Get ready, okay April three, twenty twenty six, allegedly according to that thing we call a calendar. This is the Ocelly effect. So normally I have Larry on lately on Wednesdays, but today I have Larry Hancock with me. Of course, he is the great author of a great many books.
I'm not going to list them all, but I do have them all, and so should you go to the links in the show description follow up on Larry's work, his discussions of the security state, the national security state of the United States, as well as global politics, history in general, of course, the JFK assassination, and various other focuses of his research, and well what shall we call it? He is a historian of record in my mind, who has gone back, revised some history, and given us all
new stuff. And I might have a sidebar conversation with him very soon about my recent interesting interaction on the Monday Morning AM wake Up show where I was confronted with a JFK author who complained that Larry ignored him. And I may have a discussion with Larry at some point in the near future about that, And I don't
know if we're going to do it. On air just saying, but I will get to it, because not only is Larry a remarkable author and somebody who has done, like I say, a great deal of work responsibly, in a sober fashion, in an effective way as a researcher, etc. Etc. But he's also a friend of mine, so I'm going to have a friendly conversation with him about that. Don't worry, but tonight that's not the topic. The topic, unfortunately, is the current conflict with Iran and the United States and
Israel and everything else. And quite frankly, I mean I've got a starting point. I don't know where Larry wants to begin, but we're going to try and condense an update on this into less than an hour's discussion. We'll see if I can accomplish it, because I'm the long winded one who does not know how to surmise things often without running off at the mouth into slight Let's call them off roading excursions verbally now and then, so
I'll try and keep that to a minimum. Larry, First of all, Larry Hancock is who I'm talking about, and you should follow his blog as well and have all his books. But you should know that already and if you don't, Now you do, Larry, how are you?
I'm doing fine this evening, Chuck.
Okay.
The cherry trees blooming and making.
You know, the cherry blossom festival is happening. So we have the cherry blossom trees and all that, and that is a big thing here. I'm surprised, you know that a lot of people we don't know that about Making Georgia. You know, most people find it relatively funny that our minor league baseball team is the Macon Bacon. But you know that is true. They're an independent minor league baseball team. And I've actually gone to a game anyway. Yeah. No,
the cherry blossom thing. Things are blooming. It's getting warm again, although it was freezing cold not so long ago, which was strange. But the seasons are seasoning Making Georgia at the moment. How is weather good with you?
We finally, we have had a horrible drought.
We've have probably the worst drought and recorded history winter drought. We had our first rainfall in like five months, wow, but half an inch. So the situation around here, agriculture wise, is desperate. It's spraying good. Trees are trying to leaf out. I hope they got enough moisture to continue. So we
are coming into spring ourselves and looking much nicer. But it's been an extremely dry winter, and as far as making goes, my wife and I attended the cherry festival there one time, came down from Atlanta, really enjoyed it.
So you bet we know what it looks like.
Oh yeah, cool. I didn't know that. But hey, listen, the good thing about your half inch of rain is that it had a chance to wash away the treacherous levels of pollen that were probably deposited on every surface where you were, because they certainly were here until we started getting some rain again. And it was pretty pretty extreme. I mean, you know, people that don't have breathing problems suddenly had breathing problems. Here is just the way of
the world. Except my son, who seems to survive everything, but everybody else seemed to be affected. You know, you couldn't breathe for a little bit and you're wondering why, and it might because there was more things in the air than air a little too often when you were taking a breath. But anyhow, now that we've checked in on all of that, let's get to the world conflict.
The issue that may in my mind, and you know, I'm told that that's more of a liberal panicking talking point become a World War three type event if it continues on. But other people want to strongly disagree with me, and one of them is certainly the President of the United States, who gave a remarkable statement last night. And I want to begin there because why is it remarkable?
Because he bragged because he stated that, you know, we the United States, and of course our coalition with Israel and whoever else we can convince to send us some supplies. I guess, you know, are definitely you know, banging all over and actually have launched some weapons on Tehran, not just hitting a remote, you know, weapons base, allegedly things like that. But he claims that, you know, regime change
has already pretty much happened. All that good stuff and hyperbole is definitely just the cost of doing business if you want to listen to this guy talk. But it was very concise. It was very precise, even the language he didn't run on, He didn't take a lot of
time with it. It was very quickly done. He did find time to congratulate himself because if he wasn't doing that his well, he wouldn't be breathing in his mouth, wouldn't be moving if he wasn't congratulating himself and his accomplishments.
But it was done in a very shorthand kind of manner, and so much so that I found it almost disturbing that we didn't get normal Donald Trump in a speech where he takes on the airwaves, which used to carry a lot more gravity when the president used to do that, because there were only three networks at the time, and he would, you know, the president at the time, would take over all of them and later on, you know that plus gable if the announcement and the news was major.
So he does that sort of thing where the president says, taken over all the networks for a moment live to give a speech, and he doesn't give a Donald Trump ish speech, very almost not presidential, but very direct, almost
seeming like somebody else wrote it for him. In my mind, And I'm not trying to launch conspiracy theories here, but I will also say I question whether it was live because I was watching the President's YouTube channel, the White House YouTube channel, which doesn't have commentators, doesn't have commercial breaks, okay,
except for what YouTube shoves on you. And therefore it went straight from a feed almost directly like within moments of the live presidential speech allegedly live presidential speech to him on Air Force one. And to my mind, the clothes he was wearing did not look like they aged fifteen minutes. They looked like they aged some hours. And he went out to basically say to the press, she got any questions about what I just said, that would
be the shorthand way to put it. And then of course there were other things that happened there, but I don't care. I want to focus back on the speech, and you know, take a little look at that, because that was supposed to tell us update us as to where we are or were as of last night. Do you have any thoughts about the presidential address? And do I sound completely crazy to you when I'm saying something
is odd? I'm not sure if that was live. And also I won't believe, no matter how many times you tell me that he authored it, because it was way too short, it was way too efficient in its communication style, and it was I'll say it again, way too short for the guy who set two consecutive records on State of the Union, addresses to Congress, where he ran on and on, repeated himself, continued to go back over the points he wanted to, you know, beat like a team
of dead horses. And this is not what we got last night at all. It was very not Donald Trump in its trump Ish ways, even though it had some of the elements, they were all how shall I say, restrained, limited, and quite frankly, he can't even limit himself when he's given a time limit on a debate stage. He overruns, talks over people, interrupts, pushes into things, and pushes past and even insists on answering questions that he wasn't even asked during a debate, you know, which I guess is
good form for him. But when he's completely seemingly in control, has taken over all the networks, has the time if he wanted to go on for an hour, you know. I mean, it's almost like me. If you ask me a question and I have a microphone, you're going to get an answer and it's going to be more than you know, three words. It's a promise, no matter what it is. So weird this speech was to me. But Larry,
how do you interpret that? Speech and the update and the nature of things before we even get into the reality of the circumstance. As best you can tell us, what do you think about this, the speech and our progress and what that stated, and you know, and also my idea that quite frankly, hey, he didn't write it. That's not his words. Okay, he didn't script it, he
didn't craft it. It wasn't his decision. He definitely if he wasn't working with notes live or as it was being recorded, he definitely was working off of a set of bullet points. And there was a clear indication that he was, you know, restraining himself, roping it in. So what are your thoughts on those two things that maybe it wasn't live and also the almost way out of character on Donald Trump's style of restraint and limiting oneself and limiting oneself's words. What are your thoughts?
Well, the first thing astrayed me is there's no doubt that it was totally uncharacteristic. I mean, nobody has ever seen that before. Nobody has ever seen Donald Trump passed the opportunity to take major credit for things that were going on.
It's like nothing you've ever seen before. Larry, like nothing you've ever seen. Sorry, I had to do that. Go ahead.
I mean, if you look at where I could not fathom where there would have been another fifteen to twenty minutes on the Moon mission, right, I mean, where was the Moon mission, first first launch to the Moon in fifty years. If you look at the White House statements about that, he's making prolific remarks and making huge claims about being totally responsible for turning the space program around.
I mean it's almost impossible not to see that.
It worked into the speech because he I mean we saw in his National Security Council meeting he was taking ten minutes to take credit for a sharp eye discussion, right that apparently never happened.
You know, So how did how did the Moon get left out of this? How?
Just so?
No, no eight no complaints about anything else, which is very uncharacteristic. No, no complaints about birthright citizenship. I mean, he had taken the time that day to go to the Supreme Court, right in an extremely atypical effort to intimidate and obviously impress the justices who were not swinging his way, and he was complaining about that elsewhere, but not in the speech.
Nothing.
So yeah, that that that part is very uncharacteristic, and I certainly had to flavor you know, well, it's as if he can this part and then walked away.
Can I ask you one thing? Can I ask you one thing about this, by the way, because in addition to what you said about the Supreme Court, right, and anything that's going on currently, regardless of what Trump is there to talk about. I mean, even when he goes to give a you know, the Presidential Medal to somebody who's dead and he's honoring their family, he takes the time to tell you about the stock market if he's
happy with the numbers that day. Okay, So you know, it's not like he won't bring things up out of context. Not only did he have the whole Supreme Court thing going on, but he also fired Pam Bondy. Now, usually Trump has a way of dropping hints when he can't you know, he can't even contain himself when he's about ready to do something major, Right, I don't recall Pam Bondi coming up in the presser, you know, in the announcement on TV, or even in the back and forth
with the press after. I see no hint of that. So that either indicates that again, he restrained himself greatly by not bringing up something that was currently, you know, concurrent with the situation, even if it wasn't related, or maybe it was, I don't know, but the point is either it was a snap decision or he restrained himself. There.
Doesn't that seem out of character that he wouldn't have said something about that and even maybe said, well, you know, very soon we're going to have a big announcement about you know people. Something would have been said here just in passing about the fact that he's getting ready to get rid of guess who is attorney general? But nothing.
Go ahead, Sorry again, but the one counter what I offer. It's become quite clear in the last few weeks, in particular, that there are two subjects that he will walk away from. If he's asked the question, he will literally walk away from it. He doesn't want to talk. He doesn't even to the extent of using it as a platform to talk about something else, which is a common practice.
And one is Epstein. That's clear.
Okay, So if you talk about BONDI you're going to have to get into Epstein because that's this major complaint.
Okay, So I.
Can see a pass on that he really really does not want to talk about Iran anymore, and I think you heard that last night. He really My sense is he really wants to walk away from Iran as quickly as possible. So in one sense I can see him it being characteristic, true, but it's also uncharacteristic for him wanting to walk away from things.
He likes to engage with him so much.
But those two subjects at this point in time, I can see him mentally walking away from and saying, I'm not gonna Last night, he did not really want to talk about Iran and people. Actually, I think his advisors did not want him to talk about On because if you looked at what happened yesterday, two things happened. The market bounced yesterday, right because everybody expected that he was going to declare victory and walk away today, and that he didn't do it.
He talked too much.
He just for thirty seconds he couldn't resist saying, oh, but we're going to take two or three more weeks and drive him back into the stone age.
And look at what happened to the market today.
There are people that want him to shut up, not people that oppose him, people that are in his court who he's hurting financially. That really there are people that he listens to that want him to pull back.
They don't want this, they really don't, but he can't help himself. So I think there.
May be a conflict going on here, like an internal conflict. That's like, I know I promised them I wouldn't say anything more, but you know, I can't look weak.
I got it.
So I don't know how much of that counseled itself out to prevent it from being an hour long speech.
Who knows?
Okay, Now, look, I don't want to argue about this or belabor the point, but let me offer a counter to your counter politely. Okay that being the case, Larry, then why in the hell do you take the special time to make an announcement at all? You See, That's the weird thing here is that this isn't just you know, his usual mo of well, I'm just going to drop some major craziness on truth social and screw you. You can deal with it till the morning when I feel
like answering it again. That's normally what he does. It seems like to me when it comes to like all of a sudden, you know, people are clamoring for an answer on Epstein or you know, hey, gee, you said that this was going to happen, and you've now just did the opposite. He says, stuff on truth sold your
bunch of losers. You don't understand what's going on, and now you can just have fun with that in the news meeting and read my truth post for the next you know, twenty four hours until I feel like answering you again. That seems to be his mo. That's not what happened here, though. This is a special arrangement to I mean, you know, not super special in that you know, okay, they only do this when we're going to war or
something like they used to. But I mean, in a way, this is extra effort to make no point, which means I don't buy the argument of this is just him trying to walk away from it, because it's more like, instead of walking away from the dangerous thing, you walk into it. You know, well, I didn't want to bump my head on that thing that was hanging down, so I walked straight in its direction, you know what I mean? And talk about a guy who doesn't know how to duck.
You know what I'm getting out of here? Or do I make no sense to you?
I don't know that. We can no check because my speculation would be that some one is influencing him. Okay, and we're not We're not just talking. I'm not talking about pulling. Someone is influencing him and literally saying, you know, we the royal We because there are he does have influencers, influencers that are telling him that we need to wrap this up. You know, we lost five thousand points in the market. Okay, Now now's the time. You need to
move on to a victory statement. So you need to and and a victory statement of Trump on board a carrier, you know. And it needs to be prominent. It needs to be something to move the needle, which it almost did.
It could have.
Everybody was expecting it to move the needle. I think the market was prepared and there there are people playing the market with him. I got to tell you, I just there is no doubt, including the Secretary of Defense, that there are people that are playing the market them and I think they had imprimed to say something that would have shot it up two thousand points in a day. And he messed it up. He just couldn't he couldn't resist,
you know, it couldn't look weak. So I think it was a big deal, but not in the sense that you're talking. I think that was a big deal for his influencers. I will not put out the somebody wants oil.
Prices to be big, right, of course they.
I mean he's done three things that have helped Iran and Russia. Okay, the invasion actually helped rest here, certainly, the oil price, the withdrawing of the sanctions.
I mean, who in.
The world would withdraw sanctions on Iran when you just went to war with them on oil? Now to the point that okay, and they're letting the Russian Okay, we withdrew our sanctions on all oil transportation for both the Iranian shipping and the Russian caring. You know, somebody is winning here. And then he comes through the speech and says, and this is this is the most important.
I saw this in local news. That's sort of saying, but.
We're okay, it's not going to hurt us because we've got all the oil we need.
Now.
If you think about that for a minute, it's like what I saw in print was the person at the gas station who's paying three point fifty to four dollars is going to be asking, if we have all the oil we need and we don't have to worry about the rest of the world, why is my price up?
Yeah? Well, see, that's the thing is, if it didn't really matter, then oil wouldn't have reached one hundred and fifteen dollars a barrel, right, you know this is this is counterintuitive profit taking.
So I not I'm conspiratorial in a different way.
I do think Trump can be influenced by political and business interests.
Oh no, it can be influenced.
To the.
And I think that's what we saw.
I think people came to him and said we need you to and he did, and it just didn't And in the end it really didn't change anything.
No, but there was real I think there was a shock. There was a real effort to land it the way you wanted to though, because he even put the context of it on. You know, we had these other conflicts and here's what happened. And it took a long time, and that was to drive home the point that hey, look, we're only a couple of weeks and it's going to be over soon, so don't worry about it yet. Okay, anyway, I don't want to keep going on this because this
is not actually the most important point. But don't forget that. Yeah, that little nuance was in that speech. Guaranteed he did not author that where he gives you a progressive view of well, you know, here's what happened with World War one, world War two. I mean you caught that part right, world War one, world War two? What was the next one? Did he say Korea? Next? I think so? Then he went Vietnam, and then he went you know, Iraq, Afghanistan,
and don't worry. I'm not going to have these belabored, costly things happen and it'll be all over with soon, so don't worry about it. There was an effort to do that in a way that Trump doesn't do that, so that was present as well. So I guarantee that
there was something very much up with this. And at the end of the day, by the way, I also almost be a liking you don't need to answer this, Larry, But I suspect, because there's always these little itches in the back of my brain, that something else was attempted to be communicated here other than what was on the you know, public facing side of it. But who knows. And as you said, the influencers there, whether they bought their way in or they're on team Trump for real,
is irrelevant. They are definitely present and exerting their force one way or another. So that is the obvious point to take away, for sure. But I still say somebody's gonna come up with the idea, probably make it popular for a moment that that speech was, as you said, canned ahead of time, pre canned, let's say, for consumption.
But maybe not. Maybe things will just disappear like they usually do, and we'll get back to business as usual, where people are still screaming about Epstein and not really getting all the information straight about what's actually happening. And look, I pray that it's correct that this conflict ends quickly. But given the fact that you know, ground troops are being maneuvered into position for use, and Iran, regardless of what people think, has been destroyed, still have a lot
more cards to play in the game. I think there's you know, stay tuned more to come. Anyway, let's talk about stay tuned more to come. With the conflict itself, I sort of you know, referenced a couple of things here. But since we last spoke about this. I know you speak to a lot of people about a lot of things. But where do you think the have you know, changed, gone forward, changed direction, maybe gone in a different way than you first predicted regarding this, or gone exactly as
you predicted regarding this situation. Where do we stand now as opposed to only maybe two weeks ago, when last we might have referenced this, Larry, I mean, and when last we discussed it? What do you think has happened in the very recent days going forward in this? Again? What type of conflict are they going to call it? Now? Is it a war? Really? It's definitely combat based. There's definitely shots being fired. There is definitely parts of different
places that are being attacked that previously were not. And oh, by the way, the people that even you know, give the benefit of the doubt to al Jazeer, well, finally al Jazeera is doing something right. It's called self interest. They're based in Katar, and of course they're going to report on this. And you know who side do they want to be on? Well, probably the biggest guy with the biggest gun, who has protected Katar for various reasons.
And again go back and look at maybe the motivations as to why you give somebody a multi million dollar you know, pleasure plane, whatever you know, as a present. There might be a good reason. You know, you often want to give your protector treats, whether it's a dog or it's you know, a violent husband who keeps you safe in a neighborhood that is not necessarily safe for you. It's always good to bring him a cake, you know what I mean, Or to give your dog a bone,
because that's who will protect you. But anyway, enough of my strange thoughts about the dynamics and power dynamics or lack thereof. What do you see about this conflict? What can we you know, responsibly ascertain in the past I don't know ten days in your opinion, what has changed, what has progressed, what is not progressing, and what are the circumstances yet to come.
Well, I think there are three things that jumped out of me when we when we last talked about this back then.
We we've gone.
Through several phases of what our primary and secondary objectives were supposedly, but regime change was just as in Venezuela. I mean, a lot of people are around here and a lot of people I know, you know, would would be more comfortable with the fact that these these countries, uh, you know, have dictated dictatorships.
We want to do away with dictatorships. We don't like dictatorships.
We like democracies, of course, and we like democracies that are comfortable with us. So the idea of regime change is good for countries that speak out against us. We like, we like regime change. So in Venezuela and in Iran, we're both looking to do regime change.
And and two.
Weeks ago when we talked, we talked about, you know, there there might be regime change in Iran. You know, there there were massive street demonstrations.
Uh.
We were talking to the supposedly talking to the Kurds. We were talking to a former son of the former Shaw King of Iran. You know, there's a lot of stuff coming from the White House that we're you know, we're talking to people that want to do deals and there will be real regime change and you know, a more liberal attitude towards the West and Tehran, and you know, so we were talking about that as an opportunity, and at one point in time when we started all of
this that that was the goal. It was regime change, so Tehran would stop threatening everybody and stop being a you know, potential danger to everybody. I mean, quite frankly, other than Israel and our bases in the Middle East, they weren't. I mean, at that point in time, they had not been a danger to Bat Dubai or Kuwait or the UAE or anybody.
Else in the region. I mean, there was no active conflict.
So two weeks ago we were talking about the possibility regime change. Regardless of what the President said last night. Eliminating the top twenty guys in an infrastructure or religious by the way, strongly religious based infrastructure like that is not regime change.
I mean, yeah, blunt lead, it's a theocracy.
Decapitation, that's the right word for it. Is decapitation. That's not regime change.
But it's a theocracy with a hierarchy of individuals that are tied to that religion and that overseeing power structure. You didn't remove it, you just took off the top layer. There are people that are groomed to succeed those that were on top. I mean unless I misunderstand the structure, you know, the infrastructure, or am I incorrect.
And they know this is coming.
I mean, this is no spride but sure a theocracy, it's a very it's a very structured religious system for one thing. It's a very structured military system for another. I mean, both of these are not there. I don't like the Runian Revolutionary Guard. They are very professional, They're very structured. You know, they may not be Masad class, but as far as the other military is in the Middle East.
They're pretty good. And they have been. They've proven themselves very resilient.
We have decapitated their leadership over and over again. How many times have we knocked out the top two or three or israel Is knocked out the top two or three? Okay, now we knocked out the top fifteen or twenty, okay. But decapitation is not regime change. So we possibly had an opportunity if we had committed ourselves militarily when all of those people well out in the street. Maybe, if we had agreement with the Kurds in advance or anybody else in advance. Maybe Apparently we did not. That all
slipped through and we struck too late. And now what appears to have happened is the opposition has literally been the opposition has been decimated. That they killed them, thousands of them.
That's so.
So, you know, regime change doesn't if it looked like it might be in the cards two weeks ago, I certainly don't see it being in the cards now. The other thing we're talking about that was our primary objective was we would prevent Iran from being.
Able to project force.
Okay, and last night we wrapped that up with a statement that said, well, we destroyed their navy, and we destroyed the air force, and we destroyed their capability and launch missiles. Clearly, that third point is not true, because there's still quite frankly, the missile strikes that occurring today, yesterday, day before yesterday are much less but much more accurate. Israel is taking much more punishment now from when they were allobbing hundreds of missiles in the last exchange. Their
strikes are becoming more and more accurate. Whether or not that's targeting info from the Russians or Chinese, not gonna say. But the reality is when they can knock out an E three W setting on a runway in Saudi that's a darn accurate strike for ballistic missile. When they can knock out a tanker setting in a port somewhere in the Middle East, that's a really effective strike. So they're becoming more efficient with both missiles and drums as far
as projecting force. But we have taught them something. We have essentially taught them that all the money you guys spent on your navy was wasted. You don't need cruisers, you don't need destroyers. You need lots of little boats with drones and with mines, and you need to get in touch with your buddies the Hawthy's because there's there are other gulfs.
The Gulf of Aiden is.
A choke point, Bob the beb I can't pronounce it anyway. The strait, the straight down in the Gulf of Aiden is a choke point. The traffic across the east coast of the continent is a choke point. There are lots of places where they can dramatically project power.
They don't have.
Projecting power is attacking resources. Could you just give a brief well tankers, Yeah, could you just give.
A brief description for the listener to have them understand why these other waterways, straits are relevant when it comes to disruption, Like why they're important because everybody is, you know, very much, even in recent news reports focused on the Straight of Woor moves, which no doubt is very important due to the fact that a lot of the start points for many oil tankers that are relevant to that area of the globe and getting oil to countries or
to places where they can it can be refined or utilized. It's a very important start point and choke point. But why are these other places, Like if you can give a basic description as to why these other places you mentioned that are not being mentioned in news reports, et cetera, why they're important, and just a quick idea about that and how the Iranians have the ability to choke these things off. Please.
Yeah.
I think what it boils down to is it's directional. If you look at the oil flow, I think it's estimated twenty to thirty percent of the oil it's across
the Pacific. That means up to China, up through the Philippines down to Australia is coming out of from Iran and the countries that are on the Gulf that are fed through the Strait of Promos so it's that straight and that path is very important for oil and stuff that's being shipped across the Pacific, which is why right now, and again it's not getting much coverage, but the Philippines is declared an emergency. Australia is suffering terribly from the closure.
They're the ones that are feeling the pain right now. The other shipmentths the Gulf of Aden and the straits down there off Yemen.
Feeds through the Red Sea, feed through.
The canals, but off the coast of Yemen, you also have the pathway that's going to take you around the Horn of Africa and go to go west. I mean, if I can't go east, okay, I've got to ship around, and it's got to be a lot more expensive, right so I can't.
If I can't ship east.
I'm going to have to ship all the way around the world and go the other way. Going to be a lot more expensive. And the problem for me is that the Hothies are in position. They're they're allied with the Irradians religiously, and there's a faction there. They can mess around with that as right now. Right right now, that is area has been subject to pirate attacks there've
been movies about that. There's actually a combined force that's operating there with Asian and European there's a there's a it's called the.
Red Sea Force. Okay, they're solely trying to contain them.
Yes, So just to give the shorthand for dummies, if you don't mind, I just want to add this. What you're saying essentially is that the entire area that I often refer to as Oceania, which is you know, Australia and the parts of Asia and those island nations, et cetera that are reliant on foreign oil for certain aspects of their system of energy and the consumption of resources can be choked off because there is a disruption in the seafaring travel places for oil tankers coming out of
that area number one. Number two, a disruption of the oil that ultimately takes care of part of Europe for its foreign imported energy needs of oil are also choked off easily if there is a disruption again in the shipping lanes if you will, that have to go around Africa, that have to travel west. So I mean this is a significant part of the map that is getting its energy affected, its flow of continuous, and it is continuous. It's like a twenty four seven three sixty five constantly moving,
you know, seafaring. It might as well be a pipeline, but it is tankers that distribute. This aspect of foreign imported oil from various nations can all be choked off from a couple of these let's call them sea lanes of travel. Is that an accurate, oversimplified kind of description, where you're at good?
The bottom line is the Gulf of Aighten, which goes around Yeman, Okay, is a key transport point for shipment across the Pacific, especially southeast across the Pacific and to Europe. So it is it's important a choke point for those kind of those kind of wild shipments, as amaz straight is going northeast Okay. So both of them are key choke points. And essentially the interesting thing is at this point in time, the Iranians are only really messing aggressively with one of them.
They've held back. The Hawthys have not engaged.
They fired a couple of missiles at Israel, but they have they have not returned to the kind of attacks on shipping passing their areas that they did a couple of years ago.
And you've gotten very used to Yes, sorry, you've gotten very used to reading the Hawthey's. Uh, most people pronounce that the Hooti's just for the point of reference, So I know that's it looks like the Hawthy's though on paper or the haughtiest.
Oh well, what can I tell you?
It's okay. I just want to make sure nobody gets confused, like who are the Hawthys versus the Hoothies. But it is relevant because a lot of people, even fairly smart people, get a little lost on the geography. So that's why I'm trying to break it down to a simpler level here and make sure that what you're saying is not lost on somebody who goes yes. So what this is extremely significant, And even more significant is that what you're also saying is that they haven't messed with easily half
of this. You know of this sea lane that might as well be a pipeline of ships that moves along and makes this oil, this resource travel. One. Two, they haven't even fully caused the problem with the Strait of Hormuz. Regardless of this discussion about well they let some tankers go, they didn't let other tankers go. They haven't even begun to exert full force that they are capable of. That
is a point of vulnerability in this. You know, again, in this commerce, these international international commerce that takes place as a matter of just the practice that the world is engaged in constantly, there is a h there are trade routes here that are vulnerable to anybody who'd want to disrupt them. But the Iranians are capable, have the equipment, have the manpower, have the ships to do a hell of a lot more to disrupt this than they are
currently doing. And then it seems like they have the potential to easily just change their mind and really create serious problems that would have a greater impact, even if they were only temporary. They would cause you know, a temporary disruption, could cause a lot of things to go sideways temporarily. I mean like it would have a serious impact, even if just temporary. Sorry, I ran out of breadth there, Even if just temporarily, sorry, go ahead.
Temporary is not the right word.
See what we're totally missing And I'm afraid what we missed with this attack we still haven't learned, or the Secretary of Defense hasn't learned or some I think our military has learned, but we actually it may have been a favor for the Iranians. Like I said, they didn't need those ships. They didn't need those old jet aircraft that they're trying to maintain after thirty forty years. They weren't using those anyway. They had never used their ships
or their aircraft to project force. Okay, they had used missiles, they hadn't used groans in any you know, they're the ones that gave the Russians the shaheeds, the whole warfare that's going on in Ukraine and Russia, where now Ukraine can strike oil depots fourteen hundred miles from their orders.
Yeah. I bet a lot of people forgot. I bet a lot of people forgot that the Iranians were capable of supplying the Russian army with drones for their arsenal I want to Yeah, I think that's the point. You're right that people may have sort of let go already because it was sort of part of the news. And the Iranians have made a deal to supply the right
Think about that for a second. They had enough, and they had something that was capable of, you know, not saying that the Russians have had a great deal of success, but they have in a sustained way now utilized a lot of drones in an active war with Ukraine that they were supplied with, you know, from their ally. Don't forget that that their ally is Iran. They have a they have agreements, they have all sorts of paperwork there stating that you know, their allies they I mean, I
don't know how else to put it, you know. And that's another weird thing that I keep asking myself, is is there a point at which Russia's supposed to intervene here? Because I remember reading some time ago that there was an agreement about that that if they were literally attacked Iran in a significant way, the Russians were under some sort of I don't know if you'd call it a treaty or a pact or whatever, they had an agreement to go in there on their behalf and assist them
if they were being attacked. And quite frankly, now they're being attacked.
And they are assisting them, there's no doubt about that.
But do you hear anybody discussing it? You know? What I'm saying is you do.
You don't hear it in the mainstream media, but if you do in the right places. A part of this what I discussed earlier, the targeting. Why is the targeting.
Targeting is improved.
We're attacking Israel and we can't hit anything. Now we can individual ships. We can hit at a tanker in a rock, at a port. We can hit a tanker in the UAE in a port. Targeting is getting a lot better. How is this targeting any better? Iran doesn't have satellites. They don't have satellites surveillance. Russia and China do.
So they've been given access to resource resources and literal data for intelligence purposes, which has increased their accuracy and efficiency when it comes to counter strikes. Is what you say.
Yeah, this is a new type of warfare that we didn't we're not catching onto And as you pointed out earlier, Iran is a big place right to fight the war that the Ukrainians are fighting now and taking it to the Russian oil and gas and manufacturing infrastructure. You need truck mounted drones that can fly fifteen hundred miles. You don't need ballistic missile bases. It's a big Iran is a big place you put them out there. Yeah, yeah, you lose without a doubt. We're pretty good at that.
But all you need to do is maintain a cadence. And that's where I said the temporary where temporary isn't right.
You need a cadence.
You need a cadence of being able to get a couple of drones through every day or so so that nobody is going to risk a tanker. You need to get a couple of drones through every day or so so that the UAE and Dubai I mean, who were never struck before, nobody had projected any force against them. Now the Iranians are making it quite clear that you know, you really shouldn't have.
Invited the Americans.
You guys, you know they are out of control and now it's on you. So we've got projection of forced all of a sudden in places there wasn't any before.
Now it's there.
Can they maintain it? How long can they maintain it? I don't know, but the most recent reports I'm saying, if they shift from you know, the high value resources like ships and planes to drones. Uh, you've maintained that for a long time, okay, And they've got a lot of drones left even best astract I sent you a leak that you can post from croiters that have some estimates. So if if they can maintain a cadence, all they
really have to do is maintain a cadence of risk. Okay, And the only way you're going to use you're going to have region to settlement at some point. And I guess I'm going to make an argument that a lot
of people are not going to like. But yes, we have destroyed a lot of wren and we've made a lot of bitter enemies, but we have actually put them in the position of showing that they can project force in a way that hurts us more hurts us the world more than the missile strikes they were carrying out against Israel.
Right.
And here's the thing as well.
We're talking about projecting economic force.
Well, right, because here's the thing that is being missed in the conversation in my opinion, as far as all the reports on this, and that's why you're getting a propaganda free discussion here regarding this with Larry, and I hope people appreciate it, because again, down to the last dozen minutes, I want you to get to the rest of what we're missing so far. But just recognize and I will put in the show notes the links that Larry is referencing that he shared with me in preparation
for this discussion. He gives me a couple of articles sometimes to take a look at. One of them was last minute. I didn't see it, but I understand where we're going. I think this is something relevant though, to keep in mind. And I want you to go ahead and lay down the last of what you have on this and we'll close out this thing in an hour in total, which is barely enough time to do it right. But of course Larry gets it done even with me
distracting and causing interruptions. The thing is that this is not just about force projection. What we're seeing here, which is quite different from any of the recent conflicts that the United States has found itself involved in. I'm trying to be generous and even handed about this. The thing is, it's not just about force projection. There is the projection
of economic pressure in addition to threat projection. There is a great deal of this conflict being played out on many different levels that quite frankly, I think the current leadership is incapable of fully understanding. The only reason we're not completely losing in this conflict at this moment, I believe, is because there are others beneath the heads of the organizations.
Even though go very slowly and without a lot of fanfare, some people are getting dismissed from Homeland Security and DJ I predict there will be some heads rolling elsewhere because again, the upper echelon of leadership I don't think is capable of understanding that there is threat projection, there is economic pressure being exerted, there is force projection, and all of them do not match the descriptions by the upper echelon
of leadership. The overall conflict is being played out in many ways that are being ignored oversimplified by the majority of the mainstream media, for sure, and I do believe that we are still yet to have an accurate description
of the action that is occurring in real time. Now, those are my opinions, for sure, and Larry Hancock doesn't have to share them and may not, But either way, that is the point that I do believe Larry is making in a extremely precise and let's call it a pithy manner, and he's getting it done with an elegant simplicity here where he's laying out a lot of detail and giving you a look at what's really happening here without any hyperbole, without any cheerleading or any you know, politicized,
polluted leaning that's meant to project a narrative that doesn't necessarily match what's happening. So I just want to tell you that I truly appreciate it, Larry, that you're doing this with me and walking through it and allowing me to do my oversimplified descriptions of some of the things you're saying. But I'm sure that we missed a few
things so far. And I want to give you the last say, ten minutes here, unless you want to take it a little longer or whatever, up to you entirely to give us the rest of the story up to now. What is it that we need to know going forward, anything that we need to know about what's going to happen in the future, what's currently happening, or what has already happened that maybe we're under informed about. There's a deficiency maybe in the information that has been gathered and uh,
you know, related publicly thus far. What else do you think we're missing or is there something that we should recognize, et cetera, et cetera. The floor is yours.
Well there, I think there are two things that we're missing, and one is an hour on discussion by itself, and that we're we're missing the fact that we have basically given up our ability to be a partner. We we we don't partner. Well we we did, you know when we we we fought wars in the Middle least before we build up coals. We didn't move until the coalition was established. Could we have built the coalition up here, possibly.
But we didn't.
In fact, it doesn't look like there was any any effort to do so until after the fact.
Well, quickly, I want to ask something about that, just real fast. I need to ask something about that, because I would contend that in the past we did build real, working, legitimate coalitions at certain times in order to take on conflicts, whether we required it or not, in order to effectively achieve our objectives. It was done in the past for certain Then there were also times when it was fagned and it was kind of a joke. The coalition of the willing that Bush had for a rock kind of
a joke. Some of the Coalition of the Willing the partners listed, you know. I'm sure you remember the scene from fair Night nine to eleven, you know where I mean one nation agreed to send us I don't know what was it. Landmine detecting monkeys, you know, and things like that, and one of our you know, willing coalition of the of the willing partners, you know, sent a ship, you know, things like this, weird things where the Coalition of the Willing was sort of more window dressing than reality.
But there were legitimate coalitions in the past where there was partnership. And even when there wasn't legitimate, full fledged partnership, there was at least the attempt to project that there was. That's no longer it unless you want to count Israel, you know what I'm saying, where yeah, they're definitely a partner of sorts.
Go ahead, Sorry, the point and I I remember giving speeches about the Coalition of the Willing Vietnam back in nineteen sixty eight, so we won't go back that char But the point is, even when you had a coalition of the willing that wasn't significant for military purposes, at least you were maintaining your partnerships. Okay, you weren't cutting
yourself off with the knees. Now we're in a mode that we're our president is is happy to literally disregard people that have been allies for decades and make remarks about, well, the British didn't really fight well in Afghanistan, you know. But basically there's a difference. I'm not saying that we haven't done some things that were coalitions that were just coalitions for show, but at least.
They didn't hurt anything.
We didn't destroy anything, or we're going to go in on our own, but we didn't like cut everybody off with the knees, so that, you know, Okay, So that's another story itself, and there's tons of implications that go along with that.
But the smaller thing that I'd like to bring out.
That it's strictly got to do here with in the last three weeks, we have used up the vast majority, regardless of what you hear of our are anti missile systems, anti missile inventories, not for just us, but what we supplied to all those partner nations in you know, in the Gulf.
Okay, that's that's not a good thing to chew up.
And we're we're taking a lot of credits for this for having high precision, high technology, extremely effective weapon systems, which are also extremely costly.
We've chewed through that.
Okay, Now we're looking at years and new new production lines and whatever to replace those expensive weapons. But we're not facing up to the fact that, yeah, those are good and they're effective, and they're highly you know, high technology, but so were those little drones that are taking out the individual ships and factories, and they're not anything like a comparable cost, and they can be manufactured a lot quicker,
and they require to oppose them. You need to, you know, if they're going to send five hundred drones at you, you can't afford five hundred ten million dollar missiles.
Right now, I was going to say this do yeah, sorry, I was going to save this till the end, Larry, but you're begging me to bring it up here. So this is the last thing I'm going to ask you. Because my thought about this since the opening, you know, the opening volleys, let's say, a weapons discharge, okay, in the conflict. My initial thoughts immediately were that I really am rooting for Trump to be right about this will
be over quick. And the declarations from Hegseth about this is going to be over real quick anyway, don't worry about it. I really want to believe them, because here's the reality that I think is also being ignored, and that is that if this is a prolonged conflict, if this is in any way going to be something that
a circumstance of attrition is part of the equation. Not only is it going to cost us more, but due to the speed of our manufacture, the overwhelming expense to answer they're cheaply manufactured and quickly manufactured weapons, we are looking at a circumstance where we don't win if this goes long term and they can maintain any level of answers to us every It's almost like my gun has five hundred dollars bullets in it and yours cost a nickel.
You can send somebody the store and go buy you plenty more before I can go get a hold of my five hundred dollars bullets. At some point, you're going to outpace me, even if I'm bigger and stronger in a conflict, and that I'm talking about one gun and the price of bullets, because again I'm trying to oversimplify. But is it or is it not true that in a prolonged conflict here we would lose economically, we would lose as far as the speed of manufacture without some
sort of change in our current system, etc. Etc. Doesn't this put us in a vulnerable position if this conflict continues to drag on and our participation continues to be run the same way? Or is that something that I have wrong here?
Well, not only this conflict, but any conflict. I mean, the logic now, it is kind of like if you were to go to war in China, you would either win or lose in two weeks because nobody has the ability to resupply. Right, You're not going to fight to four year war anymore. It's not going to happen, not with those kind of weapons, which leads you down two different pets, Okay, And I think that the most interesting path is not being discussed at all in the mainstream media.
Is the Gulf nations are pretty sharp and they see that the threat that has revealed, and so guess what are they going to continue to spend money bying the number of anti missile missiles that they have from the US, especially when we claim we've knocked out all the Iranian missiles, so there's no you know, what are they going to buy? Well, Ukraine made an offer to us to supply to them the Gulf States anti drone weapons, which Ukraine is building
and which are increasing and successful. Our president turned down the offer. So Zelenski went directly and made a sure of each of the Gulf nations and they've all made contract deals with Ukraine to buy anti drone weapons. You may well see shipments of you know, multimillion dollar anti ballistic missiles reverting to purchases of anti drone weapons. There's there's going to be a bit. This is this is this is showcase the shift in weapons.
And also the mistake. Sorry, but also in my opinion, and this may be my opinion alone, but the mistake that it was to not engage with Ukraine as a friendly nation, and it may have been against our best interests in the long run to treat them like, well, you need our help, so too bad and you ought to be thankful for what you've gotten already. Perhaps not the wisest posture to take with a nation that could have been you and putting a position to truly be
grateful in the future. That's my note on this. I'm sorry, but I saw that coming a mile away, and it isn't because of you know, magic chemical plants that I believe exist or other criminal operations that absolutely had to be exterminated. And good for the Russians for doing it. According to one side of this equation, I really felt like it was a grand mistake for our benefit, not just benevolent handing something over to Ukraine because we love them so much, but a matter of it was a
strategic mistake in my mind. But people didn't see.
That technology partner for the Soviet Union.
Yeah, I know.
So if you're going to pick and choose, what partner do you want, Yeah, it was you want the people that were building missiles and providing computer technology to the Soviets.
Yeah.
Yeah. But that's my point is that it's not a matter of emotion, it's a matter of cold calculation. It was wiser to assist them and to take advantage of that, because it's not all about the money we put there or how much we were propping them up necessarily, But you know what, if you're going to do that kind of stuff, maybe decide to do it with somebody that can be to your benefit afterwards. I mean, I'm just saying, but I've always shaken my head at that because like, oh,
you just have trumped arrangement syndrome. And I'm like, no, that's poor strategy. I don't care who's doing it, but no, I was wrong and anything.
Sorry, if you looked at the Soviet Union and looked at what resources were were were, and we're totally objective, it.
Would be I, as the US, I do not need their oil. I got oil.
What I need is you know what was coming from what was coming from the Ukraine, what was coming from Kiev. They were building their subs, they were you know the react. It's like it wouldn't have been hard to do.
But be that as it may. But I guess the third.
Point I was going to make is this, this conflict has really revealed, regardless of how much the President boast about it, it's not that those extremely expensive high precision weapons aren't don't have their uses, but to use them totally for fighting a new type of conventional war. Nobody can afford a long war that way. And I think that's the point you were bringing up. What it brings out is that the future really kind of has two paths.
The super high tech weapons, you know, have their applications to take out very specific targets bunker busters.
Okay, fine, but there's going to.
Be a whole generation of low tech, highly accurate stuff that we're going to have to learn to cope with. So that leads you down two different paths. Entirely, it's it's frightening, but the two different paths that leads you down to our high precision, low tech in one direction and back to nuclear in the other direction.
And if you look at the.
Article today on the new analysis of what China's doing to their nuclear weapons infrastructure, it's frightening. Have they made that decision like they know they can't win a three week war either.
With you know, high tech weapons. I don't know.
But we're bragging about what we're doing now. Is what worries me in regard to the amount of hubris. You know, you're not going to see what you should be doing if you don't recognize what's happening to you now. And it appears that we're claiming victory now is you know, it's fine, and the military deserves extreme praise, but you need to be you need to be learning some lessons too, and I'm afraid we may not be learning them right.
So in order to tie a bow on this one, like I often say with you, Larry, a final thought comes to me, and that is, ultimately big picture wise, over the longer term, let's say, regardless of what's happening in this conflict and how you want to break it down or which part you want to analyze, here in my opinion, and I want to see if you agree or disagree. And this is a weird thing because I usually don't do this with you, But my overall opinion
is as follows. The biggest winners here according to the way things are just going in general, and I am talking about not just the Middle East, but the plans to maybe deal with Cuba next. What's happening, you know in Venezuela. The overall geopolitical let's call them spheres of influence and pressure. The overall game winner at the moment,
in my mind is China is the Russian Federation. Those two are going to benefit the most if things continue as they are without some changes here, I feel as though the United States, even if we win in the next handful of conflicts, are putting ourselves in a position of vulnerability here that is allowing those two greater powers in the world to benefit immensely in the future. That's what I see happening. Whether that's being done intentionally or not.
Whether it's being done you know, consciously or not by their opponents is another story. But I think the real brain trusts in both of those places in the world are looking at this and saying, oh, we have just been handed gifts for the future. We're going to have presence to open up in the you know, in the theoretical Christmas of long term when it comes down to it,
sometime from now. These are gifts that we're going to be given where our stature, our position of power on the planet is literally going to be well elevated, and we're going to be stronger and better in the near and further future because of what's currently happening. Do you see it that way or is it just me?
This The last six months to me have been a real shift. I might not have thought that strongly before, but if you look at I mean, look.
At today you mentioned Cuba.
Today we have a Russian tanker docking with months of fuel for Cuba, and it's okay. The President just said, it's fine, it's it's like humanitarian.
Well wait a minute, I mean.
At the at the moment, it just appears that we do not have a strategy, and that over the last six months, Yes, the the balance is shifting towards having a unified strategy that you know, would have would have eliminated some at least frozen things in place. But the winners at present are undoubtedly China, Russia, and North Korea.
By that matter.
It continues to it continues to stun me Iran was not a threat to the continental United States in no way, shape or form. North Korea is deploying nuclear submarines with nuclear ICBMs. They're an outstanding threat, and not so much even in themselves that they can they're happy to supply that to anybody. So it just it looks like we've taken our eye off the ball of who are the real potential threats, especially over the.
Last six months. I don't know how that happened.
A year ago, when we were sanctioning Russia and at least supporting Ukraine vocally to some extent, but it shifted and I don't know why, but no, I don't think we're in.
A good space geopolitically. Hit the moment right.
And you're correct. I did leave North Korea out of the discussion because remember this, And I don't mean to say this to you, Larry, I mean to just say this out loud. North Korea, in its isolation state, has developed a parallel set of technologies which are extremely useful to guess who their allies. They don't have a long list, but they have a consistent list of people who have
been their allies. So in a pinch, not knowing what it is, they have actually fully developed, regardless of their demonstrations and their occasional very public and very direct communications where they launch missiles toward Japan near Japan, over Japan,
you know, things like that to make a point. Guess what, we don't even know their full potential, at least not publicly for sure, And they are willing and working allies of Guess who the two adversaries I just said are benefiting North Korea to my mind, is one of their benefits in this current circumstance is literally not a just a beneficiary like they are, but a benefit in and of itself as a partner. So I'm glad you mentioned it. I wasn't going to bring it up. But definitely a
significant part of this equation is just that. So, you know, while we're worried about the ballroom and calling the Kennedy Center the Trump Kennedy Center, even though it says memorial afterwards, which I always find funny and nobody else seems to, because obviously, if you name something after two things and you call it a memorial center, I would assume both
of those people are dead. But anyway, here we are, we're in a circumstance where I almost feel like we're handing on not just silver platters, but golden platters, which of course Trump would approve of gifts to these adversarial nations, and those gifts are definitely things to be opened in
the future. And they've made investments with North Korea and probably some nations that were not even fully thinking of that have been ignored, isolated, demonized, you know whatever, that are also going to be involved here as of resource, as providers of manpower, as providers of technologies that are either parallel to existing things or are completely unique from some existing things, And once those things are fully developed and invested in a little further, they may be unveiled
in the future as surprises. And like you said, nuclear technology, it's not a matter of do you know, does North Korea have weapons? It's only a matter of the degrees and to what adaptation can that be added to some other pre existing technologies. I mean, it would take no time at all for there to be enough exchanges.
Yeah, sorry, God, we know there's ample evidence to show that North Korea has been the primary missile and technology along with Russia. But actually North Korea has been the mentor for Iran on missiles, so there's a strong relationship, and nobody.
Is even.
Brought that in regard to this conflict. And that's because the North Koreans are very good at doing covert technology transfer right for money.
They do that really well, well out of necessity based on the way things have run since the you know, Armistice of the Korean conflict. Guess what that is the circumstance they find themselves in. I sit back and say, what do you expect? It's actually quite logical and should have been expected, but we see it not being addressed. We see a lot of things in my mind not being addressed currently and in some cases maybe a little too much emphasis on other things we're not looking at.
I mean, you say there's no strategy. I think they've got the wrong read on the situation. You know, they're running a great passing play, but they're not seeing all the guys that are there to intercept the ball. You know, they think their receivers in the clear, they think the quarterback is protected, but they don't see the entire field. It seems like to me anyway, enough analogies, enough of all that, Larry, is there anything you want to say
in closing before? I recommend all of your books which are available and there will be a link in the description for people to get them. And they all talk about, let's call it the interaction of international elements the various aspects of the intelligence apparatus in various places, the interactions thereof through things like the King assassination, the Kennedy assassination, but also great books like Creating Chaos Unidentified, which we
discussed recently regarding UAP, etc. Etc. Larry, you are a great, you know, historian in that you're recording and re recording some things from the past that maybe we're not properly recorded in the first place, but you're also recording current things and things in the aftermath, as after action reports, so to speak, when it comes to some of the mistakes. Of course, everybody's heard of the book that we run an ad for, and we'll run an ad for at
the end of this discussion. But all of Larry's work is highly recommended. Oh, by the way, is the new Oswald puzzle out? Somebody did ask me about that recently. They gave me some idea that they weren't sure.
Sorry, two weeks.
It's it's not shipping yet. I actually I've got my paper kit bat copy. Is actually your your paperback copy went in the mail today to you. Wonderful Okay, So it's uh, it's it's closed.
Actually it should be.
I think Amazon says they're beginning deliveries in two weeks, shipments in two weeks, so it's close.
Okay. So when Larry says two weeks, it's not Trump's two weeks. So within a couple of weeks or within a month or so, you and I will probably be discussing at least, you know, take one conversation. Unless you know, things get really crazy and other subjects that we might discuss. Will probably take the time to discuss the update on
the Oswald Puzzle, which I highly recommend. But Larry's written about a great many other things, and maybe tonight's discussion would relate more to shadow warfare, surprise attack creating chaos for various reasons. Did I miss something, Larry.
Now that covers it pretty well?
Okay, So any final word before we're done, or do you think we've done a good enough job with this? I ran you over a little over an hour, and I always got to apologize for it. Sorry about that, but we also started late. So here I am taking up a lot of Larry's time, and I appreciate that you granted to me so generously and kindly. But anything you want to add before we're all done.
Now, I just I would encourage people to look at some of the like we talked about tonight.
It's good.
You know, the mainstream media at this point in time is very politically oriented. It's really missing some of the I mean, since we're engaged in a war, right, it's still primarily talking politics, it's not talking military. So I just follow up on some of this dialogue that's going and what's really happening in the military domain is important
for the longer term. You know how, whatever we declare in terms of victory right now, there is a longer term to be concerned about, and it has to do with actually what we talked about.
This is a new type of projection of force.
It's a new world in terms of how you're going to be projecting power in terms of using actually inexpensive long range weapons that are highly, highly selective. It's just if you folks haven't been involved in following what actually Ukraine is doing to Russia, then you're missing it because they are. They are taking them apart at the seams right with cheap long range weapons.
And there you have it. Warfare has changed, and you know what happens when you fall behind the times. So once again, thank you Larry Hancock for helping us once again to give a better analysis then you're gonna get anywhere else. I think this is a propaganda free analysis actually of the conflict in Iran and around the Middle East. And I hope you the listeners appreciate it as much
as I do. And it's not due to anything that I did except ask a few awkward questions and interrupt Larry here and there, but I do my best to frame what Larry is is conveying to us because it's extremely informative and important. So to end this particular Thursday night discussion, I say, I am merely o'celly. All of
you are the effect. Please support the network. I am having a hard time right now, and you know, I really don't want to be sitting here tearing my hair out on my birthday, which is in less than a week, trying to figure out how to keep things running. So please do utilize what I have left for being able to support me because I'm not getting paid for memberships anymore or anything else that I used to. So it is your direct support that will keep us running or
not in the very near future. So please do that, and thank you for listening once again everybody, and thank you Larry for indulging me for yet another hour plus as we try and make our way through the current and past three houries.
M M.
M M.
Revelation through conversation.
Radio Wall Street dot dot Wall Street, Windows dot com dot com.
Michael Swanson, the brilliant author of the War State, gives you the benefit of his knowledge. Wall street, dot dot go there, now go there, now there now nuclear holocaust. You know what uranium is, right?
You think called nuclear weapons and other things like lots of You know what uranium is, right? Bad things things are done with uranium, including some bad things nuclear holocaust. You know what uranium is, right, I've been agree nuclear holocaust is nuclear holocaust.
You know what uranium is right?
Next think called nuclear weapons and other things like blood.
Say you know what uranium.
Is, right?
Bad things things are done with uranium, including some bad things nuclear holocaust, nuclear hololear Holocaust, nuclear holocaust, nuclear holocaust, nuclear Holois.
The War State by Michael Swanson explains the great national transformation that took place and put the Kennedy presidency in the context of the times, and reveals never before published information about the Cuban missile crisis. President Kennedy would not have been assassinated if he had been president two hundred years ago. His assassination took place in the context of the Cold War and the rise of the national security state.
Before World War II, the United States was a continental republic. In the decade that followed, it became an imperial superpower. Generals such as Curtis LeMay not only wanted to invade Cuba, but knew that there were short range missiles on the island aren't with nuclear warheads that they could not destroy because they were on mobile launchers. Their invasion could have led to a Third World War, and they wanted to
go to war anyway. The War State by Michael Swanson reveals why, and we'll show you what President Kennedy was up against. For more information, The War State dot com the use.
Expressed by caller schools, there anyone else who happens to get on the air of Jelly dot Com do not necessarily reflect the views of Jelly dot Com or Jeff Jelly, and we are not responsible. We're getting stupidity which might ensued.
Thank you.
Your here.
In Denial The Secret Wars with air strikes and Tanks by Larry Hancock. Secret Wars became a state the US covert operations and are still happening today. Larryhancock's book In Denial rips the cover.
Off many of them, using new files.
It exposes things about the Bay of Pigs that no one has ever written about before. It shows why it really failed and why the United States did not learn from it. It also shows why other countries today are doing secret operations with more success. This is the book that puts what some want to deny into the light. In Denial secret wars with air strikes and tanks Larry Hancock. For more information, go to Larry hyphen Handcock dot com.
Pick up your copy of In.
Denial at Amazon dot com in digital or physical for you.
The first double nigga I ever met in my life?
Do you like history? Real history that you were never taught in schools? Why the Vietnam War Nuclear Bombs in nation Building in Southeast Asia by author Mike Swanson, with new documentation never seen before that will open your eyes to events that led up to this. Why the Vietnam War Nuclear Bombs in nation Building in Southeast Asia nineteen forty five through nineteen sixty one. Get your copy today at Amazon dot com. Why the Vietnam War by author Mike.
Swanson dot Com Radio Network Chili dot Com.
Pledge allegians a false flag of the never United Manic state of Maguel.
Grida, write Orange Margarita, one nation beneath the anti Gods and anything that would team worthy of ranting Completely divided, explaining algorithms animized without the liberty to speak freely and justice probably the elite that can afford to rite, but not home justice with a sale That transuit is tech pro a sex Docky tell as.
The opportunity to be slaughtered by the systems that be is for the rest of us all.
Don't forget that, don't we are right? The life country we us might make it sold.
The penalty will be the punishment for.
Terrory to burn the flag of war.
Already place will make shirt or Jesus gets a third tun because tatiest guy.
So it's for raging ranges.
Of techno crazing romas sky that's worker and Jesus wept as we save ourselves from communism and fascism with Leo equal fascism and kryptocracy is in the new drug Bible.
Body where the anti Christ is a.
French gender or and babylon as franchises that barely include a truck tower and a.
McDonald's in every new city of the prison.
For profit planet.
Bother budding.
Do not LOLd justice with a seat on the trans human. It would not loan justice with a seed on a transument.
Is that bro?
Oh, don't forget that we are right to life.
Don't forget that though we are right to life, country, we just might make it so the death penalty will be.
The punishment for that. Read to burn the flag off the true so ready.
Ways will make shirt or Jesus gets a third son because that is God's sooice for rachel oranges and woh that no crazy promise.
Look, the anti Christ is a transgender whore, and Babylon has franchises that merely include a.
Foot Tower and a McDonald's vision New City.
The vision to the.
Effect decide is broken.
Revelation to conversation must.
Lie so.
Fact revelations on the sasa a devastation, revelation conversation are the effecta conversations.
Demonstrator hotel fact Melissa.
A Titian through converse, Oh shall effect revelation on the face gone had forgotten. I show you in fact beyond the places and sears lirror of the shade.
Yet the years finds that shall find me. I'm afraid, and that is not a brave decate charge. The scroll I am the master of my fate, I am the chant of my soul.
Show only of fact, revelation const propaganda Horse continued cashing in and.
Teach us about religion, keeping score at home. Are people you'd like to see even by wolves, dishropped.
Dying soon the cagles, my taco tips and his continued golf storming tour and winning a streak, says.
God sparred him and decided to firefighter dies.
In the.
Revelation conversation affect, you are the effect. You are the effects revelation to conversation. Ball's praise.
No straights, no.
Revelation through conversation.
Through conversation.
I'm all raised.
Restraints tell affect revelation through conversation, through conversation, all restraints, I'll tell you effect revelation through conversation.
Time as the dead from pole, whatever done for my undocable soul in the constant circumstance, I have not WinCE, NOI.
Allow needs a chance. My head bloody out. You are the effect, the actually effect revelation, true conversation, revelation, conversation.
Effect.
You are the effect. You are the effect revelation through conversation. Ball's praise, No restraints of.
Revelation to conversation, true conversations. Restraints all tell effect revelation to conversation through conversation.
All restraints will tell effect. Revelation to conversation.
L Break, Bradwater, wilnother john Bars.
Lead us to the front of Macamania and from the merger every made in China, South phil in the States for nothing legitim and we stand broken nation and morally wake rock God, divide it nothing but muscle brain for doubt, remember being something denied for all because Lena is all, rather than knock on.
It for foul ideas for coming for me on the coming yacht last but not a better bit of brought by.
Or something with not as the golfers of the Laitue practice gold Ships.
Made him be a non simultaneously deprecated from a hole in an actual real estate. Let the Queen's waiting more US troops coming to.
A police state nears you, replacing three.
Of wood maca no constitution two point all the biogas the free wo who lacks that, the cast of byant bond and.
The walking from center of bathering and had this massive trump, the crump puffing and.
The water rime by play the fact for appen Merphy from the gold be casting.
Songs, the elder breaks Tico for candle.
And leged brial Man's man of the Manisphere of.
Rodes bond people and Donna rolls forty stars off brains and no fast chicks.
Also no fast buffelt sens in no case you mean fit.
Absolutely no ticks with dicks, says on the door street of sit for Listrid nor Christmas Batay physical bankrupt to your frump frame and something.
President here required deligious to a pop flag and then a united managed state of Magareta d or you have a senior raiders would they've been breaking new?
Yet the Don and Maggie Piper me more than you're prating completely divine.
It's blending some auber weapons out of my dumb the lever and a break freely and nothing's.
Only r leading to a fer render. Oh Jack never owns nothing, see a self transhumanist some us good double plus good. Is no God because now I thought the little reeman reduning forth the pocracy.
Old Christian and you are Scottish for God down whether you do know anything, I'll come back in books unaware of that shoal water.
Jack brow facous is.
The hell flotter b is then be uncle one and never all.
President's not going to brief these blessing, let's be blessing. Not the man got a ship things Sand's like Jesus back, sun of beach around me without.
Eyes, demanding the peace or form, but never bend ignores with course and what was that?
Children?
Crazy?
I feel trauma Buddhist never random evil, never random offer the.
Riot of somn profession. You prease agreement to relatives against thanks.
For boss and no advancement resy that thass reading the.
Soviet bond or a dance and it's my thanks, thanks and about them finding faith.
To increase peace.
Bucket brains off by this praise.
You're reading your milissidium, the putorically relative world's third bart.
The U real Boss and the late set the parting with both blinds do and re sists. Fuck you back