My perspectives on Iran, Ukraine, global geopolitics, Trump, Musk, Israel, and other key topics.

First of all, I want to say sorry again for not writing more. I’m simply feeling depressed, and I’m not sure if I’m actually sick. I just haven’t been feeling well lately.

I’m extremely happy that all my rambling and posts about the “Division of Labor” theory — and my advocacy for Brian Beletic — have paid off, and that he has finally reappeared on The Duran.

I could easily write 10 or even 100 pages. I have so much to say, but I know that if I write too much, people won’t read it. So I’ll try to keep it short.

I spend almost all of my free time listening to geopolitical analysis to understand what’s really going on. Since so much is happening — and I have a regular day job — I usually don’t have time to write. Fortunately, I have a few days off now, so I hope I’ll find both the time and motivation to write some posts.

Also, I apologize for the poor structure of my writing. I know a lot, but I’m not very good at expressing it in writing. I hope you’ll stick with me to the end, even though my writing style may not be the best.

People Are Waking Up

In my opinion, we can distinguish three types of positions when it comes to geopolitical analysis.

The first is the position I hold, which is shared by Brian Berletic and John Helmer. This approach is based on the “Division of Labor” theory.

Then there’s the position which was held by The Duran and Nima R. Alkhorshid from the Dialogue Works YouTube channel. I would describe this as a kind of copium/hopium — not because they lack intelligence, but because they tend to interpret events as they hope they are, rather than as they truly are. I call it copium/hopium because facing reality can often be deeply depressing.

Lastly, there’s a more extreme and, in my view, deranged position held by people like Tom Luongo — what I refer to as the Orange Jesus theory. This line of thinking was also promoted by Alex Krainer, who is now pushing the idea of an imaginary “City of London” theory, which I have openly criticized.

I have a huge amount of respect for The Duran and Nima R. Alkhorshid and fully understand their copium/hopium position. Again, it’s not about intelligence — it’s about perspective. Personally, I’ve written that I wish I were wrong and that The Duran and Nima were right. I didn’t want my more pessimistic predictions to come true. Unfortunately, as has often been the case, my Machiavellian point of view has once again proven accurate — and now, more people are waking up to it.

One sign of this shift is that, after my long advocacy to have Brian Berletic featured on The Duran, it finally happened. The same kind of shift seems to be happening with Nima R. Alkhorshid from the Dialogue Works channel. Here’s a fragment from one of his recent videos that reflects this change.

– YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

52:06

People who voted for Donald Trump saw these sorts of color revolutions and Soros-type activities in other countries. One of the main characters in this fight was Elon Musk, and he hates Soros and all that. In the case of Venezuela, he did the same thing that Soros did for many years: he tried to do everything to overthrow the government in Venezuela.

Right now, with the case of Iran, right after the attacks on Iran, Mark Levin—you know him, he works at Fox, he’s crazy, he yells all the time—he said, “Elon Musk, it’s time for you to provide Iranians with Starlink.” And Elon Musk responded instantly, “They’re getting it right now as we speak.”

This guy, this “Soros” for me, it doesn’t matter; the name has changed, but the agenda is the same. You’re trying to do regime change in other countries. That’s your mission. Who are you to decide other countries’ futures and other countries’ affairs? These people are so out of touch; they don’t understand their role or their mission. I don’t know if they want to control it, but it comes from this sort of mindset of hegemony.

Elon

Just a week ago, you could find videos on Nima R. Alkhorshid’s channel where he defended Elon Musk, claiming Elon left the Trump administration because he didn’t support wars and color revolutions. It’s good to see that he’s finally waking up and beginning to understand the Venezuela case more clearly.

I also criticized The Duran for praising Elon and buying into his nonsense. How can anyone seriously believe that Elon — one of the biggest military contractors, whose entire business model relies on government funding — would want to reduce government spending?

Elon’s idea of “reducing government spending” is about dismantling welfare, destroying social security, and cutting programs that support ordinary people — just so that money can be redirected toward Mars missions for him and his SpaceX company, military contracts for his Starlink system, and the green agenda to boost Tesla. He doesn’t want to cut government spending — he wants to redirect it from the public to himself.

Then there’s the USAID narrative. How could anyone believe he was “against” USAID when he was effectively doing the same kind of operations in Venezuela? The whole point wasn’t to dismantle USAID but to seize full control over it. Aside from that, nothing has changed.

I wrote about this before: remember when USAID was supposedly “shut down,” and suddenly Ukrainian media outlets started experiencing financial problems? If USAID had truly been stopped, those outlets would have gone bankrupt. But they didn’t. That tells us everything — USAID wasn’t shut down. It was never about ending wasteful spending; it was a power grab aimed at fully controlling USAID.

Trump

Regarding Trump and Epstein, I’ve also criticized The Duran for dismissing their connections. In a recent video, I heard Alexander claim that, according to his “good sources,” Trump hated Epstein. I’ve written about this before, and it’s also addressed in the main video I attached to this post.

Trump’s mentor was Roy Marcus Cohn — a Jewish mobster and close associate of Meyer Lansky. Cohn specialized in blackmail, organizing gay orgies, and procuring underage individuals for powerful people, often recording them for blackmail purposes. Interestingly, Trump later bought the hotel where Cohn used to organize and record these events.

Similarly, as Ian Carroll pointed out, Trump also bought a yacht from Adnan Khashoggi — an arms dealer known for organizing orgies, likely involving minors, and equipping his yacht with surveillance tools, presumably for blackmail as well.

Then we come to Epstein:

“Explosive tapes recorded by author Michael Wolff show Epstein claiming Trump liked to ‘f—‘ his friends’ wives and first slept with Melania on the ‘Lolita Express.’

Jeffrey Epstein described himself as Donald Trump’s ‘closest friend’ and claimed intimate knowledge of his sexual habits, including cuckolding his best friends, according to recordings obtained exclusively by the Daily Beast.

Epstein even claimed, ‘The first time he slept with [Melania] was on my plane,’ referring to the infamous Lolita Express.”

I’ve heard from many sources that Epstein introduced Trump to Melania. Whitney Webb has also spoken about this. Epstein wasn’t just involved in procuring minors for figures like Bill Gates or Bill Clinton — he also groomed and matched attractive women as potential wives for powerful men.

While I suspect Trump didn’t have contact with minors — and I can’t be entirely certain — we truly don’t know what Trump did when he was young and even more stupid.

Let’s review the pattern:

• Trump’s mentor was a gay pedophile blackmailer, from whom he bought a hotel used for illicit activities.
• He bought a yacht from another blackmailer, Khashoggi, equipped with recording devices.
• He had a close relationship with Epstein, another pedophile blackmailer — who called Trump his “best friend” and may have introduced him to Melania.

Given all of that, claiming that Trump had nothing to do with Epstein, or couldn’t possibly be in the Epstein files, seems inaccurate to me.

As Ian Carroll noted in the main video:

“You asked me, ‘Trump looks more like a dude who collected blackmail than a dude who was blackmailed.’ But that’s speculation — no proof, and it’s proof we’ll likely never get.”

I agree with this sentiment. But it still makes Trump’s presence in the Epstein files highly probable. So when Elon Musk, in what I assume was a drug-induced rant, blurted out something to this effect — it may have been one of those rare glimpses of truth that shouldn’t have been said out loud.

Israel, Anti-Semitism, and Radical Islam

Now let’s get to Trump and Israel. Here’s a clip from a great show that touches on this topic:

For those interested in PNAC — the Project for the New American Century — here’s a full documentary I’ve shared before in my posts:

Documentary: The New American Century ‘The Secret Plan For World Domination’

This documentary film goes in detail through the untold history of The Project for the New American Century with tons of archival footage and connects it right into the present. It exposes how every m

When it comes to Israel and its relationship with America, there are two main views:

1. One view, represented in the main video I attached, argues that Israel controls America.
2. The other view — supported by people like me, Brian Berletic, John Helmer, and Col. Larry Wilkerson — is that Israel is an American proxy, an attack dog, an unsinkable aircraft carrier in the Middle East.

Here’s a short clip from the Jimmy Dore Show featuring Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir:

Head of Palantir Reveals the Globalist Agenda!

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

All this propaganda about “protecting Israel” and “fighting anti-Semitism” isn’t really about protecting Jews or even Israel — it’s about protecting the narrative. The narrative that allows the West to deploy armies to the Middle East. Israel’s very existence serves not just a military role — as an unsinkable aircraft carrier of the Western capitalist empire — but also as a tool of ideological justification.

Without the narrative that “Islam is evil,” “we must fight anti-Semitism,” and “protect Jews,” how would they convince people to send their children to die in wars in the Middle East, to in reality steal resources, and to oppress those nations?

They can’t tell the truth — so they construct this puppet show. And the people in the West, fooled by it, believe this “clash of civilizations” narrative. They think Muslims are evil and teach their children to kill Christians — all while being manipulated into supporting imperialist wars.

Anyone who believes Islam is inherently bad, or that it’s our enemy, is just a manipulated pawn of the Western capitalist empire. I’ve written many posts trying to dismantle this brainwashing — especially the nonsense about a “clash of civilizations.”

If radical Islam were truly our enemy, why do we ally with regimes that support it? We’re told Iran supports radical Islam — yet the West allied with Iran at times to fight ISIS. Saudi Arabia, one of our closest allies, is the biggest sponsor of radical Islam.

We even put a former Al-Qaeda leader — a radical jihadist — in charge of Syria. HOW CAN RADICAL ISLAM BE OUR ENEMY IF IT DOES OUR BIDDING?

This hypocrisy is best illustrated by a recent article I found stating that Burkina Faso is under attack by jihadists. Interesting — considering Burkina Faso, under the leadership of Ibrahim Traoré, who is openly opposing our Western capitalist empire. So-called “radical Islam” suddenly shows up to attack him. Convenient, isn’t it?

People who claim Islam, Arabs, and radical jihadists are our enemies clearly have no understanding of how the world actually works. They are fully captured by imperial propaganda.

And here’s Netanyahu, just to remind you who you’re siding with if you believe this propaganda:

#Netanyahu says progressive left and “radical #Islam” against #Israel 🟪🗞️🇺🇸🗽 #news #politics

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

SO IF YOU THINK YOUR ENEMY IS “THE LEFT,” SOME IMAGINARY MARXIST THREAT, OR ARABS AND ISLAM — YOU HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT THE REAL WORLD. YOU ARE CAPTURED BY IMPERIAL PROPAGANDA AND YOU ARE SIDING WITH PEOPLE LIKE NETANYAHU.

My Machiavellian Geopolitics Analysis

I wrote five pages, and I still didn’t touch on my geopolitical analysis. Everything is connected, and I have so many things to write. I have so much information in my head, I could write multiple books. My problem isn’t that I don’t have anything to write about; my problem is deciding what to write about from the thousands of things I could cover. I have hundreds of posts in my head. I want to write — whether it’s about propaganda and psychology, philosophy and behaviorism, geopolitics, or economics.

I have criticized The Duran for saying there couldn’t be a “bigger plan” and for criticizing power politics and the geopolitical grand chessboard idea. This is how the real world works, whether you admit it or not. There is always a bigger plan. All this talk about people panicking — I don’t agree with that assessment, because there is always a plan. The people who own this world are not stupid. And if you think they are panicking or that they’re stupid, ask yourself if your analysis is really correct.

Now let’s tackle Ukraine first. I wrote over a year ago that they would not start this war unless they were sure they’d win — no matter what the outcome might look like. I said many times: if they win in Ukraine and Russia falls, good — they will plunder Russia. But even if Russia wins, they put Germany in its place as an American vassal, because Germany under Merkel was trying to become independent from the U.S., which America didn’t like.

So this war in Ukraine has multiple purposes. First, it’s an attempt to destroy Russia. But even if that fails, it weakens Germany and crushes its dream of independence — while also binding Russia’s resources to Ukraine. Take the cold Machiavellian view I’ve written about many times. Our Empire sees Ukraine as a Russian ally and part of Russia’s sphere of influence. So even if Russia wins and destroys Ukraine, our Empire also wins.

To make an analogy: imagine China managed to start a war involving America and Britain. I know it’s an absurd comparison, but stay with me. If China could take control of Britain and start a war against America – if Britain wins, China would use it to take control over America. But if Britain loses, China wins anyway because America would be forced to destroy its own ally. The same logic applies to Ukraine. It was seen as Russia’s ally and “brother nation.” So even if our Empire forces Russia to destroy Ukraine, our Empire wins by making Russia destroy its ally.

This is why they started the war — because no matter the result, our Empire wins. They’re not stupid; they wouldn’t risk their empire on a coin flip. Another function of the war is to tie up Russian resources. Now ask yourself: would Syria have fallen if Russia weren’t bound in Ukraine? The war allows our Empire to finally destroy Syria. If the war in Ukraine had never started or ended sooner, Russia would have the capacity to help Syria, as it did before. So, besides making Russia fight its ally, this war helps destroy another Russian ally elsewhere in the world.

Now I’m starting to think that all this tariff stuff is also intentional — to tie up China’s resources, to distract it with the tariff crisis so it can’t help Iran, just like the war in Ukraine distracted Russia. So we did all we could to weaken Iran’s allies. We bound Russia with Ukraine and China with economic warfare. Now that Iran’s allies are weakened and busy with problems we created, it’s the perfect time to attack Iran. That’s how the geopolitical chessboard works.

Without the war in Ukraine, our Empire wouldn’t even think about messing with Iran, because Russia would have the resources to help Iran. Same with China: if not for the economic problems we caused with tariffs, they’d have more capacity to support Iran. So nobody really cares about Ukraine or whether Ukraine falls. It was always a Russian ally and part of Russia’s sphere of influence. It serves empire interests — even if Ukraine loses — we still made Russia destroy its ally, weakened Germany, ending German independence ambitions, and binding Russian resources.

This also allows the Empire to first destroy Syria (another Russian ally) and now to move against Iran (another Russian ally). At first, I thought the tariffs on China were completely stupid. But now, knowing the goal was to attack Iran, it all starts to make sense. Even if tariffs don’t fully work, they still create economic stress for China — keeping its resources tied up and making it harder to support Iran in case of war.

So stop thinking the people ruling our world are stupid. Even I got tricked by the tariffs, thinking they were dumb, but now I see it was all part of a bigger plan. These people are always five steps ahead. I think of myself as someone who understands a lot and has deep knowledge, but even I was manipulated into thinking they were foolish. When I thought the tariffs were stupid, I should’ve stopped and asked myself: where did I go wrong in my analysis? If your analysis leads you to believe they’re stupid, then your analysis is flawed — because the people who rule the empire are not stupid. Again, if your conclusion is that they are dumb, you need to reassess. There’s always a bigger picture.

As for Alexander, who constantly says there can’t be a bigger picture because “our leaders are stupid” — first of all, the people we see on screen, our so-called leaders, are just puppets. They’re part of a reality show creating a fake world for the naive through propaganda. The real decisions and plans come from think tanks. The official leaders are just brand names, like Trump. They are actors meant to sell the masses a false narrative about the world.

For example, I watch Alex every episode not to learn what’s really happening or what people think — but to understand what they want us to think. I think Alex sometimes misses this perspective. He takes things too literally and believes too much of what he reads. Still, I’m extremely thankful to him for following the mainstream media brainrot. He reads the New York Times and all that garbage and summarizes it for me — so I don’t have to. For that, I’m extremely thankful. I just wish he’d keep a bit more distance and see this info as something they want us to think, not as something they actually believe.

The best example was one of the Ukrainian offensives that was supposed to cut off Crimea and take Mariupol. People believed the West truly thought this offensive would succeed. NATO generals were hyping it. But I wrote at the time that it was nonsense — if I knew it would fail, they must have known too.

Later, we got the Pentagon leaks:

Pentagon leaks: What are the latest takeaways?

A news report says documents may have been spread online by a gun enthusiast who worked at a US military base.

What the leaks reveal about the Ukraine war
Several purported US intelligence assessments paint a more pessimistic outlook for the Ukrainian military than the US has provided publicly. They suggest Kyiv is heading for only “modest territorial gains” in its much-anticipated spring counteroffensive.

So while NATO generals were claiming Ukraine would take Mariupol and cut off Crimea, in reality they knew the best they’d get were modest territorial gains. They knew it would fail.

Later, I heard a theory that they wanted the offensive to fail—to convince people in the West that Russia is a real threat. That would justify increased military spending and push countries like Finland and Sweden into NATO.

At the time, I heard analysts say, “The West really thinks this offensive will succeed; they’re stupid.” I wish people would stop believing that what they hear in the media reflects what people in power actually think. If someone like me could see this offensive would fail, how could top generals and decision-makers not know it?

Same with the idea of Ukraine winning — stop thinking people in power believe that. They just say it for the narrative. They know the war is lost, but they can’t admit it. Why? Because they need Ukrainians to keep dying for our geopolitical goals.

How do you imagine they’d say, “Ukraine lost, but Ukrainians still need to die so we can keep Russia tied up in Ukraine and away from Iran?” Of course, they can’t say that. They have to lie and say Ukraine is winning — so Ukrainians will keep fighting and dying for our geopolitical goals.

They don’t believe Ukraine is winning. They’re just cynically lying to keep the narrative going and to reach their geopolitical objectives. None of them are panicking. None of them believe what they’re saying.

It’s already nine pages, so I’ll stop here. I don’t want to make it too long — I could write 100 pages on how everything is connected. But if it’s too long, people won’t read it. Again, I’m sorry for jumping from topic to topic and for the poor structure of my posts. I’m not good at writing. I’m good at analyzing situations and facts — but not at writing or passing on my knowledge.

Anyway thanks to everyone who stuck with me until the end of my post. And, as always… 

“Knowledge will make you be free.”

― Socrates

+

“Knowledge isn’t free. You have to pay attention.”

― Richard P. Feynman

=

“Freedom is not free, you need to pay attention.”

― Grzegorz Ochman

Please pay enough attention, or we will all be screwed. God bless you all.

“If you are going to control any population for any length of time, you must have some measure of consent. It’s exceedingly difficult to see how pure terrorism can function indefinitely. It can function for a fairly long time, but I think…uh, sooner or later, you have to bring in an element of persuasion, and element of getting people to consent to what is happening” – Aldous Huxley from “The Ultimate Revolution”

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”

― Edward Bernays, Propaganda

“Almost as an article of faith, some individuals believe that conspiracies are either kooky fantasies or unimportant aberrations. To be sure, wacko conspiracy theories do exist. There are people who believe that the United States has been invaded by a secret United Nations army equipped with black helicopters, or that the country is secretly controlled by Jews or gays or feminists or black nationalists or communists or extraterrestrial aliens. But it does not logically follow that all conspiracies are imaginary.

Conspiracy is a legitimate concept in law: the collusion of two or more people pursuing illegal means to effect some illegal or immoral end. People go to jail for committing conspiratorial acts. Conspiracies are a matter of public record, and some are of real political significance. The Watergate break-in was a conspiracy, as was the Watergate cover-up, which led to Nixon’s downfall. Iran-contra was a conspiracy of immense scope, much of it still uncovered. The savings and loan scandal was described by the Justice Department as “a thousand conspiracies of fraud, theft, and bribery,” the greatest financial crime in history.

Often the term “conspiracy” is applied dismissively whenever one suggests that people who occupy positions of political and economic power are consciously dedicated to advancing their elite interests. Even when they openly profess their designs, there are those who deny that intent is involved. In 1994, the officers of the Federal Reserve announced they would pursue monetary policies designed to maintain a high level of unemployment in order to safeguard against “overheating” the economy. Like any creditor class, they preferred a deflationary course. When an acquaintance of mine mentioned this to friends, he was greeted skeptically, “Do you think the Fed bankers are deliberately trying to keep people unemployed?” In fact, not only did he think it, it was announced on the financial pages of the press. Still, his friends assumed he was imagining a conspiracy because he ascribed self-interested collusion to powerful people.

At a World Affairs Council meeting in San Francisco, I remarked to a participant that U.S. leaders were pushing hard for the reinstatement of capitalism in the former communist countries. He said, “Do you really think they carry it to that level of conscious intent?” I pointed out it was not a conjecture on my part. They have repeatedly announced their commitment to seeing that “free-market reforms” are introduced in Eastern Europe. Their economic aid is channeled almost exclusively into the private sector. The same policy holds for the monies intended for other countries. Thus, as of the end of 1995, “more than $4.5 million U.S. aid to Haiti has been put on hold because the Aristide government has failed to make progress on a program to privatize state-owned companies” (New York Times 11/25/95).

Those who suffer from conspiracy phobia are fond of saying: “Do you actually think there’s a group of people sitting around in a room plotting things?” For some reason that image is assumed to be so patently absurd as to invite only disclaimers. But where else would people of power get together – on park benches or carousels? Indeed, they meet in rooms: corporate boardrooms, Pentagon command rooms, at the Bohemian Grove, in the choice dining rooms at the best restaurants, resorts, hotels, and estates, in the many conference rooms at the White House, the NSA, the CIA, or wherever. And, yes, they consciously plot – though they call it “planning” and “strategizing” – and they do so in great secrecy, often resisting all efforts at public disclosure. No one confabulates and plans more than political and corporate elites and their hired specialists. To make the world safe for those who own it, politically active elements of the owning class have created a national security state that expends billions of dollars and enlists the efforts of vast numbers of people.”

― Michael Parenti, Dirty Truths