna be till they have an election. You know, for a democracy, it’s a long time. They haven’t had an election in a long time. There was a poll that came out, 82% of the people are demanding a settlement be made, Ukrainian people. They wanna see a settlement be made. I understand that. They’re losing thousands and thousands of people a week. They wanna see it ended. And I do say at what point, when do they have an election in Ukraine? That’s not casting aspersions on anybody, but they do have a massive corruption situation going on there… People are asking this question, ‘When do they have an election?’ Are they gonna have an election, or are they gonna just keep it going like this? So, I think it’s time to get that war settled, and I think it’s a war that can be settled. But it takes two to tango.”
1:54

🚨President Trump announced that there might be a high-level meeting with Zelenskyy as early as this weekend, but didn’t specify if he would participate, and once again reiterated that UA should hold elections right now (note: it’s against the constitution to hold elections during the martial law, also it’s simply not safe, and UA society is widely opposed to the idea). TRUMP: “They would like us to go to a meeting over the weekend, in Europe, and we’ll make a determination depending on what they come back with. We don’t wanna be wasting time. Sometimes you have to let people fight it out, and sometimes you don’t. But the problem with letting people fight it out is you’re losing thousands of people a week. It’s ridiculous. The whole thing is ridiculous.” Q: “And when you say that the European leaders want to have a meeting over the weekend, are you talking about with Zelenskyy or with them?” TRUMP: “With Zelenskyy and us.” Q: “And you said in an interview yesterday that you think it’s time for Zelenskyy to start accepting things. What things are you talking about?” TRUMP: “Well, I think he has to be realistic. And I do wonder about how long is it gonna be till they have an election. You know, for a democracy, it’s a long time. They haven’t had an election in a long time. There was a poll that came out, 82% of the people are demanding a settlement be made, Ukrainian people. They wanna see a settlement be made. I understand that. They’re losing thousands and thousands of people a week. They wanna see it ended. And I do say at what point, when do they have an election in Ukraine? That’s not casting aspersions on anybody, but they do have a massive corruption situation going on there… People are asking this question, ‘When do they have an election?’ Are they gonna have an election, or are they gonna just keep it going like this? So, I think it’s time to get that war settled, and I think it’s a war that can be settled. But it takes two to tango.”

Kateryna Lisunova

10,801 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

“Death to Khamenei” State media in Iran is portraying Khamenei as someone who's come to the rescue of targeted schoolchildren in the chemical attacks which they call "suspected poisoning". But Iranians took to the streets and chant against Khamenei and believe that the regime is behind the attacks. The State media in Iran is not an independent news organization, but is a branch of intelligence service. #MahsaAmini
0:21

“Death to Khamenei” State media in Iran is portraying Khamenei as someone who's come to the rescue of targeted schoolchildren in the chemical attacks which they call "suspected poisoning". But Iranians took to the streets and chant against Khamenei and believe that the regime is behind the attacks. The State media in Iran is not an independent news organization, but is a branch of intelligence service. #MahsaAmini

Masih Alinejad

54,284 görüntüleme • 3 yıl önce

Secretary of State Marco Rubio on March 2: "The purpose of this is to destroy that missile capability. Why does Iran want that ballistic missile capability? What they are trying to do and have been trying to do for a very long time is build a conventional weapons capability as a shield where they can hide behind. Meaning there would come a point where they have so many conventional missiles, so many drones, and it can inflict so much damage that no one can do anything about their nuclear program. That is what they were trying to do, is put themselves in a place of immunity where the damage they could inflict on the region would be so high that no one can do anything about their nuclear program or their nuclear ambitions."
0:34

Secretary of State Marco Rubio on March 2: "The purpose of this is to destroy that missile capability. Why does Iran want that ballistic missile capability? What they are trying to do and have been trying to do for a very long time is build a conventional weapons capability as a shield where they can hide behind. Meaning there would come a point where they have so many conventional missiles, so many drones, and it can inflict so much damage that no one can do anything about their nuclear program. That is what they were trying to do, is put themselves in a place of immunity where the damage they could inflict on the region would be so high that no one can do anything about their nuclear program or their nuclear ambitions."

Batya Ungar-Sargon

31,216 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

"The ADC is not mincing the words that when it comes to money, that the APC can outspend the ADC; definitely they can outspend because they have our coffers, our national wealth, at their disposal to do whatever it is that they're going to do with it. 'The one thing that I can tell you is they cannot outpassion us,' says Aisha Yesufu "They have 30 governors, but we have over 200 and something million Nigerians minus the 30 governors and a few of the supporters that they have." #PoliticsToday
4:21

"The ADC is not mincing the words that when it comes to money, that the APC can outspend the ADC; definitely they can outspend because they have our coffers, our national wealth, at their disposal to do whatever it is that they're going to do with it. 'The one thing that I can tell you is they cannot outpassion us,' says Aisha Yesufu "They have 30 governors, but we have over 200 and something million Nigerians minus the 30 governors and a few of the supporters that they have." #PoliticsToday

Channels Television

58,024 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Former Israeli negotiator Daniel Levy: ‘Iran believes they can sustain the war LONGER than the US…unpopularity of the Iran war is UNPRECEDENTED.’ ‘In absolute terms Iranian losses are greater. But in terms of what the respective systems can absorb. I think they would still look at this and say the Americans can’t sustain this. The Americans can’t sustain petrol prices at the pump above a certain level. The Americans, we can see, they don’t want to put troops on the ground with 20 body bags. One is sure for the people who lost their lives, their families, is a terrible loss for them, but it’s sustainable. But not if that number ticks up and ticks up. What does it do to the midterms? What does it do to the markets? So I think they look at this. It’s a very unpopular war with the American public. Look at the grilling this week that War Secretary Hegseth took in the Senate. That is again unprecedented terrain. Just months into a military effort against a country that has been held up as the ultimate enemy in America for so long. And yet there he is being grilled on what the hell is going on with this war and its costs. So I think the Iranian calculation would be we can sustain this longer than them. And that has been an accurate calculation until now. The short term is that you still have an American system that doesn’t seem to have a joined up strategy, doesn’t seem to know what it wants to get out of this. Thought it was on a cakewalk here, and it’s been anything but.’ —Former Israeli negotiator Daniel Levy on the latest episode of Going Underground Watch the full interview in the quoted post below👇
2:57

Former Israeli negotiator Daniel Levy: ‘Iran believes they can sustain the war LONGER than the US…unpopularity of the Iran war is UNPRECEDENTED.’ ‘In absolute terms Iranian losses are greater. But in terms of what the respective systems can absorb. I think they would still look at this and say the Americans can’t sustain this. The Americans can’t sustain petrol prices at the pump above a certain level. The Americans, we can see, they don’t want to put troops on the ground with 20 body bags. One is sure for the people who lost their lives, their families, is a terrible loss for them, but it’s sustainable. But not if that number ticks up and ticks up. What does it do to the midterms? What does it do to the markets? So I think they look at this. It’s a very unpopular war with the American public. Look at the grilling this week that War Secretary Hegseth took in the Senate. That is again unprecedented terrain. Just months into a military effort against a country that has been held up as the ultimate enemy in America for so long. And yet there he is being grilled on what the hell is going on with this war and its costs. So I think the Iranian calculation would be we can sustain this longer than them. And that has been an accurate calculation until now. The short term is that you still have an American system that doesn’t seem to have a joined up strategy, doesn’t seem to know what it wants to get out of this. Thought it was on a cakewalk here, and it’s been anything but.’ —Former Israeli negotiator Daniel Levy on the latest episode of Going Underground Watch the full interview in the quoted post below👇

Going Underground

21,394 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Bill O’Reilly draws a direct parallel between the final days of Nazi Germany and the current situation in Iran, explaining why the Iranian people may not have risen up against the regime. O’REILLY: “So in the U.S. government and Israel were hopeful that the people would rise up in conjunction with the military destruction.” “And that has not happened.” “That has meant that the Pentagon has to basically redefine what a victory is. So regime change is starting to recede in the background.” “Now, this is not unusual.” “Students of history and people who’ve read my book Killing Patton know that in 1945 even though Germans were getting pummeled, okay, they would not turn on Hitler.” “They would not rise against him. Even in Berlin.” “And the reason was that SS shot them dead if there was any sign of rebellion.” “And we saw that when the Persians tried to demonstrate against the mullahs, 30,000 — and we’ve confirmed that figure — Iranians were killed by their own countrymen.” “So people are frightened. They’re scared to death, and I use that phrase literally, to rise up.” “It’s not likely that that will happen. So therefore, the definition of victory in Iran for the U.S. and Israel is to destroy every bit — and I mean that literally — of military infrastructure.” “Down to pistols if they can do it.” “Just wipe that out, so they have no chance to ever be on the offense again.”
1:42

Bill O’Reilly draws a direct parallel between the final days of Nazi Germany and the current situation in Iran, explaining why the Iranian people may not have risen up against the regime. O’REILLY: “So in the U.S. government and Israel were hopeful that the people would rise up in conjunction with the military destruction.” “And that has not happened.” “That has meant that the Pentagon has to basically redefine what a victory is. So regime change is starting to recede in the background.” “Now, this is not unusual.” “Students of history and people who’ve read my book Killing Patton know that in 1945 even though Germans were getting pummeled, okay, they would not turn on Hitler.” “They would not rise against him. Even in Berlin.” “And the reason was that SS shot them dead if there was any sign of rebellion.” “And we saw that when the Persians tried to demonstrate against the mullahs, 30,000 — and we’ve confirmed that figure — Iranians were killed by their own countrymen.” “So people are frightened. They’re scared to death, and I use that phrase literally, to rise up.” “It’s not likely that that will happen. So therefore, the definition of victory in Iran for the U.S. and Israel is to destroy every bit — and I mean that literally — of military infrastructure.” “Down to pistols if they can do it.” “Just wipe that out, so they have no chance to ever be on the offense again.”

Overton

78,088 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

When I am at the gym and I see somebody’s water bottle there or a towel or something. I know they just stepped away for a moment and that the machine is occupied. Out of respect I won’t move it out of the way only for them to come back and have to explain themselves anyways. This young lady on the machine left her water bottle on it because she stepped away for a moment to use the restroom only for somebody else to come by and try to use it in her place. Would you have understood the etiquette or is it just a free for all? When I first started working out I was unfamiliar with the gym etiquette. Some people just got done with a hard set and need to stand up and walk for a few moneys or get a drink of water and they use it as their rest period so that they can go back at it. Interrupting that process is the same thing as booting them off the machine mid workout. It’s rude and uncalled for but why does it keep happening? I think what it is, is that some people are very judgmental, they see others and think that they are more serious about working out than the other person so that to them it means they are entitled to use it first because their workouts are more important. I used to let them do that to me but no more. I treat it as first come first serve, if they don’t want to wait then maybe they need to avoid the gym during peak hours. This is the very reason I work out in the middle of the night most of the time. I rather not be bothered and if I need to take my time I can, most of the time nobody else is even there anyways when I go.
0:58

When I am at the gym and I see somebody’s water bottle there or a towel or something. I know they just stepped away for a moment and that the machine is occupied. Out of respect I won’t move it out of the way only for them to come back and have to explain themselves anyways. This young lady on the machine left her water bottle on it because she stepped away for a moment to use the restroom only for somebody else to come by and try to use it in her place. Would you have understood the etiquette or is it just a free for all? When I first started working out I was unfamiliar with the gym etiquette. Some people just got done with a hard set and need to stand up and walk for a few moneys or get a drink of water and they use it as their rest period so that they can go back at it. Interrupting that process is the same thing as booting them off the machine mid workout. It’s rude and uncalled for but why does it keep happening? I think what it is, is that some people are very judgmental, they see others and think that they are more serious about working out than the other person so that to them it means they are entitled to use it first because their workouts are more important. I used to let them do that to me but no more. I treat it as first come first serve, if they don’t want to wait then maybe they need to avoid the gym during peak hours. This is the very reason I work out in the middle of the night most of the time. I rather not be bothered and if I need to take my time I can, most of the time nobody else is even there anyways when I go.

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

176,262 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

🦖: There was once someone who used to be a fan who loved us, and one day that person said they felt disgusted by us. I can understand that to some extent. It comes from the kind of news they were exposed to and the anger they felt. I myself probably wouldn’t do the same thing that person did to us. 🦖: What I want is for people to look more at the reality of what is happening, what actually occurred between Thailand and Cambodia. And to try to understand it, because in truth, ordinary people like us, and people on the Cambodian side as well, are directly affected by this situation. But this is not something we should be blaming or attacking each other over.
2:19

🦖: There was once someone who used to be a fan who loved us, and one day that person said they felt disgusted by us. I can understand that to some extent. It comes from the kind of news they were exposed to and the anger they felt. I myself probably wouldn’t do the same thing that person did to us. 🦖: What I want is for people to look more at the reality of what is happening, what actually occurred between Thailand and Cambodia. And to try to understand it, because in truth, ordinary people like us, and people on the Cambodian side as well, are directly affected by this situation. But this is not something we should be blaming or attacking each other over.

𝓢𝓽𝓱𝓮𝓯 ࿔⋆🎀

71,792 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

Nick Fuentes warns that the fight in 2026 won’t be open or obvious confrontation. It will be imitation, subversion, and an attempt to skinsuit the movement. “We’ve been gearing up for this fight for ten years. I always said that America First is inevitable because I knew that eventually the truth would get out.” “They are going to fight back in a way that is subversive and convoluted and which is not actually obvious…They are going to try and skinsuit this movement.” “This is always the track that the political class will take. They did it with the Tea Party movement. They did it with MAGA.” “This is how they will defang and neutralize the Groypers. They are going to offer a moderate option that is going to look and sound like me, but on the fundamentals, it’s going to be completely different.” “They will not affirm the reality and centrality of race. They will not talk about the jewish mafia that is running the fcking planet. They are not going to talk about feminism in and of itself being the problem.” “I don’t know if they’ll kill me in 2026. I don’t know what they’re cooking up for me.” “But in 2026, that is the year where they’re going to try to strike at the head. The sheep scatter, and they’re going to try to corral them back into slavery incorporated.”
8:03

Nick Fuentes warns that the fight in 2026 won’t be open or obvious confrontation. It will be imitation, subversion, and an attempt to skinsuit the movement. “We’ve been gearing up for this fight for ten years. I always said that America First is inevitable because I knew that eventually the truth would get out.” “They are going to fight back in a way that is subversive and convoluted and which is not actually obvious…They are going to try and skinsuit this movement.” “This is always the track that the political class will take. They did it with the Tea Party movement. They did it with MAGA.” “This is how they will defang and neutralize the Groypers. They are going to offer a moderate option that is going to look and sound like me, but on the fundamentals, it’s going to be completely different.” “They will not affirm the reality and centrality of race. They will not talk about the jewish mafia that is running the fcking planet. They are not going to talk about feminism in and of itself being the problem.” “I don’t know if they’ll kill me in 2026. I don’t know what they’re cooking up for me.” “But in 2026, that is the year where they’re going to try to strike at the head. The sheep scatter, and they’re going to try to corral them back into slavery incorporated.”

Fractured Light

179,239 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

🚨 MARCO RUBIO ON PRESIDENT TRUMP'S DEBATE WITH POPE LEO: "What the President basically said is that Iran can't have a nuclear weapon because they would use it against places that have a lot of Catholics and Christians and others for that matter!" "It goes back to the central point. I think the President, without trying to speak for him, but I think I can characterize it this way. He doesn't understand why anybody, leave aside the Pope." "The President and I for that matter, I think most people, I cannot understand why ANYONE would think that it's a good idea for Iran to ever have a nuclear weapon." "Look what they're doing with the Straits right now. They're holding the whole world hostage." "They have these sailors on commercial ships that are going to starve to death out there. They don't care. They don't care that this is melting the economies around the world, even of their own allies." "This is what they're doing with the Straits. What do you think they would do if they had a nuclear weapon? They would hold the world hostage with that nuclear weapon. That's what they would do."
1:22

🚨 MARCO RUBIO ON PRESIDENT TRUMP'S DEBATE WITH POPE LEO: "What the President basically said is that Iran can't have a nuclear weapon because they would use it against places that have a lot of Catholics and Christians and others for that matter!" "It goes back to the central point. I think the President, without trying to speak for him, but I think I can characterize it this way. He doesn't understand why anybody, leave aside the Pope." "The President and I for that matter, I think most people, I cannot understand why ANYONE would think that it's a good idea for Iran to ever have a nuclear weapon." "Look what they're doing with the Straits right now. They're holding the whole world hostage." "They have these sailors on commercial ships that are going to starve to death out there. They don't care. They don't care that this is melting the economies around the world, even of their own allies." "This is what they're doing with the Straits. What do you think they would do if they had a nuclear weapon? They would hold the world hostage with that nuclear weapon. That's what they would do."

Eric Daugherty

18,840 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

WATCH: Very newsy exchange at the White House Tuesday afternoon between President Trump and CBS’s Ed O'Keefe about Iran, revealing the U.S. was gifted “a present” from whatever remains of the new/old Iranian regime that is “oil and gas related”.... President Trump: “Do you have another question? You haven’t been here in a while.” O’Keefe: “Well, on Iran, can you give us any more sense of who exactly in Iran it is, either Witkoff or Kushner you’re speaking with?” Trump: “Yeah. We had — I hate to say this in front of these young people — they’re not children. I spoke to most of them. They sound like adults to me. Even though they are sort of children, right? They’ll always be your children. But I hate to say it, but we killed all their leadership. And then they met to choose new leaders, and we killed all of them. And now, we have a new group and we can easily do that. But let’s see how they turn out. It’s — we have, really, regime change. You know, this is a change in the regime because the leaders are all very different than the ones that we started off with that created all those problems. So this was — I think we can say, Jason, this is regime change, right?” O’Keefe: “What makes you trust them?” Trump: “I don’t trust anybody. I don’t trust you. I mean, that’s only because I know you, but if I didn’t know you, I’d probably have more trust. But I don’t trust anyone.” O’Keefe: “Why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Why do you — why do you say that? Why do you say what makes you — do you think I trust them? I don’t trust them.” O’Keefe: “Then why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Because they’re going to make a deal. They’re going to make a deal. They did something yesterday that was amazing. Actually. They gave us a present. And the president arrived today and it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. And I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize. And they gave it to us, and they said they were going to give it, so that meant one thing to me. We’re dealing with the right people —” O’Keefe: “Was it nuclear related.” Trump: “No, it wasn’t nuclear related. It was oil and gas related. And it was a very nice thing they did. But what it showed me is that we’re dealing with the right people because, you know, you don’t know because the leadership was killed, all gone. Khamenei, all gone. As the expression goes, the past Supreme Leader and then the new Supreme Leader was racked up at a minimum, racked up pretty good, and everyone else was gone. And then many of the people in the third tier are gone. But we’re dealing with a group of people that I think turn out and the — the present, the gift they made to us was very significant. And they said they were going to do it and it happened. And they’re the only ones that could have done it.”
2:36

WATCH: Very newsy exchange at the White House Tuesday afternoon between President Trump and CBS’s Ed O'Keefe about Iran, revealing the U.S. was gifted “a present” from whatever remains of the new/old Iranian regime that is “oil and gas related”.... President Trump: “Do you have another question? You haven’t been here in a while.” O’Keefe: “Well, on Iran, can you give us any more sense of who exactly in Iran it is, either Witkoff or Kushner you’re speaking with?” Trump: “Yeah. We had — I hate to say this in front of these young people — they’re not children. I spoke to most of them. They sound like adults to me. Even though they are sort of children, right? They’ll always be your children. But I hate to say it, but we killed all their leadership. And then they met to choose new leaders, and we killed all of them. And now, we have a new group and we can easily do that. But let’s see how they turn out. It’s — we have, really, regime change. You know, this is a change in the regime because the leaders are all very different than the ones that we started off with that created all those problems. So this was — I think we can say, Jason, this is regime change, right?” O’Keefe: “What makes you trust them?” Trump: “I don’t trust anybody. I don’t trust you. I mean, that’s only because I know you, but if I didn’t know you, I’d probably have more trust. But I don’t trust anyone.” O’Keefe: “Why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Why do you — why do you say that? Why do you say what makes you — do you think I trust them? I don’t trust them.” O’Keefe: “Then why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Because they’re going to make a deal. They’re going to make a deal. They did something yesterday that was amazing. Actually. They gave us a present. And the president arrived today and it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. And I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize. And they gave it to us, and they said they were going to give it, so that meant one thing to me. We’re dealing with the right people —” O’Keefe: “Was it nuclear related.” Trump: “No, it wasn’t nuclear related. It was oil and gas related. And it was a very nice thing they did. But what it showed me is that we’re dealing with the right people because, you know, you don’t know because the leadership was killed, all gone. Khamenei, all gone. As the expression goes, the past Supreme Leader and then the new Supreme Leader was racked up at a minimum, racked up pretty good, and everyone else was gone. And then many of the people in the third tier are gone. But we’re dealing with a group of people that I think turn out and the — the present, the gift they made to us was very significant. And they said they were going to do it and it happened. And they’re the only ones that could have done it.”

Curtis Houck

108,556 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

This is a pertinent clip from Sam Harris on the moral difference between Israel and her enemies. The moral difference comes down to understanding the answer to this question: what would each side do if they had the power to do it? TRANSCRIPT: The truth is that there is an obvious, undeniable, and hugely consequential moral difference between Israel and her enemies. The Israelis are surrounded by people who have explicitly genocidal intentions towards them. The charter of Hamas is explicitly genocidal. It looks forward to a time, based on Koranic prophesy, when the earth itself will cry out for Jewish blood, where the trees and the stones will say “O Muslim, there’s a Jew hiding behind me. Come and kill him.” This is a political document. We are talking about a government that was voted into power by a majority of Palestinians. The discourse in the Muslim world about Jews is utterly shocking. Not only is there widespread Holocaust denial—there’s Holocaust denial that then asserts that we will do it for real if given the chance. The only thing more obnoxious than denying the Holocaust is to say that it should have happened; it didn’t happen, but if we get the chance, we will accomplish it. There are children’s shows in the Palestinian territories and elsewhere that teach five-year-olds about the glories of martyrdom and about the necessity of killing Jews. And this gets to the heart of the moral difference between Israel and her enemies. And this is something I discussed in The End of Faith. To see this moral difference, you have to ask what each side would do if they had the power to do it. What would the Jews do to the Palestinians if they could do anything they wanted? Well, we know the answer to that question, because they can do more or less anything they want. The Israeli army could kill everyone in Gaza tomorrow. So what does that mean? Well, it means that, when they drop a bomb on a beach and kill four Palestinian children, as happened last week, this is almost certainly an accident. They’re not targeting children. They could target as many children as they want. Every time a Palestinian child dies, Israel edges ever closer to becoming an international pariah. So the Israelis take great pains not to kill children and other noncombatants. What do we know of the Palestinians? What would the Palestinians do to the Jews in Israel if the power imbalance were reversed? Well, they have told us what they would do. For some reason, Israel’s critics just don’t want to believe the worst about a group like Hamas, even when it declares the worst of itself. We’ve already had a Holocaust and several other genocides in the 20th century. People are capable of committing genocide. When they tell us they intend to commit genocide, we should listen. There is every reason to believe that the Palestinians would kill all the Jews in Israel if they could. Would every Palestinian support genocide? Of course not. But vast numbers of them—and of Muslims throughout the world—would. Needless to say, the Palestinians in general, not just Hamas, have a history of targeting innocent noncombatants in the most shocking ways possible. They’ve blown themselves up on buses and in restaurants. They’ve massacred teenagers. They’ve murdered Olympic athletes. They now shoot rockets indiscriminately into civilian areas. And again, the charter of their government in Gaza explicitly tells us that they want to annihilate the Jews—not just in Israel but everywhere.
3:08

This is a pertinent clip from Sam Harris on the moral difference between Israel and her enemies. The moral difference comes down to understanding the answer to this question: what would each side do if they had the power to do it? TRANSCRIPT: The truth is that there is an obvious, undeniable, and hugely consequential moral difference between Israel and her enemies. The Israelis are surrounded by people who have explicitly genocidal intentions towards them. The charter of Hamas is explicitly genocidal. It looks forward to a time, based on Koranic prophesy, when the earth itself will cry out for Jewish blood, where the trees and the stones will say “O Muslim, there’s a Jew hiding behind me. Come and kill him.” This is a political document. We are talking about a government that was voted into power by a majority of Palestinians. The discourse in the Muslim world about Jews is utterly shocking. Not only is there widespread Holocaust denial—there’s Holocaust denial that then asserts that we will do it for real if given the chance. The only thing more obnoxious than denying the Holocaust is to say that it should have happened; it didn’t happen, but if we get the chance, we will accomplish it. There are children’s shows in the Palestinian territories and elsewhere that teach five-year-olds about the glories of martyrdom and about the necessity of killing Jews. And this gets to the heart of the moral difference between Israel and her enemies. And this is something I discussed in The End of Faith. To see this moral difference, you have to ask what each side would do if they had the power to do it. What would the Jews do to the Palestinians if they could do anything they wanted? Well, we know the answer to that question, because they can do more or less anything they want. The Israeli army could kill everyone in Gaza tomorrow. So what does that mean? Well, it means that, when they drop a bomb on a beach and kill four Palestinian children, as happened last week, this is almost certainly an accident. They’re not targeting children. They could target as many children as they want. Every time a Palestinian child dies, Israel edges ever closer to becoming an international pariah. So the Israelis take great pains not to kill children and other noncombatants. What do we know of the Palestinians? What would the Palestinians do to the Jews in Israel if the power imbalance were reversed? Well, they have told us what they would do. For some reason, Israel’s critics just don’t want to believe the worst about a group like Hamas, even when it declares the worst of itself. We’ve already had a Holocaust and several other genocides in the 20th century. People are capable of committing genocide. When they tell us they intend to commit genocide, we should listen. There is every reason to believe that the Palestinians would kill all the Jews in Israel if they could. Would every Palestinian support genocide? Of course not. But vast numbers of them—and of Muslims throughout the world—would. Needless to say, the Palestinians in general, not just Hamas, have a history of targeting innocent noncombatants in the most shocking ways possible. They’ve blown themselves up on buses and in restaurants. They’ve massacred teenagers. They’ve murdered Olympic athletes. They now shoot rockets indiscriminately into civilian areas. And again, the charter of their government in Gaza explicitly tells us that they want to annihilate the Jews—not just in Israel but everywhere.

Colin Wright

4,195,398 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Seyed Mohammad Marandi replies to question about Russia and China's involvement in Iran. Glenn Diesen: "The American media as well as the European is full of accusations that Russia could be assisting Iran with intelligence with possible targeting. What do we know actually about China and Russia being involved?" Mohammad Marandi: "I don't know the details, but what I do know is that the Chinese and the Russians and the Iranians have moved closer to each other. This has been ongoing for years, but after the 12-day war, they've moved even closer. Iran has 15 neighbors. It's a large country. All the transit routes really have to go through Iran in Asia that would connect West Asia and East Asia, and the the Persian Gulf to to Europe and the Caucuses and Central Asia. So, the ability for Iran to receive weapons or anything that would help with the war is there. It could be done through its eastern borders. It can be done through its northern borders and there would be nothing that the United States could do about it. And the Chinese and the Russians can easily use these routes to trade with Iran, for Iran to send what what Iran purchases. I think it's clear as day that the the Russians do not want the United States to succeed in West Asia, and the Chinese obviously don't want it either. ...Zionist expansionism would basically mean further empowerment for the Trump regime and the United States, and they would have control over all the oil that are no longer leaving the Persian Gulf as we speak, but they would have control over everything and that would put China in a very very dangerous situation. More than dangerous. So, I think it's only natural to assume that the Chinese and the Russians are going to cooperate with Iran more. What the United States has done is that it has cemented the relationship between Russia, Iran and China for the years to come. They cemented it."
4:48

Seyed Mohammad Marandi replies to question about Russia and China's involvement in Iran. Glenn Diesen: "The American media as well as the European is full of accusations that Russia could be assisting Iran with intelligence with possible targeting. What do we know actually about China and Russia being involved?" Mohammad Marandi: "I don't know the details, but what I do know is that the Chinese and the Russians and the Iranians have moved closer to each other. This has been ongoing for years, but after the 12-day war, they've moved even closer. Iran has 15 neighbors. It's a large country. All the transit routes really have to go through Iran in Asia that would connect West Asia and East Asia, and the the Persian Gulf to to Europe and the Caucuses and Central Asia. So, the ability for Iran to receive weapons or anything that would help with the war is there. It could be done through its eastern borders. It can be done through its northern borders and there would be nothing that the United States could do about it. And the Chinese and the Russians can easily use these routes to trade with Iran, for Iran to send what what Iran purchases. I think it's clear as day that the the Russians do not want the United States to succeed in West Asia, and the Chinese obviously don't want it either. ...Zionist expansionism would basically mean further empowerment for the Trump regime and the United States, and they would have control over all the oil that are no longer leaving the Persian Gulf as we speak, but they would have control over everything and that would put China in a very very dangerous situation. More than dangerous. So, I think it's only natural to assume that the Chinese and the Russians are going to cooperate with Iran more. What the United States has done is that it has cemented the relationship between Russia, Iran and China for the years to come. They cemented it."

Eva Karene Bartlett

23,102 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Former World Bank Lead Economist warns the world is close to WORLD WAR 3, draws parallels to the world before WW1: ‘You can say that of course in the World War One and what is similar today, you had coalitions. You had coalitions that were getting ready to sort of pounce on each other…. And nowadays we have the same situation. We are actually having more and more clear coalitions. On one hand it is China, Russia and Iran. On the other hand it’s Europe and the United States, and people are unaware of what the war would bring and they were similarly very oblivious and they were very optimistic… You know that famous story ’we will be back home for Christmas’, they just did not figure which Christmas it would be they thought it would be Christmas 1914 but it turned out it was Christmas 1918. When they came back after 20 or 30 million dead so I think we should not take this lightly at all and I think there’s people who have either no knowledge of history or actually they don’t have family who have been exposed to war and they believe the war is some kind of game.’ —Branko Milanovic on the latest episode of Going Underground Watch the full interview in the quoted post below 👇
2:02

Former World Bank Lead Economist warns the world is close to WORLD WAR 3, draws parallels to the world before WW1: ‘You can say that of course in the World War One and what is similar today, you had coalitions. You had coalitions that were getting ready to sort of pounce on each other…. And nowadays we have the same situation. We are actually having more and more clear coalitions. On one hand it is China, Russia and Iran. On the other hand it’s Europe and the United States, and people are unaware of what the war would bring and they were similarly very oblivious and they were very optimistic… You know that famous story ’we will be back home for Christmas’, they just did not figure which Christmas it would be they thought it would be Christmas 1914 but it turned out it was Christmas 1918. When they came back after 20 or 30 million dead so I think we should not take this lightly at all and I think there’s people who have either no knowledge of history or actually they don’t have family who have been exposed to war and they believe the war is some kind of game.’ —Branko Milanovic on the latest episode of Going Underground Watch the full interview in the quoted post below 👇

Going Underground

41,067 görüntüleme • 12 gün önce