America's Capitulation - Political Disaster | Israel's VILE 'LeaderSS' | US - Iran MoU Breakdown

G'day legends, I hope you're having a wonderful day, a fantastic start to your week and you had a brilliant weekend. I've been off YouTube for a few days because I've been down with a nasty cold. For those who know I went through chemotherapy last year and that just makes me more vulnerable to picking up something like this. So I've had a few days off but I'm hoping I can push through this video in the next couple of days until I am better. But today's video will be an update on the situation. We haven't spoken about Israel, US, Iran for the best part of a week so I'll update you on everything around this. Not only the Memorandum of Understanding, it being signed in Versailles which is unbelievably ironic for the situation we are seeing. What's in that now that we have the full text, the current status of that, talks in Switzerland between delegations, mediators from Pakistan. We'll give an update on all of this. We'll talk about Lebanon, the sticking point of Lebanon and how I think some people actually need to google definition of ceasefire. This does not mean that well I'm not pulling the trigger but my tank is still moving forwards. Nor does ceasefire mean that it's no we can maintain the current level of operations, it's not increasing that level. So full update on that and we need to talk about is the US having a change of position. We've seen JD Vance and Trump of course massively pro-Israel, criticizing Israel and what my take on that actually is. And today we've had Netanyahu talking about the delegitimization of Israel and then I want to overlay this with some comments made and publicized by people in his own cabinet that he appointed and go well I wonder why. So we do have a long video to go over today, a lot in this being the 22nd of June. Today is the 85th anniversary of Operation Barbarossa of course where Nazi Germany moved in Soviet Union and well we know the rest of the history there over those numbers of years. And I think this is important to point out because this is the most costly, the most devastating offensive operation in human history. It shows the devastation, the nightmare of when great states go head-to-head and the millions upon millions who then were slaughtered. The tens of millions and the tens and the hundreds of millions who then suffered from these actions and why we need to avoid great state wars and conflicts and how this can be dragged in with minor starts into then global scale and consequences. So let's start here and we have to talk about what the security minister of Ben-Gavir has said, what he has publicly said about Lebanon, about mothers, about the future here. But first I just want to step back and have a look at what Bibi Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, has said in a speech that he has posted today and obviously they are massively monitoring the comments on this because they were all positive. But I pledge to you we'll fight the battle of antisemitism around the world, we'll fight on the eighth front, the battle against delegitimization, the battle against that is directed against the Jewish people. This is false or malicious statements against someone to destroy reputation. But this delegitimization, I want to focus on this and then talk about Ben-Gavir's statements and go, well at what point if Israel is suffering a crisis of delegitimization, at what point do you go, are we contributing any actions of which may be causing a delegitimization? And he urges the diaspora people in America to stand up, don't count, don't be afraid and fight back. And then of course we speak about delegitimization but then we see things like this. Now this is not some outside minister somewhere, no, no, no, this is a high level Israel's security minister, okay. Seemingly every time I click on something translate from Hebrew to English I think of that are we the baddies mean. But delegitimization, well things like this, what responsibility do you take of this? If I saw that Australia was being delegitimized on the world stage and the finance minister or the security minister were operating like Smotrich or Ben-Gavir do, well I wouldn't be going at everyone else. At what point do you consider genocide, slaughter, the use of sex or water or food as a weapon as per the UN has said, compromising operations here, there and everywhere, meddling in huge domestic affairs, standing in front of the UN, ripping up the UN charter, at what point does the senior members of the state of Israel look and go maybe some of the delegitimization isn't some historic anti-Semitism that is apparently baked into everyone who had up until 12 months ago a positive view of Israel that has now changed. Maybe it's response to actions. And I think that people like Ben-Gavir, Smotrich, Bibi Netanyahu are the most dangerous people since the mid-40s, most dangerous people for the Jewish people. Let's look at what Ben-Gavir has said and that he's still holding a position in government after wearing a noose as a lapel pin, an apartheid law, his missus baking him a cake for his birthday with the noose on it, he's a fat disgusting pig of a man. And you know that I don't like ad hominem attacks but I'll make an exception for this modern day SS officer who is just more poorly dressed and re-branded with a different hat. For every tear of an Israeli mother, a thousand Lebanese mothers must weep. All of Lebanon must burn. Again repeats later that all of Lebanon must burn, that we must make a thousand Lebanese mothers weep for every tear of an Israeli mother. Enough with the ping-pong in the Middle East. You don't win with measured responses in a straight. You need to go berserk to obliterate. Again, I don't need to tell anyone who watches my channel, those who have a position of humanity first, rhetoric like this is absolutely absurd. It has no place in countries that want to call themselves civilized, especially from sitting ministers appointed by a democratically elected prime minister of Netanyahu. Now, why do I have an asterisk democratically elected? Because in that democratic system, well, they get into those positions from the population. If a dictator said something as radical as this, I could say, well, there's some excuse here because they, you know, you don't get to select this. But one of the main criticisms above Netanyahu and Netanyahu is before. I haven't seen him push back against this statement, but one of the main criticisms from the society that put him in power is that he is too moderate. Now, this Ben Giver guy, you might've heard of him before, but he's the one we've seen videos mocking, taunting, threatening Australian humanitarian volunteers on the flotillas across of others who attempted to go to Gaza. These are Australian citizens, American citizens, British citizens, and he's there making a video of mockery and taunting. They were held as prisoners of war and they are not such. If you're going to say things like this publicly on Twitter, on X in front of the entire world, what concerns me, what scares me is your actions that would be in private or within a setting that you can control. So if you're willing to say this on Twitter, you're the security minister. If there's actions that aren't filmed in a jail or controlled setting, et cetera, what does that look like? iPhone's the greatest thing that has ever happened to war. Not the footage that we see coming out and the celebration you'll occasionally see. It is that there's recorded evidence of now most things that occur and actions of which we've seen previously, people won't get away with. Well, you'd hope not. Now that we see information, evidence can be widely shared, but in a situation where you can control that, how does that look? But I've also thought about Ben Gaviria and go, imagine if phones didn't exist, what would his actions be then? The tweet before this one was about J.D. Vance and that the proposal to deal with Nazis of the 21st century, just as the US dealt with the Nazis of the 20th century, to deal with, he's saying, the Nazis of Iran. What I'll say to Ben is, Ben, the 8 billion people that live on this world, the vast majority of them do not see that the Iranians are the 21st century Nazi. The vast majority probably say, look, the Iranian regime is extremist, theocratic, not the good guys. But if you want to talk about who the 8 billion people see as the modern day 21st century Nazis, well, rhetoric, the actions, the intent of you, people within your government, that is the reason people see Israel as the 21st century Nazis. When you have a system in place, a legalisation in place of apartheid laws, when you have the dehumanisation that we see, officials like you, the world sees as the modern poorly dressed SS, and that is incredibly dangerous to the world Jewish population. I see it as insanely dangerous. Iranian foreign minister has capitalised on this and said this is not the rant of a random genocidal lunatic. It's a public post by the national security minister of the Israeli regime. His only interest is in permanent war. You will see people like Mr Zygmunt Bauman, Jewish author born in the 1920s in Poland, speak about that the Israeli leadership no longer knows how to lead outside of a permanent war and it's an inversion of Clausewitzian principles. But this is very scary and you read things like this and go, yeah I might build a shitload of underground bunkers and weapons as well. And there is some diversion away between the US and Israel. But what I will say is this sudden change that we have seen between J.D. Vance and Trump towards Netanyahu and Israel, well I believe a lot of this is a facade. There was no problems with actions over the past years. It's only when now they are trying to save the midterms, have J.D. Vance on a ticket and end the Iran war that suddenly there's any criticism whatsoever. I don't think that this is completely honest for one second. What I believe, especially J.D. Vance, is the advisors have gone, the younger people just aren't buying this narrative. Let's switch up the rhetoric. Let's not change the actions. Let's change the rhetoric. Because why am I saying that to appeal to younger people that have all just jumped ship from MAGA? Why am I saying shifted rhetoric and not actions? Because the US, they could influence actions that Israel carries out before lunch if they wanted to. But all we've seen so far is then rhetoric. J.D. Vance in a message to the Israeli cabinet ministers has said, if I was the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be attacking the only powerful ally that I have left. And the only powerful ally that Israel does have left is America. I do question, though, the American people. Currently, maybe so. But once the boomers are dead, it'll be a very different America. People I've seen, your typical pro-Zionist accounts, your Levines, etc., have been pointing to Argentina. Now, I would say that Margaret Thatcher wants a discussion with maybe a lot of Argentinians. But of course, if you're speaking of powerful ally, the Falklands will have something to say. He continues, two-thirds of the defense weapons that have protected your homeland have been built by American hands and paid for by American tax dollars of defensive weapons. I wonder how much of offensive weapons. He continues, the problem for Israel is not Donald J. Trump. And anybody in Israel who thinks their biggest problem is the president of the U.S. needs to wake up and smell the reality of the situation the country is in. My message to them would be twofold. Number one, Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time. And next administrations I couldn't see being more sympathetic. So we have that movement. But how legitimate do I think this is? I don't know. I think there's a fair bit of saving ass going on after a lot of silence. The ABC then report Mr. Vance criticized Mr. Ben-Givir and Smotrich in New York Times interview released early Thursday. What is your exact proposal? You're a country of nine million. You can't just kill your way out of solving every single national security problem that you have. I find this whole freak out in Israel a little bit odd because I think it comes from a place of mistrust. And I think America has earned the trust of that region in the world. Well, I wouldn't say that region in the world. I think America has earned the mistrust of the Middle East. But as far as in Israel, yes, they should have the trust because they've carried out any actions that has really been then asked of them. But again, this goes back to the idea of it is a small nation that has their solution would be of bombing your way out of every single national security issue. Some might call a final solution is bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb. And eventually you'll have what you're after. And what Vance is saying is, if that's your long term strategy, that's that's very not only concerning short term, but probably existential long term. So we've seen Vance and that's sort of gone everywhere. And Trump, Trump, who has claimed as the first Jewish president and agreed with this, he said this commenting on the Israeli strikes on Beirut, of course, in Lebanon, that should not have happened. They're taking on a special day when we're so close to a peace deal with Iran. Now, what was said to have occurred was Hezbollah, they fired in a few missiles, and then Israel responded strikes over Beirut buildings down, etc. And of course, then it just upends sabotages the peace deal with the MOU, the negotiations, the talks that are happening. Trump says Israel's right to defend itself against threats, but the attack it was from was small and meaningless. Nobody was hurt, injured or killed. And it should not disrupt this important process. There should be no more attacks by Israel anywhere in Lebanon. But there should also be no attacks by any other party, including Hezbollah, against Israel. We need ceasefire, what actually is meant by the definition of ceasefire. And Axios has reported Trump saying, why did Bibi have to ******* attack? I was so pissed off. I let him know he has no ******* judgment. I let him know that. So again, what Trump is saying and what a lot of people are witnessing is continued actions here are destroying any chances of the MOU going through. Trump at the G7 summit has said too many people ain't killed. You don't have to knock down an apartment house every time you're looking for somebody because there's a lot of people in those apartment houses and they're not all Hezbollah. Where was that when bombings going on all through Lebanon or in Gaza or even in Iran, complete buildings down? You know, this is only an issue to the US now because it is sabotaging the Iran peace deal and that the advisors are going, we're going to get very little votes in the midterms. That's why it's been the change. But let's continue before we then step into what is actually occurring here. So Trump released a tweet that the corrupt and failing New York Times had a title, what changed after almost four months of war? Analysts say not much. And well, I would say a lot has happened after the first four months of war. US and Israel are in a far weaker position and Iran has ended up in a far stronger position than they were before the start of the war. It has been strategically, politically, diplomatically, financially, a ******* disaster. So no, not much. I'd say it's been a ******* disaster at the worst possible time when you have a competing hyper power, multipolar order that is rising very quickly and credibility on the world stage matters a hell of a lot. And when you've got three radical theocratic regimes going head to head, well, it doesn't end up well for anybody. The Air Force is gone. Well, I guess I'm thinking and imagining the MiGs 29s and the F-14s flying around, launching phantom missiles and drones. They are almost gone. I don't know. There's been a lot of excavation of those areas we believe weren't destroyed. If and when, and I think it's probably more of a when, this goes back to launching. It'll be interesting to see how true that statement is. Of course, Trump's social posts have about as much credibility, legitimacy as, I don't know, shutters on a submarine. The top two sets of leaders are gone. But then he has also gone on recently to say, I never was focusing on regime change after announcing regime change and change and change. The Homewood Strait is open. Oil is gushing. The stock market and jobs are at record highs. If I die in a war and then the leader of my country brags about stock market highs, know that I'm happy gone. And the Strait, well, it does appear to be open, but some restrictions, but we do know that Iran can snap that closed at any moment. And that tolls, sanctions lifting, well, it's going to be far more beneficial to Iran. He goes on to say things like this. It's funny how the Democrats, trust me, if you want to claim high IQ and that you're low IQ opponents, and then you want to call someone the Democrats, the only people that find that funny is the boomers who are on Facebook, just absorbing AI ******* slot. That Iran is in a stronger position today than they were three months ago, despite the fact that they have been defeated militarily with no Navy, no Air Force, defeated militarily. Again, time will tell. Radical left fools and Democrats realize how well we have done in our war against Iran and their country being completely defeated militarily. Obama was kept giving them billions in cash. Well, the cash that Obama appears, Obama gave Iran appears to be a tiny, tiny piece of what you will be giving Iran after tens and tens of billions of dollars have gone into the war that you launched alongside of Israel. So let's look at the MOU and look at the actual writing of this and go, well, what is it? Is it fair? Is it in America's favor? Is it in Iran's favor? Now, by this point in time, you probably know, well, it's not. What I'll say is having Trump sign the initial MOU in the French palace of Versailles is the absolute cherry on top that sums up, I think, a lot of the campaign that we have seen. Declaring victory 40 times, declaring they've been obliterated, decimated, that the only way forward is unconditional surrender. And then we see, of course, this. Now, in the original form of the MOU that I'm about to show you very quickly, it's the U.S. that is acquiescing to Iranian demands and their current global positions. It's not the other way around. It's hell of a lot Iranian unconditional surrender. I was shocked when I first read this. I read it about three times and looked for as many sources as I could because I'm like, there's no way this is real. Take one look at your Shapiro type characters online and you'll see how the most pro-war voices, the most pro-Trump voices, are feeling about this deal. Not only is this unbelievably embarrassing, it is politically catastrophic. The war was already highly unpopular amongst Americans and growing more unpopular as it was not ever explained why this was needed. It was never going to be cheap. It was unfathomably costly. It drove allies away, especially Macron, for those who know some of the rumors about them, maybe a love somewhere, and drove potential partners who may have seen the U.S. as a great stabilizing force away. If you're a growing, say, great state of like Indonesia and you're looking at, right, we're developing a multipole order. Indonesia will be a great state in the next coming decades. Working within this is not going to be a hyper state of the U.S. and China, or if there's some European hegemon, but they'll be very, very powerful. Well, who do we see as a great stabilizing force? And that is very important. The U.S. absolutely has even taken away the rhetoric of doing it for the upholding of liberal values or of democracy or of humanity. It's, we're going to go steal the oil and just destroy them. Now, why is it so important now? Why is it more important now than what maybe occurred in the early 2000s? Well, we're at a critical global turning point. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, and even the last decade of the Soviet Union, we have, for the first time, a competing hyper power and the evolution of a multipolar order. That's why this is at such a critical time. So let's go through these points that the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran and their allies in the current war have assigned the MOU to declare an immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon. So immediately terminating that, that hasn't happened, ensuring the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon, that U.S. Iran will respect each other's sovereignty, territorial integrity, and refrain from interfering in each other's internal affairs. How much has there been interference in those internal affairs? U.S. and Iran commit to negotiating and achieving a peace deal within 60 days, extendable by mutual consent. Upon the signing of this, that U.S. will remove the naval blockade impediments against the Islamic Republic of Iran, and then fully end the blockade within 30 days. So America will lift it, Iran will lift it, and oil will flow. The strait has been both opened and closed over the past days by the ARGC. At this point in time, I believe that it is open, but it is a really good way that they are using to go, well, they're just going to ******* close it again. You can either stop striking and operations in Lebanon, or we'll open and close it. The Strait of Hormuz is very, very strategically valuable. Upon signing, the Islamic Republic of Iran will make arrangements using its best efforts to safe passage through then the strait, with no change 60 days, you know, through the Persian Gulf Sea of Oman. Iran will conduct dialogue with Oman to define the future administration of maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz. So what was the status quo before this? It was open and free passage and moving through. Well, now between Oman and Iran, they're going to be working out then the future administration of this area. Six, the U.S. undertakes with regional partners, so Gulf partners, to develop a definitive mutually agreed plan with at least $300 billion for the reconstruction economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran. So with these partners, $300 billion flowing into Iran. Yeah, that sounds like an unconditional surrender to me. That is an astronomical amount of money. Do I think though that that is cheaper than continuing an operation in a ground war into Iran? Yes. You look at other wars in this region, the world cost hundreds of billions into the trillions of dollars. If you're, if I was an advisor right now to Trump, and the two options, three options were ground operation, nuclear strike, $300 billion in basically a reparation. Interestingly, it'd be interesting to see what precedent that sets for the war in Ukraine. This one's the cheapest. Nuclear strike would wipe trillions of dollars off the stock market in a day. And you risk, of course, if I was in Taiwan or Ukraine, I would not be there within about half an hour, be swimming off the ******* island at that point or across the Black Sea if U.S. did that. So that's a non-option, I believe, I hope. Military operation will soak up that much money in the first days. Movement there, several months to get planning, et cetera. If that's what it takes, it's probably financially cheaper option, but incredibly embarrassing. The U.S. undertakes, terminate all types of sanctions against Iran, including UN Security Council resolutions, IAEA Board Governors of Resolutions and unilateral sanctions, primary and secondary. So not only primary sanctions on Iran, excuse me, but if you've sanctioned X country for working with Iran, maybe someone like China, China, American acknowledge the critical importance of sanctions termination issue above mentioned and their intention to immediately address. And so this is the thing, this is where if I was sitting in the parliament in Knesset in Israel, I'd be super ******* concerned. So you're saying they're getting $300 billion, another $25 billion in frozen assets. So we're talking, you know, three and a quarter, three hundred and a quarter billion dollars. That's a weird way to say that. And then sanctions of a country of 92 million people in an incredibly important area. Shit, you're looking down the most powerful country in the Middle East territory in a few decades to come with probably a chip on their shoulder. Iran reaffirmed that it shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons. A disposition of a stockpile enriched material pursuant to a mechanism that will be mutually agreed upon. So again, this is where we have seen again and again the ******* goalposts move. This was achieved diplomatically by the current and previous administrations. And then the goalposts were shifted to justify the war and give causes belly for the war of developing of nuclear weapon. When then they changed it to go, no, but it's enrichment as well, bombing, no enrichment, no enrichment. Well, development of nuclear weapons. Okay. I believe that was only ever an arm twist threat anyway. And then we'll discuss the issue of enrichment for Iran's nuclear based needs, whether it's power or medicine, et cetera. So again, that's not a concession by Iran pending the final deal. The countries will agree to maintain the status quo. They will maintain the concept of the nuclear program in the U S will not impose any new sanctions and will not deploy additional forces into the region. Immediately upon signing the termination of sanctions, the department of crude oil, petroleum and derivatives and associated services, including banking transactions, insurances, transportations, unfathomable amount of money from one of the oil giants of the world that fully available frozen restricted funds from Iran. Well, U S treasurer Scott percent, he said that the war in Iran isn't costing the Americans any money because they're using Iranian frozen assets to pay for the American weapons. Well, now that it's going back, who's wearing that cost Scott Scott raised these funds. So it'll be, uh, as far as I'm aware, the first 12 and a half billion now, and then at the end, the another 12 and a half billion, but this is usable for payment to any ultimate beneficiary designated by the central bank. So it goes into a bank account of which it came from and then can be used. However, U S and Iran green executive mechanism to establish a monitor implementation of the MOU and a further compliance with the deal. After signing subject to the beginning of implementation for the paragraphs, the final deal will be endorsed by a UN security council resolution. Obviously this is not the negotiated outcome. This is just the starting point, but anyone who reads this will notice that there is not a single Iranian concession. It leaves Iran in a better situation long-term than they were in before the war legitimization to the Iranian regime who was not legitimate sanctions lifted programs still in order, then frozen assets back and likely further control of the Strait of Hormuz returning to the status quo of the straight or a level of enriched uranium. This is not a concession returning to the status quo is not a concession, nor do I believe the procure or develop nuclear weapons is a concession. In my analysis, that not only was this achieved to not develop or procure a nuclear weapon, Iran's nuclear threat worked. The enrichment to these high percentages was the threatened to obtain that weapon used as a tool of politics that was more important than actually obtaining it. Because once you've obtained it, well, you're not going to get sanctions relief, but threatening to obtain it, you are. And as we've seen again and again, the U.S. said no enrichment, no enrichment for months. And now we have this. Now you'll see a lot of these Luma, Levin, et cetera, types saying stupid things like Russia is going to help Iran procure or build a nuclear weapon. If that was going to occur, that likely would have occurred in the past decades. And I've even seen some of them saying things like, and they're struggling to make one. Russia's had nuclear weapons for decades. If they wanted to give them one, so Pakistan, they could. I don't think it's in anyone's interest to have Iran with a nuclear weapon. This is not just a bad deal for the U.S. from the guy that wrote the book, Art of a Deal. It is to U.S. surrender. That is how the history books, if it can say anything even like this, is how it will be written about. If even 50% of this remains as the final deal after 60 days, sanctions lift, level of low enrichment, no talk of missiles, it is a complete failure of the Clausewitzian theory of war. That war is an extension of politics. You use war as a blunt force instrument to influence politics. Well, it's done an inversion of that. You've used war and come out with a worst version of politics. That's why America is very good at warfare. They're not very good at war. They're good at the bombing. They're good at the killing. They're good at this. But turning that into an outcome, well, the last decades have shown there's very little, if any, success in doing so. And that's actually been the opposite here, that the use of this war has ended up, if this comes to fruition, in a better position from Iran. Obviously in this, there's no restrictions on weapons, you've got sanctions lifted, you'll have a population to rally around the flag, a much younger, likely more competent regime in charge. Israel cannot and will not let this pass through because you're going to end up with a significantly more powerful and influential state. And well, how is this really being upended? In Lebanon. And tying this deal to Hezbollah and ceasefire in Lebanon and de-occupation, liberation of territory is twofold for Israel. It's its largest challenge, but also very valuable. Israel don't want, then, Lebanon to be exclusive from this deal. Why? Because it gives them a way to sabotage and upend the deal dealing with Hezbollah. Of course, a terrorist organisation. Now, the challenge is the drones, there's FPVs, along with ATGMs, etc, are making already universally unpopular occupation forces moving through southern Lebanon. It's giving great difficulty and high cost in those actions. Where is the value? Well, Hezbollah is not going to stop fighting the IDF. They're not going to stop fighting them as they're occupying military operations in Lebanon. I actually don't know if Iran has the power to do so. Even if they cut off the aid, it might reduce tempo of operations, but I don't know if it's actually going to cease. What this gives is it gives Israel the opportunity to upend and sabotage the US-Iranian deal that's going on. It then shifts blame to Iran saying, well, it's actually Iran who's upending it because you're not stopping your proxy. And this is poison pill diplomacy, saying, well, it's actually you who's stopping it because this one you support won't stop fighting us. Now, it's very clear that both Hezbollah and Israel clearly violate the ceasefire again and again and again. I think people overstate the power that Iran may actually have on Hezbollah as a proxy. But the difference when we look at this is the side who's violating it more seriously, taking down entire buildings in Beirut, is completely reliant on US offensive and defensive systems to do so. And if Vance or Trump were serious, that could stop this morning. What I've said is ceasefire mustn't translate or be understood in Hebrew. Because the interpretations I'm seeing online, they're saying it means, no, no, no, not that everyone stops firing and sits in place or pull back. No, no, no. It means you don't increase military actions or that you can continue advancing, you just can't fire. That it's a ceasefire. Well, our tanks will continue moving. And if a drone hits them, we'll fire back. That's not ceasefire. Imagine if Russia, Ukraine have a ceasefire, and then Russia go, okay, no one's firing. Let's move this armoured column forward. And then Ukraine smash those with FPVs or ATGMs. Okay, see where this is falling apart. Obviously, both here, but the US has a lot more power over one, not the other. And it's incredibly costly, and highly unpopular. And this is coming out, this was in the last hour before filming today. We had Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Pakistan, nothing really in this document, but just saying that they've made some ground on mediating partners here between US, Qatar, Pakistan, Iran, in Switzerland, that deconfliction sells between parties, Lebanese Republic, facilitate by the mediators to ensure adherence to the termination of military operations in Lebanon. And Iran's Foreign Affairs Minister saying Thailand, Pakistan, and Qatar mediation has delivered major progress to end the Lebanon war. Oil, petrochemical exports are waived, blockade lifted, some frozen assets released, major reconstruction development plan launched for Iran. So are you tired of winning yet? America has then said things like this, Iran must immediately stop their highly paid proxies in Lebanon from causing trouble. If they don't, we'll hit Iran very hard again, just like we did last week, only harder. And this is what I said, is there's no doubt that Iran supports the proxy of Hezbollah. There's no doubt on that. But I think people overestimate, and I don't know how much, but I think I overestimate how much control Iran has on Hezbollah. They are an organic terror group, but in southern Lebanon, due to Israel's occupation there, they will continue firing. How much will that capacity reduce if Iran cut off all funding to Hez? All funding and any weapons are going there. How much will it actually reduce that? Well, six months ago, 12 months ago, I would have said quite a lot. Now I actually think less. I think the need for industrial produced weapons has actually decreased with drones. That to have a weapons system in the past decades, it's had to be made in a factory by industry. Now with a drone, you can order parts online and put it together and put a grenade and RPG on it, which are everywhere through this area anyway. So it's actually likely decreased a fair bit. A lot of the plastic explosive we dealt with was factory made and packed in a country starting with P. But now if it's something strapped on an old shitty warhead strapped on a drone, it's going to be more lethal than something like that. So it's actually probably decreased the reliance too. Let's look at this. This is from Israel's Minister of Defense. So seven hours before apparently some breakthroughs in Switzerland, he has said Israel has no intention of withdrawing from the Beefoot Castle in southern Lebanon, which is an integral part of the security zone in Lebanon and essential to the defense of the Galilee settlements and Israel will not withdraw from the security zone in Lebanon. So from the Yellow Line area here, will not withdraw from here. Again, this is the region we're talking about Beefoot Castle right here out from Metula. Of course, Israel actions want to come up to the Latani River going through here. So will not withdraw from there. We know that they are moving settlers into these areas also. Iran's Foreign Minister spokesman Ismail Bakay at the end of today's talks in Switzerland from Middle East spectator. That technical discussions continue throughout the night focusing on a variety of issues and Iran's frozen assets, necessary issuing of sanctions, waivers on Iranian oil and petrochemicals, quadrilateral talks mainly focused on the situation in Lebanon. The situation must be solved before the final negotiations. Mechanisms of safe passage through the SOH mechanism monitoring ceasefire in Lebanon. Apparently it was established and after Trump threatening statements earlier, the Iranian delegation announced they are willing to continue in the quadrilateral format. So talks proceed in a different format. So Trump made threatening statements. Of course, what we see somewhere like this and others that Iran said we're not doing this and then it has managed to continue but apparently in a different format. Exactly how that looks will likely be with further intermediaries. But what this is giving, Israel cannot accept the Iranian US deal. Can't accept that. From a realist point of view, cannot accept that. Due to hundreds of billions of dollars going in here, far more than that then being unsanctioned to export in oil. All that. No restrictions on weapons, barely any for enrichment and rally around the flag in a younger regime. So what this is giving in Lebanon is the ability to upend that. And this is where I see that Israel does not want to end these operations in here and will continue operations to sabotage that deal and try to drive a wedge between what appears to be some level of working between the US and Iran. Where my concern is, is how far will Israel go to sabotage those operations? If then Iran would agree. I don't think they would. But if they said, well, then don't involve Lebanon in it. That's not a condition. We're going to make this deal between the US and Iran. And Israel would say Iran with these conditions of no sanctions, heaps of money, et cetera, et cetera, is an existential threat to us. How far would it go? And there's been some interesting comments made by some of those control outlets more recently. Laura Loomer says this, we have massive munitions crisis now and Islamic enemies and our adversaries around the world are well aware of that. So the munitions that have been used in this war, which you were super in favor of, are shorter than they were. Is it a munitions crisis against any of these majority Muslim countries? No, they're not that powerful. Is it a crisis against a great state player like China? Yes, it is. My adversaries around the world are aware of that. We are sitting ducks for the next 9-11. Short munitions of Patriots and Tomahawks, et cetera, would have done nothing for a situation like 9-11. Parts of me think that next 9-11 will be done with drones. I remember this from the 11th of March, the day after my birthday. FBI said to warn California that Iran could launch drones from a boat at the West Coast. So some Iranian drone boat with drones launched them into California. Sure, we will see terror attacks absolutely with drones at some point in the future. I'm actually very surprised we have not seen as yet. And then we see things like this. This is a journalist for I-24, an Israeli journalist. Maybe the U.S. needs another Pearl Harbor or 9-11 to remember who is the enemy and who is the friend. Replying to another journalist, the U.S. is going to regret acquiescing to Iranian demands and include Lebanon in this memorandum of understanding. Linkage is one of the biggest mistakes. So is there a timeline? Is there a timeline where there is some agreement between the U.S. and Iran that Israel sees as a matter of existential threat and that some level of false flag or attack or something is carried out to upend that? Yes, there is. And Israel has had a modus operandi before of using things like false flags. Tying it to Lebanon is the way for them to upend this deal at the moment. But if this gets solved, I cannot see if that MOU has America acquiescing to Iran. Israel cannot accept that from a rational or logical point of view. They couldn't accept that. Now, I'm not saying that is rational logic under realist framework, which is, of course, where we assess this from. That if this country is going to become a superpower, this country, which is incredibly powerful and growing, don't like you. Well, ----. I do wonder in this how much influence China has had on Iran following Trump and Xi's meeting a few weeks ago as China gets a lot of oil from him. But you've got to remember, this oil is going to be coming out cheap. That helps the great competing power of America at the moment, which is China. So this whole war, the war is very easy to start, almost impossible to end. And I see at this point in time, as I know Joe Kent would say, the best way is to find a way out now. But if America is actually willing to acquiesce to those deals, the situation must be far worse for America, and Iran must have far more power than it's actually letting on. If that's actually the deal, you're going to pay $300 billion. Shit. Okay. There's a bit of me, this is conspiratorial speculation. Given how quickly and how hard this came, there's a bit on me that almost thinks that did Iran send a photo of an actual nuclear weapon to America and go, what the **** are you doing? We do have one. Huge conspiratorial, I don't believe that to be true, but we have seen a radical 180, and Israel will not settle for this. Legends, you have a fantastic day. I need to go lie down, look after yourselves. I'll speak to you tomorrow. Thank you. Bye-bye.