Ron Unz #1325

Ever notice how ads always pop up at the worst moments when the killer's identity is about

to be revealed?

During that perfect meditation flow, on Amazon Music we believe in keeping you in the

moment.

That's why we've got millions of ad free podcast episodes, so you can stay completely

immersed in every story, every reveal, every breath.

Follow the Amazon Music App and start listening to your favorite podcast, sad free, included

with Prime.

Imagine you're a business owner relying on a dozen different software programs.

Each one is expensive, overly complicated, and worst of all, none of them are connected.

It can be incredibly stressful, right?

Now picture O2.

CRM, accounting, inventory, manufacturing, marketing, HR, and more.

O2 brings all the tools your business needs into one simple platform, and all seamlessly

connected.

Everything works together, giving you the peace of mind that your business is running smoothly

from every angle.

O2's open source applications are user friendly and designed to scale with your business,

saving you time and money.

Say goodbye to juggling multiple platforms and hello to efficient integrated management.

Stop wasting resources on complicated systems and make the switch to O2 today.

Visit O2.com, O-D-O-O.com, and discover how O2 can simplify and streamline your business

operations.

O2, modern management, made simple.

What's up, everybody?

I just want to take a quick second and let people know that I am self-supported.

I now put all of my episodes on sub-stack for paid subscribers, I put them up early,

and then 24 hours later, I release them to the public on all my platforms.

I also have Venmo, PayPal, Cash App, Buy Me a Coffee, Zell, PO Box, and I don't think

locals, Patreon, and all of the links are in the show notes of every single episode

I put out.

Look forward to continuing to provide great conversations, and thank you all for your

continued support.

This episode is brought to you by Vaultid, launched by McOvanney Financial Group.

The simplest and most affordable way to own physical gold and silver.

Physical gold is the only asset outside of the control of the government and banking

system.

They can print dollars, but they can't print gold.

Click on the promo link in the show notes or go to vaultid.blbvux.net forward slash

coffee and a mic.

On this episode of Coffee and a Mic, Ron Ones is the founder and chairman of the Underview.

He talks his recent article titled Trump's Around War as America's Suez Moment, Question

Mark, how China holds all the cards in the Iran conflict.

We talk to Tucker Carlson, and much more.

Please subscribe, like, and share this podcast.

Ladies and gentlemen, the mic is on and welcome back, Ron Ones.

Ron, my first question, and you know, you and I have known each other now for several

years.

We had many conversations, and I've never thought to ask this, so shame on me.

Have you read every single one of those books behind you?

Well, not every single one, but most of them.

In other words, you know, most of them are the books I've read, and then some of them

are the books they're sort of in the in pile.

Those are the ones more piled up in sort of stacks, that sort of thing.

You strike me as somebody that you do research all the time.

Oh, exactly.

What is your daily routine, like, Ron?

I mean, how many hours, if you had a guess, you spend doing research, reading, watching,

that's most of the time I spend.

In other words, you know, I probably spend, like, maybe a couple of hours on the website,

you know, sort of managing the website, doing some of the moderation, that sort of thing.

And then pretty much most of the rest of my day spent either reading or researching

or watching, you know, sometimes videos, documentaries, interviews, or then writing

my articles.

So I'm not really where I spend most of my time.

In fact, I usually do my reading in a local park.

It's sort of nice.

It's sort of sit on a park bench and, you know, watch the people go by and then just do

my reading.

Do you ever, I mean, can you take a vacation?

Are you able to break away?

I've sometimes taken some breaks.

But I mean, right right now, you know, especially, I mean, given the current circumstances, I

don't think I'll be taking any breaks for, you know, the immediate future.

Yeah, I try to explain to people, like, in our world.

And I'm obviously different world than you, but similar, that, you know, with everything

going on, I wouldn't leave for anything either right now.

Because it's just so much happening.

Exactly.

So, you know, your last article that you put up a few days ago, great, great article.

And in terms of what's going on with Iran, you know, I'll let you, I'll let you go into

detail about it.

But you titled it, Trump's Iran War is America's Suez moment.

Sure.

I mean, I'm not sure how many people really remember it.

In 1956, the British and French who ruled the Middle East for really a couple of generations

ended up aligning themselves with the Israelis and they launched an attack against Egypt.

The idea they had was that they would overthrow NASA, you know, the leader of Egypt.

And thereby really regained their sort of dominance over the entire Middle East.

And you know, Britain and France had come out as victors of the Second World War.

So they were still considered great military powers.

And they easily defeated the Egyptian military and gained control of Egypt.

And it seemed that they'd won the war.

But Dwight Eisenhower, the American president, was opposed to what they were doing.

He thought it would look very bad if America allowed them to overthrow the government

of the most important era of power, Egypt.

And so what he and our doing was without sending a single American soldier, he destroyed

them.

He destroyed them economically.

In other words, he imposed, he threatened them economically, imposed economic sanctions

against them.

So the pound sterling collapsed.

And basically Britain was faced with the choice of either really being destroyed economically

or surrendering.

And that's pretty much what they did.

So in other words, they ended up they and the French and the Israelis pulled out.

And it was a complete defeat on their side.

Without America having to deploy a single soldier or fire a single shot.

So the point I was making is that even though the British and French had won the war operationally

in terms of military force, they lost the war from the broader strategic perspective

because of the economic situation.

And that I think is something that could very much happen to the United States right now

with regard to Iran.

In other words, you know, we ended up being very successful initially.

So I mean, we basically launched a sneak attack where we were in the middle of negotiations

with Iranians.

And then we suddenly launched a sneak attack and assassinated their supreme leader, the

Ayatollah, and a number of their other top leaders.

In other words, their defense minister, many of their top military commanders.

I think really probably at least several dozen of their top military officers were killed

in that initial wave of missile attacks.

So in other words, from a military point of view, we were really very successful that way,

you know, with assassinations.

In other words, if you're willing to use those sorts of tactics, you can sometimes assassinate

the leaders of the other side.

And you know, I mean, somebody could assassinate America's leaders very much in the same way

if they wanted to.

The Iranians, we sort of assumed that the Iranian government would collapse, but they

didn't.

They ended up firing missiles.

They have a very large stock of ballistic missiles.

And it upfiring missiles at all of our bases in the Middle East.

And from what I've heard, they basically destroyed most of America's key bases in the

Middle East.

In other words, we've had to pull our forces out.

These are bases we've had for decades.

They represent America's military power in the Middle East.

And most of them have been destroyed.

And also we're running low on munitions.

So in other words, from what I've heard, you know, it was something that our top military

leaders had mentioned before the war even began, that we were very low in our stockpile

of munitions, but Trump ran ahead with it anyway.

And now we're, you know, even lower.

So in other words, we're in a difficult situation there.

We hope that if we simply assassinated the top leaders of the Iranian government, the

Iranian government collapse, and we bring in a puppet ruler or someone like that.

And you know, we end up controlling the country, but that's not the case.

And so we're now faced with a situation where it's unclear how we can get out of the problem.

Because the Iranians also, for example, shut down the strait of Hormuz, which is the means

by most, which about 20% of the world's oil goes.

And they've also launched attacks on all these Gulf oil states, you know, doing tremendous

damage to them.

I mean, really shattering the sort of reputation they'd built up as a very safe haven for the

world's capital, the world's elites, that sort of thing.

And it may be something that they'll never recover.

So in other words, you know, what we've really done is do tremendous damage to our own

bases and to our closest allies in the Middle East with no clear exed ramp.

In other words, from what I've heard, basically Trump has desperately been asking the Italians

to try to intercede with the Iranians and arrange negotiations for a ceasefire.

But since we've attacked them twice during the period of our previous negotiations, they

were on a say, why should we negotiate with you again?

I mean, you've basically betrayed us twice before when we were negotiating with you.

So it's simply not clear how Trump can get out of this problem that he's gotten ourselves

into.

But that's sort of something that everybody's been talking about.

In other words, you know, again, I mean, where you could say that we're winning militarily

on the operational level, we're inflicting a lot of damage on Iran.

But Iran is still firing back, and it's inflicting damage on us, and since there's no way we

can probably win the war and overthrow the government, at some point we'll simply have

to retreat.

We'll, you know, run out of munitions.

We'll have to send our forces away, and it'll be tremendous humiliating defeat for

us.

So in other words, that's something other people have been talking about.

But point I made, which was the central piece of the article, is that China has the opportunity

to really inflict a gigantic strategic defeat on the United States right now, something comparable

to what America inflicted upon Britain and France in 1956.

And that's simply a very simple issue.

China, both the Chinese government and the American government, for the last few years now,

have been saying they both expect a war to break out in the near future.

In other words, it's not certain, but both China and America think there's a good possibility

that there will be a war between those two countries in the next few years.

China also feels very strongly.

One of its top priorities is reunifying with Taiwan.

Taiwan is the breakaway province that, you know, was occupied by nationalists after the

end of the Chinese Civil War.

And it's been independent, de facto independent from China for the last 80 years.

But theoretically, it's still part of a single unified China.

And America and all the other countries in the world have accepted that.

But the Chinese, you know, are sometimes concerned if, you know, that country might eventually

go independent or something like that.

And in the fact of said, if it comes down to it, they would be willing to launch a military

invasion of that country if they felt it might be, you know, moving towards independence.

They would prefer peaceful reunification, but if necessary, they'd fight a war of it.

And a war like that would be very bloody.

It would wreck the island, it would do tremendous damage to China's reputation.

So it's something China would certainly want to avoid.

But here's the thing, America has been taking many, many hostile steps towards China in

the last few years.

In other words, embargoing microchips, everything we can to sort of attack and insult and damage

China.

We, you know, Trump launched those crazy tariff attacks against China.

And when China stood up to then Trump backed off and, you know, pretty much gave up on

it.

But I mean, still, you know, Trump's attitude has been very hostile towards China.

So with America having committed so much of its military forces right now to the war against

Iran, China is faced with a dilemma.

China imports right now a lot of its oil from Iran and the rest of it from the Persian

Gulf.

So in other words, if the war continues, China will, you know, face some difficulties with

the oil of normative import and they'd probably have to pay a lot more for it even if they

can get the oil.

Second of all, if America somehow won the war against Iran and imposed its will on that

country, subjugated it, America then would totally control the Middle East with all of

its oil.

And that would give America tremendous leverage over China and the rest of the world because

we would control the main source of oil for the world, you know, along with our own oil

and, you know, some other places like that.

So you know, therefore, if the war goes on for weeks or months, that's bad for China.

If America wins the war against Iran, that's also very bad for China.

So what China would best prefer is to ensure America's very rapid defeat.

And the point I made in the article is it would be very easy for China to do that, very

easy and do so probably without firing a single shot.

As all of us know, a couple of months ago, America imposed a blockade against Venezuela.

Venezuela is a country a thousand miles from the United States.

It has no real connection in the United States.

We imposed that blockade on Venezuela, stopping all of its oil shipments and a no fly zone

over the country because we didn't like what the country's government was doing.

Okay.

But we've said a precedent, China could simply impose a blockade on Taiwan.

The entire world recognizes that Taiwan is part of China.

It's a province of China.

China would have every right to impose an air-in-sea blockade against its own rebellious

province.

If China does that, all the estimates are that America would have absolutely no chance

of militarily breaking that embargo, breaking that blockade because China's vast military

superiority.

We're talking about an area just a couple of hundred miles from the Chinese coast and

thousands and thousands of miles away from America, also with committed our naval forces

to the war against Iran.

So in fact, there was a secret Pentagon report that some of the generals leaked that the

Pentagon's estimate is that if we did get into a shooting war with China and used our aircraft

carriers, the Chinese would be able to destroy our aircraft carriers within minutes.

In other words, within minutes, we would lose the war.

The whole war would probably last owner an hour or two.

So there's no way America would challenge a blockade of Chinese blockade of Taiwan.

It turns out Taiwan only has a couple of weeks supply of oil and natural gas, energy supplies.

Within a couple of weeks, they would run short of oil, gas, all of the supplies that they

need.

And if America then refused to commit its military to try to break that blockade, Taiwan

would have to surrender.

In fact, it turns out the old nationalist government of Taiwan, which has intermittently

been in power, still dominates the Chinese that Taiwanese military.

And there's some talk that they might probably stage a coup and take over the government.

They're much more friendly with the mainland government.

And so basically the point is if China imposes a blockade of Taiwan, Taiwan would have to

surrender.

And if China imposes that blockade, the key point is that virtually all of the world's

most advanced microchips are now produced in Taiwan.

Ninety-ninety-five percent of the top microchips are produced in Taiwan's factories.

These are the microchips that are constantly used by all of our AI companies, all these

tech giants.

These tech giants, because of the AI bubble we're now in, together they're worth probably

$20, $25 trillion, maybe even $30 trillion.

They're incredibly leveraged, they're overvalued, and they can only survive with a constant

flow of Taiwanese microchips.

If China imposed a blockade, an air-sea blockade of Taiwan, the flow of microchips would

be halted.

And I think what we would see is trillions, possibly even $10 trillion of market value,

Wall Street stock prices, disappear within a week or two.

It would be the greatest economic financial catastrophe in America's history.

It would be comparable probably to the Great Depression, much, much worse than what we

saw in the 2008 financial collapse.

I was saying that a couple of months ago in an article, and you know, your audio cut

out a second, Ron, can you hear me?

Yeah, you got muted for a second.

Nope, I can't hear you.

I don't know what happened just there.

Didn't you hear me now, gotcha?

Okay, great.

Yeah, sometimes they're committing.

So the point I was making is that if the supply of microchips coming from Taiwan was interrupted,

or people thought it might be interrupted, all these tech companies would lose gigantic

amounts of market value, probably would be $5 trillion, $10 trillion, maybe even $12 trillion

of wealth that would suddenly disappear.

The only chance of those stock prices coming back is if the microch, if the flow of microchips

were restored, and that would only happen if China agreed to end its blockade.

So in other words, basically what we would see is the worst stock market collapse probably

in American history, taking place in a period of a few days or a week or something like

that.

And with all these heavily overlavered stocks, with hedge funds, with everything like

that, it would cause an economic catastrophe for the United States.

It would be every bit of serious as what America under Eisenhower had done to Britain in

1956.

Furthermore, when I originally published an article making these points back in January,

I'm sure a lot of people thought, oh, you're making these arguments, is it really true?

You're talking through your hat?

Could it really be possible?

It turns out just over a week ago, the New York Times published a major article based

on secret American reports, government reports, the relief, saying exactly the same thing.

They said if China imposed a blockade over Taiwan, the world economy would probably lose

$10 trillion, $10 trillion.

I mean, we'd be talking about economic apocalypse for all these American companies.

So there was nothing America could do about it.

In other words, our forces are right now in Iran.

Even if we, even if we basically gave up on Iran and sent all of our forces to Taiwan,

they would easily be defeated by the Chinese military.

So we would have no hope except basically surrendering to China.

What we would have to do under those circumstances, and again, every wealthy individual who owns

wealth in the stock market, every tech executive, every billionaire would be lobbying desperately

the American government to basically give in to China's demands.

And if China basically then reestablished control over Taiwan, you know, putting in, for

example, friendly government or at least, you know, basically driving up the current, more

separate, this government, the loss to America's credibility, the tremendous national humiliation

we would suffer would really be catastrophic.

For example, South Korea, because of Trump's erratic behavior and all the terror of season

posed against South Korea, and the fact that, for example, he had ICE arrest hundreds

of South Korean engineers in the United States brutally arrest them.

I mean, it was outrageous from the point of South Korea.

South Korea has been shifting back towards China, becoming more friendly towards China.

South Korea and all these other Asian countries would basically shift their interests completely

back to China, because America would have shown itself to be a paper tiger.

In other words, if we don't have the military strength in East Asia to prevent, to break

a Chinese blockade of Taiwan, then we're a paper tiger.

Japan, for example, would probably have to basically apologize for some of the things

they had done to China in the past and would also shift back to China.

So in other words, what America would have suffered would be the sort of disastrous defeat,

strategic defeat, that Britain had suffered in the Suez crisis.

And that defeat would have been fictored by China without China firing a single shot.

Now, you know, from the point of view of a patriotic American, you know, most patriotic

Americans would be horrified over the idea of China basically defeating them, China

are the largest, most powerful geopolitical rival, defeating America in that way.

But the thing to keep in mind is that, you know, America right now, at least I think

most Americans are extremely dissatisfied with the sort of uniparty that's been running

our country for the last 20, 30, 40 years.

In other words, the Democrats and Republicans are unified in so many of the crucial issues.

And I mean, we've tried everything we can to dislodge them.

I mean, the recent Trump won the election, as he was viewed as somebody as an outsider

who could finally break the establishment democratic Republican duopoly.

But I mean, basically what he's done now in Iran is do exactly the opposite of what he promised.

In other words, he ran as the peace candidate, the America first candidate.

And he's basically become the Israel first candidate.

The whole reason he's fighting the Iranian war is because these railings told him to.

And I mean, basically that's what, for example, Marco Rubia said.

He said, you know, basically Trump couldn't stand up to these railings.

These railings demanded that he attack Iran and that's exactly what he did.

So, you know, unless we basically somehow overturn the regime running our country,

we'll be stuck in this situation indefinitely.

And I think the sort of strategic East Asian defeat America would suffer.

The tremendous humiliation plus the economic consequences that would follow would be enough,

I think, to cause basically a total collapse of the political credibility.

Of the sort of democratic Republican government that we've had.

And that includes the Trump administration, includes all the Republicans in Congress,

includes all the Democrats in Congress.

I mean, with a handful of exceptions here and there.

And so, I think basically that would have the benefit of freeing America from the sort of

establishment ruling elite that have been running the country into the ground over the last

30 or 40 years. And so, you know, I think basically the Chinese would not be doing it to help America.

They would not be doing it to save Iran.

They would be doing it out of their own self-interest to make sure that the flow of oil from

the Middle East were reestablished, to make sure that, for example,

they established their own dominance in East Asia and that they regained their rebellious

province of Taiwan. But I mean, if they took that step without firing a shot,

they could inflict disastrous fatal emiliation on what can be called the American regime that's

been running the country into the ground over the last couple of generations.

And I'm just surprised that, you know, they haven't taken that step.

I mean, the other whole point about it is it's such an easy thing to do.

I mean, there would be almost no downside. Simply, they don't have to fire a shot.

They're simply imposing the sort of blockade over their own province of Taiwan

that America had imposed over Venezuela. And there's no way American would challenge

that blockade. And I think the rest would, you know, happen very quickly.

So, I mean, that's basically, you know, the thesis I was making that article. I mean, since then,

most of what I've seen, I mean, right now, what we've done in the Middle East is I think

permanently destroy our position in that region. In other words, we've made ourselves

incredibly hated. Our bases have all been destroyed by the Iranian retaliation.

And since it doesn't look like we're going to be able to actually overthrow the Iranian regime,

which is supposedly the reason we got into this, I mean, we'll have to end up retreating without

having been at all successful and having further worn down our stocks of munitions.

And also having shown, for example, the Gulf Arab states, you know, have tremendous wealth.

I mean, they're basically a source of that they basically have been keeping the dollar

float that we can't defend them against military attack. And I think that will mean that they'll

decide, you know, the notion of basically staying in America's side doesn't make any sense.

So, I think we've really potentially destroyed our posture in the Middle East.

And if China plays their cards right, we'll have destroyed ourselves in East Asia as well.

Something that's basically what the article is focusing on.

Well, and the fact that you were able to, you know, the parallels between that time period

and now, because it sounds like to me China, you know, if in fact they were to do this,

then they just put export controls on any chips that are leaving Taiwan and economically you

starving out the United States. They'd be hurting themselves too, though, to a certain extent.

I mean, they could do the China basically. China tends to mind its own business. In other words,

China tends to mind its own business, stay in its own part of the world. It feels very strongly

about Taiwan, because Taiwan is a rebellious province. In other words, the government of Taiwan

and the government of China both agree that they're part of the same country. They disagree which

government should be ruling that combined country. And so there's absolutely no reason that China

would prevent its microchips from going to America or other parts of the world once they regain

control of Taiwan. But on the other hand, I mean, they would basically require America to behave

itself. In other words, America has been imposing all of these trade sanctions against China for

no logical reason. In other words, we have been acting like we are the rulers of the world. In other

words, if we want to say that because of the monoductant, we refuse to have other countries

middle in our hemisphere. The Monroe doctrine had a second part, which was saying that we refuse

to metal in other people's backyards. And that's exactly what we've been doing. In other words,

we've been picking a fight with China in its own backyard via Taiwan. We've been picking a fight

with Russia through Ukraine, through NATO. And we've been picking a fight in the Middle East,

partly because these rallies tell us what to do. So, so long as we minded our own business,

China would certainly mind its own business, and we're not middle in our affairs. I mean,

what they basically want to do is sell us their products. And by our products in return, which

is perfectly fine. Now, you know, if it turns out that we spend all of our money and military

supplies, very, you know, wasted all of it, I mean, right now, we spend more money on the military

than every other country in the world combined. And imagine how it would look if China imposes

a blockade on Taiwan. And despite our gigantic military budget, we can't go near it. We can't

break the blockade. I mean, we're wasting all of this money on, you know, a military that can't

even, you know, do a lot of these things. So, I mean, basically China will certainly sell us the

things that they want to sell us. If we don't want to buy it, that's perfectly fine. In other words,

if we're unwilling to buy their products, that's fine. If we don't want to buy their $8,000 cars,

and we prefer buying 20 or 30,000 dollar cars that we make ourselves, that's perfectly fine. They

don't mind it. But I mean, you know, if we try to basically say that we're going to attack them,

we're going to prevent, I mean, we fit more than 50 years ago. We basically agreed that Taiwan

was part of China. That was part of our agreement that Nixon made with China in 1972. And since then,

we've backed away from that agreement. I mean, Trump, for example, just sold Taiwan 11 billion

dollars of weaponry, including missiles that Taiwan could use to hit Chinese cities. How would we

feel if the Chinese sold missiles to, for example, Mexico or Cuba that could hit American cities?

I mean, that's the sort of thing we've been doing that has basically been a series of very hostile

unfriendly acts towards China, which is exactly the reason China might want to impose a

blockade on Taiwan and basically bring us down over that. I mean, it's such an insane thing we've

been doing. The fact that all of our tech companies are entirely dependent on microchips,

produced in a province of China that's right off the Chinese shore.

At the time, we're trying to pick a fight with China is just utterly insane. And when countries do

insane things, sometimes bad things happen to them down the road. So it sounds, I mean, China is,

would you say China is the wild card in this situation? Or I mean, how would you, it's simplified,

describe it, China, what the world, the way I'd put it is China has all the cards in this situation.

In other words, China right now, because of our attack on Iran are totally illegal,

unprovoked attack on Iran. Iran has blocked the streets of Hormuz. And so all the oil, the oil

on natural gas that normally flows to the rest of the world, including China, can't go out. So

in other words, China will have to pay much higher prices. They'll have to work out in the

arrangement, buying more oil from Russia. Prices will go up, prices will go up for India, prices will

go up for all the other countries in the world, because we started a war in the Middle East.

And not only that, but the Iranians, for example, have retaliated with drone attacks,

and have shut down the oil, the natural gas facilities in Qatar. So in other words,

the world's natural gas supplies have been cut off. I mean, Europe will be tremendously hurt by

this. Far more damage than China. I mean, Europe is theoretically our friend. I mean, they're

theoretically our closest allies. And we've inflicted tremendous economic damage on Europe.

The best way to alleviate the damage is for America to basically call off the war in Iran.

To make recompense for the fact that we'd attack them illegally, we'd launch to Pearl Harbor

style attack against them, assassinated some of their top leaders. And then in turn,

the Iranians will allow the flow of oil and natural gas to resume. And Europe will be saved

economically, and China can go back to buying this gas. So I mean, it's just insane what we've

been doing. I mean, when you go around attacking all of these other countries in the world,

I mean, attacking Russia through the Ukraine, attacking Iran, trying to pick a fight with China

its own backyard. I mean, eventually you run into very serious problems. And I think certainly

would serve us right if the Chinese inflicted tremendous economic damage against us without

firing a single shot. And I think we'll teach us a lesson. Maybe we'd start to be more responsible

in the future. Are you surprised that the Iranian government has not collapsed? Oh, not at all.

I mean, it was what we the idea we had was just utterly insane. In other words, there are small

numbers, not small, I mean, probably hundreds of thousands of Iranian exiles. I mean,

basically something like one in 1000 Iranians, 0.1% of Iranians, generally the wealthiest ones

who supported the Shah fled the country after this new government came into power about 45, 50

years ago. And naturally, they've been trying to get America and other countries to overthrow

the existing governments so they can go back into power. I mean, exiles always do that sort of

thing. And so, you know, the Iranian exiles are very happy that we attack the Iranian government.

But virtually all the ordinary Iranians support their government. I mean, for example, you know,

the American media is so utterly dishonest. For example, from what I've heard, I don't watch TV,

but what I've heard, all of the cable news channels have been showing large demonstrations by

Iranians against the Iranian government, you know, praising what we've done. Those demonstrations have

been places like Los Angeles or parts of Canada where a lot of Iranian exiles live. And for example,

I think Los Angeles demonstration had three or four hundred people marching. So in other words,

the television camera makes it look huge. And we're talking about three or four or five hundred

people. Meanwhile, a million Iranians have marched on the other side. For example, one of the

missile strikes either we are the Iranian or either we are the Israelis launched, destroyed a

girl's elementary school and killed 165 young girls in that country. How would we feel

if somebody had launched a sneak attack against us when we were in the middle of negotiations,

totally unprovoked pearl harbor sniped sneak attack, killed some of our top leaders,

and then fired a missile that killed 165 young American girls at an elementary school.

I mean, that's totally outrageous. And that's the reason the Iranians are refusing to negotiate

right now. In other words, they basically want America to make sufficient concessions.

This sort of thing won't happen in the future. And they're basically they've decided to drive

America out of the Middle East. And by destroying all of our military bases, I think that's probably

what they're done. In other words, our military base is one problem we have right now,

which our government covers up. We again spend as much money on the military each year

as every other country in the world. In fact, with Trump's new budget increase,

it's more than every other country in the world. So I mean, we probably spend 30 times,

50 times more per year than the Iranians do. We still have not been able to build hypersonic

missiles. We've tried for 10 years. We have not been able to successfully build and deploy

hypersonic missiles, which all these other countries have. Because, you know, we have a very

corrupt military establishment that just takes the money for profit rather than builds good weapons.

Second of all, we don't have effective air defenses. In other words, our air defenses are

totally ineffective. So when the Iranians filed their ballistic missiles at these bases,

our air defenses didn't work. They failed. So in other words, you know, all these Iranian

missiles hit the bases, destroyed the bases, and we've lost our bases in the region. And,

you know, given the fact that we were unsuccessful in defending these air wealthy Arab oil states that

gave us the right to have those bases, I mean, the reason they let us put the bases in those

countries is we told them we would defend you against attack. We failed. If you hire somebody

as a bodyguard and he proves to be a total failure, you stop paying. And that's exactly what

probably these countries, these Arab oil sheath dens, these wealthy world sheath dens,

we'll do. I mean, we basically failed to defend them. So why would they let us keep our bases

in their country in the future? They probably won't. So I mean, what we'll probably end up doing,

there's I think a very good chance we'll be driven out of the Middle East. And in terms of

overthrowing the government around, there was never any chance of that. In other words, we had

this idea that if we assassinated the top leaders of that government and a sneak attack,

and we were very successful, we've gotten good at assassinating people over the last few years.

So if we assassinate these top leaders with a sneak attack, the government would collapse. Now,

you know, let's look at another one. If somebody launched a sneak attack against the United States,

and assassinated some of our top leaders, would that cause America to collapse? No, I mean,

to be honest, probably an awful lot of Americans would be happy at that. And would say, oh, we'll

get some better leaders than the ones we have. I mean, look, supposedly, let me just put it in

very simple terms. If somebody fired a missile into Congress and killed every single member of

Congress, would that cause the collapse of the United States? No, probably an awful lot of

Americans would say, it'll help the United States. America will recover. America will be stronger

than ever if we've lost these worthless corrupt members of Congress. So in other words, you know,

we certainly, there might be changes in our government, but it wouldn't cause the collapse of

America. And the last thing that would happen is that we would surrender our country to the control

of the other country that had attacked us that way. I mean, the notion of the Iranians surrendering

to America is just utterly ridiculous. I mean, there was no chance of that. I mean, so far,

it's been a dismal failure. Again, I mean, we have a strong, we certainly have a stronger

military than the Iranians. There's no doubt about that. I mean, you know, if you spend 50 times

more money than another country, you're going to have a stronger military. But I mean, you know,

we can't stop the Iranians from destroying our bases. So in other words, we're destroying

Iranian infrastructure and they're destroying our infrastructure. And that will go on for a while.

And we won't end up achieving any of our strategic objectives. So we'll have to leave. And what

happens when we leave will have lost the war. So in other words, unless we can win the war,

we've lost the war. And I can't see any way we can win the war because our objective was

overthrowing the Iranian government and simply won't happen. At least I'd be very surprised if

it does happen. What do you think the future of Israel is then? I think it's really pretty bleak.

I mean, the whole thing is everybody knows right now that the only reason we attacked Iran was

the Israeli's forced testing. In other words, Marco Rupi said exactly that. I mean, you know,

it's not even him. I mean, for example, Tucker Carlson, Tucker Carlson is very close to Donald

Trump. He was meeting with Donald Trump, urging him not to get involved in this crazy Iran war.

And on his podcast, I mean, he basically said, you know, the Israeli's forced us to do it.

And Marco Rupi, I mean, a couple of days later, said exactly the same thing. Marco Rupi is our

secretary of state and our national security advisor. I mean, he said it to I think it was the

New York Times. So, you know, it's not a secret. I mean, basically Israel controls the American

government. It's very simple. America is not a sovereign nation. We are a colony of Israel.

And in fact, in Tucker Carlson is the most prominent conservative media figure in America.

And he made some very strong and provocative statements in his most recent show. I mean,

anybody who has not seen it, it's about two hours long, every minute is worth it. It's one of

this most important shows. He said, basically, the Israelis ordered us to attack Iran. It was in

Israel's interests, not in America's interests. It was contrary to the will of 80% of the American

people. There was only 20% support for America for an attack. Trump had run for the presidency

on a promise not to get involved in any more wars. He'd violated that completely. It was

an idiotic thing to do, but the Israelis ordered him to do it. And as Tucker Carlson said,

there were basically three possible options. One option is to go along with the attack,

which is what we did. The second option is basically for America to sort of do everything

we can to try to persuade the Israelis not to do it. And we tried and failed. In other words,

we tried to stop the Israelis from doing it. They went ahead with them and forced their

students to do it. And then the third option that Carlson said is for America to simply say,

no, we won't let you go ahead with the attack to tell them no. And what Carlson said is the last

president who was willing to say no to the Israelis was 63 years ago, John F. Kennedy when he

said no. And he was assassinated a year later because John F. Kennedy had refused to allow these

Israelis to develop nuclear weapons. He made a major point. He was against, he was against

proliferation. He basically put tremendous pressure on the Israeli government saying we will not

let you develop nuclear weapons. We will stop it. We will impose economic sanctions. We will take

every step necessary. And then he was killed. And more and more people are coming to the inclusion

that these Israelis killed our president. And in fact, Carlson said in his, you know, in his

presentation, I urge everyone to listen to him, he said, since that time, no American president

has been willing to say no to these Israelis for a variety of different reasons, including

the fact that there were of what happened to John F. Kennedy. Not only that, but a John Kirky

is a long time CIA officer and really famed whistleblower. He was one of the most important

nine or eleven whistleblowers. He, you know, developed a strong reputation that way. He just came

out with an interview a few days ago saying the same thing that he is convinced that these

Israelis assassinated John F. Kennedy 63 years ago in Dallas. They were involved. Not only that,

but he said that there are thousands of JFK files in that the American government still has that

have not been released, that have not been declassified, even though the law was passed, saying that

they all had to be released and Trump promised that they were all released. He said thousands of them

not been released. And those files that have been kept back show very clearly that it was these

Israelis and the Mossad that killed John F. Kennedy. So what happens to Israel when the Americans

more and more Americans start to realize that we are not a sovereign nation, that Israel assassinated

our president 63 years ago. And that since that time, we have been increasingly under the control

of a foreign country. I mean, America, we're coming on the 250th anniversary of the United States,

1776. This is the 200th anniversary, 250th anniversary year. I think Americans would prefer to be

independent, would prefer to have a sovereign nation, rather than be under the control of a foreign

power on the other side of the world, a foreign power that assassinate our own leaders. And another

thing I should point out, which I mentioned in that article as well, is the Charlie Kirk was one of

the most influential, popular, younger conservative leaders in America. He was vehemently against the

Iran war. And there are tweets of his, there are statements of his saying it's just insane policy.

It would be crazy for America to do. And if he were alive today, it's quite possible that his

influence would have been enough to prevent Trump from going along with this crazy war, which has

been so damaging. He was assassinated. And I think there's a great deal of evidence he was

assassinated by these railways for exactly that reason. So how do some, how do the American people

feel about a foreign country that kills our leaders and controls our government? I don't think

they take very kindly to that. I think most Americans would rather have an independent country

of their own. And I think that puts Israel in a very dangerous situation. In other words, they

basically have been taking more and more arrogant steps, acting in a more and more irresponsible

and arrogant way. And it's very difficult for a country of seven million people on the other

side of the world to permanently control a superpower of 350, 340, 350 million people. I mean,

we're talking about a country with 2% of our population. Do Americans really want to be ruled

by foreigners that way? I mean, isn't that what 1776 was all about? And I mean, basically,

America that time, the American, the 13 colonies were colonies of Britain. We were closely tied

with Britain. We had deep connections with Britain. Most Americans, I mean, George Washington

always thought of himself as a British subject up until the time that he decided that independence

was necessary. And that's very different, I think, than the way most Americans feel about being

ruled by a country on the other side of the world that does not have that connection to nearly any

Americans. And so I think Israel has just been taking some very, very risky steps in this way.

I mean, just to give you one more example, then, you know, let you get a word you're not

wise. I mean, basically, Israel had demanded that we attack and destroy Iran. And the reason they

said it is not that they thought the Iranians were building a nuclear weapon, but Iran is a large

regional power. Israel wants to be the unchallenged hegemon of the entire Middle East, to control

the entire Middle East, to seize the territory from all these other countries, to do whatever it

wants. If Iran is a major power, Israel can't get away with that. So, Israel basically ordered

their American lackey to attack and destroy Iran. And that's basically what we're trying to do

right now. Another major regional power is Turkey. And a former prime minister of Israel,

just a week or two ago, went public and said, oh, we have to destroy Turkey now. Turkey is now

our main enemy. Turkey is even stronger and more effective than Iran. So, the next thing we have

to do after destroying Iran is destroying Turkey. I mean, when you go around attacking and destroying

all of your neighbors, when you claim that you have a god-given right to seize all of the territory,

that's you probably saw the Tucker Carlson interview with Mike Huckabee, you know, the American

ambassador to Israel. I mean, basically, Huckabee and people like him believe that Israel has the

god-given right, not only to the West Bank and Gaza, but also to Jordan, all of Syria,

all of Lebanon, most of Iraq, much of Egypt, and much of Saudi Arabia. So, in other words,

basically, Israel has the god-given right to the entire Middle East. And I don't think those

other Middle Eastern powers really agree with that. And so, you know, if Americans really will be

interesting to see what happens, if more and more Americans start to believe that Israel had killed

our president, John F. Kennedy. I mean, how would Americans feel about another country that

assassinated our own president? I don't think they would very happy about that. Now, you know,

this is something I'd never suspected that there was anything suspicious. I'd never really

suspected. I'd never given any thought to the Kennedy assassination until about 12, 15 years

ago. As I started looking into it, it seemed that there was very strong evidence that these

railers had killed Kennedy. But it was something so explosive, so controversial, that virtually none of

the people involved in the JFK, you know, conspiracy community had written all these books about

the Kennedy session and ever dared even consider that idea. I mean, 99% of them until a few years ago

never dared. But more and more people are seeing that likely, for example, just in the last year or

so I mean, something like Jeffrey Sachs, you know, a very, very respectable academic figure at Columbia

University. Basically, a few weeks ago, he said exactly the same thing. He pointed out that, you

know, Kennedy, John F. Kennedy, who, you know, he considers one of his great personal heroes,

had made a tremendous effort to stop these railers from getting a nuclear weapon. And he'd been

assassinated. And, you know, Sachs said maybe one reason Trump has to do what these railers tell

him to do is Trump knows the lesson of John F. Kennedy. And so more and more people are taking

that position, you know, it's not just fringe people. I mean, it's people like Tucker Carlson,

like Jeffrey Sachs, and you know, once those ideas get into wider circulation, I don't think Americans

will be very happy about that and also make people start wondering who really attacked us in 9-11.

And, you know, who did some of these other things against us recently? And, you know, I just think

if you're a country of 7 million people doing things like that to a country of 340 or 350 million

people is a very dangerous road to follow. I mean, you do it if you're incredibly arrogant

and you're overconfident, but sometimes pride goes before or fall. So I mean, I think, you know,

it's interesting to see where things will go, but I think these railers may have taken some

very, very dangerous steps by pushing their luck just a little bit too far.

I want to ask you, probably won't have time to talk about all your other articles, but I want to

ask about the article you wrote a couple weeks back with American Provda, Nick Fuentes, Tucker Carlson,

Jeffrey Epstein, and Pete Tegate. Oh, exactly. I mean, with that story, it's really astonishing.

In other words, you know, again, there's been all this controversy right now going on about

the Jeffrey Epstein case and everything like that. I'm not sure how many people remember Pete Tegate,

but it was this major scandal of, it probably popped up in 2016 and last in 2017,

where there really seemed to be very, very suspicious evidence in emails about a pedophilia ring

at the top ranks of the Democratic Party and to some extent, the Republican Party. I mean,

it seemed very solidly documented. I mean, there were some, you know, again, not solid proof,

but extremely suspicious evidence that, you know, there was basically pedophilia ring there.

Now, you know, at the time I thought, you know, the evidence seems pretty strong, but I simply

wasn't sufficiently confident about it at the time to write anything about it. In other words,

I certainly talked about it, discussed it with people. I thought it was probably true, but I didn't

think, you know, I hadn't overcome the hump, but then the Jeffrey Epstein case broke a couple of

years later and I was just astonished. In other words, I'd never believed any of these stories

circulating about the Jeffrey Epstein case. In other words, you know, he sounded like a James Bond

villain. I mean, we're talking about somebody running a gigantic sex-traffing blackmail ring

who had the largest mansion in New York City, who had a private island, who had a plane called

Lolita Express, who was involved with all of these top elite billionaires and other people. I mean,

you know, those stories started circulating on the internet. I never believed a word of it.

I never clicked any of the links. It seemed too outlandish and suddenly was on the front page of

the New York Times. And so when that happened, I really decided, yes, you know, there'd been so much

more evidence for Pizzagate. I thought Pizzagate was probably true. And in fact, I wrote an article

combining those issues together along with some other things. Now, here's what shocked me about

the Pete about the Jeffrey Epstein case, you know, with this huge dump of emails. You know, again,

there'd been stories about Epstein being involved in pedophilia. And I was skeptical of that. In

other words, I hadn't seen any solid evidence. It sounded like almost all the young women he was,

you know, involved in sex-traffing it. You know, they were 15, 16, 17, so it was illegal. I mean,

he was clearly running a blackmail operation, but that's very different than pedophilia.

Pedophilia were talking five or six year olds. And I just hadn't seen any evidence of pedophilia.

And in fact, Nick Fuentes, for example, also was pretty skeptical. He was a popular

right-wing podcaster. And he did a couple of shows I watched. There had been a few emails that seemed

to hint at pedophilia, you know, for example, there was talk of like young children. And he showed that

they were basically mischaracterized. In other words, you know, the emails basically were wrong in

that way. And so I thought, yeah, you know, he's debunked it. And then I watched a Tucker Carlson

show on the same subject. It turns out the Jeffrey Epstein emails that were released,

the word pizza was used 911 times, 911 times in an extremely suspicious manner.

Now pizza with the pizza gate pedophilia ring, the reason it was called pizza gate is pizza was a

code word for pedophilia, along with some of the other code words. And when we have the Jeffrey

Epstein ring, using the word pizza 911 times, not only that, it turns out they were using the word

pizza. And exactly the same time the pizza gate ring was using it. And as soon as the pizza gate

story broke and gotten headlines, they stopped using the term pizza. And the way they were using

the term pizza, I mean, they, for example, said, are you up for pizza and grape soda? Now how many

of these billionaires really spend all the time in emails talking about pizza and grape soda?

And all these other things, I mean, they were using other code words. Now, you know, there's no

proof of what those code words were for. But when you're using code words like that, when you have

a sex trafficking ring involving just re-upstate, using the word pizza as a code word for something

clearly very explosive and illegal. And at exactly the same time, you have a pedophilia ring,

using the word pizza as a code word for pedophilia. It's pretty obvious what they were talking about.

And so, you know, we're really talking about basically this is how our government is controlled.

In other words, the elites, these billionaires, these top public officials, these top elected

officials, these top media figures, I'm not saying all of them are involved in the pedophilia ring.

Probably it's only a fraction of them. Probably most of them were involved just with some of the

underage girls that Jeffrey Epson had. Some of them were being blackmailed in other ways. Epstein

was peddling influence. But I mean, when you use the word pizza, which is a code word typically for

pedophilia, 911 times in the email, I think it's clear what you were talking about. Furthermore,

millions of emails have not yet been released. And in fact, Pam Bondi, our attorney general,

she was quoted a couple of times as saying that there are thousands of videos showing young

children, basically pedophilia cases, that have not been released. And so putting that all together,

we are talking about a pedophilia ring controlling our government. And for example, when you want to

ask, for example, why are government does certain things that seem to make no sense to the ordinary

American people? Why they promise to do certain things when they're running for office and do

exactly the opposite when they're elected? I think one of the possible answers. I mean, certainly

many of the being bribed by campaign contributions, many of them being coerced by the media,

but I think a lot of them are being blackmailed. And when you look at what they're being blackmailed

for, I think, a lot of his pedophilia. I mean, give you one example. That's a classic case. I mean,

it's on paper. The longest serving Republican Speaker of the House in American history was Dennis

Hastery. He spent much of that time as the highest ranking Republican in America. He was third in

line to the presidency. In other words, the Speaker of the House, third in line to the presidency.

All the media reports I always read about him. He was basically a former gym coach.

There was nothing special about him. Nobody seemed to think he was all that bright. Nobody seemed

to think he was charismatic or dynamic. It's always sort of wondered, how did he get to be

speaking of the House? How did he get to be the top Republican in America? And then after he left

office, years later, it came out he'd been involved in a lifelong child molestation ring. He was

sent to prison. And the judge basically denounced him as one of the worst child molesters he'd ever

come across. And so when we're talking about, look, I don't think most Americans are child

molesters. I don't think even 1% of Americans are child molesters. I doubt if it's even more than

one tenth of 1%. So we're talking about one in 1,000 people, one in 2,000 people, one in 3,000

people. What are the odds that a long-term child molester is the speaker is the Republican speaker

of the House and the third ranking political figure in America. I mean, I think the odds are

very much against it. So the reason he became speaker of the House was that since they had the goods

on him, the blackmail goods on him, he was totally under their control. Whose control he was under?

Who knows? I mean, maybe it was different people shared the blackmail. But I mean, they basically

control them. He was a puppet. And that's true of so many of our other political leaders. They're

basically puppets in the hands of shadowy figures, shadowy government. Who knows who controls them?

But they're not our leaders. And when you ask yourself, why has America have all these problems

in the last 10 or 20 or 30 years? Why are streets terrible? Why are we having all these political

difficulties? Why is our society doing that badly? If we have elected officials who are not

our elected officials, but under the control of other people whose interests may not be our own,

I think that explains why our country has all these problems.

You know, I was talking to a, excuse me, a friend of mine about this, you know, in terms of like

that you've seen the decay in all these cities, every city. And you know, I brought up the question

of what is the point of Iran? And people, you know, you had people on the right, oh, wow,

you know, terror and it's, you've heard all, I mean, I'm not going to tell you anything

or you don't, you haven't heard a million times. And I said, okay, I'm not the smartest guy here.

And I'm, you know, not claiming that, not intellectual, but let's just look at this rationally

for a second. Do you really think if they were to over topple the government that terror would

just end? This is not a good guy's bad guys. And you're going to get a kick out of this,

Ron, I've been using the analogy, this is not a superhero movie. This is not the Avengers.

But to your point, you know, what will happen in Iran? You know, I mean, I don't know,

but in terms of, well, they, well, they toppled the regime to what you said, probably not. So

a lot of money's going to get spent. A lot of people are going to die. And the cities in the

United States a year from now will be more shaped than what they are today. I mean, look at, for

example, Tucker Carlson, as somebody who's spent, he's been in politics for 30, 35 years. I mean,

he started off as a neocon. He was one of the main writers at the weekly standard, Bill Christel's

weekly standard. He spent his early curves or neocon. He was a cheerleader leader for the Iraq war.

He's emphasized that in all of his talks. I mean, he basically was in that crowd. And he

knows perfectly well. And he said so in this recent show, the whole reason we thought the Iraq war

is because Israel wanted us to fight the Iraq war because Israel viewed Iraq, Saddam Hussein's

Iraq as a dangerous regional rival. So they just ordered America to destroy Iraq just like they've

ordered us to destroy Iran. We ended up spending $6 trillion on that war on those wars,

$6 trillion. Now, $6 trillion can do a lot of good things for the American people that spent at

home. We spent it all overseas. That's the reason Trump was elected. One of the main reasons

Trump got the nomination in 2016 is he denounced the Iraq war as being a disaster for the country.

He was debating all the other Republicans. All the other Republicans were shocked by that.

They all supported the Iraq war. Trump defeated them all. Trump ran as the candidate saying he will

basically avoid starting foreign wars. He will spend the money at home. He will be the America first

candidate. And unfortunately, the Israelis told him we won't let you do that. You're the Israel

first candidate. And for various reasons, maybe blackmail, maybe funding, maybe they didn't want

to suffer the fate of John F. Kennedy. I mean, he basically said, you know, I'll have to do what you

want. And so, you know, what we're talking about is we're not a sovereign country. In other words,

you know, if you're a colony of another country, I mean, your leaders are not under your own

control. And if your country has all sorts of problems, you shouldn't be surprised because they're

not acting on behalf of you, they're acting on behalf of other people. And I'm not saying it's only

Israeli. Of all these other lobbies, for example, the military industrial complex, all these corporations,

where does the trillion dollars we spent on the military defense go every year? It goes to all these

corrupt contractors that can't even produce weapons that work. So I mean, you know, it's sort of

we have an awful lot of problems right now. And, you know, I mean, when Trump ran the first time,

I thought, well, you know, there's some things he says I don't like, but there are many things he

says I do like. And, you know, I didn't vote for him. I probably was glad to see him win. And, you

know, the reason he won, the reason he defeated both the Democrats and the Republicans was people

thought he would be different. And now he's turned out to be exactly the same. I mean, he's not

an independent leader is under foreign control. And we still have Russia and Ukraine going on

through all this wrong. Exactly. Exactly. Exactly. I mean, he basically came to power saying that he

would make peace in 24 hours. It's been, you know, over a year and we still don't have peace there.

I mean, it's simply, you know, Trump is basically somebody and also Trump constantly changes what he

says. He switches back and forth every day. It's something different. And I mean, you know, I don't

know why he's having all these problems. Maybe it's the same problems that Biden had who just

wasn't in touch with things during the last year or two of his presidency. But I mean, we're just

in a terrible position. I mean, basically, our bases in the Middle East have now been destroyed

by the Iranians. I mean, is that what we wanted? We spent years building up that military presence

in the Middle East and our bases have been destroyed. So I mean, what did we get out of this war?

What do we get out of any war, Ron? No. I mean, you know, again, if we have to fight a war,

we have to fight a war. But I mean, going to the other side of the world to attack countries that

have never attacked us just because we've been ordered to do that. And the people ordered to also

buy up all the media channels. So for example, all these people you're talking about, they watch Fox

News or they watch some of the other channels. And anybody watches them basically just getting a

totally distorted view of things. In other words, remember, when Trump ran for office the first time,

Fox News was dead set against him. Fox News blasted him from top to bottom.

But I mean, he was saying things that the American people supported. So people voted for him.

You know, in all the years that you've been doing this, researching, writing,

what is your, how does this compare, like, what is your level of concern right now just to the

state of the night of the country? Well, I mean, it'd be perfect. Honestly, it's gotten steadily

worse over the years. I mean, right now, we're basically in war. I mean, one problem right now

is the Iranians are firing their ballistic missiles at our bases and also at Israel. I mean,

Israel's air defenses don't work. So the Iranians are blasting Israel constantly because

Israel will attack them. In other words, if you attack Iran, is it so surprising that the Iranians

attack you back? A lot of people are very concerned that these rallies may launch a nuclear attack

against Iran. In other words, there's no way they can stop the Iranians from firing these missiles

into Israel. So they're only way they can do anything is maybe use nuclear weapons. Nuclear

weapons have not been used for over 80 years now. Once you let the nuclear genie out of the back,

anything can happen. And I mean, there's much more of a chance of a nuclear war breaking up.

That's just very important thing. Do you think somebody would cross that threshold though, Ron?

There are a lot of people whose opinion I trust are very concerned that Israel might do that. In

other words, Israel had thought that with America's help, they could topple the government of Iran,

defeat it, break it up into pieces, destroy it as a rival. And so far, it's not working. I mean,

maybe they're running governmental collapse. But right now, the Iranians are firing their missiles

into Israel. Israel doesn't like being hit by missiles. In other words, it's fine for these

railroads to go and assassinate other leaders. It's fine for Israel to fire its missiles in other

countries, but Israel doesn't like the idea of those countries retaliating. And since the Israeli

air defenses don't work, the only thing they can do is force the Iranians to stop. And I think

the only way they can force them to stop is basically either threatening or using a nuclear weapon.

So I mean, people are concerned about that. Maybe it'll happen, maybe it won't. I mean, I'm not saying

there's a better than 50-50 chance it'll happen. But this is exactly the reason John F. Kennedy

was absolutely opposed to allowing these railroads to have nuclear weapons. He was very concerned

they would behave in exactly this fashion. And that's probably why he was killed. And so, you know,

now we're seeing the consequences of something that happened, you know, more than 60 years ago.

I think if I had the means and I was a, you know, just a regular person in Tel Aviv, I'd be

packing up and leaving. A lot of people are doing that. A lot of people are doing that. I mean,

it's simply, you know, when you have a totally irrational government, I mean, you know,

the end result sometimes ends up being very bad for it and bad for the people under that government.

Working people find your own. Oh, the website is uns.com, the uns review. And you know, we have a mix

of things, all sorts of different views that are not found in the mainstream media from all

different perspectives. And my own articles cover the sort of ground. So I mean, now that we're

talking about a war, you know, and one thing I should say is I've been writing about the issue of

what happened to John of Kennedy and who probably killed him since 2018. I thought it was probably the

case for a few years before that, but 2018 I began writing about. So it's been eight years I've

been writing that very, very, very few people in the rest of the world were even willing to consider

that possibility back then. But now we have Tucker Carlson pretty much saying or implying that

on his own show. We have Jeffrey Sachs, one of the most reputable mainstream academics in America,

taking pretty much the same position in some of his public comments. We have a couple of CIA officers

saying that one of whom says that there are thousands of secret government documents, JFK

documents, they've still not been released that provide the evidence that these rallies killed

our president. And I think more and more people are starting to realize that's probably what happened.

And once people realize that our government can seal the truth of the John of Kennedy assassination

was probably the most famous single event of the 20th century. Certainly one of the most famous,

along with a couple of others, you know, it was the most famous assassination in the history of the

world. I mean, our president had been killed, you know, thousands and thousands of books have

been written about it. If people find out that it was the government of Israel that probably killed

them and everybody in our media and in our government that even in the JFK conspiracy community,

people wrote all those conspiracy books had been keeping its secret for 60 years because it was

too explosive. I think people will then start wondering what other secrets are being kept back.

And that may lead to some other, you know, revelations.

That's last quick question. Have you already started crafting up your article from Monday?

And if you have, do you mind sharing what it's going to about?

Sure, I'm working on another article. It's basically just in some ways it's putting together a

number of these different things. In other words, arguing that there's a direct connection

between some of these scandals going on, Jeffrey Epstein, Pizzagay, JFK 9-11 and the Ron War.

In other words, you know, that's pretty much what Jeffrey Epstein, what Jeffrey Sachs and what

Tucker Carlson have said. They said, the reason we're at war with the Ron is partly because of

the fact that JFK got assassinated 63 years ago. And so, you know, there's a connection between

those things. And once people start seeing the connection, they start to look at other possible

connections. Ron, as always, I enjoy our conversations. And for those that are listening, watching,

I put all my, all my shows up early from my paid subscribers on Substack. So if you consider

supporting my work, you know, please consider becoming a paid subscriber. If not, I put on YouTube

and Rumble. Apple, like, share, comment. I read all the comments. And Ron, I'm sure it won't be

that long before we speak again. Hey, thanks for having me. Mike Drop.

And save up to 80% off everything home.