Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

When readiness is tested, ⚡ speed matters. #SteadfastDart26 puts NATO’s ability to deploy, move, and reinforce forces at speed to the test strengthening deterrence where and when it is needed. Led by NATO Joint Force Command Brunssum, the exercise demonstrates how the Alliance turns plans into action in a...

NATOJFCBS's profile picture

NATO Allied Joint Force Command Brunssum - JFCBS

73,703 subscribers

25,775 views • 6 months ago •via X (Twitter)

News & PoliticsScience & Technology#SteadfastDart26
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Did you know the 🇫🇷 French Navy contributed carrier-based air power to #SteadfastDart26⁉️ Two Rafale M fighters launched from the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle took part in the exercise as part of the French Carrier Strike Group, a unique and strategic capability in Europe. ⚓ Acting as a floating air base ✈️ Enabling sustained air operations at sea 🤝 Strengthening Allied interoperability & cohesion ➡️ As operations continue, the strike group sails onward toward Exercise #ORION26, sustaining readiness and Allied cooperation. 📹 Watch the video to see how powerful this capability truly is. 👀 #WeAreNATO #StrongerTogether #CharlesDeGaulle #FrenchCSG Armée française - Opérations militaires Marine nationale French Carrier Strike Group Naval News Ministère des Armées et des Anciens combattants Force et Opérations Terrestres Chef d'état-major de l'armée de Terre Commandement Terre Europe La France à l'OTAN SHAPE - NATO Allied Command Operations NATO Maritime Command
1:17

Did you know the 🇫🇷 French Navy contributed carrier-based air power to #SteadfastDart26⁉️ Two Rafale M fighters launched from the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle took part in the exercise as part of the French Carrier Strike Group, a unique and strategic capability in Europe. ⚓ Acting as a floating air base ✈️ Enabling sustained air operations at sea 🤝 Strengthening Allied interoperability & cohesion ➡️ As operations continue, the strike group sails onward toward Exercise #ORION26, sustaining readiness and Allied cooperation. 📹 Watch the video to see how powerful this capability truly is. 👀 #WeAreNATO #StrongerTogether #CharlesDeGaulle #FrenchCSG Armée française - Opérations militaires Marine nationale French Carrier Strike Group Naval News Ministère des Armées et des Anciens combattants Force et Opérations Terrestres Chef d'état-major de l'armée de Terre Commandement Terre Europe La France à l'OTAN SHAPE - NATO Allied Command Operations NATO Maritime Command

NATO Allied Joint Force Command Brunssum - JFCBS

32,561 views • 5 months ago

British Navy’s F-35 jet stranded in Thiruvananthapuram Malfunction or Covert Operation? The prolonged grounding of a British Royal Navy F-35B Lightning II fighter jet at a civilian airport in India has rapidly evolved from an operational mishap to a high-stakes test of how far the UK can go to protect the world’s most sensitive military technology when deployed far from home waters or are they testing our capabilities after we shocked the world with Operation Sindoor?? The incident, which began on June 14, 2025, when the jet made an emergency landing at Thiruvananthapuram International Airport in Kerala, has become a glaring reminder of how vulnerable cutting-edge fifth-generation aircraft can be when forced into unscripted scenarios across geopolitically charged regions like the Indo-Pacific. Valued at more than USD 100 million (about RM 470 million) per unit, the F-35B is not just a combat platform but a flying fortress of next-generation stealth coatings, ultra-secure sensor fusion, low-probability-of-intercept datalinks, and radar cross-section management technologies that remain among the most closely guarded secrets in Western defence circles. That one of these prized assets is now effectively stranded on a civilian tarmac albeit behind layers of round-the-clock Royal Air Force security cordons has embarrassed the British Armed Forces and triggered urgent debates in Westminster over whether enough was done to prevent sensitive systems from being exposed. British lawmakers, including several on the House of Commons Defence Committee, have demanded concrete assurances from the Ministry of Defence (MoD) that no aspect of the F-35B’s stealth coating, advanced avionics, or encrypted communications suite has been compromised or inspected by unauthorised personnel. This technological secrecy sits at the very heart of the F-35 programme, a multinational endeavour led by the United States and its trusted allies that collectively invested hundreds of billions to field what is still widely regarded as the most advanced multi-role combat aircraft on Earth. “The aircraft remains under strict British control, with Royal Air Force personnel guarding it 24/7,” the Ministry of Defence stated in a bid to reassure the public and Britain’s partners across the region. Credit : Pavneet Singh.
10:45

British Navy’s F-35 jet stranded in Thiruvananthapuram Malfunction or Covert Operation? The prolonged grounding of a British Royal Navy F-35B Lightning II fighter jet at a civilian airport in India has rapidly evolved from an operational mishap to a high-stakes test of how far the UK can go to protect the world’s most sensitive military technology when deployed far from home waters or are they testing our capabilities after we shocked the world with Operation Sindoor?? The incident, which began on June 14, 2025, when the jet made an emergency landing at Thiruvananthapuram International Airport in Kerala, has become a glaring reminder of how vulnerable cutting-edge fifth-generation aircraft can be when forced into unscripted scenarios across geopolitically charged regions like the Indo-Pacific. Valued at more than USD 100 million (about RM 470 million) per unit, the F-35B is not just a combat platform but a flying fortress of next-generation stealth coatings, ultra-secure sensor fusion, low-probability-of-intercept datalinks, and radar cross-section management technologies that remain among the most closely guarded secrets in Western defence circles. That one of these prized assets is now effectively stranded on a civilian tarmac albeit behind layers of round-the-clock Royal Air Force security cordons has embarrassed the British Armed Forces and triggered urgent debates in Westminster over whether enough was done to prevent sensitive systems from being exposed. British lawmakers, including several on the House of Commons Defence Committee, have demanded concrete assurances from the Ministry of Defence (MoD) that no aspect of the F-35B’s stealth coating, advanced avionics, or encrypted communications suite has been compromised or inspected by unauthorised personnel. This technological secrecy sits at the very heart of the F-35 programme, a multinational endeavour led by the United States and its trusted allies that collectively invested hundreds of billions to field what is still widely regarded as the most advanced multi-role combat aircraft on Earth. “The aircraft remains under strict British control, with Royal Air Force personnel guarding it 24/7,” the Ministry of Defence stated in a bid to reassure the public and Britain’s partners across the region. Credit : Pavneet Singh.

Augadh

13,348 views • 1 year ago

🇵🇰 | Pakistan's new deterrence equation 🔺️Following the four-day military conflict with India in May, Pakistan created a new Army Rocket Force Command (ARFC). 🔺️Some dismiss it as a hurried move in the aftermath of recent Indo-Pak tensions. Others suspect it signals a shift toward escalation. Both views miss the point. 🔺️Background discussions with relevant authorities suggest the ARFC is not an overnight reaction but rather the culmination of a long, painstaking evolution in Pakistan's conventional military doctrine. For decades, Pakistan has been grappling with a fundamental challenge on how to balance India's overwhelming conventional superiority without sliding into overreliance on nuclear weapons. The answer, refined gradually by military planners and scientists, has been to strengthen long-range conventional strike options. The ARFC is the manifestation of that journey. At its core, ARFC consolidates Pakistan's long-range rocket and missile capabilities under a single command structure. Until now, artillery divisions with long-range vectors were dispersed, operating in relative isolation. Bringing them together under one umbrella reflects an effort at synergy, efficiency and doctrinal clarity. It is about using what already exists in a smarter way. The Fateh-series rockets stand at the heart of this project. With their enhanced range and precision, they symbolise a new phase in Pakistan's conventional response regime. These rockets are not just about raw firepower, they are about control, flexibility and credible deterrence short of the nuclear threshold. In future conflicts, such capabilities will allow Pakistan to deliver short, sharp and intense firepower duels in order to impose costs without inviting full-scale war. The timing of ARFC's unveiling invites speculation. India has been steadily expanding its conventional military edge, investing in missile defence systems and modernising its forces. Against this backdrop, Pakistan's move is as much about perception management as operational readiness. By institutionalising ARFC, Islamabad sends a clear signal. It has the means to circumvent India's air defence umbrella and strike across its territory. This matters in deterrence psychology. If India believes Pakistan lacks credible conventional responses, it may be tempted to push the envelope. The ARFC is designed to raise those costs and close that window of temptation. South Asia's deterrence debate has long been dominated by the nuclear question. Yet deterrence does not begin and end with nuclear weapons. Conventional capabilities matter. They shape the spectrum of conflict that exists below the nuclear threshold. ARFC serves as what analysts call an "operational leveler". It dilutes conventional asymmetry and complicates Indian war plans. By holding high-value targets at risk deep inside Indian territory, ARFC expands Pakistan's options in the event of a crisis. More importantly, it strengthens deterrence by punishment, the ability to inflict quick and decisive costs on any adversary who dares to test Pakistan's resolve. Skeptics will ask whether ARFC blurs the line between conventional and nuclear deterrence. The answer lies in its very design. 1/2.... Cont #Pakistan #India #Modi Read:
0:53

🇵🇰 | Pakistan's new deterrence equation 🔺️Following the four-day military conflict with India in May, Pakistan created a new Army Rocket Force Command (ARFC). 🔺️Some dismiss it as a hurried move in the aftermath of recent Indo-Pak tensions. Others suspect it signals a shift toward escalation. Both views miss the point. 🔺️Background discussions with relevant authorities suggest the ARFC is not an overnight reaction but rather the culmination of a long, painstaking evolution in Pakistan's conventional military doctrine. For decades, Pakistan has been grappling with a fundamental challenge on how to balance India's overwhelming conventional superiority without sliding into overreliance on nuclear weapons. The answer, refined gradually by military planners and scientists, has been to strengthen long-range conventional strike options. The ARFC is the manifestation of that journey. At its core, ARFC consolidates Pakistan's long-range rocket and missile capabilities under a single command structure. Until now, artillery divisions with long-range vectors were dispersed, operating in relative isolation. Bringing them together under one umbrella reflects an effort at synergy, efficiency and doctrinal clarity. It is about using what already exists in a smarter way. The Fateh-series rockets stand at the heart of this project. With their enhanced range and precision, they symbolise a new phase in Pakistan's conventional response regime. These rockets are not just about raw firepower, they are about control, flexibility and credible deterrence short of the nuclear threshold. In future conflicts, such capabilities will allow Pakistan to deliver short, sharp and intense firepower duels in order to impose costs without inviting full-scale war. The timing of ARFC's unveiling invites speculation. India has been steadily expanding its conventional military edge, investing in missile defence systems and modernising its forces. Against this backdrop, Pakistan's move is as much about perception management as operational readiness. By institutionalising ARFC, Islamabad sends a clear signal. It has the means to circumvent India's air defence umbrella and strike across its territory. This matters in deterrence psychology. If India believes Pakistan lacks credible conventional responses, it may be tempted to push the envelope. The ARFC is designed to raise those costs and close that window of temptation. South Asia's deterrence debate has long been dominated by the nuclear question. Yet deterrence does not begin and end with nuclear weapons. Conventional capabilities matter. They shape the spectrum of conflict that exists below the nuclear threshold. ARFC serves as what analysts call an "operational leveler". It dilutes conventional asymmetry and complicates Indian war plans. By holding high-value targets at risk deep inside Indian territory, ARFC expands Pakistan's options in the event of a crisis. More importantly, it strengthens deterrence by punishment, the ability to inflict quick and decisive costs on any adversary who dares to test Pakistan's resolve. Skeptics will ask whether ARFC blurs the line between conventional and nuclear deterrence. The answer lies in its very design. 1/2.... Cont #Pakistan #India #Modi Read:

Eagle Eye

12,484 views • 10 months ago

The Pokrovsk Blackhawk Down: A Failed NATO Hot Extraction Masquerading as Heroism A recent helicopter-borne incident in the besieged Ukrainian city of Pokrovsk—now 85-90% under Russian control—has been spun into two competing propaganda narratives, both of which conveniently miss the real story. Russian channels dismiss it as Zelensky’s delusional PR stunt: a suicidal waste of elite Ukrainian special forces dropped into a meatgrinder for a photo-op. Ukrainian sources, meanwhile, frame it as a daring airborne assault to reinforce trapped defenders and defy the Russian advance. Both are wrong. Sending 12–16 special operators (even if they were super-soldiers) into a city already encircled and largely lost changes precisely nothing on the battlefield. It’s not a tide-turner; it’s not even a speed-bump. The only accurate part of the Russian take is the desperation—but the desperation wasn’t Ukraine’s. It was NATO’s. What actually crashed in Pokrovsk was a classic hot extraction: a last-ditch, high-risk helicopter insertion to pull out high-value Western personnel—senior NATO special-forces officers and intelligence operatives who had been embedded in a joint Ukrainian–NATO command post on the edge of the city. The mission failed spectacularly. The Blackhawk was downed, the rescue team was wiped out, and the very people they came to extract are now either dead or in Russian hands. Moscow has every incentive to parade proof of captured or killed NATO officers. Irrefutable evidence of direct NATO combat involvement inside Ukraine—especially at the operational command level—would be a strategic earthquake, shattering the West’s “we’re only sending weapons” narrative once and for all. Even the usually pro-Ukrainian German journalist Julian “Jihadi Julian” Röpcke accidentally let the cat out of the bag when he posted footage of the operation with the caption: > “Glimpse into the ‘battle for Pokrovsk.’ The entire video, airborne operation and battle of the GRU special unit is about 2-3 occupied buildings that are technically not even inside the city limits. Gives an impression of what ‘would’ be needed to liberate the city. Won’t happen.” Those “2-3 occupied buildings” weren’t random strongpoints. They were the forward joint command center housing the NATO liaison team and senior Ukrainian officers coordinating the defense. Pokrovsk isn’t just another dot on the map. Its fall severs critical supply lines, cripples Ukraine’s steel industry (and thus its already strangled war economy), and collapses the entire Donetsk defensive front. Once it goes, the dominoes fall fast—Slovyansk, Kramatorsk, and the whole house of cards comes down. In military terms: FUBAR, followed by a fresh Russian-made meatgrinder for whatever forces Kyiv scrapes together for a counter-attack. This wasn’t about saving Pokrovsk. It was about saving NATO’s plausible deniability. And it failed. Credit > UK Military expert.
0:27

The Pokrovsk Blackhawk Down: A Failed NATO Hot Extraction Masquerading as Heroism A recent helicopter-borne incident in the besieged Ukrainian city of Pokrovsk—now 85-90% under Russian control—has been spun into two competing propaganda narratives, both of which conveniently miss the real story. Russian channels dismiss it as Zelensky’s delusional PR stunt: a suicidal waste of elite Ukrainian special forces dropped into a meatgrinder for a photo-op. Ukrainian sources, meanwhile, frame it as a daring airborne assault to reinforce trapped defenders and defy the Russian advance. Both are wrong. Sending 12–16 special operators (even if they were super-soldiers) into a city already encircled and largely lost changes precisely nothing on the battlefield. It’s not a tide-turner; it’s not even a speed-bump. The only accurate part of the Russian take is the desperation—but the desperation wasn’t Ukraine’s. It was NATO’s. What actually crashed in Pokrovsk was a classic hot extraction: a last-ditch, high-risk helicopter insertion to pull out high-value Western personnel—senior NATO special-forces officers and intelligence operatives who had been embedded in a joint Ukrainian–NATO command post on the edge of the city. The mission failed spectacularly. The Blackhawk was downed, the rescue team was wiped out, and the very people they came to extract are now either dead or in Russian hands. Moscow has every incentive to parade proof of captured or killed NATO officers. Irrefutable evidence of direct NATO combat involvement inside Ukraine—especially at the operational command level—would be a strategic earthquake, shattering the West’s “we’re only sending weapons” narrative once and for all. Even the usually pro-Ukrainian German journalist Julian “Jihadi Julian” Röpcke accidentally let the cat out of the bag when he posted footage of the operation with the caption: > “Glimpse into the ‘battle for Pokrovsk.’ The entire video, airborne operation and battle of the GRU special unit is about 2-3 occupied buildings that are technically not even inside the city limits. Gives an impression of what ‘would’ be needed to liberate the city. Won’t happen.” Those “2-3 occupied buildings” weren’t random strongpoints. They were the forward joint command center housing the NATO liaison team and senior Ukrainian officers coordinating the defense. Pokrovsk isn’t just another dot on the map. Its fall severs critical supply lines, cripples Ukraine’s steel industry (and thus its already strangled war economy), and collapses the entire Donetsk defensive front. Once it goes, the dominoes fall fast—Slovyansk, Kramatorsk, and the whole house of cards comes down. In military terms: FUBAR, followed by a fresh Russian-made meatgrinder for whatever forces Kyiv scrapes together for a counter-attack. This wasn’t about saving Pokrovsk. It was about saving NATO’s plausible deniability. And it failed. Credit > UK Military expert.

Angelo Giuliano 🇨🇭🇮🇹🔻🔻🔻

40,293 views • 8 months ago

If you're new to $EOS.AX, here's everything that matters. I think this is a prime in the making. Here's why. What they actually do Electro Optic Systems is an Australian defence technology company with four decades of experience in lasers, optics, and weapons systems. They build remote weapon stations, high-energy lasers, counter-drone systems, and space domain awareness infrastructure; and now the AI command-and-control layer to connect all of it. Land EOS has sold over 2,500 remote weapon stations globally. Their R400 Slinger is battle-proven in Ukraine; 160 systems deployed, with the Ukrainian Ambassador visiting EOS headquarters this week and publicly confirming the Slinger is receiving positive operational feedback from the battlefield. General Dynamics selected EOS as sole partner to integrate the R400 autonomously onto the M1 Abrams tank. Thousands of platforms, $3B addressable market over 15 years. Counter-drone Apollo is their 100kW high-energy laser. The Netherlands signed the world's first 100kW HELW export contract at €71.4M, and it's running six months ahead of schedule. Their Slinger cannon system is the kinetic layer. EOS has recently acquired MARSS, bringing NiDAR; an AI-enabled command and control system with 60+ fielded systems globally as the brain connecting everything. EOS can now sell a full integrated kill chain - detect, decide, engage. Sea EOS doesn't build ships. What it does is provide the weapon layer on unmanned surface vessels. R400 RWS demonstrated on BlackSea Technologies' USV at Sea-Air-Space in April alongside Lockheed Martin. A €31M order for Slinger counter-drone systems configured for naval deployment; EOS's largest ever naval RWS contract, funded by a Western European government. Space This is the part most people miss. EOS has been tracking objects in orbit from Mount Stromlo for four decades. Atlas Space Control - unveiled at IAC 2025 - weaponises that capability. Ground-based high-energy lasers, fixed or mobile, scalable from surveillance through to active engagement. As Russia parks military satellites 500 metres from commercial imaging assets supplying Ukraine, this stops being a niche product. They just appointed Air Vice-Marshal (Ret'd) Catherine Roberts to the board; inaugural Commander of Defence Space Command in Australia, 40 years of aerospace engineering, and oversight of $16B in major programmes. They're stacking the deck to own the space domain. C2 - the connective tissue Without command and control, EOS is a components vendor, but MARSS NiDAR changes that. It fuses sensors and orchestrates effectors across all domains at machine speed. The integrated EOS-MARSS stack has already defeated Iranian Shahed drones defending Gulf infrastructure in active conflict. Netherlands World's first export contract for a 100kW high-energy laser weapon @ €71.4M and running ahead of schedule. The Dutch client is already signalling readiness for serial production orders before first delivery. This is NATO reference architecture. Germany Defence Minister Pistorius visited Mount Stromlo in March 2026. CEO Schwer presented binding offers for 10 Apollo 100kW systems (€380M) plus Atlas. EOS pitch - twice the power, half the price, half the time. A German CEO with Rheinmetall executive pedigree doesn't walk into those rooms by accident. Middle East 500+ EOS remote weapon stations already in Emirati service. Calidus - Abu Dhabi's major defence integrator - took a A$40M strategic stake in EOS and is co-producing systems in a UAE manufacturing hub. Their joint system DAMITA is the UAE's first indigenous integrated counter-drone platform; EOS laser, EOS turret, MARSS NiDAR brain. This is the Gulf reference architecture, with a clear replication path into Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrain. Africa MARSS is finalising a >US$190M C4I programme with Nigeria's Ministry of Defence; NiDAR as a national command architecture, regional hubs, ISR UAVs. One of the largest defence programmes ever commissioned in Africa, with both sides publicly confirming they're moving toward contract signature. When it converts, it pushes the combined order book toward A$1B. The ITAR advantage US laser and defence companies are world class but export restricted, whereas EOS is ITAR free. They can sell to Europe, the Middle East, and Asia without years of Washington approval. That's not a minor detail; it's the entire competitive moat in a market where every NATO ally is scrambling to rearm. The numbers Order backlog - A$700M+ and growing. Gross margins - 76%. Net cash: ~A$235M post capital raise. A$190M institutional raise just completed with Calidus as strategic anchor investor. The setup The market is still pricing this like a small Australian manufacturer. The order book, the partnerships, the product depth, the combat validation, and the geopolitical tailwinds say something else entirely. Air, land, sea, space, and the brain to run them. That's the company EOS is becoming.
3:45

If you're new to $EOS.AX, here's everything that matters. I think this is a prime in the making. Here's why. What they actually do Electro Optic Systems is an Australian defence technology company with four decades of experience in lasers, optics, and weapons systems. They build remote weapon stations, high-energy lasers, counter-drone systems, and space domain awareness infrastructure; and now the AI command-and-control layer to connect all of it. Land EOS has sold over 2,500 remote weapon stations globally. Their R400 Slinger is battle-proven in Ukraine; 160 systems deployed, with the Ukrainian Ambassador visiting EOS headquarters this week and publicly confirming the Slinger is receiving positive operational feedback from the battlefield. General Dynamics selected EOS as sole partner to integrate the R400 autonomously onto the M1 Abrams tank. Thousands of platforms, $3B addressable market over 15 years. Counter-drone Apollo is their 100kW high-energy laser. The Netherlands signed the world's first 100kW HELW export contract at €71.4M, and it's running six months ahead of schedule. Their Slinger cannon system is the kinetic layer. EOS has recently acquired MARSS, bringing NiDAR; an AI-enabled command and control system with 60+ fielded systems globally as the brain connecting everything. EOS can now sell a full integrated kill chain - detect, decide, engage. Sea EOS doesn't build ships. What it does is provide the weapon layer on unmanned surface vessels. R400 RWS demonstrated on BlackSea Technologies' USV at Sea-Air-Space in April alongside Lockheed Martin. A €31M order for Slinger counter-drone systems configured for naval deployment; EOS's largest ever naval RWS contract, funded by a Western European government. Space This is the part most people miss. EOS has been tracking objects in orbit from Mount Stromlo for four decades. Atlas Space Control - unveiled at IAC 2025 - weaponises that capability. Ground-based high-energy lasers, fixed or mobile, scalable from surveillance through to active engagement. As Russia parks military satellites 500 metres from commercial imaging assets supplying Ukraine, this stops being a niche product. They just appointed Air Vice-Marshal (Ret'd) Catherine Roberts to the board; inaugural Commander of Defence Space Command in Australia, 40 years of aerospace engineering, and oversight of $16B in major programmes. They're stacking the deck to own the space domain. C2 - the connective tissue Without command and control, EOS is a components vendor, but MARSS NiDAR changes that. It fuses sensors and orchestrates effectors across all domains at machine speed. The integrated EOS-MARSS stack has already defeated Iranian Shahed drones defending Gulf infrastructure in active conflict. Netherlands World's first export contract for a 100kW high-energy laser weapon @ €71.4M and running ahead of schedule. The Dutch client is already signalling readiness for serial production orders before first delivery. This is NATO reference architecture. Germany Defence Minister Pistorius visited Mount Stromlo in March 2026. CEO Schwer presented binding offers for 10 Apollo 100kW systems (€380M) plus Atlas. EOS pitch - twice the power, half the price, half the time. A German CEO with Rheinmetall executive pedigree doesn't walk into those rooms by accident. Middle East 500+ EOS remote weapon stations already in Emirati service. Calidus - Abu Dhabi's major defence integrator - took a A$40M strategic stake in EOS and is co-producing systems in a UAE manufacturing hub. Their joint system DAMITA is the UAE's first indigenous integrated counter-drone platform; EOS laser, EOS turret, MARSS NiDAR brain. This is the Gulf reference architecture, with a clear replication path into Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrain. Africa MARSS is finalising a >US$190M C4I programme with Nigeria's Ministry of Defence; NiDAR as a national command architecture, regional hubs, ISR UAVs. One of the largest defence programmes ever commissioned in Africa, with both sides publicly confirming they're moving toward contract signature. When it converts, it pushes the combined order book toward A$1B. The ITAR advantage US laser and defence companies are world class but export restricted, whereas EOS is ITAR free. They can sell to Europe, the Middle East, and Asia without years of Washington approval. That's not a minor detail; it's the entire competitive moat in a market where every NATO ally is scrambling to rearm. The numbers Order backlog - A$700M+ and growing. Gross margins - 76%. Net cash: ~A$235M post capital raise. A$190M institutional raise just completed with Calidus as strategic anchor investor. The setup The market is still pricing this like a small Australian manufacturer. The order book, the partnerships, the product depth, the combat validation, and the geopolitical tailwinds say something else entirely. Air, land, sea, space, and the brain to run them. That's the company EOS is becoming.

OptimusDelta

218,996 views • 1 month ago

🇳🇴🇰🇷 Norway’s parliament has approved a roughly $2 billion plan to buy long-range rocket artillery, choosing South Korea’s K239 Chunmoo system over the US-made HIMARS. The move is intended to strengthen Norway’s deterrence posture against Russia, particularly in the High North and the Arctic, where Norway shares a strategically sensitive border with Russia. The decision is seen as a major breakthrough for Hanwha Aerospace in the European defence market, and a setback for Lockheed Martin, which produces HIMARS. Industry sources cited by Yonhap News Agency said a formal contract signing is expected on Friday in Oslo, and that South Korea’s presidential chief of staff, Kang Hoon-sik, is expected to attend. Why Norway picked Chunmoo Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten reported that the Chunmoo system met all of Norway’s operational requirements for ground-based long-range fires, including the ability to strike targets at ranges of up to 500 kilometres. It also reportedly offered the fastest delivery schedule among the competing options, a factor that has become increasingly important as European countries try to close capability gaps quickly. During Tuesday’s parliamentary session, Peter Frölich, defence spokesman for Norway’s Conservative Party, emphasised the importance of deep-strike capability in contemporary warfare, describing the munitions as able to reach far into enemy territory. What the deal includes The procurement covers 16 launch systems, along with an unspecified number of rockets, with a total value estimated at 19.5 billion Norwegian kroner. Under Norway’s defence procurement rules, the contract also includes an offset requirement. This means the foreign supplier must provide industrial cooperation equal to 100 percent of the contract’s value, typically through technology transfer and partnerships with Norwegian companies. Part of a wider European rearmament push The purchase comes as European countries accelerate defence investment amid the ongoing war in Ukraine and heightened concern about Russia’s military intentions. Some Norwegian lawmakers had pushed for a European missile alternative, but officials reportedly concluded that developing a new system would take too long and cost too much given the immediate security situation. Hanwha’s expanding presence in Europe The agreement further strengthens Hanwha Aerospace’s position in Northern Europe. The company has already won Nordic business, including contracts to supply K9 Vidar self-propelled howitzers to Norway signed in September 2025. Hanwha has also partnered with Poland’s WB Electronics to produce Chunmoo missiles in Poland, supporting European-based manufacturing and supply chains. Taken together, the deal highlights how quickly South Korea’s defence industry has become a serious contender in Europe, especially when speed of delivery and industrial cooperation are decisive factors. Stay connected, Follow Gandalv Gandalv
1:06

🇳🇴🇰🇷 Norway’s parliament has approved a roughly $2 billion plan to buy long-range rocket artillery, choosing South Korea’s K239 Chunmoo system over the US-made HIMARS. The move is intended to strengthen Norway’s deterrence posture against Russia, particularly in the High North and the Arctic, where Norway shares a strategically sensitive border with Russia. The decision is seen as a major breakthrough for Hanwha Aerospace in the European defence market, and a setback for Lockheed Martin, which produces HIMARS. Industry sources cited by Yonhap News Agency said a formal contract signing is expected on Friday in Oslo, and that South Korea’s presidential chief of staff, Kang Hoon-sik, is expected to attend. Why Norway picked Chunmoo Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten reported that the Chunmoo system met all of Norway’s operational requirements for ground-based long-range fires, including the ability to strike targets at ranges of up to 500 kilometres. It also reportedly offered the fastest delivery schedule among the competing options, a factor that has become increasingly important as European countries try to close capability gaps quickly. During Tuesday’s parliamentary session, Peter Frölich, defence spokesman for Norway’s Conservative Party, emphasised the importance of deep-strike capability in contemporary warfare, describing the munitions as able to reach far into enemy territory. What the deal includes The procurement covers 16 launch systems, along with an unspecified number of rockets, with a total value estimated at 19.5 billion Norwegian kroner. Under Norway’s defence procurement rules, the contract also includes an offset requirement. This means the foreign supplier must provide industrial cooperation equal to 100 percent of the contract’s value, typically through technology transfer and partnerships with Norwegian companies. Part of a wider European rearmament push The purchase comes as European countries accelerate defence investment amid the ongoing war in Ukraine and heightened concern about Russia’s military intentions. Some Norwegian lawmakers had pushed for a European missile alternative, but officials reportedly concluded that developing a new system would take too long and cost too much given the immediate security situation. Hanwha’s expanding presence in Europe The agreement further strengthens Hanwha Aerospace’s position in Northern Europe. The company has already won Nordic business, including contracts to supply K9 Vidar self-propelled howitzers to Norway signed in September 2025. Hanwha has also partnered with Poland’s WB Electronics to produce Chunmoo missiles in Poland, supporting European-based manufacturing and supply chains. Taken together, the deal highlights how quickly South Korea’s defence industry has become a serious contender in Europe, especially when speed of delivery and industrial cooperation are decisive factors. Stay connected, Follow Gandalv Gandalv

Gandalv

173,440 views • 5 months ago

The latest on the SDF’s integration into the Syrian state: Just hours after SDF commander Mazloum Abdi’s meeting with Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa, the full US withdrawal from Syria was announced as complete. One notable detail is that Qasrak airbase, the site vacated by the final American forces, lies on the strategic M4 highway and inside the Hasakah zone that remained under SDF control after the final integration agreement was sealed. Yet based on videos that emerged after the US withdrawal, the base appears to have been handed over to HTS-led elements of the Syrian Army’s 60th Division, which the SDF is set to join. The footage shows dozens of Turkish-made BMC vehicles entering the base to deploy there. More importantly, when the US left, the SDF’s anti-terror unit, known as YAT, appeared to be waiting to hand the base over to the Syrian Army, indicating clear coordination and suggesting that implementation of the integration deal is progressing relatively smoothly. It is also notable that both Qasrak and, a month earlier, Rmelan airbase appear to have been handed over to HTS-led brigades known to operate Turkish-made weaponry. These two bases matter because Qasrak overlooks the M4, while Rmelan sits beside the strategically important Rmelan oilfields. Both are located inside the zone that remained under SDF control after the cessation of hostilities at the end of January. The Syrian government is also set to take over all prisons in Hasakah, while the courts are to be transferred to Damascus-linked institutions. Damascus-linked officials involved in the integration process have said this could happen as soon as next week. At the same time, the SDF appears to be receiving more positions within the Syrian government than initially expected, with the SDF bloc emerging as an important pillar of governance. Its role is set to extend beyond the defence and interior ministries to the foreign ministry, justice ministry, and other state institutions. Meanwhile, the SDF is transitioning into politics following its formal dissolution as a separate armed entity, with strong indications that Mazloum Abdi himself may move into a political role. This also appears to fit into the PKK’s broader rebranding across the Middle East and its effort to better align its political entities across the region, from Turkey to Syria and beyond. That process now appears to include a push for new cross-border media platforms aimed at strengthening coordination as these movements become more embedded in governance in Syria and, potentially, Turkey, while also aligning more closely with the PUK sphere in Iraq’s Kurdistan Region. The broader direction points toward a reconfigured cross-border political force emerging from the PKK’s transition in Turkey, where it has moved toward laying down arms and repositioning itself as a political actor. More:
0:38

The latest on the SDF’s integration into the Syrian state: Just hours after SDF commander Mazloum Abdi’s meeting with Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa, the full US withdrawal from Syria was announced as complete. One notable detail is that Qasrak airbase, the site vacated by the final American forces, lies on the strategic M4 highway and inside the Hasakah zone that remained under SDF control after the final integration agreement was sealed. Yet based on videos that emerged after the US withdrawal, the base appears to have been handed over to HTS-led elements of the Syrian Army’s 60th Division, which the SDF is set to join. The footage shows dozens of Turkish-made BMC vehicles entering the base to deploy there. More importantly, when the US left, the SDF’s anti-terror unit, known as YAT, appeared to be waiting to hand the base over to the Syrian Army, indicating clear coordination and suggesting that implementation of the integration deal is progressing relatively smoothly. It is also notable that both Qasrak and, a month earlier, Rmelan airbase appear to have been handed over to HTS-led brigades known to operate Turkish-made weaponry. These two bases matter because Qasrak overlooks the M4, while Rmelan sits beside the strategically important Rmelan oilfields. Both are located inside the zone that remained under SDF control after the cessation of hostilities at the end of January. The Syrian government is also set to take over all prisons in Hasakah, while the courts are to be transferred to Damascus-linked institutions. Damascus-linked officials involved in the integration process have said this could happen as soon as next week. At the same time, the SDF appears to be receiving more positions within the Syrian government than initially expected, with the SDF bloc emerging as an important pillar of governance. Its role is set to extend beyond the defence and interior ministries to the foreign ministry, justice ministry, and other state institutions. Meanwhile, the SDF is transitioning into politics following its formal dissolution as a separate armed entity, with strong indications that Mazloum Abdi himself may move into a political role. This also appears to fit into the PKK’s broader rebranding across the Middle East and its effort to better align its political entities across the region, from Turkey to Syria and beyond. That process now appears to include a push for new cross-border media platforms aimed at strengthening coordination as these movements become more embedded in governance in Syria and, potentially, Turkey, while also aligning more closely with the PUK sphere in Iraq’s Kurdistan Region. The broader direction points toward a reconfigured cross-border political force emerging from the PKK’s transition in Turkey, where it has moved toward laying down arms and repositioning itself as a political actor. More:

The National Context

26,879 views • 3 months ago

Pastor Adeboye Did Not Protest Against President Goodluck Jonathan’s Government A false narrative has been circulating online, accompanied by a photograph of Pastor E.A. Adeboye holding a placard during a public walk. The image has repeatedly been misrepresented as evidence that Pastor Adeboye led or participated in a protest against the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan. This claim is FALSE. The photograph in question was taken during a peaceful nationwide walk held in response to a directive issued by the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) during the administration of the late President Muhammadu Buhari. Churches across Nigeria were instructed to hold peaceful walks after service, calling attention to the persistent killings of Christians and urging the government to take decisive action to protect lives. The walk in Ebute Metta, where Pastor Adeboye participated, was part of that nationwide exercise. It was neither organized against President Goodluck Jonathan nor connected in any way to his administration. Ironically, despite the significant media presence at the event when it took place, some of the same photographs have years later been recycled and falsely presented as evidence of a protest against a completely different government. It is important to note that Pastor Adeboye’s message during the walk was clear: all lives matter to God. His placard emphasized the value of every human life, regardless of religious affiliation. The call was for the protection of innocent Nigerians, both Christians and Muslims. Yes, Nigeria is facing enormous challenges, and citizens have every right to desire solutions. However, the growing demand that Pastor Adeboye should “command” the President or the First Lady on how to run the affairs of the nation is both unrealistic and unreasonable. Pastor Adeboye is a clergyman, not the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. Nevertheless, he has not remained silent. During the November 2025 Holy Ghost Service, Pastor Adeboye publicly offered counsel to the President of Nigeria regarding the worsening security situation and the continued killing of innocent citizens by terrorists. He warned that urgent action was necessary before foreign powers found justification to intervene in Nigeria under the guise of combating terrorism. He further advised that security chiefs should be given a clear ultimatum to decisively address the menace or vacate their positions. In his words: “When they eliminate the terrorists, ask them to eliminate their sponsors too.” At 84 years old, Pastor Adeboye continues to provide spiritual leadership, moral counsel, and national guidance within the limits of his office as a minister of the Gospel. For the avoidance of doubt: • Pastor Adeboye cannot command the President or the First Lady on how to govern Nigeria. • Pastor Adeboye and RCCG are not responsible for the current challenges facing the nation. • RCCG is not a political party. • Pastor Adeboye does not hold political office and was not elected into government. • RCCG is not the religious arm of any political party in Nigeria. Facts matter. Context matters. Truth matters. Before sharing claims about Pastor E.A. Adeboye or The Redeemed Christian Church of God, verify them through RCCG’s official communication channels. Follow RCCG PUBLIC RELATIONS for accurate information and official statements.
32:24

Pastor Adeboye Did Not Protest Against President Goodluck Jonathan’s Government A false narrative has been circulating online, accompanied by a photograph of Pastor E.A. Adeboye holding a placard during a public walk. The image has repeatedly been misrepresented as evidence that Pastor Adeboye led or participated in a protest against the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan. This claim is FALSE. The photograph in question was taken during a peaceful nationwide walk held in response to a directive issued by the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) during the administration of the late President Muhammadu Buhari. Churches across Nigeria were instructed to hold peaceful walks after service, calling attention to the persistent killings of Christians and urging the government to take decisive action to protect lives. The walk in Ebute Metta, where Pastor Adeboye participated, was part of that nationwide exercise. It was neither organized against President Goodluck Jonathan nor connected in any way to his administration. Ironically, despite the significant media presence at the event when it took place, some of the same photographs have years later been recycled and falsely presented as evidence of a protest against a completely different government. It is important to note that Pastor Adeboye’s message during the walk was clear: all lives matter to God. His placard emphasized the value of every human life, regardless of religious affiliation. The call was for the protection of innocent Nigerians, both Christians and Muslims. Yes, Nigeria is facing enormous challenges, and citizens have every right to desire solutions. However, the growing demand that Pastor Adeboye should “command” the President or the First Lady on how to run the affairs of the nation is both unrealistic and unreasonable. Pastor Adeboye is a clergyman, not the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. Nevertheless, he has not remained silent. During the November 2025 Holy Ghost Service, Pastor Adeboye publicly offered counsel to the President of Nigeria regarding the worsening security situation and the continued killing of innocent citizens by terrorists. He warned that urgent action was necessary before foreign powers found justification to intervene in Nigeria under the guise of combating terrorism. He further advised that security chiefs should be given a clear ultimatum to decisively address the menace or vacate their positions. In his words: “When they eliminate the terrorists, ask them to eliminate their sponsors too.” At 84 years old, Pastor Adeboye continues to provide spiritual leadership, moral counsel, and national guidance within the limits of his office as a minister of the Gospel. For the avoidance of doubt: • Pastor Adeboye cannot command the President or the First Lady on how to govern Nigeria. • Pastor Adeboye and RCCG are not responsible for the current challenges facing the nation. • RCCG is not a political party. • Pastor Adeboye does not hold political office and was not elected into government. • RCCG is not the religious arm of any political party in Nigeria. Facts matter. Context matters. Truth matters. Before sharing claims about Pastor E.A. Adeboye or The Redeemed Christian Church of God, verify them through RCCG’s official communication channels. Follow RCCG PUBLIC RELATIONS for accurate information and official statements.

RCCG PUBLIC RELATIONS

811,591 views • 1 month ago

Finally, Ed Davey calls for the UK to join the EU Single Market 👏 "We meet at an extraordinary moment. Vladimir Putin is still waging war on our continent. Donald Trump's chaos in the Middle East goes on. And our government, our own government is paralysed by infighting, waiting for Makerfield to release them from their agony." "And yet, despite all that, standing with you here today, I feel hope. And not just about England's chances against Croatia tonight, but hope about our country's future." "Not hope because the path ahead is easy. It isn't. Not hope because everything will magically get better. It won't." "But hope because finally, after ten long, difficult years, I believe we can move on. We can finally fix the Brexit damage, end the Brexit chaos and get our country back on track." "Because the story the media won't tell you, as they fawn over the rise of Farage, as they hang on his every empty press conference, is that the country is with us. We hear it on the doorsteps, we see it in the polls, we feel it in our communities." "People are fed up. They've had enough. Enough of the chaos in government, the queues at ports, the queues at airports, the bills that just keep on going up." "They know the hard truth that most politicians won't admit. The Brexit experiment has failed. And it's failed all of us." "£90 billion a year. That's how much it's costing us all as taxpayers" "£90 billion every year, gone" "That's £250 million every single day. Taken away from our schools, our hospitals, our armed forces. Taken out of everyone's pockets in the form of unfair tax rises." "Not because of a pandemic, not because of a war, not because of some force of nature out of our control, but because of their Brexit experiment. Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and the rest. An experiment that has now consumed a decade of British politics. That has tangled British businesses up in pointless red tape, that has pushed up prices for British families and that has left us all poorer." "Well, not all of us, apparently. Farage says that the five million he got from a crypto billionaire was his reward for Brexit. So when he said 'We'll be better off after Brexit,' it turns out he was using the royal we." "But friends, it's not only the economic and financial impact, as disastrous as those have been. It's the way they have poisoned our relationship with our nearest neighbours and friends, making it harder to work together on all the things we need to. Energy security and climate change, migration and refugees, AI, and above all, defence." "Britain has always been at its best when we stand tall with our European allies, not when we shut ourselves off. Now they promised us global Britain, but they have left us isolated at the worst possible time. Poorer, weaker and more insecure." "Their experiment has failed. We all know it. So it's time to move on." "But what do they say? The ones who caused all this. The people responsible. Farage and the Conservative Party. They say 'Tough.' They say you can't move on. They say you can't question Britain's relationship with Europe now. You can't dare to suggest there might be a better way. Doesn't matter how bad it gets, doesn't matter how much you're struggling. You just have to live with it, they say." "We say 'No.' We say Britain shouldn't have to live with a bad deal they've lumped us with. We say our country deserves far better than that." "Theirs is old thinking. It's 2016 thinking. The world has changed dramatically since then. It's time for us to change too. It's time for us to move on, move forward." "Just look around. Vladimir Putin is bombing schools and hospitals in Ukraine, murdering innocent civilians. He's testing NATO's resolve and setting his sights on the rest of Eastern Europe. He has shown that territorial conquest is not some relic of the distant past. It is happening now on European soil to our friends and our allies who share our values and our way of life." "And Donald Trump, he's torching the world economy for fun with his tariffs and his trade wars and now his actual war with Iran. He's ripping up the rules-based international order that generations of British leaders, American leaders, European leaders, painstakingly built after the Second World War. Trump threatening NATO, emboldening Putin and actively meddling in our democracies." "And then there's China, increasingly using trade supply chains and strategic dependencies as instruments of geopolitical competition." "And to add to all those political changes, there's the billionaire tech barons taking more and more control of our lives and our jobs with their empires of AI and social media, that no one nation can govern on its own." "The assumptions we have lived by for decades, that global trade would keep expanding, that international rules would broadly be respected, that our security would be underwritten by stable alliances. Those assumptions no longer hold. The world has changed more rapidly than at any time since the end of the Cold War. And our politics must change too." "Now we obviously can't turn to those who wrecked it. Farage and the Conservatives. They only want to make things worse. Even now, pushing for Brexit 2.0 with their plans to rip up the European Convention on Human Rights. They would just rerun all the old arguments, forcing Britain to replay the last ten years over and over in a never ending Brexit doom loop." "But nor, I'm afraid, can we look to Labour. Labour who failed to act with anything like the urgency this moment demands. Who don't seem to grasp the scale of the change we need in our relationship with Europe. Labour, who still kept us hemmed in the red lines they set more than five years ago. No single market, no customs union. Red lines they set before Putin invaded Ukraine, before Trump returned to the White House. Red lines that were wrong then and are even more wrong now." "The world has changed and it's time to move on. We cannot be trapped by that old thinking anymore. We have to look to the future. Not back to 2016 but to 2036 and beyond." "And that's why we're all here today, isn't it? Not because we are bitter about the past, but because we believe in a better future. Because we love our country and we know its brightest days still lie ahead." "We're here for our children and our grandchildren because we want them to inherit a country that is growing, that is confident, that is leading, not one that is shrinking, stagnating and standing alone." "That's what drives us. We're here because the world has changed, because the challenges we face to our economy, to our society and to our national defence are real and urgent. And because we believe Britain deserves ambition that matches the scale of this moment." "So what does that ambition look like? Well, first the government needs to drop those old red lines that stop us getting rid of the Conservatives' red tape. Those red lines are holding Britain back. They're hurting the British people and they are playing into the hands of Farage and Reform." "So my message to Andy Burnham, to Wes Streeting, to whoever the next Prime Minister may be, is drop those red lines. Drop them now." "If we do, we can move on from the torpor and timidity that has marked out Labour's approach to Europe so far. We can put an end to the endless talk of a reset that so far seems to just mean saying no more politely than the Conservatives did. And we can get on with properly fixing our relationship with Europe, for our economy, for our security, for our future." "Our party has led that debate for years. Last year, days before Trump took office, we set out plans for the UK to join a new customs union with the EU. And today I want to build on that and go further, much further." "Today we are calling for a new growth and defence partnership with the European Union. A new growth and defence partnership with the European Union. A bold new deal that will make Britain richer, safer and stronger, including a customs union, but also crucially taking Britain back into the single market." "Tearing down the barriers to trade. Ending the mountains of paperwork, the cost, the delays, the queues. Giving our young people the chance to study and work, live and love anywhere in the EU. Undoing the damage of the Johnson Farage Brexit deal that has held our economy back for so long." "Giving British businesses the certainty they need to invest, to hire and to grow. Giving Britain's economy the boost it needs after years of stagnation. Crucially, giving Britain's public finances a growth dividend. Tens of billions of pounds that we would use to cut the cost of living, to fix the NHS and to strengthen our armed forces." "And this new partnership must go beyond trade and growth. In the age of Putin, Xi and Trump, this must be about defence and security too. No country can be prosperous and free if it is not safe." "And Britain can help lead on defence in Europe as we have so decisively in the past. Despite the Conservatives' short-sighted cuts to our armed forces and Labour's chaos over investing in them now, Britain is still one of Europe's foremost military powers. We are a leading intelligence nation, a permanent member of the UN Security Council and the third-biggest contributor to NATO." "We should be using those strengths. We should be at the table, helping to shape Europe's security future, not watching from the sidelines. And Europe wants us at the table. They know they need our leadership on defence." "So let's seize the initiative from a position of strength to form a new partnership that strengthens both Britain's economy and our collective security. That is why our new partnership would be about defence as much as it is about growth." "That means financial cooperation through a new European rearmament bank, alongside securing UK access to the one hundred and fifty billion euro safe programme. It means joint defence procurement, creating jobs in Britain while strengthening our collective capabilities. It means deeper cooperation on intelligence, on cyber security and on protecting critical infrastructure." "It means working together on energy security so that none of us can be held hostage by an authoritarian regime turning off the gas. It means political cooperation through a new European Security Council with a permanent seat for the UK, ensuring that Europe can shoulder greater responsibility for its own security within NATO." "As Trump's actions remind us every day, that we cannot afford to rely so much on the United States. Friends, this is not a choice we can afford to dodge any longer. In the face of Putin's threats and Trump's unpredictability, a new defence pact with Europe, with allies on whom we can depend, allies who share our interests and our values, is frankly the only way to keep Britain safe and defend our values in a dangerous world." "A new defence pact with Europe is not a choice, it is a necessity. So let's get on with it." "That is the ambition we need when it comes to our relationship with Europe. No more tinkering around the edges of a bad deal. No more shackling ourselves to the arguments of the last ten years, but building something new. A partnership fit for the enormous challenges we face today." "A new growth and defence partnership with a new pact for our collective security. Forming a customs union, joining the single market. A new partnership to make us richer, safer and stronger." "I think it's the best hope our country has to stop the chaos and end the crisis. And, my friends, it is the biggest step we could take now back towards membership of the EU." "And there's another big step we need to take too. Defeating Nigel Farage and Reform. We have to stop them from turning our United Kingdom into their version of Trump's America." "And here's the point. Until we do defeat them, many in Europe will not countenance Britain joining." "Let's remember why this matters, why it's so crucial for Britain to be there at the heart of Europe, at the table with our nearest neighbours." "I've been privileged to see it for myself, the power we have when Britain leads in Europe. When Vladimir Putin invaded Crimea in 2014, we recognised then that the way to defeat him would be to get Europe off its dependence on Russian oil and gas, to take away the money that was funding his aggression, to bankrupt the Russian war machine." "So I led Britain's efforts to bring Europe together behind that common cause, and we succeeded. We wrote Europe's energy security strategy. Britain did that, sitting at the table, leading in Europe." "But then, instead of seeing it through, the Conservatives walked away. They gave up Britain's seat at the table. They locked us out of those discussions at the worst possible time." "Just imagine where we could be now if Britain had continued to lead on energy security. Imagine how much weaker Putin would be now. Imagine how much safer Ukraine and the rest of Europe, including Britain, would be now. What a terrible waste. What an indictment of the Conservatives." "And that is why I am so determined to get us back at the table, back at the heart of Europe. Britain leading again." "Now I want to speak for a moment about the bigger picture. Because our ambition is not limited to Europe alone. It's about Britain's place in the world." "The old assumption that trade, security and prosperity could be treated as separate issues no longer holds. Supply chains can be disrupted. Energy can be weaponised. Economic security and national security are now inseparable." "At a time when authoritarian powers are doing so much to undermine our security, democratic nations must work more closely together to enhance it. As Mark Carney said in Davos, middle powers must act together, because if we're not at the table, we're on the menu. He is right." "Fixing our relationship with Europe is the essential foundation, but it's not the ceiling. The UK can be an incredible force for good when it stands tall on the world stage. Our history, our alliances and our relationships across every continent gives us a unique position for us to act as a bridge, not just between Europe and the US but between Europe and the whole wider democratic world." "We are here because we believe that our country and our people thrive when we are open and outward looking. That is Britain at its best. Not a small inward looking island clinging to the wreckage of a failed experiment, but a leader, a convening power, a country that helps shape the international order rather than being buffeted by it." "That is the Britain we can be." "But friends, I want to be honest with you about the task ahead. What we are proposing is bold. It is ambitious. It requires courage, requires leadership. And it will not happen without all of us." "We know the obstacles we face, the arguments ahead, the opponents who would rather replay the last ten years instead of moving on from them. Who will tell us we can't even talk about a new deal with Europe, let alone make one. The politicians who will claim change isn't possible because the status quo works for them. But it doesn't work for anyone else." "So our job is to get out there and show people that change is possible, that it doesn't have to be like this, that there is a way forward. A better future for our country. Leading in Europe once again." "This isn't just because we believe in Europe. It's not just about friendship or shared history, or the fact that a divided Europe has always ended in misery. Fixing it is about us, our country, our future, our hopes and our dreams." "Britain needs a new plan. A plan for growth, for jobs, for defence. A plan to give our children the better future they deserve. A new deal with Europe. The only way to fix the cost of living crisis. The only way to get our country back on track." "So let us stand together. Let us end the chaos. Let us show the world what Britain can be. Not a small island clinging to a failed experiment, but a leader, open, outward looking. At the table, not on the menu." "A Britain that is richer, safer and stronger. That is the future we are fighting for." " Thank you. Thank you very much."
23:40

Finally, Ed Davey calls for the UK to join the EU Single Market 👏 "We meet at an extraordinary moment. Vladimir Putin is still waging war on our continent. Donald Trump's chaos in the Middle East goes on. And our government, our own government is paralysed by infighting, waiting for Makerfield to release them from their agony." "And yet, despite all that, standing with you here today, I feel hope. And not just about England's chances against Croatia tonight, but hope about our country's future." "Not hope because the path ahead is easy. It isn't. Not hope because everything will magically get better. It won't." "But hope because finally, after ten long, difficult years, I believe we can move on. We can finally fix the Brexit damage, end the Brexit chaos and get our country back on track." "Because the story the media won't tell you, as they fawn over the rise of Farage, as they hang on his every empty press conference, is that the country is with us. We hear it on the doorsteps, we see it in the polls, we feel it in our communities." "People are fed up. They've had enough. Enough of the chaos in government, the queues at ports, the queues at airports, the bills that just keep on going up." "They know the hard truth that most politicians won't admit. The Brexit experiment has failed. And it's failed all of us." "£90 billion a year. That's how much it's costing us all as taxpayers" "£90 billion every year, gone" "That's £250 million every single day. Taken away from our schools, our hospitals, our armed forces. Taken out of everyone's pockets in the form of unfair tax rises." "Not because of a pandemic, not because of a war, not because of some force of nature out of our control, but because of their Brexit experiment. Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and the rest. An experiment that has now consumed a decade of British politics. That has tangled British businesses up in pointless red tape, that has pushed up prices for British families and that has left us all poorer." "Well, not all of us, apparently. Farage says that the five million he got from a crypto billionaire was his reward for Brexit. So when he said 'We'll be better off after Brexit,' it turns out he was using the royal we." "But friends, it's not only the economic and financial impact, as disastrous as those have been. It's the way they have poisoned our relationship with our nearest neighbours and friends, making it harder to work together on all the things we need to. Energy security and climate change, migration and refugees, AI, and above all, defence." "Britain has always been at its best when we stand tall with our European allies, not when we shut ourselves off. Now they promised us global Britain, but they have left us isolated at the worst possible time. Poorer, weaker and more insecure." "Their experiment has failed. We all know it. So it's time to move on." "But what do they say? The ones who caused all this. The people responsible. Farage and the Conservative Party. They say 'Tough.' They say you can't move on. They say you can't question Britain's relationship with Europe now. You can't dare to suggest there might be a better way. Doesn't matter how bad it gets, doesn't matter how much you're struggling. You just have to live with it, they say." "We say 'No.' We say Britain shouldn't have to live with a bad deal they've lumped us with. We say our country deserves far better than that." "Theirs is old thinking. It's 2016 thinking. The world has changed dramatically since then. It's time for us to change too. It's time for us to move on, move forward." "Just look around. Vladimir Putin is bombing schools and hospitals in Ukraine, murdering innocent civilians. He's testing NATO's resolve and setting his sights on the rest of Eastern Europe. He has shown that territorial conquest is not some relic of the distant past. It is happening now on European soil to our friends and our allies who share our values and our way of life." "And Donald Trump, he's torching the world economy for fun with his tariffs and his trade wars and now his actual war with Iran. He's ripping up the rules-based international order that generations of British leaders, American leaders, European leaders, painstakingly built after the Second World War. Trump threatening NATO, emboldening Putin and actively meddling in our democracies." "And then there's China, increasingly using trade supply chains and strategic dependencies as instruments of geopolitical competition." "And to add to all those political changes, there's the billionaire tech barons taking more and more control of our lives and our jobs with their empires of AI and social media, that no one nation can govern on its own." "The assumptions we have lived by for decades, that global trade would keep expanding, that international rules would broadly be respected, that our security would be underwritten by stable alliances. Those assumptions no longer hold. The world has changed more rapidly than at any time since the end of the Cold War. And our politics must change too." "Now we obviously can't turn to those who wrecked it. Farage and the Conservatives. They only want to make things worse. Even now, pushing for Brexit 2.0 with their plans to rip up the European Convention on Human Rights. They would just rerun all the old arguments, forcing Britain to replay the last ten years over and over in a never ending Brexit doom loop." "But nor, I'm afraid, can we look to Labour. Labour who failed to act with anything like the urgency this moment demands. Who don't seem to grasp the scale of the change we need in our relationship with Europe. Labour, who still kept us hemmed in the red lines they set more than five years ago. No single market, no customs union. Red lines they set before Putin invaded Ukraine, before Trump returned to the White House. Red lines that were wrong then and are even more wrong now." "The world has changed and it's time to move on. We cannot be trapped by that old thinking anymore. We have to look to the future. Not back to 2016 but to 2036 and beyond." "And that's why we're all here today, isn't it? Not because we are bitter about the past, but because we believe in a better future. Because we love our country and we know its brightest days still lie ahead." "We're here for our children and our grandchildren because we want them to inherit a country that is growing, that is confident, that is leading, not one that is shrinking, stagnating and standing alone." "That's what drives us. We're here because the world has changed, because the challenges we face to our economy, to our society and to our national defence are real and urgent. And because we believe Britain deserves ambition that matches the scale of this moment." "So what does that ambition look like? Well, first the government needs to drop those old red lines that stop us getting rid of the Conservatives' red tape. Those red lines are holding Britain back. They're hurting the British people and they are playing into the hands of Farage and Reform." "So my message to Andy Burnham, to Wes Streeting, to whoever the next Prime Minister may be, is drop those red lines. Drop them now." "If we do, we can move on from the torpor and timidity that has marked out Labour's approach to Europe so far. We can put an end to the endless talk of a reset that so far seems to just mean saying no more politely than the Conservatives did. And we can get on with properly fixing our relationship with Europe, for our economy, for our security, for our future." "Our party has led that debate for years. Last year, days before Trump took office, we set out plans for the UK to join a new customs union with the EU. And today I want to build on that and go further, much further." "Today we are calling for a new growth and defence partnership with the European Union. A new growth and defence partnership with the European Union. A bold new deal that will make Britain richer, safer and stronger, including a customs union, but also crucially taking Britain back into the single market." "Tearing down the barriers to trade. Ending the mountains of paperwork, the cost, the delays, the queues. Giving our young people the chance to study and work, live and love anywhere in the EU. Undoing the damage of the Johnson Farage Brexit deal that has held our economy back for so long." "Giving British businesses the certainty they need to invest, to hire and to grow. Giving Britain's economy the boost it needs after years of stagnation. Crucially, giving Britain's public finances a growth dividend. Tens of billions of pounds that we would use to cut the cost of living, to fix the NHS and to strengthen our armed forces." "And this new partnership must go beyond trade and growth. In the age of Putin, Xi and Trump, this must be about defence and security too. No country can be prosperous and free if it is not safe." "And Britain can help lead on defence in Europe as we have so decisively in the past. Despite the Conservatives' short-sighted cuts to our armed forces and Labour's chaos over investing in them now, Britain is still one of Europe's foremost military powers. We are a leading intelligence nation, a permanent member of the UN Security Council and the third-biggest contributor to NATO." "We should be using those strengths. We should be at the table, helping to shape Europe's security future, not watching from the sidelines. And Europe wants us at the table. They know they need our leadership on defence." "So let's seize the initiative from a position of strength to form a new partnership that strengthens both Britain's economy and our collective security. That is why our new partnership would be about defence as much as it is about growth." "That means financial cooperation through a new European rearmament bank, alongside securing UK access to the one hundred and fifty billion euro safe programme. It means joint defence procurement, creating jobs in Britain while strengthening our collective capabilities. It means deeper cooperation on intelligence, on cyber security and on protecting critical infrastructure." "It means working together on energy security so that none of us can be held hostage by an authoritarian regime turning off the gas. It means political cooperation through a new European Security Council with a permanent seat for the UK, ensuring that Europe can shoulder greater responsibility for its own security within NATO." "As Trump's actions remind us every day, that we cannot afford to rely so much on the United States. Friends, this is not a choice we can afford to dodge any longer. In the face of Putin's threats and Trump's unpredictability, a new defence pact with Europe, with allies on whom we can depend, allies who share our interests and our values, is frankly the only way to keep Britain safe and defend our values in a dangerous world." "A new defence pact with Europe is not a choice, it is a necessity. So let's get on with it." "That is the ambition we need when it comes to our relationship with Europe. No more tinkering around the edges of a bad deal. No more shackling ourselves to the arguments of the last ten years, but building something new. A partnership fit for the enormous challenges we face today." "A new growth and defence partnership with a new pact for our collective security. Forming a customs union, joining the single market. A new partnership to make us richer, safer and stronger." "I think it's the best hope our country has to stop the chaos and end the crisis. And, my friends, it is the biggest step we could take now back towards membership of the EU." "And there's another big step we need to take too. Defeating Nigel Farage and Reform. We have to stop them from turning our United Kingdom into their version of Trump's America." "And here's the point. Until we do defeat them, many in Europe will not countenance Britain joining." "Let's remember why this matters, why it's so crucial for Britain to be there at the heart of Europe, at the table with our nearest neighbours." "I've been privileged to see it for myself, the power we have when Britain leads in Europe. When Vladimir Putin invaded Crimea in 2014, we recognised then that the way to defeat him would be to get Europe off its dependence on Russian oil and gas, to take away the money that was funding his aggression, to bankrupt the Russian war machine." "So I led Britain's efforts to bring Europe together behind that common cause, and we succeeded. We wrote Europe's energy security strategy. Britain did that, sitting at the table, leading in Europe." "But then, instead of seeing it through, the Conservatives walked away. They gave up Britain's seat at the table. They locked us out of those discussions at the worst possible time." "Just imagine where we could be now if Britain had continued to lead on energy security. Imagine how much weaker Putin would be now. Imagine how much safer Ukraine and the rest of Europe, including Britain, would be now. What a terrible waste. What an indictment of the Conservatives." "And that is why I am so determined to get us back at the table, back at the heart of Europe. Britain leading again." "Now I want to speak for a moment about the bigger picture. Because our ambition is not limited to Europe alone. It's about Britain's place in the world." "The old assumption that trade, security and prosperity could be treated as separate issues no longer holds. Supply chains can be disrupted. Energy can be weaponised. Economic security and national security are now inseparable." "At a time when authoritarian powers are doing so much to undermine our security, democratic nations must work more closely together to enhance it. As Mark Carney said in Davos, middle powers must act together, because if we're not at the table, we're on the menu. He is right." "Fixing our relationship with Europe is the essential foundation, but it's not the ceiling. The UK can be an incredible force for good when it stands tall on the world stage. Our history, our alliances and our relationships across every continent gives us a unique position for us to act as a bridge, not just between Europe and the US but between Europe and the whole wider democratic world." "We are here because we believe that our country and our people thrive when we are open and outward looking. That is Britain at its best. Not a small inward looking island clinging to the wreckage of a failed experiment, but a leader, a convening power, a country that helps shape the international order rather than being buffeted by it." "That is the Britain we can be." "But friends, I want to be honest with you about the task ahead. What we are proposing is bold. It is ambitious. It requires courage, requires leadership. And it will not happen without all of us." "We know the obstacles we face, the arguments ahead, the opponents who would rather replay the last ten years instead of moving on from them. Who will tell us we can't even talk about a new deal with Europe, let alone make one. The politicians who will claim change isn't possible because the status quo works for them. But it doesn't work for anyone else." "So our job is to get out there and show people that change is possible, that it doesn't have to be like this, that there is a way forward. A better future for our country. Leading in Europe once again." "This isn't just because we believe in Europe. It's not just about friendship or shared history, or the fact that a divided Europe has always ended in misery. Fixing it is about us, our country, our future, our hopes and our dreams." "Britain needs a new plan. A plan for growth, for jobs, for defence. A plan to give our children the better future they deserve. A new deal with Europe. The only way to fix the cost of living crisis. The only way to get our country back on track." "So let us stand together. Let us end the chaos. Let us show the world what Britain can be. Not a small island clinging to a failed experiment, but a leader, open, outward looking. At the table, not on the menu." "A Britain that is richer, safer and stronger. That is the future we are fighting for." " Thank you. Thank you very much."

Farrukh

10,909 views • 1 month ago

This 6-minute video reveals how Elon Musk learns complex topics: Elon Musk: “You don’t need college for learning.” “Everything is available basically for free. You can learn anything you want for free. It is not a question of learning.” Musk starts with a blunt point: College may still have value, but not for the reason most people think. He says the real signal of college is not intelligence. It is proof that someone can work through structure: “Can somebody work hard at something, including a bunch of sort of annoying homework assignments, and still do their homework assignments, and kind of soldier through and get it done?” That, in his view, is one of the main things a degree demonstrates: Discipline. Compliance. Follow-through. Not necessarily exceptional ability. Musk pushes the idea even further: “Colleges are basically for fun and to prove you can do your chores. But they’re not for learning.” Whether or not you agree with him fully, the underlying point is hard to ignore: We live in a time when knowledge is no longer locked inside institutions. The internet has dismantled the old gatekeeping model. Today, if someone wants to learn design, engineering, writing, sales, coding, marketing, or history, they can access world-class information without ever stepping into a lecture hall. The bottleneck is no longer access to information. It is desire. Focus. Curiosity. Consistency. Musk then draws a distinction that matters: “If you’re trying to do something exceptional, there must be evidence of exceptional ability.” That line changes the whole conversation. Because in real life, people do not reward credentials alone. They reward proof. Not what you enrolled in. What you built. Not what you intended to do. What you finished. Not what you say you know. What you can demonstrate. This is why portfolios outperform claims. Why execution beats prestige. Why visible work creates leverage. Musk even says, somewhat provocatively: “I don’t consider going to college evidence of exceptional ability.” And then he points to the kinds of examples people love to cite: “Gates is a pretty smart guy, he dropped out. John was pretty smart, he dropped out. Larry Ellison, smart guy, he dropped out.” His broader message is not that everyone should leave school. It is that conventional paths are not the only paths to intelligence, capability, or impact. Then Musk moves into something even more useful: His view of how people actually learn. “Education should be as close to a video game as possible. Like a good video game. You do not need to tell your kid to play video games. They will play video games on autopilot all day.” That comparison is simple, but powerful. Why do people obsess over games? Because games are interactive. They are immersive. They provide immediate feedback. They make progress visible. They create challenge without making the challenge feel meaningless. Musk’s point is that learning should work the same way. “If you can make it interactive and engaging, then you can make education far more compelling and far easier to do.” This is where traditional education often breaks down. Students are expected to move in lockstep. Same pace. Same timeline. Same structure. Same sequence. Musk rejects that model completely: “People are not objects on an assembly line.” That may be one of the clearest criticisms in the entire transcript. Because standard education often optimizes for administration, not human variation. It is easier to manage people in batches. But easier to manage does not mean better to learn. Some people move faster in math. Some are stronger in language. Some are highly visual. Some need to touch the thing, build the thing, test the thing. And yet most systems still treat learning like synchronized marching. Musk argues for something more individualized: “Allow people to progress at the fastest pace that they can or are interested in in each subject.” That idea matters beyond school. Adults learn this way too. No one becomes exceptional by waiting for permission to move at average speed. The most effective learners usually follow interest with intensity. They go deeper where curiosity pulls them. They accelerate where energy is highest. They build momentum through engagement, not force. Musk also shares one of the most practical ideas in the transcript: “Teach problem solving, or teach to the problem, not to the tools.” Then he gives an example. If you wanted to teach someone how engines work, the traditional system might start with separate lessons on screwdrivers, wrenches, and tools. Musk thinks that is backwards. A better method is: “Here’s the engine. Now let’s take it apart.” Then the tools become relevant in context. Now the student understands *why* the screwdriver matters. Now the wrench has meaning. Now the lesson is connected to reality. This is a much bigger principle than education. People learn faster when relevance is obvious. Abstract instruction is forgettable. Applied learning sticks. When people can see the problem first, they care about the tool. That is true in business too. You do not start with theory for theory’s sake. You start with the problem that needs solving. Then you learn exactly what is required to solve it. Finally, Musk says something that quietly explains why so much education fails: “A lot of things people learn, probably there’s no point in learning them because they never use them in the future.” That may sound harsh, but most people know the feeling. They do not resist learning because they are lazy. They resist learning because it feels disconnected. They are told to memorize before they understand relevance. They are told to sit still before they become curious. They are told to absorb information before they have any reason to care. Musk’s view, underneath the provocation, is actually simple: People learn best when learning is alive. When it is tied to action. When it respects differences in pace and aptitude. When it feels engaging instead of ceremonial. When it produces visible competence, not just paper credentials. The internet made learning abundant. What matters now is whether someone can turn information into evidence. That is the real separator. Lessons I'm taking away from this clip: 1. In today’s world, access to knowledge is cheap. Proof of skill is expensive. We have crossed a point where information alone is no longer impressive because everyone has access to it. You can watch the best interviews, read the best essays, take the best online lessons, and still remain average if you never turn any of it into real work. So the advantage now is not “I know this.” The advantage is “I built this, tested this, shipped this, and can show the result.” From my perspective, this is especially true in business and personal branding. The market rewards visible competence far more than silent knowledge. 2. People learn faster when the learning feels useful, alive, and connected to a real problem. This is why so many people struggle with conventional education but thrive when they start building something for themselves. Urgency creates focus. Relevance creates retention. Once the lesson is attached to a real outcome, the brain pays attention differently. That’s why I think one of the best ways to learn anything is to start a project that forces you to use the skill in public or in real life. Learning becomes sharper when there is something at stake. It stops being passive consumption and becomes active problem-solving. 3. The smartest people are often not the ones collecting credentials. They are the ones following curiosity with discipline. Exceptional people usually do not just learn what is assigned to them. They go where their interest is strongest and then they pursue it seriously. That combination matters: curiosity without discipline goes nowhere, and discipline without curiosity becomes lifeless. The sweet spot is when someone becomes obsessed enough to keep going deeper than required. To me, that is where the real edge comes from. Not from following the default path better than everyone else, but from developing uncommon depth in something that genuinely pulls you.
6:13

This 6-minute video reveals how Elon Musk learns complex topics: Elon Musk: “You don’t need college for learning.” “Everything is available basically for free. You can learn anything you want for free. It is not a question of learning.” Musk starts with a blunt point: College may still have value, but not for the reason most people think. He says the real signal of college is not intelligence. It is proof that someone can work through structure: “Can somebody work hard at something, including a bunch of sort of annoying homework assignments, and still do their homework assignments, and kind of soldier through and get it done?” That, in his view, is one of the main things a degree demonstrates: Discipline. Compliance. Follow-through. Not necessarily exceptional ability. Musk pushes the idea even further: “Colleges are basically for fun and to prove you can do your chores. But they’re not for learning.” Whether or not you agree with him fully, the underlying point is hard to ignore: We live in a time when knowledge is no longer locked inside institutions. The internet has dismantled the old gatekeeping model. Today, if someone wants to learn design, engineering, writing, sales, coding, marketing, or history, they can access world-class information without ever stepping into a lecture hall. The bottleneck is no longer access to information. It is desire. Focus. Curiosity. Consistency. Musk then draws a distinction that matters: “If you’re trying to do something exceptional, there must be evidence of exceptional ability.” That line changes the whole conversation. Because in real life, people do not reward credentials alone. They reward proof. Not what you enrolled in. What you built. Not what you intended to do. What you finished. Not what you say you know. What you can demonstrate. This is why portfolios outperform claims. Why execution beats prestige. Why visible work creates leverage. Musk even says, somewhat provocatively: “I don’t consider going to college evidence of exceptional ability.” And then he points to the kinds of examples people love to cite: “Gates is a pretty smart guy, he dropped out. John was pretty smart, he dropped out. Larry Ellison, smart guy, he dropped out.” His broader message is not that everyone should leave school. It is that conventional paths are not the only paths to intelligence, capability, or impact. Then Musk moves into something even more useful: His view of how people actually learn. “Education should be as close to a video game as possible. Like a good video game. You do not need to tell your kid to play video games. They will play video games on autopilot all day.” That comparison is simple, but powerful. Why do people obsess over games? Because games are interactive. They are immersive. They provide immediate feedback. They make progress visible. They create challenge without making the challenge feel meaningless. Musk’s point is that learning should work the same way. “If you can make it interactive and engaging, then you can make education far more compelling and far easier to do.” This is where traditional education often breaks down. Students are expected to move in lockstep. Same pace. Same timeline. Same structure. Same sequence. Musk rejects that model completely: “People are not objects on an assembly line.” That may be one of the clearest criticisms in the entire transcript. Because standard education often optimizes for administration, not human variation. It is easier to manage people in batches. But easier to manage does not mean better to learn. Some people move faster in math. Some are stronger in language. Some are highly visual. Some need to touch the thing, build the thing, test the thing. And yet most systems still treat learning like synchronized marching. Musk argues for something more individualized: “Allow people to progress at the fastest pace that they can or are interested in in each subject.” That idea matters beyond school. Adults learn this way too. No one becomes exceptional by waiting for permission to move at average speed. The most effective learners usually follow interest with intensity. They go deeper where curiosity pulls them. They accelerate where energy is highest. They build momentum through engagement, not force. Musk also shares one of the most practical ideas in the transcript: “Teach problem solving, or teach to the problem, not to the tools.” Then he gives an example. If you wanted to teach someone how engines work, the traditional system might start with separate lessons on screwdrivers, wrenches, and tools. Musk thinks that is backwards. A better method is: “Here’s the engine. Now let’s take it apart.” Then the tools become relevant in context. Now the student understands *why* the screwdriver matters. Now the wrench has meaning. Now the lesson is connected to reality. This is a much bigger principle than education. People learn faster when relevance is obvious. Abstract instruction is forgettable. Applied learning sticks. When people can see the problem first, they care about the tool. That is true in business too. You do not start with theory for theory’s sake. You start with the problem that needs solving. Then you learn exactly what is required to solve it. Finally, Musk says something that quietly explains why so much education fails: “A lot of things people learn, probably there’s no point in learning them because they never use them in the future.” That may sound harsh, but most people know the feeling. They do not resist learning because they are lazy. They resist learning because it feels disconnected. They are told to memorize before they understand relevance. They are told to sit still before they become curious. They are told to absorb information before they have any reason to care. Musk’s view, underneath the provocation, is actually simple: People learn best when learning is alive. When it is tied to action. When it respects differences in pace and aptitude. When it feels engaging instead of ceremonial. When it produces visible competence, not just paper credentials. The internet made learning abundant. What matters now is whether someone can turn information into evidence. That is the real separator. Lessons I'm taking away from this clip: 1. In today’s world, access to knowledge is cheap. Proof of skill is expensive. We have crossed a point where information alone is no longer impressive because everyone has access to it. You can watch the best interviews, read the best essays, take the best online lessons, and still remain average if you never turn any of it into real work. So the advantage now is not “I know this.” The advantage is “I built this, tested this, shipped this, and can show the result.” From my perspective, this is especially true in business and personal branding. The market rewards visible competence far more than silent knowledge. 2. People learn faster when the learning feels useful, alive, and connected to a real problem. This is why so many people struggle with conventional education but thrive when they start building something for themselves. Urgency creates focus. Relevance creates retention. Once the lesson is attached to a real outcome, the brain pays attention differently. That’s why I think one of the best ways to learn anything is to start a project that forces you to use the skill in public or in real life. Learning becomes sharper when there is something at stake. It stops being passive consumption and becomes active problem-solving. 3. The smartest people are often not the ones collecting credentials. They are the ones following curiosity with discipline. Exceptional people usually do not just learn what is assigned to them. They go where their interest is strongest and then they pursue it seriously. That combination matters: curiosity without discipline goes nowhere, and discipline without curiosity becomes lifeless. The sweet spot is when someone becomes obsessed enough to keep going deeper than required. To me, that is where the real edge comes from. Not from following the default path better than everyone else, but from developing uncommon depth in something that genuinely pulls you.

Yasmine Khosrowshahi

34,213 views • 3 months ago

Belarus has become Russia’s nuclear staging ground. Belarus has not been annexed. But functionally, it has already become part of Russia. Lukashenko has long existed only with the Kremlin’s permission. When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Lukashenko officially appeared to be a bystander - yet missiles and columns of tanks moved through Belarusian territory. Russia used it as its own operational zone. In March 2023, Putin announced the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons. In December 2024, Russia and Belarus signed the Treaty on Security Guarantees that legalized permanent Russian bases and legally included Belarus in Russia’s nuclear strategy. Since mid-2025, around 2,000 Russian troops have been permanently stationed in Belarus, including air defense and aerospace units. In December 2025, the Oreshnik ballistic missile entered combat duty near Krychaw. In May 2026, large-scale joint nuclear exercises were held: 64,000 troops, 200 missile launchers, 73 surface ships, and 13 submarines. The nuclear sharing agreement marks a departure from Russia’s long-standing position, as Moscow spent decades criticizing NATO’s nuclear-sharing arrangements. Now it is reproducing the same model it once condemned. The 2024 nuclear doctrine explicitly equated a conventional attack on Belarus with an attack on Russia - automatically creating conditions for a nuclear response. Control over the warheads officially remains with Moscow. But Putin stated that Lukashenko himself would select targets for Oreshnik deployed in Belarus. In other words, the Belarusian president would bear public responsibility for missiles launched by Putin. Now to the arsenal and the numbers. As of March 2026, Russia possesses around 4,400 nuclear warheads in total, of which up to 2,000 are assigned to non-strategic tactical forces. Belarus hosts Iskander-M - the 465th missile brigade in Asipovichy. Range: up to 500 km. Accuracy: 5-7 meters. Nuclear warhead: 10-50 kilotons. Vilnius is just 340 km away. Flight time: 3-4 minutes. NATO would have virtually no warning time. Oreshnik belongs to another category. Speed exceeds 14,000 km/h. Up to six independent MIRV blocks, each capable of deploying up to six sub-warheads. Range exceeds 5,500 km. Interception by modern air defense systems is almost impossible. From Belarusian positions, Oreshnik can reach an airbase in Poland in 11 minutes and NATO headquarters in Brussels in 17 minutes. Berlin, Ramstein, and Warsaw all fall within range. According to Ukraine’s Defense Intelligence, only three missiles had been produced at the time of deployment. One was used against Dnipro in November 2024. One was destroyed in Kapustin Yar during a joint operation involving Ukraine’s Security Service, Defense Intelligence, and Foreign Intelligence Service. The Kremlin plans to produce up to six missiles per year. There is also Lida airbase - just 40 km from the Lithuanian border. Modified Su-25 aircraft are capable of carrying nuclear bombs. The most dangerous problem is neither range nor speed. It is the impossibility of identification. Until the moment of impact, it is impossible to determine whether Oreshnik carries a nuclear or conventional warhead. Every launch is an automatic nuclear alarm regardless of the actual payload. This ambiguity is a strategic weapon no less important than the warhead itself. Now to the likely scenarios. ◾️ The most likely scenario is not total nuclear war. It is a "demonstration strike": a single low-yield tactical strike against a peripheral military base - for example, an airfield in Poland or the Baltics. The goal is not destruction but testing Article 5. The Kremlin’s logic: "You will not launch a nuclear response over a single tactical strike." ◾️ The second scenario is an Oreshnik strike against a NATO logistics hub: Rzeszów, Ramstein, Warsaw. Most likely with conventional warheads. But this cannot be confirmed before impact. Even a conventional strike under the carrier’s nuclear ambiguity could freeze weapons transit to Ukraine. Shock and fear of escalation alone would be a sufficient outcome for the Kremlin. ◾️ The third scenario is a strike on a nuclear power plant with a conventional warhead. A radiological effect without the formal use of weapons of mass destruction. Maximum psychological pressure on Europe. ◾️ The fourth: a new ground offensive against Ukraine launched from Belarusian territory under nuclear blackmail. NATO freezes, Ukraine becomes isolated, and the frontline shrinks by 400 kilometers. Finally, let’s turn to the West’s response - or the absence of one. No symmetrical nuclear response followed. NATO did not deploy nuclear weapons in the Baltics or Poland. The response remained conventional: additional brigades and expanded air defense. New START expired in February 2026. No new treaty exists. Verification of nuclear arsenals is effectively absent. The United States abandoned the "voluntary compliance with limits" proposed by Russia. Patriot and THAAD were not designed to intercept targets at Mach 10 with maneuvering flight trajectories. Kyiv directly called Belarus’s transformation into a "nuclear outpost" near NATO borders an unprecedented challenge to the global security architecture and a dangerous precedent that de facto legitimizes nuclear proliferation among authoritarian regimes.
1:06

Belarus has become Russia’s nuclear staging ground. Belarus has not been annexed. But functionally, it has already become part of Russia. Lukashenko has long existed only with the Kremlin’s permission. When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Lukashenko officially appeared to be a bystander - yet missiles and columns of tanks moved through Belarusian territory. Russia used it as its own operational zone. In March 2023, Putin announced the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons. In December 2024, Russia and Belarus signed the Treaty on Security Guarantees that legalized permanent Russian bases and legally included Belarus in Russia’s nuclear strategy. Since mid-2025, around 2,000 Russian troops have been permanently stationed in Belarus, including air defense and aerospace units. In December 2025, the Oreshnik ballistic missile entered combat duty near Krychaw. In May 2026, large-scale joint nuclear exercises were held: 64,000 troops, 200 missile launchers, 73 surface ships, and 13 submarines. The nuclear sharing agreement marks a departure from Russia’s long-standing position, as Moscow spent decades criticizing NATO’s nuclear-sharing arrangements. Now it is reproducing the same model it once condemned. The 2024 nuclear doctrine explicitly equated a conventional attack on Belarus with an attack on Russia - automatically creating conditions for a nuclear response. Control over the warheads officially remains with Moscow. But Putin stated that Lukashenko himself would select targets for Oreshnik deployed in Belarus. In other words, the Belarusian president would bear public responsibility for missiles launched by Putin. Now to the arsenal and the numbers. As of March 2026, Russia possesses around 4,400 nuclear warheads in total, of which up to 2,000 are assigned to non-strategic tactical forces. Belarus hosts Iskander-M - the 465th missile brigade in Asipovichy. Range: up to 500 km. Accuracy: 5-7 meters. Nuclear warhead: 10-50 kilotons. Vilnius is just 340 km away. Flight time: 3-4 minutes. NATO would have virtually no warning time. Oreshnik belongs to another category. Speed exceeds 14,000 km/h. Up to six independent MIRV blocks, each capable of deploying up to six sub-warheads. Range exceeds 5,500 km. Interception by modern air defense systems is almost impossible. From Belarusian positions, Oreshnik can reach an airbase in Poland in 11 minutes and NATO headquarters in Brussels in 17 minutes. Berlin, Ramstein, and Warsaw all fall within range. According to Ukraine’s Defense Intelligence, only three missiles had been produced at the time of deployment. One was used against Dnipro in November 2024. One was destroyed in Kapustin Yar during a joint operation involving Ukraine’s Security Service, Defense Intelligence, and Foreign Intelligence Service. The Kremlin plans to produce up to six missiles per year. There is also Lida airbase - just 40 km from the Lithuanian border. Modified Su-25 aircraft are capable of carrying nuclear bombs. The most dangerous problem is neither range nor speed. It is the impossibility of identification. Until the moment of impact, it is impossible to determine whether Oreshnik carries a nuclear or conventional warhead. Every launch is an automatic nuclear alarm regardless of the actual payload. This ambiguity is a strategic weapon no less important than the warhead itself. Now to the likely scenarios. ◾️ The most likely scenario is not total nuclear war. It is a "demonstration strike": a single low-yield tactical strike against a peripheral military base - for example, an airfield in Poland or the Baltics. The goal is not destruction but testing Article 5. The Kremlin’s logic: "You will not launch a nuclear response over a single tactical strike." ◾️ The second scenario is an Oreshnik strike against a NATO logistics hub: Rzeszów, Ramstein, Warsaw. Most likely with conventional warheads. But this cannot be confirmed before impact. Even a conventional strike under the carrier’s nuclear ambiguity could freeze weapons transit to Ukraine. Shock and fear of escalation alone would be a sufficient outcome for the Kremlin. ◾️ The third scenario is a strike on a nuclear power plant with a conventional warhead. A radiological effect without the formal use of weapons of mass destruction. Maximum psychological pressure on Europe. ◾️ The fourth: a new ground offensive against Ukraine launched from Belarusian territory under nuclear blackmail. NATO freezes, Ukraine becomes isolated, and the frontline shrinks by 400 kilometers. Finally, let’s turn to the West’s response - or the absence of one. No symmetrical nuclear response followed. NATO did not deploy nuclear weapons in the Baltics or Poland. The response remained conventional: additional brigades and expanded air defense. New START expired in February 2026. No new treaty exists. Verification of nuclear arsenals is effectively absent. The United States abandoned the "voluntary compliance with limits" proposed by Russia. Patriot and THAAD were not designed to intercept targets at Mach 10 with maneuvering flight trajectories. Kyiv directly called Belarus’s transformation into a "nuclear outpost" near NATO borders an unprecedented challenge to the global security architecture and a dangerous precedent that de facto legitimizes nuclear proliferation among authoritarian regimes.

Anton Gerashchenko

59,276 views • 2 months ago

Why Russia launched “Special Military Operation” I publicly announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russia’s actions. It is to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through blockade, large-scale punitive operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only guilt was that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their forefathers’ laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up their children as they want. During these years, the Kiev authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it. They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia. There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic attempts are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we have grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine. Our numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance by Ukraine and its US and NATO patrons. In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this special military operation. The movement of Russian forces against Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24. As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself. Our fellows – soldiers and officers – are displaying courage and heroism and are doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities. This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what is happening in reality, on the ground. The operation is being carried out successfully, in strict conformity with the approved plan. I must note that, encouraged by the United States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing for a scenario of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time. However, our Armed Forces have shattered these plans. Kiev was not just preparing for war, for aggression against Russia – it was conducting it. There were endless attempts to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea. Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed over this time. As you know, there was a missile strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody act of terror that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few days. They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics and the exasperation of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves. But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism is not just Kiev’s blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy in Donetsk, as if nothing happened. This is how they have been hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply moral degradation, complete de-humanisation. It was no longer possible to tolerate this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end to this genocide, Russia recognized the people’s republics of Donbass and signed treaties of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties, the republics appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We rendered this aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act otherwise. I would like to emphasise this point and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within the people's republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have been a final solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately removed the threat – to our country, this time to Russia. On the contrary, a new frontline would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed conflict would have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled by the revanchist hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military infrastructure faster and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with the fact that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already at our borders. I will repeat – we had no alternative for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive actions against our country.
8:03

Why Russia launched “Special Military Operation” I publicly announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russia’s actions. It is to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through blockade, large-scale punitive operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only guilt was that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their forefathers’ laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up their children as they want. During these years, the Kiev authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it. They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia. There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic attempts are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we have grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine. Our numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance by Ukraine and its US and NATO patrons. In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this special military operation. The movement of Russian forces against Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24. As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself. Our fellows – soldiers and officers – are displaying courage and heroism and are doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities. This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what is happening in reality, on the ground. The operation is being carried out successfully, in strict conformity with the approved plan. I must note that, encouraged by the United States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing for a scenario of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time. However, our Armed Forces have shattered these plans. Kiev was not just preparing for war, for aggression against Russia – it was conducting it. There were endless attempts to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea. Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed over this time. As you know, there was a missile strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody act of terror that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few days. They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics and the exasperation of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves. But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism is not just Kiev’s blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy in Donetsk, as if nothing happened. This is how they have been hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply moral degradation, complete de-humanisation. It was no longer possible to tolerate this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end to this genocide, Russia recognized the people’s republics of Donbass and signed treaties of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties, the republics appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We rendered this aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act otherwise. I would like to emphasise this point and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within the people's republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have been a final solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately removed the threat – to our country, this time to Russia. On the contrary, a new frontline would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed conflict would have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled by the revanchist hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military infrastructure faster and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with the fact that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already at our borders. I will repeat – we had no alternative for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive actions against our country.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

47,164 views • 10 months ago

🚨Why Russia launched “Special Military Operation” I publicly announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russia’s actions. It is to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through blockade, large-scale punitive operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only guilt was that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their forefathers’ laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up their children as they want. During these years, the Kiev authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it. They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia. There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic attempts are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we have grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine. Our numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance by Ukraine and its US and NATO patrons. In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this special military operation. The movement of Russian forces against Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24. As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself. Our fellows – soldiers and officers – are displaying courage and heroism and are doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities. This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what is happening in reality, on the ground. The operation is being carried out successfully, in strict conformity with the approved plan. I must note that, encouraged by the United States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing for a scenario of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time. However, our Armed Forces have shattered these plans. Kiev was not just preparing for war, for aggression against Russia – it was conducting it. There were endless attempts to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea. Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed over this time. As you know, there was a missile strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody act of terror that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few days. They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics and the exasperation of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves. But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism is not just Kiev’s blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy in Donetsk, as if nothing happened. This is how they have been hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply moral degradation, complete de-humanisation. It was no longer possible to tolerate this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end to this genocide, Russia recognized the people’s republics of Donbass and signed treaties of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties, the republics appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We rendered this aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act otherwise. I would like to emphasise this point and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within the people's republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have been a final solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately removed the threat – to our country, this time to Russia. On the contrary, a new frontline would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed conflict would have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled by the revanchist hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military infrastructure faster and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with the fact that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already at our borders. I will repeat – we had no alternative for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive actions against our country.
8:03

🚨Why Russia launched “Special Military Operation” I publicly announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russia’s actions. It is to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through blockade, large-scale punitive operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only guilt was that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their forefathers’ laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up their children as they want. During these years, the Kiev authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it. They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia. There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic attempts are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we have grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine. Our numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance by Ukraine and its US and NATO patrons. In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this special military operation. The movement of Russian forces against Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24. As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself. Our fellows – soldiers and officers – are displaying courage and heroism and are doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities. This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what is happening in reality, on the ground. The operation is being carried out successfully, in strict conformity with the approved plan. I must note that, encouraged by the United States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing for a scenario of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time. However, our Armed Forces have shattered these plans. Kiev was not just preparing for war, for aggression against Russia – it was conducting it. There were endless attempts to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea. Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed over this time. As you know, there was a missile strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody act of terror that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few days. They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics and the exasperation of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves. But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism is not just Kiev’s blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy in Donetsk, as if nothing happened. This is how they have been hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply moral degradation, complete de-humanisation. It was no longer possible to tolerate this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end to this genocide, Russia recognized the people’s republics of Donbass and signed treaties of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties, the republics appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We rendered this aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act otherwise. I would like to emphasise this point and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within the people's republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have been a final solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately removed the threat – to our country, this time to Russia. On the contrary, a new frontline would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed conflict would have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled by the revanchist hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military infrastructure faster and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with the fact that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already at our borders. I will repeat – we had no alternative for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive actions against our country.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

21,050 views • 5 months ago

War Diary Day 1,391 Blaise Metreweli, the Chief of Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, sticks it to the Killer in The Kremlin. And all his creepy helpers. I agree with every fucking word. VPDFO! (Transcript of the speech, exactly as it was delivered) 📷 Welcome inside MI6. This iconic building, familiar to movie fans everywhere, is the home of Britain’s foreign intelligence agency. But whilst hundreds of my team pass through the entry pods each day, the truth is that most of our work happens many miles away from this place - out of sight, hidden from the world, undercover, recruiting and running agents who choose to place their trust in us, sharing secrets to make the UK and the world safer. You might pass one of our officers on the street or sit next to them on a plane when you’re about to set off on an adventure of your own, or in a foreign city taking selfies by the sights. Whether it’s in seemingly everyday places, or on the front line embedded with our military, MI6 is there. In my first few weeks, I’ve heard repeatedly that MI6 is trusted and respected globally, two things that we never take for granted. We are seen as a source of hard power, soft influence and rapid innovation. I’ve also heard that people want to believe in MI6. It’s my job to make sure they can. Today, I want to talk about human agency. We all have choices to make about how we deal with the undercurrents shaping our world. About how, in our new, faster, more dangerous and technology-mediated world, it will be our rediscovery of our shared humanity, our ability to listen, and our courage that will determine how our future unfolds. Conflict is not inevitable. Understanding human nature is in my bones. From a family shaped by devastating conflict, I grew up with a deep sense of gratitude for the UK’s precious democracy and freedom. I spent much of my childhood overseas, which is where my passion for travel and adventure began. I studied anthropology, and later psychology and AI, exploring how we make sense of the world and each other. It’s why I was drawn to MI6: it offers strong purpose, a chance to serve and a belief in the positive power of human connection. Like the Service, I’m operational to my very core. Over nearly three decades, my career has involved recruiting and running agents in hostile territory; and leading operations in warzones to defuse threats and support peace. Always in teams, always learning from others. Over the years, I’ve worked with hundreds of brilliant partners – and indeed occasionally those we’d label as adversaries – across dozens of countries, tackling weapons proliferation and terrorism. During my time at MI5, I saw close up what it takes to defend Britain from being targeted by hostile states. You’ll find many like me in my organisation: powerfully motivated to protect our precious country; curious about how our world is changing, joining dots and taking action, across domains. But it was in my last role as ‘Q’, where it was my job to turn emerging technologies from threats to opportunities that I could most see the world changing. As I dug deep into data and extraordinary innovation, I could see how technology was rapidly reshaping not just our capabilities but also conflict and trust, truth and global power. Let me lay out how I see the global issues MI6 must tackle. Because the greatest danger we face is to misunderstand the nature of the problem. Let’s be in no doubt. Our world is more dangerous and contested now than it has been for decades. Conflict is evolving and trust eroding, just as new technologies spur both competition and dependence. We are being contested from sea to space, from the battlefield to the boardroom. And even our brains, as disinformation manipulates our understanding of each other and ourselves. Across the globe, we are now confronting not one single danger, but an interlocking web of security challenges – military, technological, social, ethical even – each shaping the other in complex ways. We are now operating in a space between peace and war. This is not a temporary state or a gradual, inevitable evolution. Our world is being actively remade, with profound implications for national and international security. Institutions which were designed in the ashes of the Second World War are being challenged. New blocs and identities forming and alliances reshaping. Multipolar competition in tension with multilateral cooperation. But there’s something distinctive that will make this change unlike any other: the impact of advanced technologies, which will accelerate the pace and scale of every threat and opportunity, and increasingly, individualise them too. Advances in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and quantum computing are not only revolutionising economies but rewriting the reality of conflict, as they ‘converge’ to create science-fiction-like tools. There’s incredible promise in all this for all of us, from green technologies to hyper-personalised medicine. But also peril. AI-powered robots and drones are brilliant for scaled manufacturing but devastating on the battlefield. Discoveries that cure disease can also create new weapons. And as states race for tech supremacy, or as some algorithms become as powerful as states, those hyper-personalised tools could become a new vector for conflict and control. Power itself is becoming more diffuse, more unpredictable as control over these technologies is shifting from states to corporations, and sometimes to individuals. And at the same time, the foundations of trust in our societies are eroding. Information, once a unifying force, is increasingly weaponised. Falsehood spreads faster than fact, dividing communities and distorting reality. We live in an age of hyper-connection yet profound isolation. The algorithms flatter our biases and fracture our public squares. And as trust collapses, so does our shared sense of truth – one of the greatest losses a society can suffer. The defining challenge of the twenty-first century is not simply who wields the most powerful technologies, but who guides them with the greatest wisdom. Our security, our prosperity, and our humanity depend on it. Our world is being remade. And for the first time, we are all at the heart of it. My Service must now operate in this new context too: not just expert on hostile states, terrorism, proliferation and more, but also fluent in technology, able to anticipate the second and third order effects of advances that reshape the world in minutes not months. And as China will be a central part of the global transformation taking place this century, it is essential that we, as MI6, continue to inform the government’s understanding of China’s rise and the implications for UK national security. I’m going to break with tradition and won’t give you a global threat tour, but will focus here on Putin’s Russia. We all continue to face the menace of an aggressive, expansionist and revisionist Russia, seeking to subjugate Ukraine and harass NATO. I find it harrowing that hundreds of thousands have died, with the toll mounting every day, because of Putin’s historical distortions and his compromised desire for respect. He is dragging out negotiations and shifting the cost of war onto his own population. But Putin should be in no doubt, our support is enduring. The pressure we apply on Ukraine’s behalf will be sustained. Because it is fundamental not just to European sovereignty and security but to global stability. Alongside the grinding war, Russia is testing us in the grey zone with tactics that are just below the threshold of war. It’s important to understand their attempts to bully, fearmonger and manipulate, because it affects us all. I am talking about: Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure. Drones buzzing airports and bases. Aggressive activity in our seas, above and below the waves. State-sponsored arson and sabotage. Propaganda and influence operations that crack open and exploit fractures within societies. Countering this activity is the work of intelligence and security services across Europe and the globe. And as the Foreign Secretary made clear in a speech last week, the UK is defending itself against this Russian information warfare – sanctioning Russian media outlets pushing Kremlin narratives. The export of chaos is a feature not a bug in this Russian approach to international engagement; and we should be ready for this to continue until Putin is forced to change his calculus. So, how should we respond? It’s not enough now just to understand the world. We must shape it too. MI6 is well-positioned to respond to these threats and wider global instability. And we will continue to evolve, just as we have throughout our long history. The UK government has invested in our intelligence agencies and we are all using our unique powers to keep the British people safe. Our ‘open and connected’ partnerships across the UK Intelligence Community, with HMGCC, NSSIF and the wider tech ecosystem in the UK will become even more important – because in the digital battleground, no single organisation can prevail alone. As a global agency, MI6’s inbuilt strength is our partners and our people. The risks I have set out require us to work ever more closely with our colleagues in MI5, GCHQ and in defence and diplomacy. But also with our Five Eyes partners, with the E3, the EU, NATO, those across the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific and beyond. And with many valued partners whose identity needs to remain secret. Together, we integrate our diverse talent, data and tools to meet the threat. AI is a domain in which we will excel, using the technology to augment, not replace, our human skills. Every digital trace, every byte of data, every algorithmic decision has implications for the safety of the lives of the courageous people who work with us as officers and agents, and for the UK’s strategic advantage. Mastery of technology will infuse everything we do. Not just in our labs, but in the field, in our tradecraft, and even more importantly, in the mindset of every officer. We will become as comfortable with lines of code as we are with human sources, as fluent in Python as we are in multiple other languages. Under my leadership, MI6 will continue to attract Britain’s best and most creative minds: linguists and data scientists, case officers and engineers, behavioural experts and technologists. We need people who walk in the shoes and get in the heads of our adversaries. We need people who think differently, challenge assumptions, and act decisively. All can thrive and make a difference at MI6. At an operational level, we will sharpen our edge and impact with audacity, tapping into – if you like – our historical SOE instincts. We’re at our best when we’re hustling to make things happen, because our intelligence is most valuable when it changes reality on the ground. We will take calculated risks, where the prize is significant and the national interest clear. We will never stoop to the tactics of our opponents. But we must seek to outplay them. In every domain. In every way. So intelligence must drive action. Action must deliver advantage. And advantage must serve Britain’s security and prosperity. But at the core, our deeper contribution is also our simplest – how we unlock human agency. Our fast-paced, tech and threat-infused world now generates more heat than light. As nations retrench and rearm, we are losing opportunities to listen to what’s really going on. I’ve seen time and again throughout my career, that this is where MI6 matters most: we listen and we hear. We understand, because we take time to learn languages and cultures, complex technical and historical detail, immerse ourselves in what’s really driving the situation. Across the globe, right now, our officers are finding people with the courage to step forward, and they are taking time to sit and listen to break these tightening cycles of violence. They listen for nuance, for connection, for opportunity. Over the years, I’ve listened to terrorists who have told us how to defuse the bomb because they know that more violence won’t help. To proliferators and smugglers who’ve told us where to find the dangerous material, motivated to protect their children’s future. To people trapped in authoritarian regimes who know, deep down, that their humanity is being chipped away – and that telling us what’s really going on is an important release, allowing us all to find better ways to navigate our changing world. So, we will work with our agents. And we will continue to engage directly, and with respect, with states and organisation currently working against us. Away from the glare of the media, we will use MI6’s convening power wherever we can to make a material difference, bringing parties together to defuse tensions. But the response to the increasing risks we face won’t be delivered by the UK intelligence community alone. Wider society has a role to play too. That includes work taking place in schools across the country so our children don’t get duped by information manipulation. Let’s all check sources, consider evidence, and be alive to those algorithms that trigger intense reactions, like fear. It also means everyone in society really understanding the world we are in – a world where terrorists plot against us, where our enemies fearmonger, bully and manipulate, and the front line is everywhere. Online, on our streets, in our supply chains, in the minds and on the screens of our citizens. We must all stand together against this. As we do today with our friends in Australia after the shocking antisemitic terrorist attack this weekend. My thoughts -and those of my whole organisation – are with the family, friends and loved ones of the victims. Light will always win over darkness. In rising to meet these challenges we, in MI6, will remain anchored to our values: courage, creativity, respect and integrity. And to our principles: accountability and trust are not constraints on our work; they are the foundations of our legitimacy with the British public. Recently, I had the privilege of meeting and thanking a foreign agent who has worked with us for decades, taking extraordinary risks to help keep the UK safe. I asked why. They said simply, ‘Your values. Your integrity and respect. None of us have a future without them’. This moment reinforced to me that we must remain a very human agency. And so, to sustain that trust, MI6 will continue to be more open. Not for the sake of visibility, but because it matters – and as my MI5 counterpart Sir Ken McCallum said recently - because it is a strength. We will continue the practice of speaking publicly, broaden our channels of engagement, and sustain our focus on attracting the most diverse talent to join our Service. Transparency does not mean revealing what must remain secret. It means showing the British people who we are, what we stand for, and why our work matters. We need your trust and support for the difficult and often dangerous work our agents pursue, every day of the year. In an age of uncertainty, one constant remains: the choices made by human beings still determine the shape of the world. Yes, technology can illuminate possibilities: but information requires judgement; complexity demands clarity; and only people can decide which path to follow. The United Kingdom’s global voice has never rested solely on strength – it has rested on trust, principle, and the ability to understand others as well as ourselves. That is also the essence of intelligence: not simply knowing the world, but interpreting it through a uniquely human lens. Ours is the quiet service, the hidden service. It is one rooted in a profound belief that when human beings act with purpose and integrity, they can steady a faltering world. When the Berlin Wall fell, it was our shared belief in freedom that carried Europe forward. When acts of terror targeted open societies, it was intelligence, cooperation and resolve that preserved them. And when adversaries blur fact and falsehood, our task is to defend the space where truth can still stand. As we step into the future, the tools at our disposal will evolve. But what will always matter most is the human element – the person who stands in the shadows and says: this is right, and that is wrong. That choice – the exercise of human agency – has shaped our world before, and it will shape it again. Because in the end, it is not what we can do that defines us, but what we choose to do. Thank you. Published 15 December 2025
0:59

War Diary Day 1,391 Blaise Metreweli, the Chief of Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, sticks it to the Killer in The Kremlin. And all his creepy helpers. I agree with every fucking word. VPDFO! (Transcript of the speech, exactly as it was delivered) 📷 Welcome inside MI6. This iconic building, familiar to movie fans everywhere, is the home of Britain’s foreign intelligence agency. But whilst hundreds of my team pass through the entry pods each day, the truth is that most of our work happens many miles away from this place - out of sight, hidden from the world, undercover, recruiting and running agents who choose to place their trust in us, sharing secrets to make the UK and the world safer. You might pass one of our officers on the street or sit next to them on a plane when you’re about to set off on an adventure of your own, or in a foreign city taking selfies by the sights. Whether it’s in seemingly everyday places, or on the front line embedded with our military, MI6 is there. In my first few weeks, I’ve heard repeatedly that MI6 is trusted and respected globally, two things that we never take for granted. We are seen as a source of hard power, soft influence and rapid innovation. I’ve also heard that people want to believe in MI6. It’s my job to make sure they can. Today, I want to talk about human agency. We all have choices to make about how we deal with the undercurrents shaping our world. About how, in our new, faster, more dangerous and technology-mediated world, it will be our rediscovery of our shared humanity, our ability to listen, and our courage that will determine how our future unfolds. Conflict is not inevitable. Understanding human nature is in my bones. From a family shaped by devastating conflict, I grew up with a deep sense of gratitude for the UK’s precious democracy and freedom. I spent much of my childhood overseas, which is where my passion for travel and adventure began. I studied anthropology, and later psychology and AI, exploring how we make sense of the world and each other. It’s why I was drawn to MI6: it offers strong purpose, a chance to serve and a belief in the positive power of human connection. Like the Service, I’m operational to my very core. Over nearly three decades, my career has involved recruiting and running agents in hostile territory; and leading operations in warzones to defuse threats and support peace. Always in teams, always learning from others. Over the years, I’ve worked with hundreds of brilliant partners – and indeed occasionally those we’d label as adversaries – across dozens of countries, tackling weapons proliferation and terrorism. During my time at MI5, I saw close up what it takes to defend Britain from being targeted by hostile states. You’ll find many like me in my organisation: powerfully motivated to protect our precious country; curious about how our world is changing, joining dots and taking action, across domains. But it was in my last role as ‘Q’, where it was my job to turn emerging technologies from threats to opportunities that I could most see the world changing. As I dug deep into data and extraordinary innovation, I could see how technology was rapidly reshaping not just our capabilities but also conflict and trust, truth and global power. Let me lay out how I see the global issues MI6 must tackle. Because the greatest danger we face is to misunderstand the nature of the problem. Let’s be in no doubt. Our world is more dangerous and contested now than it has been for decades. Conflict is evolving and trust eroding, just as new technologies spur both competition and dependence. We are being contested from sea to space, from the battlefield to the boardroom. And even our brains, as disinformation manipulates our understanding of each other and ourselves. Across the globe, we are now confronting not one single danger, but an interlocking web of security challenges – military, technological, social, ethical even – each shaping the other in complex ways. We are now operating in a space between peace and war. This is not a temporary state or a gradual, inevitable evolution. Our world is being actively remade, with profound implications for national and international security. Institutions which were designed in the ashes of the Second World War are being challenged. New blocs and identities forming and alliances reshaping. Multipolar competition in tension with multilateral cooperation. But there’s something distinctive that will make this change unlike any other: the impact of advanced technologies, which will accelerate the pace and scale of every threat and opportunity, and increasingly, individualise them too. Advances in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and quantum computing are not only revolutionising economies but rewriting the reality of conflict, as they ‘converge’ to create science-fiction-like tools. There’s incredible promise in all this for all of us, from green technologies to hyper-personalised medicine. But also peril. AI-powered robots and drones are brilliant for scaled manufacturing but devastating on the battlefield. Discoveries that cure disease can also create new weapons. And as states race for tech supremacy, or as some algorithms become as powerful as states, those hyper-personalised tools could become a new vector for conflict and control. Power itself is becoming more diffuse, more unpredictable as control over these technologies is shifting from states to corporations, and sometimes to individuals. And at the same time, the foundations of trust in our societies are eroding. Information, once a unifying force, is increasingly weaponised. Falsehood spreads faster than fact, dividing communities and distorting reality. We live in an age of hyper-connection yet profound isolation. The algorithms flatter our biases and fracture our public squares. And as trust collapses, so does our shared sense of truth – one of the greatest losses a society can suffer. The defining challenge of the twenty-first century is not simply who wields the most powerful technologies, but who guides them with the greatest wisdom. Our security, our prosperity, and our humanity depend on it. Our world is being remade. And for the first time, we are all at the heart of it. My Service must now operate in this new context too: not just expert on hostile states, terrorism, proliferation and more, but also fluent in technology, able to anticipate the second and third order effects of advances that reshape the world in minutes not months. And as China will be a central part of the global transformation taking place this century, it is essential that we, as MI6, continue to inform the government’s understanding of China’s rise and the implications for UK national security. I’m going to break with tradition and won’t give you a global threat tour, but will focus here on Putin’s Russia. We all continue to face the menace of an aggressive, expansionist and revisionist Russia, seeking to subjugate Ukraine and harass NATO. I find it harrowing that hundreds of thousands have died, with the toll mounting every day, because of Putin’s historical distortions and his compromised desire for respect. He is dragging out negotiations and shifting the cost of war onto his own population. But Putin should be in no doubt, our support is enduring. The pressure we apply on Ukraine’s behalf will be sustained. Because it is fundamental not just to European sovereignty and security but to global stability. Alongside the grinding war, Russia is testing us in the grey zone with tactics that are just below the threshold of war. It’s important to understand their attempts to bully, fearmonger and manipulate, because it affects us all. I am talking about: Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure. Drones buzzing airports and bases. Aggressive activity in our seas, above and below the waves. State-sponsored arson and sabotage. Propaganda and influence operations that crack open and exploit fractures within societies. Countering this activity is the work of intelligence and security services across Europe and the globe. And as the Foreign Secretary made clear in a speech last week, the UK is defending itself against this Russian information warfare – sanctioning Russian media outlets pushing Kremlin narratives. The export of chaos is a feature not a bug in this Russian approach to international engagement; and we should be ready for this to continue until Putin is forced to change his calculus. So, how should we respond? It’s not enough now just to understand the world. We must shape it too. MI6 is well-positioned to respond to these threats and wider global instability. And we will continue to evolve, just as we have throughout our long history. The UK government has invested in our intelligence agencies and we are all using our unique powers to keep the British people safe. Our ‘open and connected’ partnerships across the UK Intelligence Community, with HMGCC, NSSIF and the wider tech ecosystem in the UK will become even more important – because in the digital battleground, no single organisation can prevail alone. As a global agency, MI6’s inbuilt strength is our partners and our people. The risks I have set out require us to work ever more closely with our colleagues in MI5, GCHQ and in defence and diplomacy. But also with our Five Eyes partners, with the E3, the EU, NATO, those across the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific and beyond. And with many valued partners whose identity needs to remain secret. Together, we integrate our diverse talent, data and tools to meet the threat. AI is a domain in which we will excel, using the technology to augment, not replace, our human skills. Every digital trace, every byte of data, every algorithmic decision has implications for the safety of the lives of the courageous people who work with us as officers and agents, and for the UK’s strategic advantage. Mastery of technology will infuse everything we do. Not just in our labs, but in the field, in our tradecraft, and even more importantly, in the mindset of every officer. We will become as comfortable with lines of code as we are with human sources, as fluent in Python as we are in multiple other languages. Under my leadership, MI6 will continue to attract Britain’s best and most creative minds: linguists and data scientists, case officers and engineers, behavioural experts and technologists. We need people who walk in the shoes and get in the heads of our adversaries. We need people who think differently, challenge assumptions, and act decisively. All can thrive and make a difference at MI6. At an operational level, we will sharpen our edge and impact with audacity, tapping into – if you like – our historical SOE instincts. We’re at our best when we’re hustling to make things happen, because our intelligence is most valuable when it changes reality on the ground. We will take calculated risks, where the prize is significant and the national interest clear. We will never stoop to the tactics of our opponents. But we must seek to outplay them. In every domain. In every way. So intelligence must drive action. Action must deliver advantage. And advantage must serve Britain’s security and prosperity. But at the core, our deeper contribution is also our simplest – how we unlock human agency. Our fast-paced, tech and threat-infused world now generates more heat than light. As nations retrench and rearm, we are losing opportunities to listen to what’s really going on. I’ve seen time and again throughout my career, that this is where MI6 matters most: we listen and we hear. We understand, because we take time to learn languages and cultures, complex technical and historical detail, immerse ourselves in what’s really driving the situation. Across the globe, right now, our officers are finding people with the courage to step forward, and they are taking time to sit and listen to break these tightening cycles of violence. They listen for nuance, for connection, for opportunity. Over the years, I’ve listened to terrorists who have told us how to defuse the bomb because they know that more violence won’t help. To proliferators and smugglers who’ve told us where to find the dangerous material, motivated to protect their children’s future. To people trapped in authoritarian regimes who know, deep down, that their humanity is being chipped away – and that telling us what’s really going on is an important release, allowing us all to find better ways to navigate our changing world. So, we will work with our agents. And we will continue to engage directly, and with respect, with states and organisation currently working against us. Away from the glare of the media, we will use MI6’s convening power wherever we can to make a material difference, bringing parties together to defuse tensions. But the response to the increasing risks we face won’t be delivered by the UK intelligence community alone. Wider society has a role to play too. That includes work taking place in schools across the country so our children don’t get duped by information manipulation. Let’s all check sources, consider evidence, and be alive to those algorithms that trigger intense reactions, like fear. It also means everyone in society really understanding the world we are in – a world where terrorists plot against us, where our enemies fearmonger, bully and manipulate, and the front line is everywhere. Online, on our streets, in our supply chains, in the minds and on the screens of our citizens. We must all stand together against this. As we do today with our friends in Australia after the shocking antisemitic terrorist attack this weekend. My thoughts -and those of my whole organisation – are with the family, friends and loved ones of the victims. Light will always win over darkness. In rising to meet these challenges we, in MI6, will remain anchored to our values: courage, creativity, respect and integrity. And to our principles: accountability and trust are not constraints on our work; they are the foundations of our legitimacy with the British public. Recently, I had the privilege of meeting and thanking a foreign agent who has worked with us for decades, taking extraordinary risks to help keep the UK safe. I asked why. They said simply, ‘Your values. Your integrity and respect. None of us have a future without them’. This moment reinforced to me that we must remain a very human agency. And so, to sustain that trust, MI6 will continue to be more open. Not for the sake of visibility, but because it matters – and as my MI5 counterpart Sir Ken McCallum said recently - because it is a strength. We will continue the practice of speaking publicly, broaden our channels of engagement, and sustain our focus on attracting the most diverse talent to join our Service. Transparency does not mean revealing what must remain secret. It means showing the British people who we are, what we stand for, and why our work matters. We need your trust and support for the difficult and often dangerous work our agents pursue, every day of the year. In an age of uncertainty, one constant remains: the choices made by human beings still determine the shape of the world. Yes, technology can illuminate possibilities: but information requires judgement; complexity demands clarity; and only people can decide which path to follow. The United Kingdom’s global voice has never rested solely on strength – it has rested on trust, principle, and the ability to understand others as well as ourselves. That is also the essence of intelligence: not simply knowing the world, but interpreting it through a uniquely human lens. Ours is the quiet service, the hidden service. It is one rooted in a profound belief that when human beings act with purpose and integrity, they can steady a faltering world. When the Berlin Wall fell, it was our shared belief in freedom that carried Europe forward. When acts of terror targeted open societies, it was intelligence, cooperation and resolve that preserved them. And when adversaries blur fact and falsehood, our task is to defend the space where truth can still stand. As we step into the future, the tools at our disposal will evolve. But what will always matter most is the human element – the person who stands in the shadows and says: this is right, and that is wrong. That choice – the exercise of human agency – has shaped our world before, and it will shape it again. Because in the end, it is not what we can do that defines us, but what we choose to do. Thank you. Published 15 December 2025

John Sweeney

42,257 views • 7 months ago

I Cracked Polymarket Using Claude Opus 4.6: The 96,000 Dollar Script For 5 Minute High Leverage Windows most traders are currently sitting at their desks fighting a losing battle against a digital wall because they do not realize the house always wins against human emotion. while the crowd is busy chasing the next meme coin or getting washed out in a single wick an automated agent just pulled nearly a hundred thousand dollars out of thin air using nothing but raw logic. i have seen people blow their life savings in these five minute windows because they treated a high leverage prediction market like a playground instead of a laboratory i am moon dev and i believe that code is the great equalizer because through losing money with liquidations and over trading i knew i had to automate my trading. in the past i spent hundreds of thousands on devs for apps thinking i would not be able to code myself which was a massive waste of my time and resources. with bots you must iterate to success so i decided to learn live on youtube and now we are here with fully automated systems trading for me instead of getting liquidated by the market the five minute markets on polymarket are essentially a high speed game of musical chairs where the person left standing is usually the one with the fastest script. leverage makes these markets extremely dangerous because it amplifies every mistake you make until your account is completely empty. the only way to survive this environment is to stop trading based on a gut feeling and start trading based on a stress tested mathematical edge the real breakthrough happened when i started using claude opus four point six to write the execution code for these specific five minute windows. having an ai agent that can analyze microstructure data means you can find trends that are completely invisible to the naked eye. it is essentially like having a team of twenty engineers working for you around the clock without the communication lag or the massive overhead costs some of our back tests show a sixty four percent win rate which sounds like a dream to anyone who has ever spent a night staring at a red screen. however the return on these tests varies wildly based on a few specific changes to the strategy parameters and histogram filters. i found that a return of forty one thousand dollars can jump to nearly double that just by adjusting how the bot handles the macd histogram threshold the trap that most people fall into is thinking that a good back test is a license to print money immediately without any further validation. this is a dangerous lie that leads to huge losses because the market in the past is not a perfect mirror of what is going to happen today. that is why i never launch a bot with full size until it has survived the incubation phase where it trades with ten dollars at a time incubation is the ultimate reality check for any trading strategy regardless of how good the numbers look on a computer screen. it is nerve wracking to watch a bot enter its first real trade even if the size is small because that is the moment theory meets reality. most of the bots that pass a back test will fail during the first forty eight hours of incubation and that is exactly why this step is non negotiable the data i use to build these systems covers over two hundred weeks of historical one minute candles to ensure the results are robust and not just luck. we are currently moving toward a machine learning approach where the system can adapt to changing market conditions without me having to intervene. this means the bot will eventually be able to recognize when a high leverage window is too risky and simply wait for a better entry the strategy itself relies heavily on macd variations which is a well known indicator but it is used here with a very specific and proprietary twist. by filtering for trades that hit a specific threshold we can ignore the random price noise that usually liquidates manual traders. we look for an edge of at least six percent which is enough to cover all platform fees and still leave a significant profit on the table i used to think that being a successful trader meant being a genius who could predict the future with a magical crystal ball. the truth is far more boring because success is just about researching an idea and testing it until the data proves it works in the past. then you just let the bot do the work while you go live your life instead of being a slave to the candle sticks and charts this world is changing fast and the people who learn to leverage ai to automate their thinking are going to be the ones who win the next decade. i am not asking you to trust a back test or a screenshot from a website because i want you to trust the process of testing it yourself. code allows you to take your life back from the screens and finally stop the cycle of over trading and emotional liquidations the difference between the traders who make it and the people who blow up is simply the willingness to iterate on their ideas daily. you might fail on your first ten bots but the eleventh one might be the script that changes your entire financial trajectory forever. it is about staying in the game long enough for the math to finally work in your favor and removing the human heart from the execution every day i am back testing and researching new ideas to see if they can survive the stress of real market data. i launch these live bots and let them run for seventy two hours to see if they can handle the pressure of the current market trend. while everyone else is coping and complaining about market volatility we are just adjusting our parameters and letting the ai find the next profitable window vibe coding with claude opus four point six has changed the speed at which i can deploy a new strategy from weeks down to just a few minutes. you can give the ai a general strategy idea and it builds the entire trading infrastructure for you while you focus on the logic. this speed is the ultimate advantage in a market that moves as fast as a five minute prediction window on the blockchain the future of trading is not found in a chat room or a paid signal group but in the code you write and the data you process. i believe that everyone has the ability to become an automated trader if they are willing to put in the work to learn the scripts. it is the only way to escape the trap of the nine to five and the anxiety of manual hand trading in a manipulated market i want you to understand that the ninety six thousand dollar returns i see are the result of hundreds of failed tests that never saw the light of day. you have to be willing to look at a failing bot and kill it without emotion so you can move on to the next research project. that is the quantitative mindset that separates the winners from the people who are just gambling with their savings if you are ready to stop being the liquidity for the big players then it is time to start building your own automated army of bots. for the cost of a few cups of coffee you can get access to the road map and the scripts that are driving these results. i am here every day showing you the process because i want to see more people use code to find their financial freedom and beat the house at its own game
11:04

I Cracked Polymarket Using Claude Opus 4.6: The 96,000 Dollar Script For 5 Minute High Leverage Windows most traders are currently sitting at their desks fighting a losing battle against a digital wall because they do not realize the house always wins against human emotion. while the crowd is busy chasing the next meme coin or getting washed out in a single wick an automated agent just pulled nearly a hundred thousand dollars out of thin air using nothing but raw logic. i have seen people blow their life savings in these five minute windows because they treated a high leverage prediction market like a playground instead of a laboratory i am moon dev and i believe that code is the great equalizer because through losing money with liquidations and over trading i knew i had to automate my trading. in the past i spent hundreds of thousands on devs for apps thinking i would not be able to code myself which was a massive waste of my time and resources. with bots you must iterate to success so i decided to learn live on youtube and now we are here with fully automated systems trading for me instead of getting liquidated by the market the five minute markets on polymarket are essentially a high speed game of musical chairs where the person left standing is usually the one with the fastest script. leverage makes these markets extremely dangerous because it amplifies every mistake you make until your account is completely empty. the only way to survive this environment is to stop trading based on a gut feeling and start trading based on a stress tested mathematical edge the real breakthrough happened when i started using claude opus four point six to write the execution code for these specific five minute windows. having an ai agent that can analyze microstructure data means you can find trends that are completely invisible to the naked eye. it is essentially like having a team of twenty engineers working for you around the clock without the communication lag or the massive overhead costs some of our back tests show a sixty four percent win rate which sounds like a dream to anyone who has ever spent a night staring at a red screen. however the return on these tests varies wildly based on a few specific changes to the strategy parameters and histogram filters. i found that a return of forty one thousand dollars can jump to nearly double that just by adjusting how the bot handles the macd histogram threshold the trap that most people fall into is thinking that a good back test is a license to print money immediately without any further validation. this is a dangerous lie that leads to huge losses because the market in the past is not a perfect mirror of what is going to happen today. that is why i never launch a bot with full size until it has survived the incubation phase where it trades with ten dollars at a time incubation is the ultimate reality check for any trading strategy regardless of how good the numbers look on a computer screen. it is nerve wracking to watch a bot enter its first real trade even if the size is small because that is the moment theory meets reality. most of the bots that pass a back test will fail during the first forty eight hours of incubation and that is exactly why this step is non negotiable the data i use to build these systems covers over two hundred weeks of historical one minute candles to ensure the results are robust and not just luck. we are currently moving toward a machine learning approach where the system can adapt to changing market conditions without me having to intervene. this means the bot will eventually be able to recognize when a high leverage window is too risky and simply wait for a better entry the strategy itself relies heavily on macd variations which is a well known indicator but it is used here with a very specific and proprietary twist. by filtering for trades that hit a specific threshold we can ignore the random price noise that usually liquidates manual traders. we look for an edge of at least six percent which is enough to cover all platform fees and still leave a significant profit on the table i used to think that being a successful trader meant being a genius who could predict the future with a magical crystal ball. the truth is far more boring because success is just about researching an idea and testing it until the data proves it works in the past. then you just let the bot do the work while you go live your life instead of being a slave to the candle sticks and charts this world is changing fast and the people who learn to leverage ai to automate their thinking are going to be the ones who win the next decade. i am not asking you to trust a back test or a screenshot from a website because i want you to trust the process of testing it yourself. code allows you to take your life back from the screens and finally stop the cycle of over trading and emotional liquidations the difference between the traders who make it and the people who blow up is simply the willingness to iterate on their ideas daily. you might fail on your first ten bots but the eleventh one might be the script that changes your entire financial trajectory forever. it is about staying in the game long enough for the math to finally work in your favor and removing the human heart from the execution every day i am back testing and researching new ideas to see if they can survive the stress of real market data. i launch these live bots and let them run for seventy two hours to see if they can handle the pressure of the current market trend. while everyone else is coping and complaining about market volatility we are just adjusting our parameters and letting the ai find the next profitable window vibe coding with claude opus four point six has changed the speed at which i can deploy a new strategy from weeks down to just a few minutes. you can give the ai a general strategy idea and it builds the entire trading infrastructure for you while you focus on the logic. this speed is the ultimate advantage in a market that moves as fast as a five minute prediction window on the blockchain the future of trading is not found in a chat room or a paid signal group but in the code you write and the data you process. i believe that everyone has the ability to become an automated trader if they are willing to put in the work to learn the scripts. it is the only way to escape the trap of the nine to five and the anxiety of manual hand trading in a manipulated market i want you to understand that the ninety six thousand dollar returns i see are the result of hundreds of failed tests that never saw the light of day. you have to be willing to look at a failing bot and kill it without emotion so you can move on to the next research project. that is the quantitative mindset that separates the winners from the people who are just gambling with their savings if you are ready to stop being the liquidity for the big players then it is time to start building your own automated army of bots. for the cost of a few cups of coffee you can get access to the road map and the scripts that are driving these results. i am here every day showing you the process because i want to see more people use code to find their financial freedom and beat the house at its own game

Moon Dev

10,921 views • 4 months ago

Intelligence Agency Alleges “Pro-Russia” TikTok Accounts Are Interfering In Czech Elections Despite speculation, there is no evidence tying social media accounts to Russia by Cecílie Jílková alex gutentag and Michael Shellenberger Almost 1,000 accounts on TikTok are promoting pro-Russian narratives in support of “extremist” parties ahead of this week’s elections in the Czech Republic, according to a Czech intelligence agency and a group of analysts who identify as the “Center for Online Risk Research.” And some in the Czech news media are suggesting that Russia may be behind the accounts. “Secret services have discovered hundreds more pro-Russian accounts that want to influence the election,” reported Denik N, a Czech news publication, this morning. “They have millions of views.” But neither BIS nor the Center for Online Risk Research says they can link the Russian government to any of the accounts. “We don’t know,” said researcher Vendula Prokůpková to Public. “We don’t have the tools to find out.” The BIS declined to comment. A TikTok spokesperson told Public, “We have proactively implemented additional safety and security measures ahead of the elections in Czechia, including an in-app Election Center to provide access to authoritative information about the vote. We continue to aggressively counter deceptive behaviour, and we have already prevented and removed millions of fake likes and follow requests in Czechia since the start of August.” Notably, the Czech media and the Center are making similar arguments to those used by a Romanian court last year to nullify the presidential election, which legal scholars viewed as unconstitutional. The case may seem unimportant to Americans, given the relatively small size of the Czech Republic, which has 11 million people, and since the Romanian intelligence agencies made stronger claims about Russian interference than the Czech BIS or the Center for Online Risk Research have made. And the possibility remains that Russia, or Russia-linked bot networks, are indeed engaged in algorithm manipulation to help the Czech parties opposed to continuing arming of Ukraine. In Romania, intelligence officials accused the Russians of creating fake accounts and manipulating algorithms. But the information comes at a moment when Internet censorship is a sticking point between the Trump administration and the EU over a trade deal, and just days after the European Commission leaked plans that it could fine Meta’s Instagram and Facebook up to six percent of its global revenue if it doesn’t make it easier for users to flag posts for censorship. The Commission is currently investigating Facebook and Instagram for supposed failure to stop “disinformation” and “deceptive advertising” in advance of last year’s European Parliament elections. The EU has made no secret of its desire to censor social media worldwide, not just in Europe. Meanwhile, Americans are obligated under NATO to defend both Romania and the Czech Republic, and the NATO treaty requires its members to hold free and fair elections, which Romania did not do. Romania’s intelligence officials presented no evidence to support their claims, and subsequent analyses revealed that the Romanian ruling party had funded at least some of the allegedly pro-Russian TikTok accounts. Where the Romanian TikTok accounts supposedly promoted a right-wing populist, the Czech Center claims that the Czech language TikTok posts, back the “far-right SPD party, which ranks third in most polls with around 13% support, and the far-left Stacilo!,” according to Reuters, “which is gaining just over the 5% threshold needed to secure parliamentary seats.” Notes Reuters, “Both parties advocate for Czechia to leave NATO and the European Union.” Prokůpková said, despite its name, that “Center for Online Risk Research” is “not an organization. We are an initiative.” However, she also said, “My partner is the CTU,” referring to the Czech government’s Telecommunications Office. This office organized a meeting on August 29th due to the upcoming Czech elections, which was attended by the European Commission, Google, Meta, Microsoft, TikTok, and X. “The participants discussed their readiness to address potential systemic risks in connection with the parliamentary elections and respond to possible incidents,” a European Commission spokesperson told Public today. Prokůpková also said, “I proceed in accordance with the DSA,” the EU’s Digital Services Act, which entitles anyone to report false accounts or misinformation on social media to the Czech Telecommunications Office.”We are ordinary citizens and we use the R programming language,” she explained. One of the Center’s members is Josef Šlerka, who collaborated with “The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project,” which the US State Department created in 2008, and which the USAID funded. After President Trump cut off USAID funding, the European Commission began to financially support OCCRP. In January, Šlerka and the director of the Czech government’s Security Information Service (BIS), the equivalent of the FBI and DHS in the US, briefed Czech members of Parliament about the Romanian TikTok case as a potential model for the Czech Republic. Now, the BIS has sent a report on Czech-speaking pro-Russian TikTok accounts to the president, prime minister, and Czech Telecommunications Office. Earlier this year, a Czech Army group admitted to monitoring opposition figures. Leaked documents show the group monitored “the opinions and attitudes of these [opposition] individuals towards the activities of the Ministry of Defense, its leaders, senior representatives of the Czech army, and the war in Ukraine.” General Karel Řehka later defended the Army’s actions by alleging that it was just a military exercise in case of possible future interference in the elections. A few weeks ago, Romania’s Interior (security) Minister said the intelligence agencies of the Czech Republic and those in other nations admire what Romania did. “I believe that what happened in Romania last year is currently being studied by all intelligence agencies in the Western world,” said Cătălin Predoiu. “Conclusions are being drawn and countries are taking defensive measures, inspired by how Romania defended itself.” He went on to say that “my Czech colleague, who is a good friend of mine, approached me and said, ‘We also have elections in the fall, and we are watching very closely what has happened in your country.’” From left: Vít Rakušan, Czech Minister of the Interior and Deputy Prime Minister, and Marian-Cătălin Predoiu, Romanian Minister of the Interior and Deputy Prime Minister, at the Round Table (Justice and Home Affairs Council) on December 12, 2024. Source: Other groups are involved in the possible influence operation. A liberal website called Voxpot recently published a list of websites that repost content from Russian state platforms, but provided no information about any links to or financing from Russia. The Independent Journalism Foundation financed the Voxpot report. And Seznam, a news website that has advocated for EU government censorship of “misinformation,” finances the Foundation. Finally, GLOBSEC, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), and CEDMO (Central European Digital Media Observatory), all of which appear to have links to the intelligence community, published a report warning of the alleged risks of Russian interference; however, it contained no evidence to support these claims. Major military contractors, including Lockheed Martin, KNDS, and Saab finance GLOBSEC, while the US, UK, EU, and other Western governments finance ISD and CEDMO. While the allegations focus on alleged pro-Russian support for the nationalist-populist SPD party and the radical Left-Wing coalition Stacilo!, party, the latest polls show that the ANO party, led by former Prime Minister and billionaire Andrej Babiš has over 33% support, which is 12 points more than the centre-right SPOLU (Together) coalition, which the current Prime Minister leads. Like the SPD and Stacilo!, Babiš is running directly against the EU’s agenda, including on migration, climate change, the Ukraine war, and censorship. His party rejected NATO’s new defence spending target and called for halting ammunition supplies to Ukraine. With the SPD and Stacilo! expected to win roughly 18% of the vote, and given their shared opposition to arming Ukraine, they could join in a coalition government with ANO to end further military support. “If the electoral contest were close, then even several tens of thousands of votes that voters cast for someone (or conversely decided not to cast) could determine whether, for example, the Czech ammunition initiative, crucial aid for defending Ukraine, will continue,“ confirms in today’s article the Czech liberal newspaper Deník N. Czech President Petr Pavel is a former NATO general and a strong supporter of supplying Ukraine in its war with Russia. Nothing happened after the Romanian court nullified its election. Romania remains a member of NATO and the EU. Indeed, the EU supported the judicial coup. The same could happen in the Czech Republic. Others think that’s unlikely. “I don’t think we are approaching what is known as the ‘Romanian scenario,’” wrote Lukáš Prchal, a journalist who has written on the TikTok scandal for Deník N, in an email to Public. Whatever the case, the fact remains that there is no evidence of Russian government interference in the Czech elections, and any effort to nullify it based on allegations about anonymous TikTok accounts would violate the Czech Republic’s constitution, the European Union’s constitution, and the NATO treaty. “There is an attempt here,” a source told Denik N, “but the potential and significance are not essential. It is an unsuccessful attempt.”
9:54

Intelligence Agency Alleges “Pro-Russia” TikTok Accounts Are Interfering In Czech Elections Despite speculation, there is no evidence tying social media accounts to Russia by Cecílie Jílková alex gutentag and Michael Shellenberger Almost 1,000 accounts on TikTok are promoting pro-Russian narratives in support of “extremist” parties ahead of this week’s elections in the Czech Republic, according to a Czech intelligence agency and a group of analysts who identify as the “Center for Online Risk Research.” And some in the Czech news media are suggesting that Russia may be behind the accounts. “Secret services have discovered hundreds more pro-Russian accounts that want to influence the election,” reported Denik N, a Czech news publication, this morning. “They have millions of views.” But neither BIS nor the Center for Online Risk Research says they can link the Russian government to any of the accounts. “We don’t know,” said researcher Vendula Prokůpková to Public. “We don’t have the tools to find out.” The BIS declined to comment. A TikTok spokesperson told Public, “We have proactively implemented additional safety and security measures ahead of the elections in Czechia, including an in-app Election Center to provide access to authoritative information about the vote. We continue to aggressively counter deceptive behaviour, and we have already prevented and removed millions of fake likes and follow requests in Czechia since the start of August.” Notably, the Czech media and the Center are making similar arguments to those used by a Romanian court last year to nullify the presidential election, which legal scholars viewed as unconstitutional. The case may seem unimportant to Americans, given the relatively small size of the Czech Republic, which has 11 million people, and since the Romanian intelligence agencies made stronger claims about Russian interference than the Czech BIS or the Center for Online Risk Research have made. And the possibility remains that Russia, or Russia-linked bot networks, are indeed engaged in algorithm manipulation to help the Czech parties opposed to continuing arming of Ukraine. In Romania, intelligence officials accused the Russians of creating fake accounts and manipulating algorithms. But the information comes at a moment when Internet censorship is a sticking point between the Trump administration and the EU over a trade deal, and just days after the European Commission leaked plans that it could fine Meta’s Instagram and Facebook up to six percent of its global revenue if it doesn’t make it easier for users to flag posts for censorship. The Commission is currently investigating Facebook and Instagram for supposed failure to stop “disinformation” and “deceptive advertising” in advance of last year’s European Parliament elections. The EU has made no secret of its desire to censor social media worldwide, not just in Europe. Meanwhile, Americans are obligated under NATO to defend both Romania and the Czech Republic, and the NATO treaty requires its members to hold free and fair elections, which Romania did not do. Romania’s intelligence officials presented no evidence to support their claims, and subsequent analyses revealed that the Romanian ruling party had funded at least some of the allegedly pro-Russian TikTok accounts. Where the Romanian TikTok accounts supposedly promoted a right-wing populist, the Czech Center claims that the Czech language TikTok posts, back the “far-right SPD party, which ranks third in most polls with around 13% support, and the far-left Stacilo!,” according to Reuters, “which is gaining just over the 5% threshold needed to secure parliamentary seats.” Notes Reuters, “Both parties advocate for Czechia to leave NATO and the European Union.” Prokůpková said, despite its name, that “Center for Online Risk Research” is “not an organization. We are an initiative.” However, she also said, “My partner is the CTU,” referring to the Czech government’s Telecommunications Office. This office organized a meeting on August 29th due to the upcoming Czech elections, which was attended by the European Commission, Google, Meta, Microsoft, TikTok, and X. “The participants discussed their readiness to address potential systemic risks in connection with the parliamentary elections and respond to possible incidents,” a European Commission spokesperson told Public today. Prokůpková also said, “I proceed in accordance with the DSA,” the EU’s Digital Services Act, which entitles anyone to report false accounts or misinformation on social media to the Czech Telecommunications Office.”We are ordinary citizens and we use the R programming language,” she explained. One of the Center’s members is Josef Šlerka, who collaborated with “The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project,” which the US State Department created in 2008, and which the USAID funded. After President Trump cut off USAID funding, the European Commission began to financially support OCCRP. In January, Šlerka and the director of the Czech government’s Security Information Service (BIS), the equivalent of the FBI and DHS in the US, briefed Czech members of Parliament about the Romanian TikTok case as a potential model for the Czech Republic. Now, the BIS has sent a report on Czech-speaking pro-Russian TikTok accounts to the president, prime minister, and Czech Telecommunications Office. Earlier this year, a Czech Army group admitted to monitoring opposition figures. Leaked documents show the group monitored “the opinions and attitudes of these [opposition] individuals towards the activities of the Ministry of Defense, its leaders, senior representatives of the Czech army, and the war in Ukraine.” General Karel Řehka later defended the Army’s actions by alleging that it was just a military exercise in case of possible future interference in the elections. A few weeks ago, Romania’s Interior (security) Minister said the intelligence agencies of the Czech Republic and those in other nations admire what Romania did. “I believe that what happened in Romania last year is currently being studied by all intelligence agencies in the Western world,” said Cătălin Predoiu. “Conclusions are being drawn and countries are taking defensive measures, inspired by how Romania defended itself.” He went on to say that “my Czech colleague, who is a good friend of mine, approached me and said, ‘We also have elections in the fall, and we are watching very closely what has happened in your country.’” From left: Vít Rakušan, Czech Minister of the Interior and Deputy Prime Minister, and Marian-Cătălin Predoiu, Romanian Minister of the Interior and Deputy Prime Minister, at the Round Table (Justice and Home Affairs Council) on December 12, 2024. Source: Other groups are involved in the possible influence operation. A liberal website called Voxpot recently published a list of websites that repost content from Russian state platforms, but provided no information about any links to or financing from Russia. The Independent Journalism Foundation financed the Voxpot report. And Seznam, a news website that has advocated for EU government censorship of “misinformation,” finances the Foundation. Finally, GLOBSEC, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), and CEDMO (Central European Digital Media Observatory), all of which appear to have links to the intelligence community, published a report warning of the alleged risks of Russian interference; however, it contained no evidence to support these claims. Major military contractors, including Lockheed Martin, KNDS, and Saab finance GLOBSEC, while the US, UK, EU, and other Western governments finance ISD and CEDMO. While the allegations focus on alleged pro-Russian support for the nationalist-populist SPD party and the radical Left-Wing coalition Stacilo!, party, the latest polls show that the ANO party, led by former Prime Minister and billionaire Andrej Babiš has over 33% support, which is 12 points more than the centre-right SPOLU (Together) coalition, which the current Prime Minister leads. Like the SPD and Stacilo!, Babiš is running directly against the EU’s agenda, including on migration, climate change, the Ukraine war, and censorship. His party rejected NATO’s new defence spending target and called for halting ammunition supplies to Ukraine. With the SPD and Stacilo! expected to win roughly 18% of the vote, and given their shared opposition to arming Ukraine, they could join in a coalition government with ANO to end further military support. “If the electoral contest were close, then even several tens of thousands of votes that voters cast for someone (or conversely decided not to cast) could determine whether, for example, the Czech ammunition initiative, crucial aid for defending Ukraine, will continue,“ confirms in today’s article the Czech liberal newspaper Deník N. Czech President Petr Pavel is a former NATO general and a strong supporter of supplying Ukraine in its war with Russia. Nothing happened after the Romanian court nullified its election. Romania remains a member of NATO and the EU. Indeed, the EU supported the judicial coup. The same could happen in the Czech Republic. Others think that’s unlikely. “I don’t think we are approaching what is known as the ‘Romanian scenario,’” wrote Lukáš Prchal, a journalist who has written on the TikTok scandal for Deník N, in an email to Public. Whatever the case, the fact remains that there is no evidence of Russian government interference in the Czech elections, and any effort to nullify it based on allegations about anonymous TikTok accounts would violate the Czech Republic’s constitution, the European Union’s constitution, and the NATO treaty. “There is an attempt here,” a source told Denik N, “but the potential and significance are not essential. It is an unsuccessful attempt.”

Michael Shellenberger

61,674 views • 9 months ago

"Anyone who leaked a [UFO] report...could be prosecuted under the Espionage Act...life in prison, or death." "Maybe we can reverse engineer this so we will have this incredible edge over the rest of the world." 🔥 Dr. Phil Had Me at The Bolender Memo 🔥 (Dr. Phil continued to kill it yesterday and this was better than the last one! Link to full video (21:52) is in the replies.) "Our government has been lying to us for more than 80 years. Ask yourself why? Why do they not want you to know this is going on?" (He starts out by showing that Google searches for "UFO" have allegedly nearly tripled since last Friday night, along with searches for UAP being up 400%. And "Dr. Phil UFO" is one of the fastest rising searches in the country. If all of that is true, it's a very good thing. Especially since he's been putting out some really good videos. He mentions the latest release (#4) of UFO/UAP files from the Pentagon last Friday.) "My team and I were granted early access, exclusive access to those documents before they went public." "Our government has been lying to us, by omission AND by intentional misdirection, for 79 years." "Look at these documents. You go back as far as 1947 where they have had clear information that there are objects not of this Earth, both technologically, metallurgically, performance-wise. But yet, that has been hidden from us. They've denied that, they've actually threatened people from talking about this. Threatened with careers, imprisonment, and some, with death, because they would consider it treason." (He backs it up with documents. See below.) Dr. Phil: "For 80 years, every time there was a legitimate UAP sighting and the U.S. government had a chance to get in there, they essentially told us, 'Nothing to see here. Move along.' To be clear, a UAP sighting is not proof of little green men or alien life. It means something happened, something was observed, something occurred for which we have no explanation. That's it. "Now, let's talk about that for a second. Things happen, and we don't have any explanation for it. We don't have technology that explains that. There's something that is observed in the sky, going at a speed, stopping, making a sharp turn, reversing direction, accelerating, changing altitudes, and we don't have anything on this Earth that can do that. That's what's called unexplained. "Now, do we know where it's from? How it does that? Well, if we did, it would be explained. But we don't. We go look at all of our secret weapons. We go look at what we know through intelligence, other countries have. And let me tell you, a lot of these (laughs) - they're not close calls. They are not close calls. And some of the things that have been observed, we damn sure didn't have anything like that in the 40s or the 50s or the 60s, and we still don't, now in 2020s. "But at the very same time, our government was telling us, 'Nothing to see here: weather balloon, reflection off of an airplane, just a weather anomaly.' And, the government was simultaneously threatening its own people with criminal penalties if they ever disclosed UAP information. "If somebody that was credible, that had seen this, spoke about it, they were threatened with all kinds of penalties. We were gaslighted. 'No big deal here. Probably weather balloons, misidentified aircraft.' And a jumpy public that watched, 'Close Encounters' one too many times, thinking, 'Look, what's really going on here?' "Behind the curtain, the government was spending generations of time and resources protecting this information. Was it happening? Yes, it was happening! Do we have proof of it happening? Yes, we have proof of it happening. And what I mean by that is we have this on radar. We have credible, military pilots reporting it. "We have aircraft that have guns, and when you open a gun and go live on a fighter, there's a camera that activates, so you have video of what the gun is shooting at. You have gun cameras. If they see one of these things in front of them, they open their weapons, in case they need them, and so it shoots video of what they're seeing. "Now let's talk about some of the proof. JANAP 146 - Joint Army, Navy, Air Force publication 146 - made it a criminal offense for military personnel and commercial airline pilots to discuss UFO sightings outside official channels. The penalty, 'up to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.' "So, you might see some guy down on a lake, drinking beer, that talks about something he saw over the lake. Yeah, they don't mind that guy talking. But credible people? Trained observers with instrumentation? No. They say something, they're going to prison. "Well, that took effect upon receipt. No hearings, no debate. The regulation says, 'All persons aware of the contents or existence...are governed by...espionage laws.' So not just the pilot who filed a report under JANAP 146, anyone who leaked a report. Radio operators, airline staff, anyone in the chain could be prosecuted under the Espionage Act. "You can see this yourself. Declassified copies are online today, including on the NSA's website. Now what is the Espionage Act? That's the same law used to prosecute spies. Section 793: Up to 10 years in federal prison for every violation. Section 794: If the information reaches a foreign power, life in prison, or death. "Imagine you're a TWA captain in 1955. You see something over the Pacific you just simply can't explain. You file your report like the regulation requires. And from that moment, talk to a newspaper, tell your own wife, puts you in the same legal category as a spy. "Ask yourself why. Why are they so interested in muzzling all this conversation? Why do they not want you to know this is going on? Why are you not entitled to know what's happening in the air around you? "Now, let's fast forward 20 years, 1971. Oliver Harry Turner was an Australian nuclear scientist and intelligence officer, head of the nuclear branch of Australia's Joint Intelligence Organization. He was asked to assess the American response to the growing UAP issue. "If you're thinking, what does an Australian know about U.S. military secrets? Well, the possibility of life beyond this planet is bigger than any one country. Australia and the rest of the world has a legitimate interest in what the U.S. knows. And Australia is one of our closest intelligence allies. What we now call Five Eyes. "The Five Eyes countries are the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. These countries have shared their most sensitive intelligence with each other since World War II. When a senior, Five Eyes nuclear intelligence officer writes a report about what the United States knows, well, that's serious. "He was outside the American classification system. He had no career to lose. He pieced this together from official CIA, Air Force, Congressional, and Project Blue Book records. Now this report was written May 27, 1971. Original classification: Secret. Title: Scientific and Intelligence Aspects of the UFO Problem. Report declassified by the National Archives of Australia in 2023. "On June 9th of 2026, whistleblower David Crusch (Yes, he said Crusch) stood on Capitol Hill and told the public to read pages seven through sixteen." ~ David Grusch: "There is a declassified 1971 Australian, formally-classified, Secret assessment that a couple years ago was put in the Australian National Archives. I encourage people to read page seven through sixteen, and that was the nuclear branch chief of the Australian government discussing the U.S. cover-up and the involvement of the CIA back in the 70s. And that's actually a little-known document that is publicly available." ~ Dr. Phil: "Now here's the kicker: foreign intelligence describing an American cover-up is now referenced in the files that our government is just now releasing. And here are six key findings in the Turner report. "Number one, what Turner called the facade of ridicule. Turner documents that early Air Force intelligence concluded, 'Some of these objects, 'had flight characteristics' that could best be explained as having 'extraterrestrial origin.' (The actual language says: "The early analysis of UFO reports by USAF intelligence indicated that real phenomena were being reported which had flight characteristics so far in advance of U.S. aircraft that only as extra-terrestrial origin could be envisaged." ) Dr. Phil: "Instead of telling the public, the CIA and Air Force adopted a deliberate debunking policy. "Now let that sit with you for a minute. Instead of telling the public, the CIA and Air Force adopted a deliberate debunking policy. We've got to get these people believing this isn't real. We've got to debunk this. "January 1953, Turner's own words: 'By erecting a facade of ridicule, the U.S. hoped to allay public alarm, reduce the possibility of the Soviet taking advantage of UFO mass sightings...and act as a cover-up so the U.S. can develop vehicles that emulate UFO performances.' "What's the point? Well, the point is, they were thinking, 'All right, let's keep this secret,' like we're the only ones seeing this, 'and maybe we can reverse engineer this so we will have this incredible edge over the rest of the world.' "That's a great goal, I guess, if you can go from flying-prop planes or early jets to this incredible speed. If these are extraterrestrial, and the nearest galaxy is Andromeda, which it takes two and a half million years to get to, flying at the speed of light, we're pretty far from being able to do that. "Today, in 2026, can we move at the speed of light? No. If we could, it would take two and a half million years to get to the next galaxy. We can't move at the speed of light, even now in 2026. But that was the goal. They'll find one of these and reverse engineer it." (I don't know whether or not any black program has tech that can move at the speed of light and I doubt Dr. Phil knows, either. Someone should show him what Lacatski said about being able to reverse engineer some of this acquired (alleged non-human) tech but "not to its full extent.") Dr. Phil: "Finding number two. He then talks about Project Sign. This was the U.S. Air Force's first official UFO investigation set up in late 1947. Its analysts reportedly concluded that extraterrestrial origin was the best explanation. Air Force Chief of Staff General Hoyt Vandenberg rejected that conclusion, and copies of the report were ordered destroyed. Destroyed! "And per Turner, in February 1949, members of Project Sign, 'either volunteered to leave or were compelled to leave,' and they were replaced by people, 'willing to ridicule the concept of UFOs.' "Think about this! We have sightings by legitimate observers with scientific instrumentation, and the people who are doing the observing are voluntarily leaving or compelled to leave, and replaced by people willing to ridicule the concept of UFOs. "Finding number three, what I spoke about earlier: JANAP 146. Up to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine for discussing sightings outside official channels. And per the regulation's own text, Chapter One, Section 102, it covered not just military personnel, but U.S. and Canadian civilian and commercial pilots. "That's legal force over airline pilots, arguably the most credible witnesses in the sky! What jurisdiction they had over Canadian pilots, I have no idea, but they listed 'em. "Turner documents a meeting between military intelligence and airline pilots at the Roosevelt Hotel in Hollywood. At that meeting, pilots were, 'coerced' to keep their sightings out of public view and inside official channels. Am I overstating it to say that there's been a cover-up, that we're being lied to? "Finding number four. But they missed the retirees. JANAP 146 only covered active service. Once you retired, you could talk. And three very senior men did so between 1953 and 1960. Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter, the first director of the CIA, Captain Edward Ruppelt, the man the Air Force put in charge of investigating UFOs, Major Dewey Fournet, the Pentagon's project officer on UFOs. Per Turner, all three publicly stated the U.S. government knew UFOs were extraterrestrial and was withholding the fact from the public! So when those three retired, they told the truth! "Finding five. The government then silenced retirees. Per Turner, the revised regulation JANAP 146e made UAP disclosure by retirees an offense under the Espionage Act. Then finding number six. 1969, 17 years, the Air Force ran a public-facing UFO investigation called Project Blue Book. If you wrote your congressman about a sighting, it went into the Blue Book. And in 1969, the Air Force shut down the Blue Book and told the country, 'We looked at more than 12,000 sightings. No problems. No national security threat. No need for the Blue Book.' "But a memo from General Carroll Bolender, the Air Force general, said the reason Blue Book showed no national security threats was because any national security threats were gag ordered under JANAP 146 and were quote, 'not part of the Blue Book system.' The serious reports never stopped; they just moved out of public view. "Now, I know that was a lot of information. You may need to listen back to that, but those are facts. Those are in the government's documents that have now been declassified! "If the government has known for decades that unidentified objects are flying through our skies, and therefore, we may not be alone in the Universe, then the greatest revelation in American history has also been the target of a huge cover-up. "One of the challenges of social media and TV news is taking something this complex and reducing it to sound bites. And you're getting bits and pieces from the media. That's why I invest so much time and energy giving you the real story. I don't want to tell you what you believe or don't believe, but I want to give you the information so you can make up your own mind. "This information is in the files, we just haven't had access to the files. And then when we get the files, we're given the files without any context. You see a radar screen and you see a blip, and then it moves. Well, what do you have to compare it to? Is it moving fast? Too fast? Unexplainably fast? Without any context, how are we supposed to interpret that? "Well, I'm digging in, I'm talking to experts, I'm finding out what the scale is. And what we're learning, is we don't have anything that'll move that fast. We don't have anything that'll turn that sharp. We don't have anything that will withstand those kind of G-forces."
8:27

"Anyone who leaked a [UFO] report...could be prosecuted under the Espionage Act...life in prison, or death." "Maybe we can reverse engineer this so we will have this incredible edge over the rest of the world." 🔥 Dr. Phil Had Me at The Bolender Memo 🔥 (Dr. Phil continued to kill it yesterday and this was better than the last one! Link to full video (21:52) is in the replies.) "Our government has been lying to us for more than 80 years. Ask yourself why? Why do they not want you to know this is going on?" (He starts out by showing that Google searches for "UFO" have allegedly nearly tripled since last Friday night, along with searches for UAP being up 400%. And "Dr. Phil UFO" is one of the fastest rising searches in the country. If all of that is true, it's a very good thing. Especially since he's been putting out some really good videos. He mentions the latest release (#4) of UFO/UAP files from the Pentagon last Friday.) "My team and I were granted early access, exclusive access to those documents before they went public." "Our government has been lying to us, by omission AND by intentional misdirection, for 79 years." "Look at these documents. You go back as far as 1947 where they have had clear information that there are objects not of this Earth, both technologically, metallurgically, performance-wise. But yet, that has been hidden from us. They've denied that, they've actually threatened people from talking about this. Threatened with careers, imprisonment, and some, with death, because they would consider it treason." (He backs it up with documents. See below.) Dr. Phil: "For 80 years, every time there was a legitimate UAP sighting and the U.S. government had a chance to get in there, they essentially told us, 'Nothing to see here. Move along.' To be clear, a UAP sighting is not proof of little green men or alien life. It means something happened, something was observed, something occurred for which we have no explanation. That's it. "Now, let's talk about that for a second. Things happen, and we don't have any explanation for it. We don't have technology that explains that. There's something that is observed in the sky, going at a speed, stopping, making a sharp turn, reversing direction, accelerating, changing altitudes, and we don't have anything on this Earth that can do that. That's what's called unexplained. "Now, do we know where it's from? How it does that? Well, if we did, it would be explained. But we don't. We go look at all of our secret weapons. We go look at what we know through intelligence, other countries have. And let me tell you, a lot of these (laughs) - they're not close calls. They are not close calls. And some of the things that have been observed, we damn sure didn't have anything like that in the 40s or the 50s or the 60s, and we still don't, now in 2020s. "But at the very same time, our government was telling us, 'Nothing to see here: weather balloon, reflection off of an airplane, just a weather anomaly.' And, the government was simultaneously threatening its own people with criminal penalties if they ever disclosed UAP information. "If somebody that was credible, that had seen this, spoke about it, they were threatened with all kinds of penalties. We were gaslighted. 'No big deal here. Probably weather balloons, misidentified aircraft.' And a jumpy public that watched, 'Close Encounters' one too many times, thinking, 'Look, what's really going on here?' "Behind the curtain, the government was spending generations of time and resources protecting this information. Was it happening? Yes, it was happening! Do we have proof of it happening? Yes, we have proof of it happening. And what I mean by that is we have this on radar. We have credible, military pilots reporting it. "We have aircraft that have guns, and when you open a gun and go live on a fighter, there's a camera that activates, so you have video of what the gun is shooting at. You have gun cameras. If they see one of these things in front of them, they open their weapons, in case they need them, and so it shoots video of what they're seeing. "Now let's talk about some of the proof. JANAP 146 - Joint Army, Navy, Air Force publication 146 - made it a criminal offense for military personnel and commercial airline pilots to discuss UFO sightings outside official channels. The penalty, 'up to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.' "So, you might see some guy down on a lake, drinking beer, that talks about something he saw over the lake. Yeah, they don't mind that guy talking. But credible people? Trained observers with instrumentation? No. They say something, they're going to prison. "Well, that took effect upon receipt. No hearings, no debate. The regulation says, 'All persons aware of the contents or existence...are governed by...espionage laws.' So not just the pilot who filed a report under JANAP 146, anyone who leaked a report. Radio operators, airline staff, anyone in the chain could be prosecuted under the Espionage Act. "You can see this yourself. Declassified copies are online today, including on the NSA's website. Now what is the Espionage Act? That's the same law used to prosecute spies. Section 793: Up to 10 years in federal prison for every violation. Section 794: If the information reaches a foreign power, life in prison, or death. "Imagine you're a TWA captain in 1955. You see something over the Pacific you just simply can't explain. You file your report like the regulation requires. And from that moment, talk to a newspaper, tell your own wife, puts you in the same legal category as a spy. "Ask yourself why. Why are they so interested in muzzling all this conversation? Why do they not want you to know this is going on? Why are you not entitled to know what's happening in the air around you? "Now, let's fast forward 20 years, 1971. Oliver Harry Turner was an Australian nuclear scientist and intelligence officer, head of the nuclear branch of Australia's Joint Intelligence Organization. He was asked to assess the American response to the growing UAP issue. "If you're thinking, what does an Australian know about U.S. military secrets? Well, the possibility of life beyond this planet is bigger than any one country. Australia and the rest of the world has a legitimate interest in what the U.S. knows. And Australia is one of our closest intelligence allies. What we now call Five Eyes. "The Five Eyes countries are the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. These countries have shared their most sensitive intelligence with each other since World War II. When a senior, Five Eyes nuclear intelligence officer writes a report about what the United States knows, well, that's serious. "He was outside the American classification system. He had no career to lose. He pieced this together from official CIA, Air Force, Congressional, and Project Blue Book records. Now this report was written May 27, 1971. Original classification: Secret. Title: Scientific and Intelligence Aspects of the UFO Problem. Report declassified by the National Archives of Australia in 2023. "On June 9th of 2026, whistleblower David Crusch (Yes, he said Crusch) stood on Capitol Hill and told the public to read pages seven through sixteen." ~ David Grusch: "There is a declassified 1971 Australian, formally-classified, Secret assessment that a couple years ago was put in the Australian National Archives. I encourage people to read page seven through sixteen, and that was the nuclear branch chief of the Australian government discussing the U.S. cover-up and the involvement of the CIA back in the 70s. And that's actually a little-known document that is publicly available." ~ Dr. Phil: "Now here's the kicker: foreign intelligence describing an American cover-up is now referenced in the files that our government is just now releasing. And here are six key findings in the Turner report. "Number one, what Turner called the facade of ridicule. Turner documents that early Air Force intelligence concluded, 'Some of these objects, 'had flight characteristics' that could best be explained as having 'extraterrestrial origin.' (The actual language says: "The early analysis of UFO reports by USAF intelligence indicated that real phenomena were being reported which had flight characteristics so far in advance of U.S. aircraft that only as extra-terrestrial origin could be envisaged." ) Dr. Phil: "Instead of telling the public, the CIA and Air Force adopted a deliberate debunking policy. "Now let that sit with you for a minute. Instead of telling the public, the CIA and Air Force adopted a deliberate debunking policy. We've got to get these people believing this isn't real. We've got to debunk this. "January 1953, Turner's own words: 'By erecting a facade of ridicule, the U.S. hoped to allay public alarm, reduce the possibility of the Soviet taking advantage of UFO mass sightings...and act as a cover-up so the U.S. can develop vehicles that emulate UFO performances.' "What's the point? Well, the point is, they were thinking, 'All right, let's keep this secret,' like we're the only ones seeing this, 'and maybe we can reverse engineer this so we will have this incredible edge over the rest of the world.' "That's a great goal, I guess, if you can go from flying-prop planes or early jets to this incredible speed. If these are extraterrestrial, and the nearest galaxy is Andromeda, which it takes two and a half million years to get to, flying at the speed of light, we're pretty far from being able to do that. "Today, in 2026, can we move at the speed of light? No. If we could, it would take two and a half million years to get to the next galaxy. We can't move at the speed of light, even now in 2026. But that was the goal. They'll find one of these and reverse engineer it." (I don't know whether or not any black program has tech that can move at the speed of light and I doubt Dr. Phil knows, either. Someone should show him what Lacatski said about being able to reverse engineer some of this acquired (alleged non-human) tech but "not to its full extent.") Dr. Phil: "Finding number two. He then talks about Project Sign. This was the U.S. Air Force's first official UFO investigation set up in late 1947. Its analysts reportedly concluded that extraterrestrial origin was the best explanation. Air Force Chief of Staff General Hoyt Vandenberg rejected that conclusion, and copies of the report were ordered destroyed. Destroyed! "And per Turner, in February 1949, members of Project Sign, 'either volunteered to leave or were compelled to leave,' and they were replaced by people, 'willing to ridicule the concept of UFOs.' "Think about this! We have sightings by legitimate observers with scientific instrumentation, and the people who are doing the observing are voluntarily leaving or compelled to leave, and replaced by people willing to ridicule the concept of UFOs. "Finding number three, what I spoke about earlier: JANAP 146. Up to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine for discussing sightings outside official channels. And per the regulation's own text, Chapter One, Section 102, it covered not just military personnel, but U.S. and Canadian civilian and commercial pilots. "That's legal force over airline pilots, arguably the most credible witnesses in the sky! What jurisdiction they had over Canadian pilots, I have no idea, but they listed 'em. "Turner documents a meeting between military intelligence and airline pilots at the Roosevelt Hotel in Hollywood. At that meeting, pilots were, 'coerced' to keep their sightings out of public view and inside official channels. Am I overstating it to say that there's been a cover-up, that we're being lied to? "Finding number four. But they missed the retirees. JANAP 146 only covered active service. Once you retired, you could talk. And three very senior men did so between 1953 and 1960. Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter, the first director of the CIA, Captain Edward Ruppelt, the man the Air Force put in charge of investigating UFOs, Major Dewey Fournet, the Pentagon's project officer on UFOs. Per Turner, all three publicly stated the U.S. government knew UFOs were extraterrestrial and was withholding the fact from the public! So when those three retired, they told the truth! "Finding five. The government then silenced retirees. Per Turner, the revised regulation JANAP 146e made UAP disclosure by retirees an offense under the Espionage Act. Then finding number six. 1969, 17 years, the Air Force ran a public-facing UFO investigation called Project Blue Book. If you wrote your congressman about a sighting, it went into the Blue Book. And in 1969, the Air Force shut down the Blue Book and told the country, 'We looked at more than 12,000 sightings. No problems. No national security threat. No need for the Blue Book.' "But a memo from General Carroll Bolender, the Air Force general, said the reason Blue Book showed no national security threats was because any national security threats were gag ordered under JANAP 146 and were quote, 'not part of the Blue Book system.' The serious reports never stopped; they just moved out of public view. "Now, I know that was a lot of information. You may need to listen back to that, but those are facts. Those are in the government's documents that have now been declassified! "If the government has known for decades that unidentified objects are flying through our skies, and therefore, we may not be alone in the Universe, then the greatest revelation in American history has also been the target of a huge cover-up. "One of the challenges of social media and TV news is taking something this complex and reducing it to sound bites. And you're getting bits and pieces from the media. That's why I invest so much time and energy giving you the real story. I don't want to tell you what you believe or don't believe, but I want to give you the information so you can make up your own mind. "This information is in the files, we just haven't had access to the files. And then when we get the files, we're given the files without any context. You see a radar screen and you see a blip, and then it moves. Well, what do you have to compare it to? Is it moving fast? Too fast? Unexplainably fast? Without any context, how are we supposed to interpret that? "Well, I'm digging in, I'm talking to experts, I'm finding out what the scale is. And what we're learning, is we don't have anything that'll move that fast. We don't have anything that'll turn that sharp. We don't have anything that will withstand those kind of G-forces."

Joe Murgia

46,292 views • 10 days ago