正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

"The situation in #Iran is extremely difficult now. It’s very different from Venezuela. The reason I mention Venezuela is because some people say Donald #Trump did something in Venezuela very quickly—he struck quickly against Venezuela’s leadership and weakened the government. But with the Iranian government, you can’t say that.... Iran’s government is far more resilient, and it has organised itself in a much more horizontal way, not vertically—meaning that even if you remove the leader from the equation, the system will not collapse. There are many factors within this system that can preserve the structure. So the situation is very complex. It’s not as simple as saying, “Strike the head and it’s over.” What can be done is weakening the state. That’s what the Israelis wanted to do—what they sought was transformation through weakening. But weakening the state can also lead to instability. I think Trump and #Israel have different objectives here. Israel’s goal is to weaken and fragment the regime, but what Trump wants is to weaken the regime and turn it into a partner that can negotiate and make a deal. So even if the government changes in some form, it needs leadership that is not paralysed or completely crippled. The problem now is that at the highest level the regime is paralysed, it doesn’t know what to do, and it is resorting only to excessive repression. What Trump wants is to negotiate with this government, lift sanctions, have American companies go there, and enter a major deal with Iran. But Israel does not have that goal."show more

Dr Andreas Krieg

43,923 subscribers

27,596 次观看 • 5 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

🚨GREATER ISRAEL PLAN: ‘Israel wants to be surrounded by failed, fragmenting, or co-opted states. Its goal in Iran is STATE COLLAPSE, NOT regime change.’ —Former Israeli Peace Negotiator Daniel Levy ‘What I’m suggesting is that the notion of a Greater Israel dominion, a project of domination in the region, is not just about territory. It’s about how far Israel can extend its hard power hegemony. And to do that, it wants to create a situation where it is surrounded by states that are either collapsed, in the process of fragmenting and dismantling, and therefore cannot prevent any challenge to that hard power Greater Israel project… Or states which find themselves easily co-opted by Israel because of vulnerabilities and dependencies that are brought into play, often actively by Israel. What Israel is trying to do is not some dream of regime change in Iran. It doesn’t really believe that. It’s going for regime and state collapse, chaos that then spills over. So that deals with Iran. Saudi Arabia being attacked in the war on Iran was by design as far as the Israelis are concerned. Because part of the goal here is to weaken the Gulf states so that they look around and they say, ‘America couldn’t deliver for us. We may not all like it, but there is a major regional power here and we are going to have to get on board with its project.’ Israel has talked openly about not only being a regional superpower, but Netanyahu has said becoming a global superpower. It’s talked about corridors for transporting Gulf oil to market that would run through to Israel’s Mediterranean ports. So it is trying to create Gulf dependencies on Israel. I’m not saying it will succeed.’ Watch the full interview in the quoted post below👇

🚨GREATER ISRAEL PLAN: ‘Israel wants to be surrounded by failed, fragmenting, or co-opted states. Its goal in Iran is STATE COLLAPSE, NOT regime change.’ —Former Israeli Peace Negotiator Daniel Levy ‘What I’m suggesting is that the notion of a Greater Israel dominion, a project of domination in the region, is not just about territory. It’s about how far Israel can extend its hard power hegemony. And to do that, it wants to create a situation where it is surrounded by states that are either collapsed, in the process of fragmenting and dismantling, and therefore cannot prevent any challenge to that hard power Greater Israel project… Or states which find themselves easily co-opted by Israel because of vulnerabilities and dependencies that are brought into play, often actively by Israel. What Israel is trying to do is not some dream of regime change in Iran. It doesn’t really believe that. It’s going for regime and state collapse, chaos that then spills over. So that deals with Iran. Saudi Arabia being attacked in the war on Iran was by design as far as the Israelis are concerned. Because part of the goal here is to weaken the Gulf states so that they look around and they say, ‘America couldn’t deliver for us. We may not all like it, but there is a major regional power here and we are going to have to get on board with its project.’ Israel has talked openly about not only being a regional superpower, but Netanyahu has said becoming a global superpower. It’s talked about corridors for transporting Gulf oil to market that would run through to Israel’s Mediterranean ports. So it is trying to create Gulf dependencies on Israel. I’m not saying it will succeed.’ Watch the full interview in the quoted post below👇

Going Underground

45,984 次观看 • 2 个月前

SEN. MULLIN: “President Trump is leading through strength. You can achieve peace through strength, as long as you use it in the right way.” “We’re not at war with Iran.” “What we are trying to do is make sure we can have peace.” “You cannot trust a regime that is the world’s sponsor of terror, who has been chanting for 40 years, death to America, who has killed over 1,000 U.S. citizens or service members over the last 40 years, either through proxy or direct.” “And you cannot have peace if they achieve a nuclear weapon. You can have peace with them if they don’t have a nuclear program.” “And so what President Trump has done here is he’s made an opportunity for us, maybe to be able to negotiate peace with them if the regime chooses so.” “But I can’t express this enough, Andrew. We are not at war with Iranian people. In fact, the people of Iran, I think we have a very good relationship.” “It’s the regime led by the Ayatollah that has taken Iran in the wrong direction.”

SEN. MULLIN: “President Trump is leading through strength. You can achieve peace through strength, as long as you use it in the right way.” “We’re not at war with Iran.” “What we are trying to do is make sure we can have peace.” “You cannot trust a regime that is the world’s sponsor of terror, who has been chanting for 40 years, death to America, who has killed over 1,000 U.S. citizens or service members over the last 40 years, either through proxy or direct.” “And you cannot have peace if they achieve a nuclear weapon. You can have peace with them if they don’t have a nuclear program.” “And so what President Trump has done here is he’s made an opportunity for us, maybe to be able to negotiate peace with them if the regime chooses so.” “But I can’t express this enough, Andrew. We are not at war with Iranian people. In fact, the people of Iran, I think we have a very good relationship.” “It’s the regime led by the Ayatollah that has taken Iran in the wrong direction.”

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

33,907 次观看 • 1 年前

Chris Murphy: "One of the reasons that President Trump is refusing to negotiate is because he likes the fact the government is closed because he thinks he can exercise King-like powers. He can open up the parts of the government that he wants. He can pay the employees who are loyal to him. This is a leader who is trying to transition our government from a democracy to something much closer to a totalitarian state. This is part of what happens in totalitarian states -- the leader, the regime only, decides what things get funded and what don't often in coordination with their oligarch friends."

Chris Murphy: "One of the reasons that President Trump is refusing to negotiate is because he likes the fact the government is closed because he thinks he can exercise King-like powers. He can open up the parts of the government that he wants. He can pay the employees who are loyal to him. This is a leader who is trying to transition our government from a democracy to something much closer to a totalitarian state. This is part of what happens in totalitarian states -- the leader, the regime only, decides what things get funded and what don't often in coordination with their oligarch friends."

Aaron Rupar

897,378 次观看 • 8 个月前

“Iran is not going to declare an end to the war while Israel is still attacking Lebanon. It has to be part of the deal. And of course, Bibi won’t play ball because he doesn’t want the war to end. And Trump is just waking up to that fact three months into the war, and he’s not happy about it.” “A lot of what he’s saying is that Bibi should do everything that he says. And now he’s learning that that’s not the way the world works. So constantly over the past three months, Trump is confronted by reality, which totally contradicts the made up story he has about the Iran war in his head. And guess what? In the end, reality is winning out.” “And that’s why we’re in the quagmire we’re in. Because Trump won’t accept the reality. He only wants the world to bend to what’s in his head. In this case, he’s not getting what he wants, so he’s throwing a tantrum.”

“Iran is not going to declare an end to the war while Israel is still attacking Lebanon. It has to be part of the deal. And of course, Bibi won’t play ball because he doesn’t want the war to end. And Trump is just waking up to that fact three months into the war, and he’s not happy about it.” “A lot of what he’s saying is that Bibi should do everything that he says. And now he’s learning that that’s not the way the world works. So constantly over the past three months, Trump is confronted by reality, which totally contradicts the made up story he has about the Iran war in his head. And guess what? In the end, reality is winning out.” “And that’s why we’re in the quagmire we’re in. Because Trump won’t accept the reality. He only wants the world to bend to what’s in his head. In this case, he’s not getting what he wants, so he’s throwing a tantrum.”

Josh Rogin

13,207 次观看 • 1 个月前

Tucker Carlson: Trump knows that the only force that can prevent the Iran deal from actually happening is not the US Congress. It's the government of Israel. They will try to torpedo the deal, as they have so many times. They'll try to blow it up. Trump knows that he has to diminish Benjamin Netanyahu—and not just Netanyahu, but the state of Israel's moral legitimacy in the United States—in order to keep going. And so, amazingly, he's done that.

Tucker Carlson: Trump knows that the only force that can prevent the Iran deal from actually happening is not the US Congress. It's the government of Israel. They will try to torpedo the deal, as they have so many times. They'll try to blow it up. Trump knows that he has to diminish Benjamin Netanyahu—and not just Netanyahu, but the state of Israel's moral legitimacy in the United States—in order to keep going. And so, amazingly, he's done that.

Clash Report

141,818 次观看 • 20 天前

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent delivered the perfect answer when Maria Bartiromo asked whether he is confident that the Iranians will keep their promises when it comes to a deal. He ended with a warning to the regime. BESSENT: “Well, what I have confidence in is that President Trump’s going to hold them to it.” “That with the Iranians, we’ll see. Their government, as I’ve said, we didn’t have regime change, but we changed the regime.” “The first layer was decapitated, second layer decapitated. We’re on the third group so maybe they have seen what happened to the others and they see what President Trump is willing to do.” “So if President Trump agrees to this deal, I would tell the Iranian leaders right now, he will enforce it. And both military and economically.” Trump will enforce any Iran deal with full force.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent delivered the perfect answer when Maria Bartiromo asked whether he is confident that the Iranians will keep their promises when it comes to a deal. He ended with a warning to the regime. BESSENT: “Well, what I have confidence in is that President Trump’s going to hold them to it.” “That with the Iranians, we’ll see. Their government, as I’ve said, we didn’t have regime change, but we changed the regime.” “The first layer was decapitated, second layer decapitated. We’re on the third group so maybe they have seen what happened to the others and they see what President Trump is willing to do.” “So if President Trump agrees to this deal, I would tell the Iranian leaders right now, he will enforce it. And both military and economically.” Trump will enforce any Iran deal with full force.

Overton

138,265 次观看 • 1 个月前

Why did the Somali government send a pro-Somaliland delegation to Davos to participate in the World Economic Forum? Trump is there. A large Emirati delegation is also there. The separatist leader is there as well. So why is the Somali government being so lenient about something like this? What makes it even more absurd is that Hassan Sheikh Mahmoud is set to travel to Ethiopia to celebrate the Ethiopian Air Force. What does Somalia have to do with Ethiopian military celebrations? Is the country not going through a critical and decisive moment, with far more urgent national issues that demand attention?

Why did the Somali government send a pro-Somaliland delegation to Davos to participate in the World Economic Forum? Trump is there. A large Emirati delegation is also there. The separatist leader is there as well. So why is the Somali government being so lenient about something like this? What makes it even more absurd is that Hassan Sheikh Mahmoud is set to travel to Ethiopia to celebrate the Ethiopian Air Force. What does Somalia have to do with Ethiopian military celebrations? Is the country not going through a critical and decisive moment, with far more urgent national issues that demand attention?

Deeqa 🇸🇴

79,867 次观看 • 5 个月前

🔴 Emily Thornbury: Netanyahu’s Far-Right Government “Just Not Listening” — Only Trump Can Make Them Stop "Well, the only person he does listen to, as far as we can tell, is is Donald Trump." And so therefore, rather than trying to speak to the Israelis, we're now, I think, in a position where we have to be speaking directly to to Donald Trump and say, "You have the strength of 10 presidents. You can get the Israelis to listen to you in a way that no other American president has done. You must get them to stop.” — Labour MP and Foreign Affairs Committee chair Emily Thornbury says Israel’s far-right government has flatly rejected a global push for a Gaza ceasefire — and only Donald Trump has the influence to force a change. Key Points from Interview: ➤ Reacting to the ceasefire call now signed by over 30 countries, Thornbury said: “Israel by almost return of post puts up a post on social media just rejecting it completely out of hand… It’s divorced from reality. It’s insulting.” “It’s another example of Israel — this far-right government in Israel — just not listening to their friends and to their allies.” ➤ “We have to think about what it is that we can do to make sure they do listen.” “More than 80% of people in Israel, from what I understand, want there to be a ceasefire and want the hostages returned. So we’re talking to this far-right government. We’re not talking about the Israeli people.” ➤➤ “The only person he does listen to, as far as we can tell, is Donald Trump.” “Donald Trump got them to turn their planes around in the air… He is somebody they listen to, and I don’t know of anybody else that they do.” “It does seem to me that this is one of the things that we should be using our political capital on.” ➤ Backing immediate UK recognition of Palestinian statehood, Thornbury said: “There’s going to be no Palestine left to recognize unless we recognize… What we should be doing is recognizing, showing that we’re players, showing that we’re acting in good faith, working with the French.” ➥ On UK hesitation: “We all want the same thing. [Starmer] just has a different idea of how to get there. And I think he’s wrong about that.” ➥ On two states: “The Palestinians are not going anywhere. The Israelis are not going anywhere. So what’s the solution? The solution is what we have said for 40, 50 years — two states. And I don’t really understand, given that it’s such a pillar of our foreign policy, why we can’t then say we agree with two states and we recognize the second state.” ➥ On existential Israeli fears: “I have absolute sympathy for Israel in their belief that they have Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis — all of them saying they want to eliminate Israel — and Iran as well. But… the only way in which Israel can be safe and secure in the region and not constantly at war is by agreeing to a solution that will allow for some peace and tranquility… which means giving the Palestinians what they need — which is a state of their own.”

🔴 Emily Thornbury: Netanyahu’s Far-Right Government “Just Not Listening” — Only Trump Can Make Them Stop "Well, the only person he does listen to, as far as we can tell, is is Donald Trump." And so therefore, rather than trying to speak to the Israelis, we're now, I think, in a position where we have to be speaking directly to to Donald Trump and say, "You have the strength of 10 presidents. You can get the Israelis to listen to you in a way that no other American president has done. You must get them to stop.” — Labour MP and Foreign Affairs Committee chair Emily Thornbury says Israel’s far-right government has flatly rejected a global push for a Gaza ceasefire — and only Donald Trump has the influence to force a change. Key Points from Interview: ➤ Reacting to the ceasefire call now signed by over 30 countries, Thornbury said: “Israel by almost return of post puts up a post on social media just rejecting it completely out of hand… It’s divorced from reality. It’s insulting.” “It’s another example of Israel — this far-right government in Israel — just not listening to their friends and to their allies.” ➤ “We have to think about what it is that we can do to make sure they do listen.” “More than 80% of people in Israel, from what I understand, want there to be a ceasefire and want the hostages returned. So we’re talking to this far-right government. We’re not talking about the Israeli people.” ➤➤ “The only person he does listen to, as far as we can tell, is Donald Trump.” “Donald Trump got them to turn their planes around in the air… He is somebody they listen to, and I don’t know of anybody else that they do.” “It does seem to me that this is one of the things that we should be using our political capital on.” ➤ Backing immediate UK recognition of Palestinian statehood, Thornbury said: “There’s going to be no Palestine left to recognize unless we recognize… What we should be doing is recognizing, showing that we’re players, showing that we’re acting in good faith, working with the French.” ➥ On UK hesitation: “We all want the same thing. [Starmer] just has a different idea of how to get there. And I think he’s wrong about that.” ➥ On two states: “The Palestinians are not going anywhere. The Israelis are not going anywhere. So what’s the solution? The solution is what we have said for 40, 50 years — two states. And I don’t really understand, given that it’s such a pillar of our foreign policy, why we can’t then say we agree with two states and we recognize the second state.” ➥ On existential Israeli fears: “I have absolute sympathy for Israel in their belief that they have Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis — all of them saying they want to eliminate Israel — and Iran as well. But… the only way in which Israel can be safe and secure in the region and not constantly at war is by agreeing to a solution that will allow for some peace and tranquility… which means giving the Palestinians what they need — which is a state of their own.”

Drop Site

15,089 次观看 • 11 个月前

The Trump plan, which was presented at the White House, included two parts. What was approved today in Sharm el-Sheikh has nothing to do with the future. Regarding the future of Gaza, we are still at the initial idea, which was not translated into details on the ground — and it’s no coincidence, because the assessment, at least in Israel, is that it’s impossible to really reach agreements with Hamas on its dismantling. There has not yet been an Islamic fundamentalist terrorist organization that agreed one day to simply dismantle. And so what we have here is a hostage release deal, and Israel is at a fork in the road. First, if Hamas is willing to disarm, Israel will indeed withdraw to the Gaza perimeter. If not, then not — and then IDF forces will be there, because we have no one to rely on but God and them. Now regarding the main issue. After all, Hamas ostensibly received guarantees. That’s what Hamas is saying. That’s its excuse to release the hostages. It is replacing the 48 hostages with an American-Qatar-Turkish-international guarantee that Israel will not enter. They say in Israel, “no problem, we also have guarantees. The war will end if Hamas disarms.” So we see here two American guarantees, which I, in order not to be anti-American, will not say that they are foolish. I will say that they complement each other: the war will not be renewed if Hamas disarms. And so, if you break it down even more: That war is over. It’s over. The ground entries, the raids, the exits, the Gideon’s Chariots A, B and maybe even C. What will happen next? Israel expects it to be “Lebanonization,” but in the positive sense of what happens after the ceasefire. In other words, not ground raids, but precise damage to any attempt to build up and/or harm IDF soldiers. This is the Israeli desire. We’ll see what happens on the ground.

The Trump plan, which was presented at the White House, included two parts. What was approved today in Sharm el-Sheikh has nothing to do with the future. Regarding the future of Gaza, we are still at the initial idea, which was not translated into details on the ground — and it’s no coincidence, because the assessment, at least in Israel, is that it’s impossible to really reach agreements with Hamas on its dismantling. There has not yet been an Islamic fundamentalist terrorist organization that agreed one day to simply dismantle. And so what we have here is a hostage release deal, and Israel is at a fork in the road. First, if Hamas is willing to disarm, Israel will indeed withdraw to the Gaza perimeter. If not, then not — and then IDF forces will be there, because we have no one to rely on but God and them. Now regarding the main issue. After all, Hamas ostensibly received guarantees. That’s what Hamas is saying. That’s its excuse to release the hostages. It is replacing the 48 hostages with an American-Qatar-Turkish-international guarantee that Israel will not enter. They say in Israel, “no problem, we also have guarantees. The war will end if Hamas disarms.” So we see here two American guarantees, which I, in order not to be anti-American, will not say that they are foolish. I will say that they complement each other: the war will not be renewed if Hamas disarms. And so, if you break it down even more: That war is over. It’s over. The ground entries, the raids, the exits, the Gideon’s Chariots A, B and maybe even C. What will happen next? Israel expects it to be “Lebanonization,” but in the positive sense of what happens after the ceasefire. In other words, not ground raids, but precise damage to any attempt to build up and/or harm IDF soldiers. This is the Israeli desire. We’ll see what happens on the ground.

Amit Segal

23,239 次观看 • 9 个月前

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.”

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 次观看 • 3 个月前

Chris Cuomo asked Bill O’Reilly what the strategy is for Iran — but he didn’t realize O’Reilly already knew what comes next. This wasn’t speculation. O’Reilly spoke directly with President Trump on Tuesday, and what he was told points to a very narrow window ahead. CUOMO: “I don’t understand what our strategy is here. I mean, it’s it’s really bad there. But it’s really bad in a lot of places.” O’REILLY: “Let me explain.” “So on Tuesday morning, I had an extensive conversation with President Trump about Iran.” “What the problem is there is that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard will fight.” “Unlike Venezuela where the army wasn’t going to fight. CIA knew that, it can send American troops in and grab Maduro.” “The Revolutionary Guard will fight. All right. So now the president has to make a decision.” “He has offered a deal to the mullahs. The deal is that you abandon your new program forever and you let out all the political prisoners. Okay?” “If the mullahs do not take that deal, there’s going to be a military strike.” “I don’t know what it is. He’s not going to tell me.” “But here’s something that no one has mentioned, Cuomo, but I know it.” “The olympics start on Friday.” “That’s when the talk is supposed to be in Istanbul. It would be very difficult for anybody launch a military action during the four weeks or three and a half weeks of the olympics.” “Exceedingly difficult to do that, because the whole world’s focus…is on a sporting event in Italy.” “So you’re going to blow that out of Iran while the skiers are going the alps? It doesn’t stack.” “So there’s a little bit of window here to get a deal.”

Chris Cuomo asked Bill O’Reilly what the strategy is for Iran — but he didn’t realize O’Reilly already knew what comes next. This wasn’t speculation. O’Reilly spoke directly with President Trump on Tuesday, and what he was told points to a very narrow window ahead. CUOMO: “I don’t understand what our strategy is here. I mean, it’s it’s really bad there. But it’s really bad in a lot of places.” O’REILLY: “Let me explain.” “So on Tuesday morning, I had an extensive conversation with President Trump about Iran.” “What the problem is there is that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard will fight.” “Unlike Venezuela where the army wasn’t going to fight. CIA knew that, it can send American troops in and grab Maduro.” “The Revolutionary Guard will fight. All right. So now the president has to make a decision.” “He has offered a deal to the mullahs. The deal is that you abandon your new program forever and you let out all the political prisoners. Okay?” “If the mullahs do not take that deal, there’s going to be a military strike.” “I don’t know what it is. He’s not going to tell me.” “But here’s something that no one has mentioned, Cuomo, but I know it.” “The olympics start on Friday.” “That’s when the talk is supposed to be in Istanbul. It would be very difficult for anybody launch a military action during the four weeks or three and a half weeks of the olympics.” “Exceedingly difficult to do that, because the whole world’s focus…is on a sporting event in Italy.” “So you’re going to blow that out of Iran while the skiers are going the alps? It doesn’t stack.” “So there’s a little bit of window here to get a deal.”

Overton

37,558 次观看 • 5 个月前

Mamdani on Arch/Ballroom/Club Rose Garden: My message would be that this is not what government has to be. This is not the only vision for what it looks like to have politics in this country—that is so divorced from the needs and wants of everyday people. And what we are looking to show in New York City is an alternative to what has led so many to become disenchanted with the political process. We want to show that not only can government work, but it must, and that at its core, our responsibility is to working people—to ensure that we’re doing everything to make their lives easier. That has to be what drives our actions, and for too long, government has felt more like a distraction than a fulfillment of the needs of the people who’ve been left behind by the politics of today.

Mamdani on Arch/Ballroom/Club Rose Garden: My message would be that this is not what government has to be. This is not the only vision for what it looks like to have politics in this country—that is so divorced from the needs and wants of everyday people. And what we are looking to show in New York City is an alternative to what has led so many to become disenchanted with the political process. We want to show that not only can government work, but it must, and that at its core, our responsibility is to working people—to ensure that we’re doing everything to make their lives easier. That has to be what drives our actions, and for too long, government has felt more like a distraction than a fulfillment of the needs of the people who’ve been left behind by the politics of today.

Acyn

31,743 次观看 • 1 个月前

A very harsh threat, made by Netanyahu toward Iran. What is behind the heightened tone? It is not only harsh, it is also unusual. The event that took place in recent months was a paralyzing fear of what is called miscalculation. They will think that we will attack first, even though that was not the intention, and then they will attack, and the entire region will be dragged into another round of confrontation. In a region where there is fear of miscalculation, you are not supposed to announce this kind of thing in the Knesset. I just want to make that clear. Yesterday, Naftali Bennett promoted his press conference on the conditions of soldiers, okay? He gets six million views because the timing looks like a countdown and he is a former prime minister, so the Iranians are in hysterics that he is actually announcing that they are going to attack. That’s the atmosphere. So when Netanyahu attacks like this and makes an unprecedented threat—not only harsh but also unusual—one can’t help but think that for Netanyahu there is a message, or something more problematic than miscalculation. And he wants to warn the Iranians. Now, what’s the issue? The issue is that if the Iranians come to the conclusion that their regime is on the verge of collapse, there is one thing that might save them. And that is an attack on Israel. Because we saw during the war what is called “rally around the flag.” Even those who were in the opposition rallied around the flag when their country was attacked. It is not only the Islamic Republic that is under attack, but also the Islamic Republic of Iran. That is essentially the issue, and that is what Netanyahu, in my opinion, is trying to stop with the threat he issued after the security discussion.

A very harsh threat, made by Netanyahu toward Iran. What is behind the heightened tone? It is not only harsh, it is also unusual. The event that took place in recent months was a paralyzing fear of what is called miscalculation. They will think that we will attack first, even though that was not the intention, and then they will attack, and the entire region will be dragged into another round of confrontation. In a region where there is fear of miscalculation, you are not supposed to announce this kind of thing in the Knesset. I just want to make that clear. Yesterday, Naftali Bennett promoted his press conference on the conditions of soldiers, okay? He gets six million views because the timing looks like a countdown and he is a former prime minister, so the Iranians are in hysterics that he is actually announcing that they are going to attack. That’s the atmosphere. So when Netanyahu attacks like this and makes an unprecedented threat—not only harsh but also unusual—one can’t help but think that for Netanyahu there is a message, or something more problematic than miscalculation. And he wants to warn the Iranians. Now, what’s the issue? The issue is that if the Iranians come to the conclusion that their regime is on the verge of collapse, there is one thing that might save them. And that is an attack on Israel. Because we saw during the war what is called “rally around the flag.” Even those who were in the opposition rallied around the flag when their country was attacked. It is not only the Islamic Republic that is under attack, but also the Islamic Republic of Iran. That is essentially the issue, and that is what Netanyahu, in my opinion, is trying to stop with the threat he issued after the security discussion.

Amit Segal

41,392 次观看 • 6 个月前

.Erik Voorhees: It’s actually good, from the Trojan horse perspective, that Bitcoin was traceable enough for traditional institutions to tolerate it. “When Bitcoin came out, everyone called it private, thought of it as private. It was referred to as anonymous in every news story. And in some ways, it is very private and very anonymous. But the truth is that it’s also extremely trackable and traceable. It is not private in reality. And the question is, should it have been from the start? And at first I thought, yes, it should have been more private. And that was a mistake in its design. However, I think if Bitcoin had been anonymous truly from the start, like a Zcash or a Monero, it would have had such antagonism from the state. I don’t know that the state could have snuffed it out, but they would have tried much harder. And I think it’s actually good, from the Trojan horse metaphor perspective, that it was traceable enough that the traditional institutions could tolerate it. They’ve never liked it, but they could at least tolerate it because there is some traceability. And that has allowed Bitcoin to grow. And I think in its shadow, that other crypto assets are actually anonymous is very healthy. The strength of cryptocurrency as a concept in society, I think, is served best when Bitcoin itself is not perfectly private, but other assets are. That is a very difficult thing, I think, for the state to combat. And that decentralization of attributes is really, really crucial. So, yeah, I’m very glad that there are other coins that are private. I want there to be more of them, and I want them to be more popular. And I think it’s okay that Bitcoin itself is not.”

.Erik Voorhees: It’s actually good, from the Trojan horse perspective, that Bitcoin was traceable enough for traditional institutions to tolerate it. “When Bitcoin came out, everyone called it private, thought of it as private. It was referred to as anonymous in every news story. And in some ways, it is very private and very anonymous. But the truth is that it’s also extremely trackable and traceable. It is not private in reality. And the question is, should it have been from the start? And at first I thought, yes, it should have been more private. And that was a mistake in its design. However, I think if Bitcoin had been anonymous truly from the start, like a Zcash or a Monero, it would have had such antagonism from the state. I don’t know that the state could have snuffed it out, but they would have tried much harder. And I think it’s actually good, from the Trojan horse metaphor perspective, that it was traceable enough that the traditional institutions could tolerate it. They’ve never liked it, but they could at least tolerate it because there is some traceability. And that has allowed Bitcoin to grow. And I think in its shadow, that other crypto assets are actually anonymous is very healthy. The strength of cryptocurrency as a concept in society, I think, is served best when Bitcoin itself is not perfectly private, but other assets are. That is a very difficult thing, I think, for the state to combat. And that decentralization of attributes is really, really crucial. So, yeah, I’m very glad that there are other coins that are private. I want there to be more of them, and I want them to be more popular. And I think it’s okay that Bitcoin itself is not.”

Arjun Khemani

23,056 次观看 • 18 天前

Ben Shapiro: “I think the Senate filibuster is actually quite important because if you do not have the Senate filibuster, what you end up with is a country that is already pendulumingside to side, doing so even farther with 51 votes in the Senate.” “Ramming through massive changes to the system of government itself... The argument President Trump has used is Democrats will do it anyway when they get the first opportunity. So we should go ahead and do it.” “I’m not sure that’s true... [What should happen] is a constitutional amendment to enshrine the filibuster in the Constitution.”

Ben Shapiro: “I think the Senate filibuster is actually quite important because if you do not have the Senate filibuster, what you end up with is a country that is already pendulumingside to side, doing so even farther with 51 votes in the Senate.” “Ramming through massive changes to the system of government itself... The argument President Trump has used is Democrats will do it anyway when they get the first opportunity. So we should go ahead and do it.” “I’m not sure that’s true... [What should happen] is a constitutional amendment to enshrine the filibuster in the Constitution.”

RedWave Press

553,369 次观看 • 8 个月前

Brett Meiselas: [Donald Trump] has his propaganda that he wants to push, and the IRGC and the Iranian regime, they have things that they want to push to their people. And so you get these maximalist statements on both sides, oftentimes neither of which line up with the truth. But I do have to say, more times than not, the Iranian story has been far closer to the truth than what we're hearing with our own government here in the United States. That is something that is deeply troubling to me. That's something that takes a lot of getting used to.

Brett Meiselas: [Donald Trump] has his propaganda that he wants to push, and the IRGC and the Iranian regime, they have things that they want to push to their people. And so you get these maximalist statements on both sides, oftentimes neither of which line up with the truth. But I do have to say, more times than not, the Iranian story has been far closer to the truth than what we're hearing with our own government here in the United States. That is something that is deeply troubling to me. That's something that takes a lot of getting used to.

MeidasClips

18,473 次观看 • 29 天前

CNN’s Abby Phillip interrupts former Iranian political prisoner Kian Tajbakhsh and immediately cuts to a commercial right after he said this: “You can draw a straight line from the 2015 nuclear deal to October 7th.” TAJBAKHSH: “What happened with President Obama, I’ll just say this very quickly.” “And I was in the State Department in the 2000s when we implored the Bush administration not to restrict the engagement with Iran simply to the nuclear file.” “What happened with president Obama is that, for better or worse — and I’m not going to litigate that here — he decided that given the four big problems that have always been on American objectives with Iran, that is enrichment, ballistic missiles, proxies and democracy inside Iran, that he would put all the last three aside and focus only on the nuclear deal.” “Now, I’m not going to say that was good or bad. I don’t think it was a great idea, but what we have seen and this is also maybe controversial and I think a lot of my liberal friends are going to hate me for this…” “Is that unfortunately you can draw a straight line from the 2015 nuclear deal to October 7th.” “I think that what the Trump administration is—” PHILLIP: “We…we…we do have to go to a break here.” TAJBAKHSH: “Okay.” PHILLIP: “There’s more on the other side. So hold your thought because I have some follow up questions for you about what the endgame is here and now…”

CNN’s Abby Phillip interrupts former Iranian political prisoner Kian Tajbakhsh and immediately cuts to a commercial right after he said this: “You can draw a straight line from the 2015 nuclear deal to October 7th.” TAJBAKHSH: “What happened with President Obama, I’ll just say this very quickly.” “And I was in the State Department in the 2000s when we implored the Bush administration not to restrict the engagement with Iran simply to the nuclear file.” “What happened with president Obama is that, for better or worse — and I’m not going to litigate that here — he decided that given the four big problems that have always been on American objectives with Iran, that is enrichment, ballistic missiles, proxies and democracy inside Iran, that he would put all the last three aside and focus only on the nuclear deal.” “Now, I’m not going to say that was good or bad. I don’t think it was a great idea, but what we have seen and this is also maybe controversial and I think a lot of my liberal friends are going to hate me for this…” “Is that unfortunately you can draw a straight line from the 2015 nuclear deal to October 7th.” “I think that what the Trump administration is—” PHILLIP: “We…we…we do have to go to a break here.” TAJBAKHSH: “Okay.” PHILLIP: “There’s more on the other side. So hold your thought because I have some follow up questions for you about what the endgame is here and now…”

Overton

651,427 次观看 • 4 个月前

Bill O’Reilly goes off on CNN for immediately bashing Trump’s deal with Iran within minutes of it being announced — “Drives me NUTS!” O’Reilly says the reason this always happens is because the LAST thing the Democrats and the media want is for Trump to emerge with a good deal. O'REILLY: “Here’s some cold reality.” “CNN doesn’t want a deal. Okay?” “They hate Trump.” “Yeah, the mullahs could back out and you can say that, but come on!” “That’s not the first thing. That’s not the headline.” “The headline is the deal.” “And Nic, YOUR job is to find out what the deal is.” “Not to cast aspersions on it within five minutes.” “Drives me NUTS!” “Now this always happens because the Trump haters and the Democratic Party, which are pretty much one in the same now, the LAST thing on earth they want is for Trump to emerge with a solid deal.” “That’s the LAST thing they want!” “Now, you can say that’s un-American, I believe it is. But it’s also un-planet Earth.”

Bill O’Reilly goes off on CNN for immediately bashing Trump’s deal with Iran within minutes of it being announced — “Drives me NUTS!” O’Reilly says the reason this always happens is because the LAST thing the Democrats and the media want is for Trump to emerge with a good deal. O'REILLY: “Here’s some cold reality.” “CNN doesn’t want a deal. Okay?” “They hate Trump.” “Yeah, the mullahs could back out and you can say that, but come on!” “That’s not the first thing. That’s not the headline.” “The headline is the deal.” “And Nic, YOUR job is to find out what the deal is.” “Not to cast aspersions on it within five minutes.” “Drives me NUTS!” “Now this always happens because the Trump haters and the Democratic Party, which are pretty much one in the same now, the LAST thing on earth they want is for Trump to emerge with a solid deal.” “That’s the LAST thing they want!” “Now, you can say that’s un-American, I believe it is. But it’s also un-planet Earth.”

Overton

65,689 次观看 • 23 天前