(0:00 - 0:57) It's called a shadow war, when states and powers engage in behind-the-scenes actions to achieve their objectives. It's called a shadow war because you're not supposed to see it, for the simple reason that if a sufficient percentage of people are aware of it, it doesn't work. It doesn't work because many of the objectives require the cooperation of the public, usually through inaction. And that is perhaps the biggest mistake the globalists made. When they launched their attack upon our rights in the form of the COVID narrative, they woke a lot of people up. People who, until that point, had been comfortably asleep and who lived in a world where they could acknowledge that there are covert operations, but those operations didn't really affect them, and so could be comfortably ignored. (0:58 - 2:40) Conversations that were reserved for analysts and the occasional economist who understood the underlying cause for world events. But now we know about the shadow war, and we know that it does affect us. Tom Luongo is one of those rare people who knew long before 2020 that world events were being manipulated. His podcast, Goats, Guns, and Gold, exposes what's really happening. What are the objectives of the various powers, and who are they? Today, Tom joins me to turn on some more lights for all of us. Despite the fact that I have now done over 500 interviews, many of them with people who have been following these shadow events for far longer than I have, Tom explained current world events with a clarity that even I had not yet seen. Why hasn't Russia brought their full military might against Ukraine and crushed them in a week? They could have. Why is the UK trying so hard to bring America into the war that the EU will almost certainly launch against Russia? Why were UN soldiers involved in the October 7 attack on Israel? Why do the globalists want Iran to have nuclear weapons? And why are those same globalists funding the riots in the US? We all know the what's now. In this interview, you will learn the why, and that why is the key to understanding everything. (2:48 - 2:53) Tom, welcome to the show. Will, thank you very much for the invite. It was good to meet you up in Calgary. (2:54 - 3:21) So, and yeah, we finally got a chance to get this together, right? Yeah, and I really enjoyed your talk at the Cornerstone Forum here in Calgary. And especially, not just because of your knowledge, I mean, obviously with your website, you write about a lot of different subjects about finance, about politics, about our personal rights, about the globalist agenda, all of that stuff. But I also really liked your extremely direct approach. I mean, you do not mince words and I love that. No, no, I'm not known for that. Not at all. (3:21 - 4:07) What I'd like to do today is just access your knowledge on starting at sort of the global scale and then working towards North America. And the big thing that's going on right now, of course, is that it is very clear that the European Union is gearing up for war with Russia. And well, I'm just going to leave it at that. I mean, what's your view on that? When can we expect that to happen? Do you think it's going to happen? And if it happens, what's the outcome going to be? No, there's an awful lot to unpack in all of those, in all of that. Timing is for the gods. I learned this a long time ago, or Martin Armstrong. And even Marty doesn't always get all the timing right. And I say that with love. Well, I've interviewed him on this already, so you're following his act. (4:08 - 8:47) Yeah, I mean, in some ways, I am. And Martin has been a very important person from that perspective to teach me how to get out of my own head over time. It's not that I agree with everything Marty says. It's not that I take his word as gospel or anything. We had many conversations in Calgary while he was up there about these things. And we don't necessarily, you know, we don't, we're not supposed to agree about everything. Without a moment of odd gaps, we're not supposed to agree about everything. That's what makes these things great. That's why we do these things. But the ideas are what's important. Like the framework, how to think about things is as important as what we think about things. I just need to preface all that up front to understand, get people to understand for your audience, how I approach all this. You know, it's just the way it is. I have a systemic way of thinking. Okay. And I will, and I feel no compunction about changing my mind based on new data. First and foremost, I'm a scientist that has morphed into this kind of field. It's the same thing with Dave Collum, a good friend of mine. And Dave and I, when we get together, we do that type of analysis and, you know, it leads us into weird places sometimes. I'm also very intuitive. Like I can look at all this stuff going around and I'm like, yeah, there's your towel. There's your signal because you've taken enough data over the course of your life. Not some of which is you're not conscious of, and you have to let you, you have to trust your, I like to call it my Spidey sense, you know, Iain McGilchrist calls this is your right brain. Pick your poison. I don't really care. So talking about your, you know, to answer your question is a long way of saying we don't know when this is going to occur or whatnot. What we're looking for are the catalysts that get us up the escalatory ladder to that point, right? And we're clearly climbing the escalatory ladder. And I was talking with my friend E.M. Burlingame and Tommy Kerrigan about this last week and we did an entire podcast on it, more of the shape, the conversation around that framework. The question is not just who's on the escalatory ladder and who's trying to push us up the escalatory ladder, but who's in control of it. And the person who makes the final decision to go, metaphorically speaking, nuclear or, and in this case, potentially literally speaking, nuclear has the control of the escalatory ladder. And in Russia, Ukraine, I believe that's Vladimir Putin. Okay. It's everybody else. It's the European union pushing up the ladder to force Putin to make the ultimate decision. And so far Putin has chosen not to do that. And he just continues to do what amounts to parallel aggression. You get off the escalatory ladder, he attacks in a parallel sense at a different, in a parallel escalatory manner at the people who pushed up the ladder, be it the Brits or the French or the Germans or the Poles or whomever, or the Ukrainians. And then he makes it known to them that, oh, by the way, you're going to do this. Well, we're going to do that, but we're not going to escalate. And when he's not doing this and being forced to do that, then he's in control, but they step up, he matches them. They step up, he matches them. They think they're in control because they're the ones doing the work. But why are they doing that? They're doing that to try and get him to go offside, to go on tilt, right? As a poker player would put it. And Putin's been very clear and very rational about it while they all lose their mind. And it's the difference between, and this is, we get into this, we can look at it from this framework. It's not the only framework, it's one of them. You have masculine energy that's in control of the situation on one side, you have female energy who are freaking out because the man refuses to submit on the other side. And that's what we have. And it's the difference between, it's like watching Mary Astor and Humphrey Bogart go after each other and try and, in the Maltese Falcon, right? It just popped into my head, like, who's the ultimate, like femme fatale was Mary Astor in the Maltese Falcon. These are just kind of touchstone things for me. And I just see the European Union now as that, they know they're caught. They know that they're still running an operation on everybody. They're trying to schmooze us into thinking that they're not running an operation on everybody and we can see them. And then we're like, no, no sugar. No, what do you call her in the movie? That's not precious. Something, he had a term of endearment for her, which will come to me after this segment is over. And I'm like, damn it. (8:47 - 9:03) Well, you got me thinking about it now too. It's been ages since I've seen, and you can hear Bogart in your head, right? You can hear it, you know it. And I'm like, and he's like, what's that? Was that sweetheart? Was that it? I think it was Angel. I think it was Angel. Okay. I can't remember. (9:04 - 9:30) So now that it popped into my head, that's what I'm getting at here is that kind of moment. And he's like, and then when you find out that he's like, nope, I know it was you the entire time. And that scene at the end of the Maltese Falcon is so, so beautifully, because Bogart's brilliant there, right? And how you can see how conflicted he is. And so he'd still in the end does the thing. And that's what Putin has been doing. And now here's a specific example, I think that ties into what you've been saying. (9:31 - 12:10) When Putin, I think it was about a month, month and a half ago, he made it clear that if Europe attacks Russia, if they actually cross into Russian territory, he said nuclear weapons would be an option. Do you think he means it? Oh yeah. That's why, why do you think NATO keeps like hiding behind the Ukrainians doing it? Even though we all know that these are British controlled planned operations. And then the worst part about it is the amount of propaganda that's out there that's trying to tie the Americans to it. We know the Americans aren't doing it. Okay. And that propaganda is the actual war. Like the Russia-Ukraine war is not about Russia, Ukraine, and the British and the French. It's about the British and the French or the Germans or whatever. It's about Davos trying to get the United States to come in on their side and do this. It's the same script they used in World War I. It's the same script they used in World War II. It's the same playbook all the way down the line. And the question now is, can they get the United States to go along with this? Well, and now after Israel-Iran kicked off and we've now had this massive, massive campaign. But the older I get and the more I watch this play out, the more I'm like, is the whole Israel controls the US government, APAC owns all of our politicians. Is that itself a psyop or at least an overblown psyop? I think so. Not saying that they don't influence, absolutely they have influence. Okay. No argument that they spend their money that way, that they do all this. But the big question is, the British are, and I'm going to keep it to the British at this point just to make it simple. But the British are a, they're also a metaphor for all Davos. Okay. Because my thoughts on all of this stuff are still evolving. But the British textually throughout history are very, very good at cutting deals with everyone and then betraying somebody at the last moment. When the moment of crisis occurs and they pledge their support, then they show up. They did this to the Turks at Gallipoli or to the Russians. They did this at Gallipoli. Richard Poe's written extensively about this. They've done it multiple times in the past. They've done it to the Kurds. They've done it to everybody. So they're going to do it, they're trying to do it to the Americans. Actually, they're now doing it to the Israelis. And that's where I came to over the last 48 hours about the Israel-Iran conflict. As I start to review everything that I've studied so intensely over the last decade, I'm like, oh, well, that's where I was wrong on that. And that's where I was right. Oh, I was so close, but I missed it. (12:11 - 12:25) You know what I mean? And like, I'm reviewing it all in this kind of massive momentic collapse or, uh, you know, yeah, really a momentic collapse of how I thought I viewed the world. I was close, but I'm not, I wasn't close enough. So we'll leave it there. (12:26 - 16:05) And I want to get to, to Israel around the Middle East in a minute, but there's a couple of questions I'm going to ask first about the European-Russia situation. And yes, I agree with you completely about the manipulation that's going on. A couple of specific instances that were revealed just very recently, the Russian intelligence service, um, discovered a couple of plans between the Brits and the Ukrainians to, uh, plan number one, that they were going to torpedo or near miss a US ship in the Baltic. And then, you know, a malfunctioning torpedo would be found that would prove to be Russian. Right. Plan two was that there were going to be Russian mines that would somehow wash up on shore. So there, there, and of course, all of this is directed at the Americans in the Baltic to try to drag them into the war. Now there's a couple of specific instances, but I'm sure that you know of some others. So give us some examples of what, you know, Davos, the global, whatever. I'll give you, I'll give you a perfect, I'll give you a perfect example. Let's go back to the, I use this one all the time. Okay. I use this one all the time. Let's go back to the shoot down of the IL-20 Elan plane over Syria about five years ago. Remember that? Yes. It was supposedly shot down by it, by Syrian air defense forces because the Israelis were flying F-16s in the area and they were the, and so the official story in the end was that the S-200 crew in Syria that was used, that was, you know, mistake, mistook the, um, the Israeli F-16 for the Russian Elan plane. There's only one problem with that story. And that is what my friend, Joaquin Flores noted at the time at the range on an S-200 missile was less than half of, or just over half of the distance to target from the S-200 battery that supposedly shot down the Russian plane to the Russian plane. Meaning the Russian plane was more than, more than, it was nearly twice the distance from the S-200 battery that could actually have, you know, the missile can't shoot that far. So who did it? Well, scrubbed from history, but there were multiple reports at the time at that moment that there were British and French frigates off the frigging coast and that there was missile fire from them. They shot down the plane. Right. And then Trump, Netanyahu, Assad, and Putin had to create, had to craft this story in order for us to avoid World War III. Right. Because the whole point of that was to break down the, because what was happening at the time, and my friend Alex Krainer and I have both discussed this, which is that the Russians and the Americans have a de-confliction hotline between the two militaries in Syria the entire time they were there. And they never flew a sortie anywhere near each other, okay, ever. And they never got into any conflict with one another because they knew exactly where the other ones were at the entire time. So the Americans were carrying out their missions against ISIS. The Russians were carrying out their mission against, you know, HTS and Al-Qaeda effectively, okay, the Turkey's back forces. And then we can get into the shootdown of the Russian Su-25 by Turkey. Do you really believe that that was Turkey? No, I don't believe that. And no one should have believed it. So like it was all, you know, Syria, the minute Putin moved into Syria, because now in hindsight, we can see, I understood it at the time, like kind of intuitively, but now that I see it in context of the JCPOA and everything that's transpired in the energy industry and Iran and all of this stuff, it makes perfect sense that they tried so hard to get the Americans and the Russians into conflict over Syria as Putin was forcing Davos back. (16:05 - 18:03) Yes. This begs the big question that I've been leading up to. And here's, I'm going to give you the opportunity here to disagree with Martin if you feel you need to. But anyways, in my interview with Martin, we talked about this situation and the fact that from his perspective, the reason why the EU is wanting to go to war with Russia is they're broke. They're looking at Russian resources and going, wow, look at all of that. But they probably understand that if they go to war against Russia by themselves, they're going to lose. And so that's why they're trying to bring America in, except, and this is where you might want to disagree with Martin if you, and that's great if you do, that's fine, whatever. I want your opinion, not his. Of course, he says, if America joins in that war, the EU-America alliance is still going to lose because China's going to ally with Russia and between the Chinese manufacturing capability and the Russian resources, they're going to be unbeatable. What do you think, Tom? That's a big question. I'm not sure that I agree with Marty's outlook on this because I don't believe that the United States is going to get involved in Ukraine. I think that you could make the argument that he made, and it's a very credible argument, don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to throw Marty under the bus or anything. No, no, I didn't mean to dissent your opinions or whatever. What he's doing is he's running out a line of reasoning at an if this, then this, if this, then that, if this, then this, then that. He's doing a series of if-then statements, very simple, logical, perfectly rational. As long as all of those if-then statements are true, then you can ask about the final conclusion as to whether or not they're true. I don't believe all of those are true because what I'm watching over Israel-Iran, what I'm watching over Iran and Israel-Iran are telling us that Putin and Trump have worked out how to beat Davos. (18:05 - 18:25) And Trump is not going to get involved in Ukraine. He has already made this abundantly clear. And the reason why it's so obvious that this is all being touched off right now is that American support for Ukraine runs out on June 30th. (18:26 - 23:35) It's the Biden era aid that's been budgeted and appropriated and we can't stop ends on June 30th. And at that moment, that's when the EU is actually broke, which is also why Trump gave them a extension on the 50% punitive tariffs until July 9th, which is enough time for him to negotiate with them. Now they're coming out and saying, okay, we're good with a 10% general tariff. How would we just go with that? You're going to have to roll over on all the regulations, all the climate change stuff, all this, all that, and everything else that Trump is like, they haven't negotiated one way on any of that stuff. This is typical European negotiating, which is to sell back to you that which they already stole from you and get a major concession in return. This is how they've negotiated with the Russians the entire time over this war, which means they don't actually want to negotiate at all. And that's how they've told Zelenskyy to negotiate. It's a pantomime. It's silly. It's sad. And I don't firmly believe that everybody now is on the same page that they were on 10-6, 2023. Now in my thinking, now that becomes the dividing line. I have a much clearer picture of what I think is going on. And it's going to annoy a lot of people who hate Israel with a purple passion and hate their own country, the United States, with a purple passion. And I'm telling you, it's time to put that aside, to get your anger about Gaza, which is honest and true. And I share it and put it aside and do your hardcore strategic thinking because that's what's going on dispassionately at Evil Corp Central, whatever you want to call it, Davos. You can put whoever you think is in charge of Evil Corp Central. You can fill that in. It doesn't matter. You want to make it all about the Jews? Fine. I don't care. I'm at that point where I don't care. But now let's look at what the real motivation was for 10-7. So what I'm going to say is, if the United States does get involved in Ukraine, it is going to be something that we can't control. I agree because at that point, there's no controlling that. You want to talk about being up the escalatory ladder at the top, and who's in control of that? There is no escalatory ladder at that point. It's a free-for-all. And you pray for humanity at that point. And I don't know about you, but I'm not living in a place where I need to worry about air conditioning and electricity in order to be able to survive. I'm just not going to be there. And that scenario is one that I honestly believe Donald Trump understands and is trying to avoid with all of his heart. And I also believe that Vladimir Putin is doing the exact same thing. I see Davos as a pit bull that refuses to submit. There is a 60-pound pit bull that's being sat on by a 240-pound mastiff. Both of these are war dogs, by the way. And Tibetan mastiffs were designed to kill everything, including pit bulls. And the pit bull doesn't know how to admit that it's beaten. And it doesn't understand that the Tibetan mastiff will still kill the pit bull, even if the pit bull has latched on to all that extra skin. Why do you think they developed all that extra skin on war dogs? It doesn't matter. It's armor, effectively, all that hair and excess skin. Meanwhile, the 240-pound dog literally kills the dog with all this bite and bite power and everything else. I'm selling it. I would not put a pit bull up against a Tibetan mastiff, but terriers won't submit. And these evil vampires won't submit either until they're punched in the mouth so hard that they have no money left. So the way to beat them is to go after them financially. Once you've engaged them at the war level, at the kinetic level, now you attack them financially. Now they have to put all their skin on the table, and that's when you can beat them. But that's a higher-level discussion. For what my non-expert opinion is worth, I agree with you. I am very optimistic that Trump is nowhere near stupid enough to get involved in that war. Yeah. Especially with Scott Bessent at Treasury. Remember, Scott Bessent traded for George Soros. I remember I chatted with Marty on Scott Newman's podcast, Shaun Newman's podcast, about how he was on the other side of the trade during all that stuff, traded against Soros and Bessent. He knows Bessent's good. And there ain't nobody nearly as good on the other side anymore. Yes. (23:35 - 24:11) And Marty's not trading this fight either because he doesn't have to. So, and that's why he's... And that's why I love to watch the evolution of Martin over the last year or so, and having finally gotten to meet him, because I've read him for years, and now we're starting to see what he really thinks about everything coming out. Because a lot of the people that... I mean, he's obvious. He had relationships he was protecting, and well for it. Men like him can't say everything that they think. CEOs can't say everything they think. (24:11 - 24:32) Presidents can't say everything they think. It's just good trading strategy. You don't let your opponent know what you're thinking. It's a good poker player. And I respect that about Martin. His ability to hold the line on that is incredible. But it's not so he doesn't know everything. Now we have to take something of a complicated left turn. Okay. (24:32 - 25:35) Let's start with, yes, October 7th. And we know, we confirmed, UN soldiers were involved in Hamas attack. There was a UN data center that was provided to Hamas that was in a tunnel underneath a school. So we know that Davos, the Robos, whatever label you want to put on them, they were involved. They incited that. They made it happen. Now, fact two, in their plan, Trump wasn't supposed to be president. That was supposed to be Harris, easily controlled, on board with the globalist agenda. So knowing those two things, the fact that they started that Hamas attack, they ignited what was going on in the Middle East. Why, when they knew they were going to have so much resistance from Trump, that the major player that they had to manipulate on the global chess board wasn't going to play along. So why do that then? Well, they didn't have Trump at that point. They didn't have the United States at that point. (25:36 - 25:57) True. They did it because, as I noted at the time, I said, oh, look, the BRICS add in the seven countries that are the most important for controlling the maritime sea routes around the Arabian Peninsula. Who are the British? They're a maritime empire. (25:58 - 26:44) And if you want to control the oil and you want to control the flow of collateral and everything else, and you want to get access to all that collateral at pennies on the dollar, like they used to have, they might get that back. And then therefore, they don't need the United States anymore at all to supply oil or energy or anything else. And then you bring the United States down by continuing to paralyze it. First, we have a mushroom sporifying in the White House, while a bunch of trainees and thags and Hunter Biden run around not running the country. And Obama manipulating, and Susan Rice manipulating everything behind the scenes, because that's what was going on. I got lost a little bit, and I'll cop to this now, after 10-7, trying to be generous to all the perspectives that I had in my head at the time. (26:44 - 27:53) My initial instinct was that this was an MI6 operation. That was my initial instinct. In the first five minutes, I saw it happen, I'm like, it's MI6. Why? Because the remnant of the British empire was being attacked bodily by taking all of the trade routes away from them by the BRICS. So late August, we have that. Six weeks later, we have 10-7. Oh, what a shock. It happened right after the big Ukrainian counterattack that was going to take back Crimea failed to take a town. Like all of this. And they dumped everything into it. And the Russians just stopped at Robertina. And it didn't go anywhere. The Ukrainians didn't take anything of consequence. And whatever they took was irrelevant and was easily taken back over the winter. So why did they do that then? Of course, they did it then. What that did, and this is, I think, the interesting thing. This is why I'm going back to 10-7 now. And this is why in the last 48 hours, I now think I understand. (27:55 - 28:55) And I have to give, I hate to say this, because I despise the man, as do most people, including people who are, you got to give him props. I think Netanyahu finally understood the depth of the betrayal of Israel. So let's play this out and let's reframe this, not as geopolitics, not as a religious war or anything else. What are Putin, Trump, Netanyahu, who was ever running Davos? They're mob bosses. And what don't you do in the mob? I was putting this thing forward the other day to Dexter White, where we were game planning. And he just looked at me and said, you're right. It's a Scorsese film. What don't you do in the mob? The capos all can have their place and have their territories and everything. And what's the one thing you don't do? You don't betray them. (28:56 - 29:13) You don't go back on your word. The thing about the mob is that inside the mob, there is a very, very strict code of honor. Who keeps breaking that code of honor? So now let's back out. (29:13 - 30:40) Now let's go back to the Balfour Declaration and Sykes-Picot and this and all this stuff that we've been talking about to try and understand all of this. And it's not hard to understand that yes, the British created and Davos created Israel and they created them as an irritant in order to blow apart the Middle East and keep it fighting amongst themselves and have the Arabs hate the Jews and all of this stuff. Meanwhile, on the other side, we have, and they installed their guy in Iran with the Shah, and then the Shah is overthrown. And then the Iran-Iraq war and Iran over time. And remember, there's still a tremendous amount of British influence within Iran. Same thing in India, same thing in India, by the way. Same thing everywhere. Let me just finish this real quick because this will make a lot of sense. Over time, the pressure on Iran by this, and everybody's arguing that Wesley Clark and Davos was trying to install their central banks everywhere and all that stuff's still valid, except it all ended with the JCPOA starting in 2015, which is what started us down this rollercoaster, right? And October 7th, which was now the inciting incident of the current story. (30:40 - 33:28) But the prologue to the story is the signing of the JCPOA by Obama. And so now the Iranians are being schmoozed by Davos. That's what the JCPOA was. It was a bribe. Come into our circle. We'll protect you from the Americans and the Israelis. We'll give you energy. We'll give you infrastructure deals. We'll build you railroads. We'll help the Russians build out the international transport corridor, and then we'll take it over and then we'll deny them it after it's all done because that was their plan. And yesterday I was working on this month's newsletter for Gold Coats and Guns, and I asked Grok, I just said, hey, give me a broad, I don't need anything detailed here, basically. This gave me, hey, what deals were signed with Iran bought by energy companies and everything after the JCPOA? And they went through the entire list and 75, if not 90% of those deals, all traced back to Royal Dutch Shell, Airbus, the Bank of England, France, Total, this one, that one. I hadn't remembered the Total deal from 2017, but there's all of these. And that's why I just had to, like Grok, refresh my memory on all the stuff that I had watched in real time and didn't put the pieces together. But I knew that the JCPOA was Obama's way of giving Europe access to the Middle East energy, and the Americans and the Israelis were angry about it. The problem is, is that I can see Netanyahu seeing that as a betrayal of their former benefactors, because the JCPOA was not, in his words, and he was probably right, and I'm going to give him props on this and say he was right about this, which is that he never really stopped Iran from enriching uranium beyond civilian use levels. And then we come to find out after all these years that finally the IAEA said, yep, no, Iran's been cheating. And they have been cheating. And they were cheating the entire time. Except now, the question is, who's in charge of the IAEA? Is it Davos? Is it us? Blah, blah, blah, blah. I can even make the argument that they helped put that report out in order to get Netanyahu to go on to start the war. Because at this point, it's like, this is like a British spy novel at this point. And I got news for you. These people just sit around GCHQ all day trying to do everything imaginable to touch off frigging wars and not look like they were involved at all. (33:29 - 34:46) And they're always going to scapegoat one of their former allies. Churchill got us involved in World War II, and that's how they set up World War I. And now they're doing it again. And so we were told it was okay to hate the Israelis for how and the way America's degradation internally and economically, it makes perfect sense that eventually the American people would be like, look, I'm tired of Israel and Iran. It's not our war. It's not our fight. We're starving. We're gasping for air. Our people are dying to fentanyl and this, that. No, we don't have time for this anymore. And then on October 8th, all the social media algorithms, after 40, 50 years of Israel being the perfect victim, all of a sudden every guy who bared any kind of grudge against Israel was allowed to speak in public. Did you not notice it? I noticed it. And the minute I noticed it, I'm like, nope, I'm staying in the middle. And I became a Zionist overnight. And I'm like, oh, I know who you were. So I'm like, now I'm getting it all. (34:47 - 35:07) I'm not sitting here saying that Iran's the bad guy and Israel's the good guy. I'm not saying that. They're all bad guys. They're all mob bosses. And somebody betrayed one of the other mob bosses. And I've been saying for seven years, well, you and I have known each other for a month. (35:07 - 37:20) I've been saying for seven years, seven years, if not longer than that, that Netanyahu wasn't careful. He was going to turn the entire world against the Jews and turn them into the scapegoats for whatever game is being played here. And here we are. The Israelis go on tilt after Gaza and righteous fury. And at the end of the day, Iran and Davos set that thing off. Because if the Iranians weren't in on it, they wouldn't be fighting it. They would be saying, we didn't do it. Yes. They wouldn't have had Hezbollah attack and have the Houthis attack and everything. Iran was in on it. So guess what? You made your bed. Now you're going to sleep in it. And it's going to be the righteous fury of the Israelis. Whether you like it or not, whether you like Israel or not, in this case, they're fully justified and we're going to take them out. And Trump is sitting back going, yeah, this is fine. This is what I want. Moreover, it fits Trump's agenda to just sit back and go, look, Bibi wants this done for his reasons. Even if you don't have a generous view of Bibi Netanyahu, even if you still believe that Israel is evil and doing the British dirty work or Davos's dirty work, which is possible. I'm not discounting that idea, which makes this thing even more complicated and gets us farther and farther away from Occam's razor. Even if that's true, if you want to hold on to that, which is fine, I don't care. He can have his reason for wanting to get rid of their Iran nuclear program. Trump can have his reason. They can meet in the diagram. That does not mean they have complete overlap on their Venn diagram, just overlap on their Venn diagram about this particular issue. They can have the desire to end Iran's nuclear program for different reasons. And that has not been part of the discussion at all. And whenever we're not allowed to discuss, and I can tell you that I am taking unbelievable backlash from bots on Twitter and from all of these people for the last 72 hours. (37:20 - 38:19) When you're not allowed to talk about that, that's probably the truth, closer to the truth than anything. That's what's probably going on. I've been doing this for 10 years professionally now, 12 years professionally. And every time I see this happen, whether it's directed at me or it's directed at somebody else, the answer is always the same. What you're not allowed to talk about is the thing they're trying to protect. Yes. Now you talked about certain, in my vernacular, lights coming on recently. And just as we're sitting here talking, one came on for me, because the thing I was going to interject earlier, when you talked about them setting up Israel to be an irritant in the Middle East, a lot of people don't know this history that subsequent to World War I, the British essentially redrew the Middle Eastern map. And they did it in such a way that they stuck a whole bunch of people together in different countries that hated each other, had hated each other for thousands of years. (38:20 - 41:47) Sykes–Picot was what you're getting at, which was 1916, by the way, just to make sure that we get our timeline right. I checked that yesterday. Sykes–Picot was signed in 1916. Moreover, nobody other than the British and the French signed it. It was a unilateral decision to create all of these fake countries. Yes. But the light that's just come on, because I always thought it was ineptitude, but what if they did it on purpose to keep the Middle East unstable? I've always looked at Sykes–Picot as being done on purpose. Why? Because every time the British empire has retreated, it's left X and anti-X. It left India, it had to have anti-India, Pakistan. It left China, we had to leave Hong Kong. North and South Korea, U.S. Canada is what we're finding out now. That after the American Revolution, Canada was set up as an irritant to the United States. Yes. And it's always been that way because nobody understands the War of 1812. Okay. So it's everywhere and they're everywhere and nowhere. So I mean, I'm at the point now where, again, Dexter White will tell me, he'll say to me all the time, you know, the Russians and the Turks have fought an awful lot of wars over the years. They don't really like each other very much. I'm like, yeah, it's going to be easy. It's interesting to see what Russian Turkish relations look like when the British aren't there trying to get you and he to fight. Doing the, hey, why don't you and he fight? Because of so many of those wars that the Russians and the Turks have fought over the last 200 years were instigated by the British on both selling arms and making deals on both sides and then backing out at a particular moment to allow a particular outcome to happen. I, you know, Richard Poe has unbelievable amounts of work on this and you can either accept it or you not. Like it's, you know, it's true. It's all primary. All of his arguments are from primary source materials. Like they're not, you know, he's a historian and an investigative journalist as much as anything else. Does he have a perspective? Sure he has a perspective. Is it the only perspective? No, it's not, but it's closer to the truth than I've seen. And his book, How the British Created Communism and Blamed it on the Jews is a hoot. You need to read it. Even if you disagree with it, you need to read it. You need to read how good Churchill was at manipulating and all the people around him were at manipulating events of surrounding, you know, World War I and the aftermath thereof. And just as further proof that this is all connected, of course, I think it was a couple of two, three weeks ago, there was a news article we reported on that Iran had purchased from China sufficient fuel for 600 ballistic missiles. Now we've got the US blowing up nuclear processing sites in Iran because obviously nobody wants these people to have nuclear weapons. As of right now, let us be clear and let us be precise in our language, Israel is doing that, not the United States. Israel and the United States have our fellow travelers and that they want the same thing, but the Israelis are using our weapons that they've improved. They're using all of that stuff and we're involved by proxy. But the thing that bothers me more than anything else is on the one hand, the same people will tell us that the Jews run everything are the same people who say that Donald Trump is actually in charge of this operation. That's like cognitive dissonance of the highest order and you just need to get over it yourself. (41:47 - 43:32) And you're absolutely correct. And thank you for correcting me on that. But we've also got Trump making very strong statements about these people cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons. Even Pierre Poilievre, the head of the conservative party here in Canada said that very bluntly about five, six months back. No, it would be an absolute disaster. No way these people can be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. So it seems that everybody except Davos looks at the, at Iran and says, no, absolutely not. Which says to me that this would have been a key part of the globalist plan. If they wanted something that everybody else doesn't want, the question then is if Iran did get a functioning nuke, what was the plan for what would have done with it? Used it to perpetuate the open wound. Look, at the end of the day, the Israelis were never going to allow this to happen. So the Iran, here's the thing. I said it the other day, I think I said it on Shaun Newman's podcast. I'm going to keep saying it until people get it through their heads. Iran's nuclear weapons program is the forever war. It's not us putting in ground troops and having to slog through mountains and all of this stuff to subdue the Iranians. No, the forever war itself is the open wound. This is what they do. They create an open wound and then they keep it going. They don't want India and China to get together. Well, let's refuse to let anybody negotiate the border. Let's have India claim Chinese territory and then the Chinese be pissed off about it. (43:33 - 43:58) Same thing in India, Pakistan. They're still fighting about Kashmir and Jammu. Same thing. Everybody's fighting. We've got the Kurds split across four different countries. How many times have we gone in and schmoozed the Kurds and given them money and told them to go, we're going to back you into doing this against Assad or Iraq or whatever or Erdogan in Turkey. (43:59 - 45:47) When somebody gets out of line, then they just try to spin up the Kurds. The Kurds are finally getting wise to it. The same thing. Iran itself, Iran getting a nuclear weapon is unacceptable, period. Israel maintaining their illusion that they don't have nuclear weapons and they're a non-signee to the NPT, along with India, along with Pakistan. All of these people are not signees. That's part of my grand bargain that I've got in my head. Everybody has to sign. Now, everybody has to get on board, including Israel. Once Israel doesn't have the Qasas Bellah of an Iranian nuclear weapon, once that's been taken removed from them, all of a sudden, everybody can look at Israel and go, okay, now, do you get to pay for your crimes in Lebanon? Do you get to pay for your crimes in Syria? Do you get to pay for your crimes in Gaza? Do you get to pay for this? Do you get to pay for that? The world is sick of Israel and the world is sick of Iran. The big question is, what does Davos fear more than anything else? They fear that the United States, the Russians, and the Chinese will understand that they have more in common in divvying up the world into spheres of influence than fighting with each other. The Chinese can't force-project, even if they're interested in force-projecting a global superpower, which has not really been in their history. Some of that is propaganda. Again, it's not wholly true. Yeah, there's some truth to it, but it's not wholly true. (45:49 - 48:08) You have to have antipodes to that. They want all of Eastern Russia. The Russians understand this. The Russians don't want to give that up. The Russians don't want to give up Vladivostok, the Kamchatka Peninsula. So, I need everybody to stop thinking about the globe the way we've been taught to think about the globe. Let's put Europe at the center of the globe, and everybody rings Europe. Let's move the globe to the Pacific Ocean, and we'll get the three major powers that ring the Pacific Ocean, China, Russia, and the United States. Yes. Think of it that way, and all of a sudden, now you've uncovered Davos is an existential threat. Because what happens when those three countries together all do what Russia and China have already done, which is effectively declare independence, repudiate all European money that was dumped into there? Putin did it by kicking everybody out, nationalizing Yukos, put the Khodorkovsky in jail, the whole Bill Browder thing, yada, yada, yada. China, they just never opened their capital account, and all the trillions of dollars that went into China and investment digging, they were going to be able to buy political access to everyone. Xi just said, nope, get to the back of the creditor line, and now we're going to blow up Evergrande, and now we're going to blow up this one, now we're going to put Jack Ma on it, now we're going to disappear Jack Ma for six months, now we're going to do this, now we're going to do that, and oh, by the way, I'm sorry, but foreign money's at the back of the creditor line. Well, we'll never get paid back, you damn right you won't, and that's why George Soros called Xi the devil, because there are plans when George Soros is a British asset, he's MI6 all the way through, all the way down the line. And Scott Bessent is a trader, and he's at the US Treasury Department, and he knows how these people think, and he knows the plumbing, and he's an eighth generation American, just like Jerome Powell. Their families go back to the 17th century here in the United States. Why do you think they have lunch every Monday? So now we've covered some really important ground, Tom. We've established a very good background for, I think the biggest question that I have for you in this interview. (48:09 - 49:25) Okay. We, you know, my viewers, you, I, we're all very aware of the globalist agenda. Let's go back a year and a half to Davos last year, when an interviewer asks Yuval Harari, what happens to the globalist plans if Trump wins? And this is almost a direct quote. He says, well, it would mean the end of our plans. So what we've established here is we've got, and you, yes, you're very, very right. And when you talked about, let's turn the globe, let's look at the Pacific, let's look at the major powers that are around it. That's, that's where the focus is. It's not Brittany anymore, other than the, they're doing an awful lot of monkeying, trying to pull strings. Sure. So we've got Russia. Okay. Putin not playing along. We've got America. Trump not playing along. We've got China. Xi only playing along to the extent that it benefits him. And no, and to no more than that. So the big question is the globalist agenda crumbling. Are they losing their little war to take over the world? Yeah, they are. If, but they still have weapons to. Oh, they're going to do a lot of damage. (49:25 - 50:12) They have a lot of weapons, but this is the big question. And, and one of the things that I, that came up in conversation the other day was how do you beat them? Well, first you take away their public funding, where the US taxpayer is paying to support their war to get rid of all the NGOs. And if you, if you don't get rid of the NGOs, you repurpose them to work for America and not against America. So all of a sudden American taxpayers are not going to work every day and funneling hundreds of billions of dollars into NGOs that go around the world to then be sent back to the United States to destroy and deracinate and give us fentanyl and everything else. That's stage number one. Stage number two in metaphoric terms, take away their private money. (50:13 - 52:33) Why were the LA riots kicked off? Because Tom Holman was serving warrants in conjunction with an investigation, his words almost exactly, an investigation into money laundering and trafficking out of these, out of the garment district in LA in support of the Mexican cartels. And unsaid, the Chinese government, this government, Canada, Bob, all that stuff, wasn't about hardworking Mexicans. It wasn't about a decolonization propaganda, decolonization agenda. Well, it is, but, you know, and so what did they do? They immediately tried to reframe it as that and turn this whole thing into a big race war because, you know, hey, if we can recreate 1968 all over again, we can do it. Okay. That's number two. Number three, what do you do after that? You have to go after their money. So you have public money, then you have the private money with the private money networks, the drug trafficking, the human trafficking, and everything else that's, that was built with the public money. And then that's the second layer of the money. You get rid of all that, all the black ops operations and all the other off balance sheet stuff and off budget stuff. You got to get rid of that as well. Then once those two things are completely dried up and we had a report this morning that the DNC is pretty much out of money because they no longer have money coming, flowing out and flowing through Ukrainian bank accounts back into their coffers or whatever it is, they're broke. The democratic party is done. You have to go, now you got to get Davos to take all those trillions of dollars or all those tens of billions of dollars, wherever it is, sitting in all these private banks that we only hear about in James Bond movies that are real, all these private financiers and all these people, you know, all these bankers who do not have Wikipedia pages, as I like to say, we got to get them to throw their money on the table in order to try. So now, see, how do you beat an enemy like this? How do you beat an enemy like this? Well, you got to make them believe that they can still win. (52:35 - 53:44) Okay. I said it in an article about the Ukrainian-Russian war in some time in either late 2022 or 2023. I wrote an article about this and my conclusion after all of this, I said, why is Russia fighting this war this way? They could clearly just put troops on the ground and blow through these Ukrainian defenses, which would bring NATO in, which would do this, which would do that, but they could do maneuver warfare if they needed to. They could expend a lot of troops, expend a lot of material and everything else, or they can fight a war of attrition and look weak and just, you know, bob 155-millimeter shells all day long. Oh, with more guidance than this. And then the drone, and then we do a little Philip K. Dick-style Second Variety where the story of Second Variety, which I think everybody should read about basically an arms race, an infinite arms race until the point where we're sending human robots to blow up at each other. You know, that's the end of that story. But it's science fiction, but metaphorically speaking, it's true. It's just an arms race. (53:44 - 56:25) So now we have drones that are, now this is drone warfare. And then eventually the drones will get more sophisticated and we'll keep going while everybody tests all their new hardware in this space. And they think, oh, well, the Russians are weak because they're not taking territory or they're not doing this, or they have to be running out of money. We've been sanctioning the crap out of them. And the Russians keep going, and the Russians keep doing just enough to make them think that they're losing here and there. Because how do you beat an enemy who has more money, power, men, material, and technology than you? You let them continue to think that they can win. And then all of a sudden they don't have anything left. I got to tell you, Tom, you just, boy, did you ever just turn on a light for me? Because I've spent the last three years asking myself that question. Absolutely Russia has the military power to just steamroll over Ukraine. They know that once they take Ukraine and don't go any farther, because they don't want Europe. They don't even want anything west of the Dnieper River. Right. They don't have any, they have no interest in ruling over these frigging gas lit pit bulls. Right. Like these people hate them. Why would you want to rule over them? Well, plus they don't have any Poles or the Bulgarians or anybody else. Right. So the question that was going through my head was, well, why wouldn't they just have done with it? Just go grab the territory they want frigging done, shut it down. So now there's no more an excuse for Europe to go to any war with them. And then just sit back and watch the European crumble because they're broke. And that is your question, that's not the objective. No, the objective is to break them financially and militarily and everything else. My good friend, Larry Johnson just came back from Moscow and he interviewed a Russian. I don't remember the name of the Russian general that he interviewed, but the Russian general, Larry asked him that same question. And in fact, and the guy said, well, you're effectively asking, why didn't you blow up all the bridges crossing the Dnieper River to keep the Ukrainian, and then you could just take everything to the Dnieper. I always say it wrong. The Dnieper, we'll just call it the Dnieper. And then just take all the territory, secure the Donbass and be done with it. He's like, but then the Ukrainians couldn't cross the bridges so that we can kill them. Yes. Right. And because so you leave the bridges intact, you let them continue to think that they can win and you keep throwing them into the cauldron and going, oh, I've done this a million times. I'm going to do a million and one times because it just makes me so happy to make such an obscure reference over and over and over again. (56:25 - 59:19) But do you remember, you're old enough to remember the send up zombie movies of the 80s, there was Return of the Living Dead. Yes. And that one was the black comedy. It wasn't the Romero movie. It was the black comedy. I saw it in the theaters. And there's that moment, the kids are having sex in the graveyard, the zombies attack, they all get attacked, the cops show up. And then we have that singular moment, which as my mind is like the best scene, best moment in the entire movie where the cop gets eaten and then you see the zombie wearing the cop hat, getting on the radio and go, send more cops. Send more cops. Right. And you're like, we can eat them. That makes sense of the entire thing because the EU wants to use the Ukrainians as their shock absorbers. They don't want to go to war until the last Ukrainian is dead and has killed as many Russians as possible. And it was in the article where I was in that timeframe when I was making this argument about this. I remember one day on Twitter, it just popped into my head. I said, it's from their perspective, from the British perspective, I think he's British, but Davos perspective, it doesn't matter. What do you call 400,000 dead slobs fighting over swampland? A good start. Right. Okay. And I'm like, that's the story in a nutshell. And there's so many angles on this and it winds up being that over and over and over again. So you call 40,000 or 50,000 dead Palestinians being sacrificed on the blood altar of your war for global power. A good start. Because now we killed some Israelis too. But then the Israelis say, you know what, we're taking the gloves off. We finally got Trump to come back into power. And once they knew that Trump was coming back into power, the Israelis then went and they wiped out Hezbollah with the pager thing. They let the Houthis shoot off all their missiles. They let Erdogan and HTS take over Syria along with Putin. Putin walks away from it all. Why would Putin walk away from Syria after he fought for 10 years? Because he doesn't need to anymore. Whereas after 10-7, Putin can read the game board as well as anybody else. All Putin cares about with Iran is securing the international North-South transport corridor so that he's no longer bottled up behind the Black Sea and Crimea. So that you have an intermodal trade route from St. Petersburg to the port of Shabar. That's all he cares about. That's why he didn't defend Armenia when Azerbaijan went after Nagorno-Karabakh, especially since the fact that Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan was put in power by fucking George Soros. (59:20 - 1:04:56) And it was an absolute color revolution. And I remember getting fought by libertarians and libertarians about this left, right, and center when it happened. I'm like, this is a freaking another color revolution. And Pashinyan has been defended over and over and over again. And he's shown himself to be quite the adept politician because Armenia is weak. But Putin at the end of the day was like, I don't care. I just make a deal with Baku so that I can use the Caspian to continue the North-South transport corridor. That's all I care about. Well, let me ask you a question. If you're Vladimir Putin and you're looking at the Dabogean-backed Iranian theocracy who wants a nuclear weapon, which Putin has not lied about and said, I don't want them to have that. And in the seven days now since the first Israeli attack on Iran, Putin has exhorted the Iranian regime to come to the negotiating table no less than three times. The Russians have stood down. They're not interested in this. They're not happy. What they're worried about is the Americans and the Israelis going too far. But remember, Putin and Netanyahu have a very good relationship. There are a lot of Russian Jews in Israel. You can make the argument there are more people in Israel speak Russian than they do Yiddish. This is real. So at the end of the day, Putin's a mob boss and all he cares about is his regime. And I said this to Larry Johnson last Thursday when he and I were on the phone together. I'll continue to say it. They don't care who's in charge in Iran. What they want is stability because you can't have trade without stability. And if the Iranian theocracy is we're going to refuse to accept stability in the Iranian theocracy, they don't care if they live or die. And if you care about peace, folks, and I mean a lasting peace in the Middle East, which everybody, all the Gulf Arab states are now acquiescing to, which Trump has promised them all and Putin is effectively also promising them all, then you're going to have to put your hatred of Israel aside for this particular operation. You can praise them for this and still hate them for everything else and still then hold their feet to the fire for everything else in some way, manner, shape, or form. I'm okay with that because my goal is for the United States to survive because the United States is the true utter antipode to the entire thousand-year Dabogean-style project to destroy what English society built with the Magna Carta. That's who we are. Ian Burlingame is not wrong about this. That's who we are. Little England has been destroyed. It's being gutted. You don't think I'm correct about this? Go watch Clarkson's Farm and stop watching it for Jeremy Clarkson's antics and watch it for what it's actually about and you'll see it. It's clear as day. It's no different than watching what's happening to America. Oh, by the way, since we've started to really crack down on the fentanyl trade, I saw a really beautiful chart of excess deaths in the United States and we're back down to baseline. You know why? Because we cut down on the fentanyl trade and maybe some of that is still vaccine complications and all this other stuff. Great, but you can't stop drug overdoses, especially with people who have no hope unless you fundamentally change the society such that the people have hope. If you want a lesson in how powerful that can be once you do the math and you're willing to actually sit down and take an honest-to-God look at reality, I learned this when I first started studying Russia back in 2013 and I noticed under Vladimir Putin as he rebuilt the economy and what did he do? Abortions as a percentage of live deaths cratered by 90%. Abortion was the primary means of birth control in Russia in the 90s, given to them by the Soviet Union. That's by alcoholism. Alcohol toxicity dropped by over 90%. Russian male, especially male, lifespans went from an average age of 58 to over 70 in 10 years, 12 years. All these statistics show you a dramatic drop in all of those nihilistic behaviors. The Russian people today have hope. The minute humanity has hope, they start having babies, building things, engaging in commerce, getting back to the world. Well, the United States has been propagandized into believing that we're the bad guy and we have no hope and our best chance of survival is to break up a civil war, is to descend into civil war and let the blue states go and the red states go. (1:04:56 - 1:07:37) And I'm like, absolutely fuck no. That's the Davosian Hobbes' choice, because the real goal in all of this is to attack and destroy the US treasury market. You destroy the US treasury market, where's capital going to flee to? And this is where Martin Armstrong are absolutely on the lockstep. And Marty's just reading the tea leaves and he's consulting his AI and he's got his view of how things are going to work out. And I'm like, we all expect the Trump to die. And when I set a cornerstone, just to bring this all the way back around so that we understand where my mindset is, when I walked out for cornerstone and I gave my 13-minute speech, did I talk about any of this stuff? No. I talked about choice and I talked about creating reality. And in my mind, your focus determines your reality and quantum mechanics teaches us that we are not passive observers of the universe. We are active agents in the outcome of the universe. And I've chosen to live in a world where Donald Trump lived and we can take these people out. As opposed to the hundreds of millions of other infinite number of eigenstates and alternate universes where Donald Trump got his head blown off on CNN and Davos runs the table on us. That simple. I chose not to live in that world and so did everybody else. And here we are today. Now, how about this? How about we choose to trust Donald Trump not to get us involved in a ground war in Asia? And you know what? We won't. It's that simple. If that's faith, great. If it's not, I don't know what the hell it is. I just know that that's where we are. This is as much a spiritual war as it is an economic war, as it is a political war, as it is a kinetic war. And we're being told by a bunch of freaking atheist vampires and locusts that we have to roll over and accept their reality. No. I'm not doing that. So Tom, you didn't just turn on lights for me. I'm sure you did for my viewers as well, because there were things that despite how deeply I have been involved in all of this for the last five years, watching everything that's going on, reporting on everything that's going on, there were factors that I had not seen that you have highlighted for us. So thank you so much for your time and for your insights. And I'm very much hoping that, I know you're a very busy person, but hopefully in not too distant future, we can get together because you've triggered a whole bunch more questions for me and some other rabbit trails I'd like to go down with you. (1:07:38 - 1:08:54) And I'd be happy to do so, especially when we start getting into the plumbing and the financial markets and where this is all headed. Because that's actually on the other side, that's why we're in the kinetic war phase right now, because they're trying to stop the last portion of the financial war. And to borrow from the title of your site, we've talked today about goats and guns, but we haven't yet talked about gold. So we should do that. Gold is only one aspect of it. The stable coins, Bitcoin, all that stuff, the US treasury market, that's another one. I can put you in touch with my friends, Caitlin Long and Vince Lanci, if you want to talk about those things in the interim, if I can't do this again, because they have as much influence on my thinking on this as anyone has. They've done yeoman's work for anybody who's interested in teasing through all of that, and I think you'll understand this groundwork. Gold Goats and Guns podcast, episodes 213 with Caitlin Long. I do recommend actually 213, 214 with Brent Johnson, 215 with Vince, and then 220 with Vince. I think those are, those will prep you for the next phase of this conversation. All right. Thank you so much, Tom. Thank you.