quite a long time in sweden's and in denmark. and so what is the situation with this up? what was the new type opened, in my opinion, it is a form of tanner, is with the key objective to intimidate the cell panics. because everything connected with radiation causes field and people in this case, they also had the task of battlefields reconnaissance. it started back in 2020 to the part of the cleaning front line. new to power plant is supervised by great britain. it is clear that there are the ice e, as in hands of the united states, everywhere, a lot of their advises. but the key grades are in this case, is great britain. so then in 2022, they plan to create a center. freddie ation contamination by inflicting 5 damage on the premises of the blood and then to carry out a simulated nuclear explosion. they would have had a visual picture along with the radiation that ground the russian federation would be accused of using tactical nuclear weapons. and as they imagined this whole construct, they would have they go floodgates opened after this optimization did include the

native block as a full legal combatants over time. this idea for whatever reason became irrelevant, then they began to has plans to take over the station by force. free attempts were foiled by all military and forceful seizure operation. critical infrastructure, it could have been damaged, which would eventually lead to the asian contamination. again, the goal is basically the same, the new location with a specific area to be contaminated with radiation. they failed again. there is a kind of 3rd wave now. and obviously from this point of view, there was a battle reconnaissance in order to find out the responsiveness of the system. the forces in means of response, the reliability of the defense systems. most likely they're still planning to launch some kind of critical strike against facilities and infrastructure, not necessarily a nuclear reactor or a power unit. and this scenario is the same. the media,

i have the money to ation and creation of hysterical environment. it is not difficult to manipulate a story related to nuclear threats. they are adams of this kind of an installation . and the picture is presented has one this presence, the countries of solving and south eastern europe. while that are of this new is as always, great to have your company with us here and i'll see rick sanchez is on direct impact. next, we'll be back in about 30 minutes. we'll see that the the fire body program. now once again, we now post a show every single day used to do it weekly. now we're doing it daily. we hold no punches here. i liked the other guys. so look for a truth. problem number one,

iran retaliate with an attack. that seems more like good. ok, creator, truth, file number 23 minutes on yahoo is most dangerous game truth bomb number 3. dick cheney for president who was saying that i'm going to tell you, i'm rick sanchez. this is direct impact the, the okay, let's get started with what you need to know about this retaliatory strike by iran on israel, by the way, the key word there. retaliatory, let me say it again, retaliatory. and if, by some chance you see or read reports on this and some other news platform, plenty of them and they don't tune on that term that word. well then stop reading

or turn them off because they're lying and they're spinning. you ok? so yes, you're ron fired some suppose a 300 project dials, some combination of drones and missiles, none of them precision guided by the way. they also see some cargo ship, which happened to have some 17 india nationals on board, something india then like by the way on board the ship was 17 indian nations of the . okay. by the time feed operation said the west was these 92 kilometers, ne of a for jetta, an area close to the state of formulas that farms the entrance to the gulf. now i mentioned that because this is a kind of thing where 3rd countries like india could get caught up in this kind of these types of actions without unintended consequences, of course. and, and it's why the world is on edge m, as in the world shouldn't be on edge the ronnie and the talk was a show of force. but let me play with those words a little bit. let me just play a little bit here. if you'll allow me right to make a point, it was

a show of force, but an actuality not so much force as it was. show. what am i say? yes, iran looked tough with its missile attack into israel, which a piece many of its citizens. as you saw and some of these celebrations on the street to pair up. but as we look at these folks who obviously are saying finally our government did what it needed to do was the wrong truly trying to effect maximum damage on its nemesis. think of that question i just asked, was it trying to effect maximum damage on its nemesis? israel? the answer is obviously no, it was not. in fact, iran gave ample warning. it put out a statement that after it's volley, it would expect that both sides all sides really cuz it was started the united

states as well. would consider this matter resolved. this is it, we're done no more. that's not fight anymore also or the wrong. well, really serious, if you really want to inflict maximum harm, what it of use more deadly weapons which you to have by the way, it would also not have given the us and this real a 5 hour heads up. you know, like imagine you're going to have somebody who say i'm gonna hit you, i'm gonna hit you 5 hours of the inside. the missile attack only injured one person . according to the reports i've seen. it may change. 99 percent of the projectiles were intercepted. now were the us and israel in on those couple condense, it sure seems like it. oh, and by the way, don't be fooled when you hear reports from the state department or the pentagon delivered of course by their p r agents in the national u. s. media like this one, u. s. official with direct knowledge of the conflict in israel tell cbs news.

president biden told prime minister benjamin netanyahu. america will not participate in a retaliatory strike on iran following saturdays drone in missile attack. okay. that what you just heard, right there is that minimum, a deceptive statement. and here's why. who do you think is shooting down those incoming drones and missiles as we are the united states of america? i'm a block from the white house, as i like to say, that decision was made to do that there. our military is very much involved in this already. and though it seems at this point, like both sides are doing their best to let this be a momentary bar fight. it's important to compare these 2 attacks at this point. the words wouldn't got us here, right? what got us to this place where we are right now? first and last. not forget this railey attack on a rainy m. m. c. is really striped, destroyed a building belonging to

a ron's embassy in damascus. according to a rainy and state media, ron's revolutionary, god said one of the senior commanders was among the dead. he's rails military didn't comment, but it's thought to regularly strike a ron linked targets. did you hear what you just said regularly striking ron link targets? i mean, when that language makes it sound like it's no big deal, no big deal. one country without notice bombs, another country. that's a violation of international law. oh, they also destroy an embassy that belongs to a 3rd country. that's a violation of the vienna convention, at least then they assassinate, assassinate, not one, but 2 iranian officials. that's a violation of every law. no, no man. oh, yeah, they regularly do this, says cbs or whatever. so,

so let's play this out. let's play out this comparison again is real bombs, that embassy killing many, including is really officials, pardon me, including many stop there. right? is really officials. right. uh and iran now comes in and says missiles meant to shoot down others and injures one person. and so on the one hand, you have somebody bombing an embassy in another country and this estimating leaders . on the other hand, you have a country single. by the way, we're going to shoot a bunch of missiles, but we're going to give you notice that you can shoot them all down which is more serious, which was done with actual malice. you tell me. but here's an even more important question that brings us to the real wild card and all of this which should be concerning to the entire world. the question is why we know that israel started this latest situation, but why? why did they started for better said, why did he started in by see,

i mean prime minister maybe nathan, yahoo, the prime minister by all indications can only keep his job, stay in office and even avoid going to jail for corruption, so long as he can prolong an escalade because countries war foot continuing the war and gaza killing palestinians. right? is in fact not good for the us, but it is good for the prime minister. and what about starting a war between a ron and the united states? starting a war between a ron and the united states, that would obviously be horrible for us, for the united states. it wouldn't danger the lives of countless us men and women in uniform, not to mention the citizens of iran and the soldiers of iran as well. but once again, wouldn't be so bad for the prime minister. you must remember what a lake has done to you says on our from holy bible and we've amended remember, and we are fighting our trucks array that troops in combatants who are now in gaza

. that is nothing. yeah. who using the hebrew bible as a reference for it and reason to kill palestinians and perhaps others when he seems to be suggesting is that the i'm on kites and their descendants, presumably the palestinians in this case are said to be cursed and forever and must be illuminated for what they did in 2 ancient israel. if it sounds crazy to you, it sounds crazy to a whole lot of people around the world. but while most the, that type of talk is dangerous from a karl rove in perspective, it's actually very effective. karl rove, you may remember was the us advisor, the president george w bush, who openly talked about how the disastrous iraq war was good for the president's approval ratings. he was right, you know, whole and when us presidents achieve the highest approval ratings of all time, here in the history of our country, the united states. let me help you,

according to dell. if i just looked it up the highest was president truman, after he dropped an atomic bomb on hiroshima to scare soviet leader joseph style. it is a pretty rating sort the 87 percent. does anyone surpass that? has anyone surpassed that? yes. george w bush had the highest premium ratings ever in our country when after he sent troops into iraq and afghanistan, his approval rating past truman's. and with the help of the media, is it 90 percent 90 percent? joining us now to talk about it, somebody who i consider a perfect guest for this conversation, maybe disagree, by the way, with some of the things i said, professor mohammed mirandi is also uh, by the way, he's a professor at the university of k ron and has been a frequent guest on this show. we're also joined by a still on got audio. i'm showing off and pronouncing my ours that way we could say

a step one, got a real competitor for our lives, news magazine, the cradle gentleman. i'm not sure where i want to begin, but i guess professor, i'm going to start with you and i said a lot there, but i did find it that it seemed to me and please correct me if i'm wrong. you're wrong, did everything possible to attack? well, not really attacking am i right? i would say that the strike was very calculated and carefully managed and that it could have been much more severe and very deadly. but it wasn't simply a spectacle what the iranians did in response to the is randy aggression on your, on your sovereignty and syria. mm hm. and the time of the embassy was it iranians warmed everyone before and what they wanted to do. and then they sent

a large number of drugs for that as well. but in the drones were old drones. uh, none of them were the more modern and more technologically developed and drugs. so they were very cheap and they had no technology that could be compromised. and therefore, when those drones reach as well, the writings knew that the americans would, uh, and you're absolutely correct. the americans play the main role in downing the most of the drones and the miss house. mm hm. you run is knew that these jobs would be attacked and that they would be down. but that was the objective. the ronnie is wanted the americans and these riley's to use their most advanced technology because they're very expensive and they're limited number of missiles. and also because uh their, their best technology. so you run, gained

a lot of intelligence. so can you, can you characterize for me the thinking behind that because you're right. it looks to me like iran was very careful, tactical, almost mechanical in the way they approach this. they want to make noise, but they didn't want to make too much noise. they wanted to get attention, but they didn't want to get that much attention. they want to hurt is real, but they don't want to destroy israel or even come close to it. what is the mindset in tehran? do you believe professor, you're there, you've talked to people behind this type of approach as well. there again, the 2 things. one is that, as i said, they wanted to deplete theirs, their, their weapon systems themselves, and they wanted to learn about their capabilities. okay. and this riley's in the americans by the estimates put forward by this raney's spent over

$1300000000.00. whereas the ronnie and drowned and a series of mist files that were old. again, none of them had the wrong key technologies. they were also fired. those were also down, but all of these were decoys. and then they were 10 between 10 and 20 missiles that were sent that were fired, that were directed towards the 2 targets one in the north and intelligence gathering center and one an air base and the south that was used to attack the embassy and also to carry out the genocide and cause of those missiles got through and so that the serious missiles, which were somewhere between $10.20, they all made it through, but all of the others that were decoys. and all of them combined probably costs it costs like $1015000000.00. i don't know that which is what you are,

but that was which is a tiny number compared to what we usually talk about in, in military terms and stay. but let me bring you into this. i want to ask you a question about the method. yeah, i'm going to share with you something that i believe as an american that i think my country should site to be nathan young. and it's something probably akin to this if you continue for your own political purposes or for whatever purposes you may think of mister bethany who and you continued trying to start a war between us, the united states. and the ron. we are a going to hold you accountable for that we are not. busy to respond, we are going to stop giving you funding for anything else you do. and we may consider breaking the relations that we presently have with your country. why is it so hard for my country to say that to someone who seems to be acting like an outlaw a good day? they seem to be trying to get to that point. now when you hear uh when you hear joe

biden, uh, he's still angry. now understand that when you see all the western media, all of us started trying to make the issue the, the general side of us are results or by the policies. a one man to position is a one man instead of the size of this project, instead of the, you know, 75 year a history of the organization of palestine. mm. that tells you that, that and that who a hobby and also his days concert. so to speak, but they're not going to the anything, but it's still on hold on a minute even now there's nothing cool. this one of the 1st words out of joe by his mouth when he heard that there had been this somewhat loose and attacked by iran on uh, on uh, israel this weekend. the 1st words out of his mouth for something like to be effective. we stand behind 100 percent israel, etc, etc. instead of being at least a little more tapping and saying something like, we understand this is a difficult situation and we really wish, as we all had not attacked iran just for this on. but nonetheless,

we will help israel in any way we can. i would understand something like that. but the immediate response was where we're going to go to war for as well. if we have to that just seem childish and stupid to me. tell me how i'm wrong. indeed. no, no not. you know, like they for 5 iron class does a bite and said, today, one of the piece of called is sacrosanct. you know, this is the level that they will go to defend after they've been israel against, against the rest of the world. so you, it's, i feel like at this point joe biden is a man buddies even waiting to hear about his own company song re election just to protect you. so just to get the drug down into our work with it on the right that uh, in the end of our for us line there seems like something inevitable just because of why the driver presents. so the reason, but the reason of west asia, which is, you know, not leaving on the right has demonic order. not leaving on there. are you on the phone or order? yeah. right. the china rush i represent, and there are so many people in this country who are now starting to see the

difference between real threats and made up threats. and maybe that's what we need to talk about when. when said quick break, i want to come back and ask our professor mirandi about that the perception of what the united states is intending to do or shouldn't do. and is there a difference between the bible ministration and the trump administration when it comes to this matter? remember, uh, president trump assassinated a israel, pardon me, a, uh, the ronnie and liter. so what is the difference? we're gonna talk about that stay right there. we're going to be right back the valley, her mother's storage. okay. the model girl that i got you, no problem saying that i'm out of the arguments us out in the drive i showed my brother through he was cited to help people for a lo so now i never looked at searches as being the same. well,

i guess i lost my list. that's the outcome of chicago police. it'd be gang chicago is like, you get for the police, you lose take your life as another crime. say another could have been a doctor. a nurse could have been the next president. we can't keep losing people out here the say, welcome back of rick sanchez, that i have enjoyed by professor mojave, randi from toronto as well as a stay on korea. and my thanks to both of you gentlemen, the professor let me uh, begin with you. by the way, i wasn't trying to leave the impression in case you may have gotten mad at the beginning that i wanted a ron to fire helen brimstone into israel and punish every part. know that that's

not what i was trying to say. i just wanted to comment on the calculated and careful way in which this whole thing was addressed. maybe more importantly is now that a step on a 9 you overheard is talking about the reaction from the binding administration, which i thought was a bit happened. um, how do you see the bite and administration thus far? reaction to all things iran, you and i had a good chance to talk back when, during the trump administration. i thought trump was really hard on iran in some cases, more stern, perhaps unnecessary, maybe even a little unjust. do you see a difference here, or is it the same old, same. busy old as we say here, well, when it comes to iran, the us political establishment and the mainstream media, they've always been very irrational. and they basically have

been influenced by the sinus lobby and barrier to the extraordinary when the united states supports the genocide and gaza, then it's obvious that the united states is going to support any atrocity that pays ready regime carries out. and of course, since the iranians have always been the key supporters of the policy, i mean, cause there's only no country in the region or in the world that seriously supports the policy and people and their resistance against the occupation and against ethnic cleansing. so obviously the us hasa lity and is there any hostility will be focused on iran, and that of course, whether it's trump, or obama, or a bite in or bush. it really doesn't make that much of a difference. obama impose maximum pressure of sanctions to target ordinate ryan's from the same to target. ordinary,

iranians abiding has continued with the maximum pressure of sanctions. all of them have spoken about all options being on the table and of course, bush as well. so that really has been a, continue it to what it comes to on. but the problem for the united states is that now they're pushing the region towards it. they do it dangerous situation. one thing that has changed after the attack on the running embassy is that the running as of now the band that b a b equation has changed. if this res, attack iranians anywhere, not inside the work, not just inside the run and embassies, anywhere from now on, you run is going to hit back at the. is there anything missing directly? and they will attack them very hard then you will consider you consider when, but let me ask you the question from your point of view, do you believe that a wrong considers that when it is attacking sea floor or full throttle, the is riley's there really just as well are getting ready to be attacked back by

both israelis and the united states. in other words, do they perceive a war with israel as a war with america as well? if the united states strikes the iran, then the iranians will strike back at the americans very hard, and b minus have been preparing for 2 decades. 6, they have drone bases and miss out bases across the country underground basis. and at the they have been designed to protect the one from the united states. if the united states attacks the ryans will expound the us from iraq using their, their that, that even though their capabilities but also their allies in iraq will overrun us spaces and their bases in syria would collapse to because they're dependent on their occupation in iraq. but more importantly, you romwell strikes us spaces across the persian gulf. and even more important than

that, you, ron will strike those countries at host us spaces because it'll be seen as compress it. and if that happens, that means there will be no oil and gas coming from the persian gulf region, not just the persian gulf, but the yeah, yeah. and the global economic catastrophe. that will be worse than 1929. so i think there's a sort of balance of terror between iran and united states where like between the soviet union and the united states. and that's what i think is the time being lighted, save, and i think there are a lot of same people, still the same people in washington. i do recognize that. yeah. so that perhaps maybe a bridge too far. but, but of course, the united states today is not being rational at all. the very fact that the united states is supporting this riley's carry out the genocide is demolishing the us. across the world is just throwing a soft power as to throwing his credibility, its reputation, its image. but the united states seem handy or can seem willing to sacrifice everything for his res. i'm on

a minute left to step on and i want to come back to you and ask you this question about this situation. the professor and i were just talking about, do you think as a student of the united states and his political policies, that there is something within the united states that could get away from this mindset of. busy or even perhaps those who think it would be good. people like john bolton, for example, who recently said he wants dick cheney to be the next president. imagine that can separate us from that more. they months mindset that we have right now. do you see it? i don't, i don't break. i know. yeah, i do hope that i maybe i would say a different answer, but i did not because this is suddenly that he started united states over the past, you know, 5060 years. there's just war and more war and more war. why? because war is profit. all because everybody else might be suffering, but the weapon companies that you're lucky, martin use your art, the x, your i,

you know, north of groom and they're all laughing all the way to the right. because this is also one of the reasons why you know this, these big support for israel and all of a sudden they want to revive this package for ukraine and israel's $60000000000.00 . so there's going to go, they're going to go into the pockets of the weapons somewhere else. so you need to be looking at this book holders, you know, for the cell phones that need these companies and then see where the change can begin. yeah, you know. busy you just made me think of a line and maybe i should klein it but it's almost like i was just having a conversation with both of you, including the professor about the united states of america and it's position. but as you just reminded us, it's not so much the united states of america anymore. it's the national security states of america. and that's, so that's a problem that we're going to have to fix down the line. if we want to all get along better, i'm out of time. my thanks to both of you as usual, a professor my randi. good to see you again. my friend,

thank you so much for sharing your insight with us. and as usual, good is good to be with you as well as them. thank you very much. before i go, i want to remind you of our mission here. what we try to do anyway. pretty simple. the style of the world we've got to stop living and these little boxes truths don't live in boxes for sure. everywhere. i'm rick sanchez. it's what we're shooting for here. underactive tax. the

. the, the thought, sorry, is this how it wrong the will cut off the hands of his enemies if they can. another attack against it, as the wind vanished, intensified between say, hon. i'm some of the great things the us defend the russian slides the same way as well. but washington refuses to have different conflicts, different complex, different interface. different rep picture this of a game and do some garza where a mass grave is discovered of a major off for the local say is really both has to have a loved ones and dumped the bodies and updates this see all 2024. they are 960.