i, you know, he thinks china is great and perfect, and i don't, i don't really totally agree with that when it comes to some of the policies in china, but other than, um, so it is uh, your statements on, on china i, i mean, i thought it was all well researched, very historical and true and was night and day in contrast to what we get from our politicians. our politicians are bought and paid for the top absolutely of war with our country. and we get that them pointing at russia as the enemy is the destruction. we know roger has its own country, not perfect, just like gosh, but we get like, oh, really 1000. we have inflation because of the russians. and we have censorship. that goes to the russian gym and then you use these were tired of it. what year it is like saying the dog is 8, my monkey garage is a dog. you know, the saying, oh mom, the dog ate my homework. this. there's like, it's like, oh, i read the car, the russians. oh, you know, i didn't pay my bill, it's the russians. it's ridiculous ahead of time so,

so absolutely people see right for it. but, and also touched on the potential threats coming from genetic research and a, i'm not sure how much you know about a i, but i'm wondering if you share his optimism that mankind will be able to her tail. those potential threats with international agreements and rules imposed on this type of technology. well, hey i, it's a reflection of us. and it looks amazing whether it's writing or, or, or images. because it's stooping, what we did, and showing it back to us. so it's kind of narcissistic or lovely in the mirror and then you want to say, i was incredible. what all it's doing is a really great job of scooping up everything we already did. so it has a lot of amazing possibilities. but we've got to take control of our evolution, and that's what he wants to do and take control of our environment and, and have a i'd be built for us. and established, ma'am, should should realize that it should be built for that and not try to use it to

control people. or that's clearly going to backfire on everybody but, but yeah, i am a very optimistic that we'll get control of a i. and that we can again, a human. just envision this. we built all this just a 120 years ago. the wright brothers took off their kitty hawk. and now, you know, we're landing on the moon and we got satellites going to the distant planets. so we have, we've only begun to realize our potential and what we can do, we've got to stop fighting with each other over petty resources and issues and, and create common goals of, of destiny that we collectively work. or we still have individual freedom. but then we individually can decide what we're going to support through the free market of ideas that creates a collective of decision that is independent. it's not forced collect of,

from the top down. it is collected from the individuals deciding what works best adopting it and then the best systems come to the top and then we can do anything. we're like toddlers right now. we're like 2 year olds. and we're fingerprinting right now. or are you doing amazing things? we can do so much if we just remove the old establishment, create new rules in new goals and new systems and transcend the old model. we've got to do it. we're all going to kill each other. okay, we're gonna leave it on that. note that alex jones journalist and founder, and then for wars dot com. thank you. alright, just stay with us. have next more of tucker carlson is exclusive interview with lot method by the why do you think the west rebuffed you then? why, the hostility, why did the end of the cold war not fixed the relationship?

what motivates this from your point of view? you said i was bitter about the answer. no, it's not bitterness. it's just a statement of fact. we're not the bride and groom bitterness, resentment. it's not about those kinds of methods. in such circumstances, we just realized we weren't welcome there. that's all okay, fine. but let's build relations in another manner. let's look for common ground elsewhere. why we received such a negative response. you should ask your leader. i can only guess why, too big a country with its own opinion and so on and the united states. i have seen how issues that being resolved and nato, i will give you another example. now concerning ukraine, the us lead to ship exalts pressure, and all nato members obediently vote even if they do not like something. now i'll tell you what happened in this regard with ukraine in 2008. although it's being discussed. i'm not going to open the secret to you, say anything new. nevertheless, after that, we tried to build relations in different ways. for example,

the events in the middle east in iraq. we were building relations with the united states in a very soft, prudent cautious manner. i repeatedly raised the issue that the united states should not support separatism or terrorism in the north caucasus, but they continued to do it anyway. and political support information support, financial support, even military support came from the united states and its satellites with terrorist groups in the caucasus. i once raised this issue with my colleague, also the president of the united states. he says it's impossible. do you have proof? i said, yes, i was prepared for this conversation and i gave him that proof. he looked at it and if you know what he said, so i apologize, but that's what happened. i'll quote, he says, well, i'm going to kick their ass. we waited and waited for some response. there was no

reply. i said to the f as to be director, right to the see i, what is the result of the conversation with the president. he wrote the ones twice and then we got a reply. we have the answer in the archive. cecilia replied, we have been working with the opposition in russia. we believe that this is the right thing to do and we will keep on doing that. just ridiculous. well, ok. we realized that it was out of the question, forces in opposition to you, do your thing and see a strong over to your government. ok, of course they meant in that particular case, the set part, this is the total is 2 4th with us in the caucuses. that's who they called the opposition. this is the 2nd point. the 3rd moment a very important one is the moment when the us missile defense abm system was created. the beginning, we persuaded for a long time not to do it in the united states. more over after i was invited by bush juniors, father of bush senior, to visit his place on the ocean. i had

a very serious conversation with president bush and his team. i proposed that the united states, russia, and europe jointly create a missile defense system that we believe if created unilaterally, threatens our security. despite the fact that the united states officially said that it was being created against missile threats from a ran. that was the justification for the deployment of the missile defense system . i suggested working together, russia, united states, and europe. they said it was very interesting. they asked me, are you serious? i said, absolutely. let me ask what year was this? your phone and i don't remember, it is easy to find out on the internet when i was in the usa at the invitation of bush senior. it is even easier to learn from someone. i'm going to tell you about and i was told it was very interesting. i said, just imagine if we could tackle such a global strategic security challenge together,

the world would change. we'd probably have disputes, probably economic and even political ones, but we could drastically change the situation in the world. he says, yes and asks, are you serious? i said, of course, we need to think about it. i'm told i said go ahead please. then secretary of defense are gates, former director of the c i a and secretary of state c. rice came here in this cabinet right here at this table. they set on this side me the foreign minister, the russian defense minister on that side. they said to me, yes, we have thought about it. we agree. i said, thank god, great. but with some exceptions. so twice you've described us presidents making decisions and then being under cut, by their agency heads. so it sounds like you're describing a system that's not run by the people who are elected in your towing. that's right

. that's right. in the end, they just told us to get lost. i am not going to tell you the details because i think it is incorrect. after all, it was a confidential conversation. but our proposal was declined. that's a fact. it was right then when i said no, but then we will be forced to take counter measures. we will create such strike systems that will certainly overcome missile defense systems. the answer was, we are not doing this against you and you do what you want, assuming that it is not against us, not against the united states. i said, okay, very well. that's the way it went. and we created hypersonic systems within the continental range, and we continue to develop them. we are now ahead of everyone. the united states and other countries in terms of the development of hypersonic strikes systems and we are improving them every day to say, but it wasn't us. we propose to go the other way and we would push it back. now about nachos expansion to the east. well, we were promised, no, ne,

towed to the east, not an inch to the east as we were told. and then what they said, well, it's not in trend on paper, so we'll expand. so there were 5 waves of expansion, the baltic states, the whole of eastern europe, and so on. and now i come to the main thing. they have come to ukraine, ultimately in 2008 at the summit. in bucharest, they declared that the doors for ukraine and georgia to join nato were open. now about how decisions are made. the germany front seemed to be against it as well as some other european countries. but then as it turned out later, president bush and he was such a tough guy, a tough politician. as i was told later, he existed pressure on us and we had to agree. it's ridiculous. it's like kindergarten. wherever the guarantees what kindergarten is this, what kind of people are these 2 of a you see they were pressed, they agreed. and then they say, ukraine won't be in nato, you know?

i say, i don't know. i know you agreed in 2008. why won't you agree in the future? well, they pressed us, then i say, why won't they press you tomorrow? and you'll agree again, well, it's nonsensical. who's that to talk to? i just don't understand. we're ready to talk. but with whom, where are the guarantees? none. so they started to develop the territory of ukraine. whatever is there, i have told you the background, how this territory developed, what kind of relations that were with russia every 2nd or 3rd person there has always had some ties with russia. and during the elections in already independent software and ukraine, which gained its independence as a result of the declaration of independence. and by the way, it says that ukraine is a neutral state, and in 2008, suddenly the doors, or gates to nato, open to it. oh, come on. this is not how we agreed. now,

all the presidents that have come to power and ukraine, they've relied on an electorate with a good attitude to russia in one way or another. this is the south east of ukraine . this is a large number of people. and it was very difficult to dissuade this electorate, which had a positive attitude towards russia. victo young cove, which came to power and how the 1st time he won after president coach ma. they organized the 3rd round, which is not provided for in the constitution of ukraine. this is a, could you just imagine someone in the united states wouldn't like the outcome in 2014. and you french before that? no, this was before that after president tomorrow, even though you're nicole, which one the elections. however, his opponents did not recognize that victory. the us supported the opposition and the 3rd round was scheduled. what is this? this is a coup to us supported it. and the winner of the 3rd round came to power imagined if in the us something was not to someone's liking. and the 3rd round of election,

which the us constitution does not provide for, was organized nonetheless, it was done in ukraine. ok, victor use jenko who was considered a pro western politician, came to power fine. we have built relations with him as well. he came to moscow with visits. we visited keith. i visited it to we met in an informal setting is pro western soviet. it's fine. let people do their job. the situation should develop inside the independent ukraine itself. as a result of question was leadership. things got worse and victory, a new could, which came to power after all, maybe he wasn't the best president and politician. i don't know, i don't want to give assessments. however, the issue of the association with the e u came up. we have always been leading into this suit yourself to so when we read through that treaty of association, it turned out to be a problem for us. since we had a free trade zone and open customs borders with ukraine,

which under this association had to open its voters for europe, which could have led to flooding of our market. we said, no, this is not going to work. we shall close all borders with ukraine. then the customs board is that is your new coverage. started to calculate how much ukraine was going to gain, how much to lose, and said to his european partners, i need more time to think before signing. the moment he said that the opposition began to take destructive steps, which was supported by the west. it all came down to might another cool in ukraine . so he did more train with russia then with the you, ukraine did. of course, it's not even the matter of trade volume, although for the most part it is. it is the matter of cooperation ties, which the entire ukrainian economy was based on. the cooperation ties between the enterprises were very close since the times of the soviet union. one enterprise

there used to produce components to be assembled, both in russia and ukraine, and vice versa. they used to be very close ties occluded, ta was committed, although i shall not delve into details now. as i find doing it inappropriate, the us told us, call me on a co which down and we will come the opposition let the situation on folding the scenario of a political settlement. we said, all right, agreed, let's do it this way. as the americans requested us to call, which did use neither the armed forces nor the police, yet the armed opposition committed a cool n t f. what is that supposed to mean? who do you think you are? i wanted to ask the vin us leadership, the backing of home the by just with the backing of c i a of course the organization you wanted to join back in the days as i understand. maybe we should. thank god they didn't let you in. although it is a serious organization, i understand my form of visa v, in the sense that i served in the 1st main directorate,

soviet union's intelligence service. they have always been our opponents. a job is a job. technically they did everything right. they achieve their goal of changing the government. however, from political standpoint, it was a colossal mistake. surely, it was political leadership miscalculation. they should have seen what it would evolve into. so in 2008, the doors of nature were open for ukraine. in 2014, there was a cool. they started persecuting those who did not accept the crew. and it was indeed a cool. they created a threat to crimea, which we had to take under our protection. they launched a warrant on invest in 2014, with the use of aircraft, and not tillery again, civilians. this is when it started, there was a video of aircraft attacking donuts from above. they launched a large scale military operation, then another one. when they failed, they started to prepare the next one full this against the background of military development of this territory,

an opening of nato's tools. how could we not express concern over what was happening from our side? this would have been a comfortable negligence. that's what it would be. it's just that the us political leadership pushed us to the line. we could not cross because doing so could have ruined russia itself. besides, we could not leave our brothers in face, and in fact, a positive russian people in the face of this war machine that was 8 years before the current conflict started. so what was the trigger for you? what was the moment where you decided you had to do this is my child, and initially it was the cool and ukraine that provoked the conflict. by the way, back then, the ripping centipedes of 3 european countries, germany, poland, and france, arrived. they were the guarantors of the signed agreement between the government of young coverage and the opposition. they signed it as guarantors. despite that, the opposition committed a crew, and all these countries pretended that they didn't remember that they were

guarantors of peaceful settlement. they just threw it in the stove right away and nobody recalls that. i don't know if the us know anything about that agreement between the opposition and the authorities and its 3 guarantors who instead of bringing this whole situation back in the political field, supported the photo. it was meaningless. believe me, because presidency on a coverage agreed to all conditions, he was ready to hold early election, which he had no chance to win. frankly speaking to him some everyone knew that. then why the cool, why the victims? why threatening try me of why launching an operation and don't boss this? i do not understand. that is exactly what the miscalculation incidents. you see, i did its job to complete the cool. i think one of the deputy secretaries of state said that it cost a large sum of money, almost 5000000000, but the political mistake was colossal. why would they have to do that? all this could have been done legally without victims, without military action, without losing crimea. we would have never considered to even lift

a finger if it hadn't been for the bloody developments on maison because we agreed with the fact that after the collapse of the soviet union, our borders should be along the borders of former unions. republics, we agreed to that, but we never agreed to nato's expansion. and moreover, we never agreed that ukraine would be in nature. we did not agree to nato bases there without any discussion with us for decades. we kept asking, don't do this, don't do that. and what triggered the latest events. firstly, the current ukrainian leadership declared that it was not implemented minsk agreements, which had been signed as you know, after the events of 2014 in minsk where the plan of peaceful settlement in done best was set forth. but no, the current ukrainian leadership for administer all other officials. and then president himself said that they don't like anything about the minsk agreements. in other words, they were not going to implemented a year or a year and

a half ago. former leaders of germany and france said openly to the whole world that they indeed signed the uminski agreements. but they never intended to implement them. they simply let us by the nose degree of going into them. but was there anyone for you to talk to? did you call us president secretary state and say, if you keep miller to rising ukraine with nato forces, this is going to get like this is going to be a, we're going to act to stay on the books and go and we talked about this all the time we address the united states and european countries need to ship to stop these developments immediately to implement the minsk agreements. frankly speaking, i didn't know how we were going to do this, but i was ready to implement them. these agreements were complicated for ukraine. they included lots of elements of those don't bus territories, independence. that's true. however, i was absolutely confident and i am saying this to you now. i honestly believed

that if we managed to convince the residents of dunbar and we had to work hard to convince them to return to the ukranian statehood. and gradually the wounds would start to hear when this part of territory reintegrated itself into common social environment. when the pensions and social benefits were paid again, all the pieces would gradually fall into place. no, nobody wanted that. everybody wanted to resolve the issue by military force only. but we could not let that happen. and the situation got to the point when the ukrainian side announced, no, we will not do anything. they also started preparing for military action. it was they who started the war in 2014. our goal is to stop this war. and we did not start this war in 2022. this is an attempt to stop it. you know, if you achieve dreams yet, no, we haven't achieved our aims yet. because one of them is the notification. this

means the prohibition of all kinds of neo nazi movement. this is one of the problems that we discussed during the negotiation process, which ended in eastern board early last year. and it was not our initiative because we were told by the europeans in particular that it was necessary to create conditions for the final signing of the documents. my counterparts in france and germany said, how can you imagine them signing the treaty with a gun to their heads? suits should be pulled back from keys. i said, alright, we withdrew the troops from keith. as soon as we pulled back our troops from care of our ukrainian negotiators immediately through all our agreements reached in east unable into the been and got prepared for a long standing armed confrontation with the help of the united states and its satellites in europe. that is how the situation has developed, and that is how it looks now. do you not agree to that? what would that mean? that, that is what i want to talk about right now. it is

a very important issue. then that's if a cation of the gaining independence ukraine began to search. as some western analysts say, it's identity, and it came up with nothing better than to build this identity. up on some false heroes collaborated with hitler. and i have already said that in the early 19th century, when the serious of independence and sovereignty of ukraine appeared, they assume that an independent ukraine should have very good relations with russia . but due to the historical development, these territories were part of the polish lithuanian commonwealth, poland, where ukrainians were persecuted and treated quite brutally, as well as were subject accrual behavior. there were also attempts to destroy their identity. all this remained in the memory of the peoples when world war 2 broke out . part of this extremely nationalist, at least, collaborated with hitler, believing that he would bring them freedom, the german troops,

even the ss troops made hitler's collaborators do the dirtiest work of exterminating the polish and jewish population. hence this brutal massacre of the polish and jewish population as well as the russian population to this was led by the persons who are well known fund, their shoot kabbage. it was these people who were made national heroes. that is the problem. and we are constantly told that nationalism and neo nazis an existent other countries as well. yes, there are ceilings, but we approved them. and other countries fight against them. like ukraine is not the case. these people have been made into national heroes and ukraine. monuments to these people have been erected, they are displayed on flags. their names are shouted by crowds that walk with torches as it was in nazi germany. these were the people who exterminated poles, jews, and russians. it is necessary to stop this practice and prevent the dissemination of this concept. i say that you craniums are part of the one russian people. they say, no, we are a separate people. okay, fine. if they consider themselves

a separate people, they have the right to do so. but not on the basis of naziism, the nazi ideology. would you be satisfied with the territory that you have now of the maintenance, you know? so i will finish answering the question you just asked the question about neo nazis and and did not certification look the president of ukraine visited canada. the story is well known, but is silenced in the western countries. the canadian parliament introduced a man who as the speaker of the parliament said, fought against the russians during the world war to swell who fought against the russians during world war 2, hitler and his accomplices. it turned out that this man served in the s s. troops, he personally killed russians, poles and use. the ss troops consisted of ukrainian nationalists, who did this dirty work. the president of ukraine stood up with the entire

parliament of canada and applauded this man. how can this be imagined? the president of ukraine himself, by the way, is a jew by nationality, is what to do about it. i mean, the hitler's been dead for 80 years nazi germany no longer exists. and so true. and so i think what you're saying is you want to extinguish or at least control ukrainian nationalism. but how, how do you do that? listen to me. your question is very sucking. i cannot tell you what i think. do not take offense. of course, on this question appears to be subtle. it is quite pesky. you say hitler has been dead for so many years. he is, but his example lives on the people who exterminated jews. russians and polls are alive and the president, the current president of today's ukraine, uploads him in the canadian parliament, gives a standing ovation. can we say that we have completely up routed this audiology?

if what we see is happening today, that is what denies if occasion is in our understanding. we have to get rid of those people who maintain this concept and support this practice and try to preserve it. that is what the nads implication is. that is what we means the the, this line is, can be started by line piece, can be scattered by true importance of what could never be kind of a station. so that transparency is extraordinary. john mystic patrice

then just succeeded in finding documents that existed in making them available to the world public. i mean, what could be more holding back by publishing information and sharing information with the public. he was exercising the rights for a speech he did so in the public interest part wants to. so mom realized tends to me uh and, and honestly, to relate continuously. i know why advice may know who is the guy that illegal anymore wisely bought the adjustments for to be on box weighing a 175 used to do it. you do have sense. it's all we going to lift that, stay at the bottom. what the lab mix is that the 4th at the tone, they're

a customer to be and we shouldn't get you should buy some of the creators didn't. okay. the house brackets the with them when you go $5.00 thing and i'm going to have to use the same one that is for that. and they have the mean gratitude. we've got to push that and the use the motors which to go to the university and she and we would have probably she up getting a good today. just come across and contribute her to the beach. so were you in the move? yes, cuz it's vision, that's when we're doing a video which is death of incentive in the english. and you have no story ish. there's private that those numbers are usually a garage. let's look at osha. go ahead. it's the most the most people could teach space that's the

to blow up north street. the deal for sure was busy that made it and you have to pay for it. but i did not pull up in australia though. american journalists, tucker carlson, brings the russian presidents on filter to view straight to western audiences. delving into the sabotage of the northeastern gas pipelines among many more issues . documents, linux, i'm reading. that was quite enough. tucker carlson shares 1st impressions on his interview with ladder and put in as it gave us nearly 150000000 views on the x platform. and in pakistan where there is still no clear winner in the.