The Last American Vagabond - Vanessa Beeley Interview - The US/Israeli-Backed Regime Change In Syria & Its Zionist Beneficiary

Starting point is 00:00:35 Welcome to the Last American Bagabond. It is Friday, December 13th. On December 1st, Vanessa Bealey and I had a conversation about what was going on in Syria. It's been an ongoing emotional roller coaster, if you will. These are a terrible analogy. We were discussing this before we started. And the unbelievable reality that we're in around not just Syria, but the genocide taking place in Gaza, the genocide that has evolved into Lebanon

Starting point is 00:01:02 and now appears to be shifting into Syria just as well. So I want to start with the discussion her and I had around this on the first and how much has shifted around this and kind of follow up around all the different changes that we saw, the conversations we had around potential deals. But I wanted to start with her in particular around the social media aspect of this. And you know, this is something that I'm really more in the last so many six months than ever, but have been talking about a long time, how important it is that we highlight not just the independent media, mainstream alternative media, but just misinformation, people that are out there in deliberately trying to lead you in very particular. partisan directions to manipulate for much larger agendas and to start how this has played out to begin with and how much this has had an effect on people's lives on the ground in Syria, the average people that tend to take the brunt of all these government agendas. So I invited Vanessa back on to discuss this and what we've seen so far and what we will see going forward. So Vanessa,

Starting point is 00:01:54 thank you for joining me yet again. How are you? Yeah, I'm okay. Thanks. Thanks for having me on. Yeah, it's a, you know, one of those kind of, it's just one of those times where, again, just kind of expressing that we were having a somber conversation before we got started, that I mean, I just, I'm personally expressing how frustrating it is that we can be in this position where there's so much awareness around this topic, around, again, just Gaza in particular, but now even in the same conversation around Syria, what Hyatt-Turalsham is, what the relationship around the United States and Israel and their funding of these proxy elements that are now

Starting point is 00:02:27 in charge of Syria and asking the question of what will ultimately stop this? You know, what is the bloodline where people, the awareness, to surround this suddenly cascades into actual action. And I think we're recognizing that that's just not how this really works. So let's start with the social media part of this because I think you agree that the, the, I mean, I'm almost strong, I hesitate using the word misinformation because I know there's a war against, you know, people calling us misinformation, but there, there is false information

Starting point is 00:02:56 out there. There's falsehoods. There's truth. And how much of an aspect that plays in not just the propaganda war, but the real people's lives on the ground that suffer because of that. So let's start there and what you saw and how that's still affecting what's going on. Yeah, I mean, you know, we talked about the effect of social media. As you said, that was early December and how social media was affecting the people on the

Starting point is 00:03:24 ground of whatever the main topic is, right, whether it's in China, Russia, Syria, Gaza, whatever, or Lebanon. But I think in Syria it has played a particularly insidious role because right from the beginning of the attack on Aleppo City in the north, social media was really whipping up terror and fear and the sense of everything collapsing almost immediately. And that demoralization campaign, in my opinion, was deliberate from, influences, people that have kind of meteorically risen to fame on social media. And we have to remember that, you know, every area where we become successful, in other words, we become successful in disseminating information,

Starting point is 00:04:23 which is enabling people to understand the intricacy of the world that they live in, and at least get some insight into what their governments are, are kind of fabricating across the world in order to achieve whatever their agendas may be. As soon as that becomes successful, then it's infiltrated. And the more successful it is, the more infiltrated it is. And for me, it was never clearer than it has been over the last couple of weeks in Syria, where social media has literally been weaponized against the Syrian people in order to create this sense of loss, this sense of of fear and apprehension, anxiety, panic.

Starting point is 00:05:10 It was remorseless. And I think, you know, even if people are unwittingly doing this, okay, let's say there are some people who are unwittingly getting carried away with the wave of information that they think is correct or they think is factual. And perhaps they even feel, oh my God, you know, this is happening. I need to tell everyone because it's so awful and so on. But if we're not checking that information, then we're responsible for increasing the panic and the terror that the people in that country that is currently being targeted. And of course, we know it's going to move on to Iraq and so on and so forth.

Starting point is 00:05:49 So we're going to be back in the same situation. And if we don't learn how to manage it from our own perspective, then that's not fair on the people that are facing the next wave of violence and proxy war. intervention and whatever else they've got up their sleeves to prosecute people that have become for them irrelevant and dispensable. Yeah, I definitely think that the weaponization of social media is a very, very important conversation to have in all this. Now, I want to state, as I'm sure you would agree, that nobody here is asking for anyone to be censored.

Starting point is 00:06:26 The point is that everyone out there has a right to be wrong, to lie. That's under free speech. but what we're talking about is the responsibility of it, right? That you out there sharing something, I mean, obviously there are people out there that do so for the very purpose of lying to people. That is they're right. But most people are highlighting is will, you know, get caught up in all of it. And that's how this works and thinking you're doing the right thing.

Starting point is 00:06:48 And what she's pointing out is that it's your responsibility to make sure that you're checking it for yourself and not just playing into the whole Twitter files play of it all, where you're just kind of getting caught up in the momentum of what they're pointing to and so on. And so this brings up a really interesting point to start with, which is that we've seen this played for a long time from both sides of this, where for a while you had the State Department and the U.S. government arguing that that was being done over there, which we can now clearly see they were responsible for, but saying, you know, Facebook was used to create this regime or this, you know, revolution in foreign countries, right? They were really using that.

Starting point is 00:07:24 Then it got flipped over to where it became, oh, we have to start censoring it here because it's being done to you. Now, whether that was actually the case. case because, and they're the ones that kick that can down the road or not, it's, it's interesting to see how their own actions can be used against you. And so, you know, in this context of it all, we can see that it's happening both ways, that it is very clearly being used to manipulate people in Syria. And even arguing, you can touch on this that the honest people in Syria who then get convinced that they're fighting for the right thing because of state department manipulation on these social media platforms, but at the same time saying through Elon Musk and

Starting point is 00:07:58 everything else that they need to restrict certain things because you're at risk because of ISIS or as Trump said in 2015 I think we need to work with Gates to shut down the internet because ISIS is influencing you you know so I just think that's an interesting overlap to it all and I think it's all by design so you need your thoughts on that yeah no absolutely I think it's by design and you know during the pandemic we had 77th brigade release to to run and push certain narratives to induce fear to induce anxiety again about the whole situation, about the vaccine, about the virus itself. You know, this kind of behavioral insights, of course, I think Britain's probably got to be number one in the engineering of mind manipulation. But of course, the US has also studied it for years.

Starting point is 00:08:55 you know and so I think the more we the further we go down the path of wherever we are heading and as you said before we came on the future isn't looking that bright to be honest you know the fall of Syria is a major blow internationally as far as I'm concerned it's not only for the resistance access in Palestine Lebanon Iraq Iran Yemen and so on. But I think globally, it's because what is it done? It's shown how powerful the machine is. Right. How the machine can basically just consume whatever stands in its way if it really wants to. Right. Because this was so fast. I mean, I can't remember. I think we were talking about the fact that once the ceasefire came into, into place between Lebanon and Israel. It was obvious that the only reason Netanyahu had accepted the ceasefire was because, yeah, okay, that's fine. That bit's done. Now we need to pivot to Syria.

Starting point is 00:10:09 And nobody expected what happened to happen. I think all of us were bracing for Israeli bombing or for some kind of Israeli escalation towards Syria. and it was known for months in advance that there was going to be an attack from the Northwest, but nobody expected it to be on this scale. Right. I think Kavakamasiin pretty clearly predicted it. Like a lot of people did. They saw this coming because it seemed pretty obvious.

Starting point is 00:10:39 A lot of us did, to be fair. I mean, it was obvious, to be honest. And many of us had been talking about the precariousness of Syria's position for months, if not years. because of the occupation by hostile states by proxy in the north, in the northwest, in the southeast, in the northeast. At any point, all of these factions could be triggered, and that's basically what happened. But I don't think, I'm not quite sure why, from some perspectives, I don't think people realize the extent to which those contained elements had grown. in strength and had been professionally trained, had been, you know, their weapon capability

Starting point is 00:11:30 had been increased considerably, most recently by Ukraine in northwest Syria. And so the scale of the attack was perhaps far greater than was expected, but I mean, we'll come onto that because there are other elements also involved, I think. Yeah, most definitely. I want to touch on the idea of, you know, the different elements,

Starting point is 00:11:52 of why that might have happened so quickly or why force we pulled back in regard to the deal and possible conversations there. Before we get to that, though, you mentioned a few things I want to touch on. First, just the global repercussions. In a general broad sense, can you just touch on a few examples of what in your mind are the global repercussions of this shift in control and power from Syria to, from Assad to whatever is happening now? Well, I think, first of all, one of the main agendas, particularly for Israel, was to destroy

Starting point is 00:12:22 the central link in the chain, in the resistance chain. So the major part of the land bridge coming from Iran through Iraq, if Syria, into Lebanon and into Palestine, to also destroy Syrian capability of one, defending itself, and to producing the weapons that were being used by Hezbollah. So destroy the supply lines, prevent any resupply to Hezbollah, and destroy the capability, of Syria to manufacture weapons that were then going to be supplied to the resistance factions.

Starting point is 00:12:58 And at the same time, of course, what we've seen is Israel destroying pretty much 80 percent of Syria's military capability, whether defense or offensive or offensive. So air defense, air bases, naval bases, oil tankers. all their essential infrastructure to be a military force to be reckoned with. And of course, who does that benefit benefits Israel? And if you look at then the land grab, so you have Turkey in the North via its pre-Syrian army, Muslim Brotherhood, now known as the Syrian National Army, have taken the northern sectors and are now battling the Kurds for control.

Starting point is 00:13:52 in the Northeast. HTS, which is backed by Israel, the U.S., the whole kind of regime change alliance, have taken sort of from the north down to Damascus, so that whole central area and have included the areas of Latakia and Tatus on the coast, which were traditionally, of course, with the government, but also al-a-white and other minority sects. And then Israel, of course, since HDS reached Damascus, have invaded the south of Syria and are now within, I think it's 20 to 26 kilometers of the center of Damascus on the western side.

Starting point is 00:14:44 But they have control over Sweda and Dada and Karnatra in the south. And I think the potential there is to continue that belt around the southeastern and northeastern borders of Syria, or at least to have them under surveillance and under control of terrorist proxy forces. Because, of course, ISIS has been for years incubated at Al-Tanaf, the U.S. military base, at Rupan, so-called refugee camp to the south of Al-Tanav. and then up controlling the main eastern border, which is the entry for the land bridge from Iran and Iraq. So in other words, when we look at what they've done in Palestine, Lebanon and Syria, then that will continue, in my opinion, into Iraq. And certainly the Iraqi resistance factions are preparing for this.

Starting point is 00:15:37 and the Iranian advisor, I think, to the IRGC, was talking about 11,000 ISIS already in Iraq preparing to begin the attack in Iraq against the resistance factions there. Yeah, well, we're definitely going to get into the groups in the background and so on. Just I'll highlight what Patrick Heddington was saying, which I'm sure, you know, we're covering. This is exactly what is anyone I think has been paying attention has already seen this pattern, but simply saying Israel is now actively ethnically cleansing parts of Syria, ordering evacuation orders, settlers were gradually follow in, you're seeing a pattern.

Starting point is 00:16:15 It's the same exact thing we're seeing. I mean, how long until we start, you know, human shields and tunnels and Hamas or Hesbili, whatever group, you know, the narrative to justify all these actions. It's pretty unnerving to see how this is what I was pointing to earlier for those listening. It's just that it's clear. It seems like everybody's acknowledging this. We can, we recognize these are lies and it just continues to stumble forward at the expense of human life. So before we get more into the groups in general, you mentioned the, the, the, I'm two questions I want to get into in regard to the imminent collapse point, but any resistance from what you've seen, your research, because the argument was pretty interesting that this was, and we'll get into this around the deal point next and what the deal might have been, but, you know, very quickly saw basically no resistance. And that was pretty broadly reported from all sides of this conversation that there was essentially no resistance. Now, it clearly benefited them to make it look like they ran and there's no resistance. So they're probably sure. I'm sure.

Starting point is 00:17:07 there were some in there, but overall, it seems as if the conversation is that up until today, Israel's been bombing, as you highlighted, all of these Syrian installations and infrastructure with nobody fighting back. So two questions. Is that actually what's happening? And the same question therein, is there any resistance in that? And is that not illegal if there's no resistance? No, absolutely. Of course, it's illegal. I don't think there's anything that Israel is doing that isn't illegal actually since its existence. So I mean, you know, we shouldn't even perhaps be trying to figure out if it is legal or illegal. They are an illegal settler state at the end of the day.

Starting point is 00:17:47 And so therefore, of course, they're going to be violating every single international law that exists. Not that I have any faith in international law anyway, because that's an entire captured, institutionalized complex anyway that's corrupt as hell and is totally compromised and in service to the United States and their allies. Anyway, that was my little rant about that. I agree. But, and I've totally forgotten the question. Oh, it's okay. Just the first one, I first one to get at is in your research over the last week or so, is there resistance happening? Are there people fighting back? Or more importantly, is there, a real resistance happening.

Starting point is 00:18:30 Then the question is, does that then make the bombing of installations and military locations illegal if there's nobody fighting back? No, of course, there's no one fighting back. I mean, if you're talking about the situation now, look, Israel's excuse is that they're bombing all of these military bases and development centers and scientific research centers because heaven forbid the weapons fall into the hands of HTS and the terrorist groups. But hang on a minute. isn't Israel already supplying weapons to those terrorist groups in order to take the territory of Syria on their behalf?

Starting point is 00:19:04 Yes. Yeah. And high fighting at the border of the Golan Heights and continue to support them on the ground. And, you know, it's ridiculous. And give them medical treatment and provide weapons and filing and so on and support. Because for them, I mean, multiple spokespeople of the Zionist regime have said on regular occasions that for them, ISIS is better than Assad anyway. where anything is better than Assad, let's face it, from the point of view of the Gulf states and Israel, Cherokee, and so on, and the U.S., of course.

Starting point is 00:19:40 So, no, there's absolutely no resistance to this. In fact, Jolani, I think in one of his very first interviews, basically said, look, Syria is not going to engage in any other war. Today, they've told the Palestinian factions to stand down. They're basically not going to provide any more weapons. And so all of this was sadly for nothing. You know, October the 7th, now Khaled Meshall is back in control. And of course, we know that Meshall was in control when Hamas betrayed Syria in the early

Starting point is 00:20:13 years of the regime change war until Nasrallah made some effort to bring them back into the resistance fold from 2017 onwards. And in 2021, they came back to Damascus having been expelled because they were were involved in the regime change operations against Syria. The leadership that was pro-the-resistance access and pro-Syria, like Yakhya Sinwa, Mohammed Dyev, have been assassinated. Even Ishmael Hanyi, I would say he was a little marginal, but he did then come back into the resistance axis after 2017.

Starting point is 00:20:52 So all of them have basically been killed. are still a few left that would let's say still have some loyalty to the resistance access and to syria um but michael no and so you know unfortunately with syria gone i i don't see now how oh i hope it didn't lose you it's early we got a lot to get to shoot well since there's an opening because so in case you guys missed the point that was making a moment ago oh there we go i got you back i'll just finish what i was saying oh that's that's an interesting view i haven't seen that it's all well anyway while she's regaining her video feed the the point i was making a second ago was ultimately the reality that and in case you missed it that it is illegal for them to be bombing

Starting point is 00:21:47 these these locations regardless of the narrative they're laying out even if everything they've said was true there's nobody fighting back so these are these are just i mean that is literal terrorism right i mean that's what's really important to see and they're making excuses for it and compare that to anything that they've highlighted about what Russia is doing in Ukraine. It's quite hypocritical. So go ahead and finish, pick up on your point there. You probably cut out maybe the last 15 seconds before that. Oh, okay.

Starting point is 00:22:12 Well, no, I mean, basically, you know, I'm just saying that from an HTS perspective, they're going to do nothing to stop this. In fact, they opened the door to it, basically. You know, they gave the green light because there isn't going to be any resistance. And because the Syrian Arabami has stood down and surrendered, then there's no one manning the air defense. So basically Israel can be using the heavy-duty bunker-buster bombs that they couldn't use before because they couldn't actually violate Syrian airspace for the risk of being shot down.

Starting point is 00:22:45 Now there's no risk. So, I mean, Israel is basically, I think they've bombed over 500 times now. I mean, no, there's no pretext for this. There's no justification for this. This is just state terrorism. which I know which people people know why Vanessa responded the way she did a moment ago because it's it's this is for the person that's just now becoming aware of this it's pretty obvious to see as we're violating the law in a thousand different ways but it's important to see that you know very clearly there but pointed question on this why wouldn't they

Starting point is 00:23:14 just take these things like is it I I I think it's probably because they don't have the resources I guess but why wouldn't they why wouldn't they say hi to Rhan go take control of these things you know is there more insight to that? Well, I think there is an element of truth that they don't want all of this to fall into the hands of HTS, not that they're trained to use most of this equipment. Because at the end of the day, it's a volatile proxy force that they've used. I mean, this is what they always do, right? Whether it's Libya, Afghanistan, it doesn't matter. They're volatile. And ultimately, of course, they're going to be fighting amongst themselves. But why wouldn't they also fight against Israel if they finally sort of realize,

Starting point is 00:23:59 well, hang on, Israel's going to be grabbing more of Syria and we want to keep that bit of Syria, et cetera. So, no, I get it from a real politic perspective that Israel, in that sense is correct that they don't want it to fall into HTS hands or any of the other factions that are on the ground and might try and take power in the future and so on. Yeah, sorry. No, that's a really important point, really for a conversation another day. We'd get deeper into that point about, you know, just because the proxy force exists does not mean that they have complete control over its actions.

Starting point is 00:24:34 And I think Saudi Arabia has even made that point in the past. MBS himself, I think, kind of alluded to an interview that clearly they were responsible. They're kind of a hobby mindset around a lot of these terrorist organizations, rather the ideology around it. And ultimately, they've lost control of some of these elements. So they are exactly what they funded them into being. and then they just went their own direction, you know, and so it's interesting to see how that works. And I think we've seen this with a lot, like even the Kurds, with the U.S.,

Starting point is 00:24:57 how one day they're working with them the next, they could care less what happens. You know, it's just interesting. So that's important to think about right there is that, so that can answer the question. That ultimately they just don't know how the future will go, so it's better for them to destroy everything. And then ultimately that allows a situation where nobody could fill that role in Syria,

Starting point is 00:25:13 which is another sad reality that Syria is ultimately gone because of that. Yeah, and exactly. That's the point is that they're, they're ensuring that in the future, regardless of who is in control in Syria, they don't have access to the weapons and to the ability to either attack Israel or to defend itself against Israel. They've effectively turned it into another Gaza then, essentially. Yeah, they've turned it into a playing field for the predators that are now going to sort of pick the country clean in one way or another. You know, you have Turkey in the north, you have Israel

Starting point is 00:25:48 in the south you have Israel and the United States up the southeast and northeastern corridor. You've got HTS through the rest of the country, basically. But at some point, of course, what's going to happen, as I've said, you've got a cauldron therefore in the center of the country, which at some point is going to turn against itself. Because it's not only Jolani, it's not only HTS. You've got multiple other groups and nationalities. also you've got foreign mercenaries fighting under the banner of HTS but at what point

Starting point is 00:26:24 are they going to you know start warring for for control in certain areas for for religious fanaticism because they don't feel that that it's you know Sharia enough for them or whatever and we're already seeing this in the conversations again on social media where some of the Chachens or some of the Uyghurs are saying well we don't accept this you know this isn't through Sharia, we want it to be more strict and so on. And of course, Jolani is under instructions to try and be as moderate as possible. And people do really need to remember that this guy is ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and is the commander of some of the most brutal terrorist forces that operated inside Syria, like Jashal-Islam.

Starting point is 00:27:13 And I noticed that Muhammad al-Luish is in the supposed new inclusive government that is made entirely of extremist, Islamists. So hardly inclusive. Yeah, yeah. I mean, I got to just say, I find it actually, I mean, I guess it fits with the rest of how absurd things are these days, but to even use the phrase, a diversity friendly jihadist.

Starting point is 00:27:38 I'm just like, how are we just to Babel on B today? Like it just, well, you know an interesting point by that on that note, actually, and if you want to laugh at this with me, that, you know, so the term intifada, for example, which just means resistance. You know, it's like using the word revolution. You can use that in all sorts of ways, but obviously if we can say the American Revolution,

Starting point is 00:27:54 it's a positive thing. It's the same difference in the conversation anywhere else, but the word jihadist is bit different. You know, it's very specific, and yet it's being used by people in the Republican conversation. Like it's somehow, now, it's just, it's weird how one can become whatever you want it to be when there's opening.

Starting point is 00:28:09 You get the point. It's just completely hypocritical and blind to the reality of it. And now literally, I guess I wonder whether that's part of this design. Like, why would they actually, actually use those terms. It's, it is comic, it's cartoonish. Well, actually the whole, um, concept of Islamic extremism was of course originated by the Zionists. Right. Yeah. So all of this terminology has been effectively foisted upon us by the Zionist movement by the various lobby groups and, and organizations that support the Zionist movement. This whole concept of, um, extremist is

Starting point is 00:28:48 which I also, because I had this conversation earlier today, when someone was alluding to the fact that, well, you know, Muslims always fight amongst themselves and this is a big problem and so on. And, you know, I said, okay, we have to look at this in a different light because pre-2011, were Muslims fighting themselves in Syria? No, Syria was one of the most secure and stable countries in the Middle East at that point. It was a fantastic country, if you listen to people that were there, Syrians, that were living there before 2011. So what does the West do? The West creates organizations that have an extremist ideology, so either Wahhabis, Saudi Arabia, or the Muslim Brotherhood, supported by Qatar and Turkey. And those elements are weaponized to create this sectarian division and strife and violence in those countries.

Starting point is 00:29:54 And then people have to actually fight back to be able to survive. And we're seeing it now because, you know, when you've got the BBC and CNN and dear old Clarissa Ward lying through her teeth again, and Jeremy Bowen running alongside crowds heading for an execution, as if he's going to a Christmas party, you know, it's very difficult to understand what you're actually normalizing when you kind of accept this sort of reporting. You know, suddenly Siddhaya becomes the new Holocaust. And this was debunked back in 2013, 2016.

Starting point is 00:30:32 Amnesty International rolled back their report because it was all AI generated. People have forgotten all this. It's forgotten. It's just gone. You know, we already debunked all of these narratives. But now it's back as the new Holocaust and everything's forgotten about Sainzaman in Israel, where they're actually sodomizing Palestinians that are not even charged with anything. Or Saudi Arabia or Egypt or America, CIA BlackSight.

Starting point is 00:31:02 You know, all of that is forgotten. Everything is focused in on Sadnaya and this sort of post-Acopulix, apocalypse, Hitlerization of Assad. We're back on that. that again. Right. And of course, right back on that track again. Also ignoring the U.S. associated exact situation in, in northeastern Syria. Yeah. Yeah, northeastern Syria. And this is from a newer report from April 17th of this year. And I'm sure you're familiar, right? And it's, as you can see right there in the line, it's with the support of the U.S. government, torture, injustice, and death, you know, and it's, and I mean, as you piloted as well in, as well as the Rupon-Altamp area, you know, and it's just, it's disgusting. And we'll come back to that in general,

Starting point is 00:31:43 I want to get into the actual big news part of it. I mean, how many people are in jail in Edlub? Right, or in Israel, in general. You know, like all these overlap. I mean, as you pointed out, the literal on video rape in a prison. And, you know, we're not highlighting that. It's just, it's, it's, we'll come back to that. Because I do want to ask you more questions about the prison itself, because that's

Starting point is 00:32:03 important for people to hear if you, and just, it's the information around that as you've highlighted has been debunked more than once, which is most of these stories. But let's go in next to, and I'll let you actually pick which thing you think we'll be better to start with. Do you want to focus on the information around Highter al-Shahm and Idlib and that focus or the deal conversation in, you think it's more important to break down what these groups are first or talk about the deal that might have happened in the last so many weeks? Well, I mean, I think we can very quickly break down who these groups are. I mean, Jolani, as we talked about, he was incubated in the CIA

Starting point is 00:32:37 black sites in Iraq. He was sent as the emissary. of Baghdadi, sort of ISIS, basically, into Syria. He then formed Nusra Front al-Qaeda in Syria. He then went on to form various coalitions of terrorist groups inside Syria. And he pretty much had command, not over all of the groups in Idlib, but he had command over, let's say, the most dominant groups in Idlib. He provided surveillance operations for the United States so they could pick off the other groups that potentially could be a threat to Jolani's supremacy in Idlib.

Starting point is 00:33:22 But under his control, also like thousands of foreign extremist factions, like even Kurdish, Salafists, Chechens, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Uyghurs. I mean, I was looking at a map the other day from 2014 of where the terrorists were coming from inside Syria. And it was extraordinary. I mean, they're coming from everywhere, from Norway, from Finland, from all of the Balkans, from Kosovo, from America, from EU, from Australia. Like, literally, they flooded in from all over the world. And they're still there. So when we talk about this being Syrian against Syrian, of course, it isn't. at least 50% of those groups are foreign mercenaries,

Starting point is 00:34:14 foreign ideologically driven, some of them, but mercenaries and proxies, right? So that's what I'm saying. At what point are they going to retain any kind of allegiance to Jolani and to HTS? Very unlikely, unless of course the money is good. Right. Well, it's sort of like the Ozav movement dynamic. I mean, it literally is the same proxy element.

Starting point is 00:34:37 Because, I mean, even I, it's pretty, I think it was, Scott Ritter that covered this the most, but where when Zelensky first took power, he walked up to them and they basically laughed him off. Like, you're on control, you know, and that was on video. I remember seeing the video myself. I played on the show. And so it's interesting is you got this proxy element. So in a way, even though Jolani clearly has, you know, some level of influence with his group,

Starting point is 00:34:55 your argument is that ultimately they're, it's just because of the chaos they've created anybody else could ultimately start. I mean, like even the Kurds come into play, because I don't think the Kurds seem to be in line with the vision they have for what's coming next with what Golani or anybody else has. So eventually one of these things are going to come up against each other, like we saw in the last dynamic where we had the State Department and CIA forces fighting each other inside of Syria, you know. Well, the Kurds have done what they've done historically. They don't learn from history that whenever they're supported by whoever that power is, they're going to be betrayed. Right.

Starting point is 00:35:31 That's exactly what's happening right now because they're being attacked in the northeast by the Turkish SNA forces. And they're literally begging America to stop it and to get Turkey to call off the troops. It's not going to happen. And people were telling them. I mean, they had the experience in Afrin when they rejected the Syrian Arabami offers to come in and help them resist against the Turkish proxies coming in and occupying Afrin. And they refused. Right. And so then what happened?

Starting point is 00:36:06 The Turkish machinaries came in and there was a massacre and they were fully displaced from Afrin. Right. You know, I don't know. With the Kurds, it's very difficult to really have sympathy because how they couldn't see what was coming. But at some point, they would be left to the wolves because the deal would be done. And as it has been done between Turkey and Israel to conduct this attack in the first place, right? Because Turkey at the moment gets the north and it gets from Aleppo across to the northeast. The Kurds are out of the picture.

Starting point is 00:36:46 Well, I honestly don't have much, like, I don't see them in the same categories I would, any of the other groups we're discussing, but you're still a, I think as you're pointing out, acknowledged, aware of being used by these elements. So it's like you said, I don't really have much compassion for what that, you know, you should have learned from these mistakes thus far, I think. Like I think they have the design on obviously their Kurdistan area, but as you're pointing out, that's not in the designs anybody's laying out. But so this is a good segue into the question about whatever went down in the last, you know, with the potential of whatever deal was brewing that I've heard you discuss. Because obviously right there, I would argue, that looks like ultimately Turkey getting what it wanted out of this and the Kurds as usual going to throw out of the bus by the U.S. government.

Starting point is 00:37:31 but so let's get so was there a deal that took place with all of this and i'd like to start from the point of where like when we were talking about this in the first and a little bit before where it was sort of like you know the sleeper cell elements you know that ultimately it seemed to some kind of an agreement was made where Assad didn't really resist we saw the point where even spatnik reported that he had essentially resigned and would call for peaceful transition you know so what really went down right there and do you think that somebody was you know what the deal was not honored by one of the parties um i'm only theorizing I don't have any, you know, hard evidence, but just looking at the picture on the ground, I mean, I know for a fact that when Aleppo was, when the defense of Aleppo was first breached, I mean, there was something like 30,000 Syrian army forces defending Aleppo.

Starting point is 00:38:25 And I know that in the east, the forces that were there were steadfast. They stayed. When they decided to stay, the Russian forces and the commander of the Russian forces left, and they went back to Khomeim. Now, at the same time, Russia was still bombing the HTS supply lines. I think we talked about this. But they left them. They abandoned the Syrian army that didn't withdraw from the eastern side. And in fact, that particular brigade then went down to the South Voleppo and liberated the people that had been trapped in the Al-Safira area to the south of Aleppo,

Starting point is 00:39:11 which consisted of military cadets, civilians, evacuees from Nubal and Zara, the Shia towns to the northwest of Aleppo. Then was when this kind of strange collapse seemed to start at this point. Now, in defense of the Syrian army, because a lot of people are being very critical, there are videos circulating of a Russian Humvee driving past them, like swearing at them and calling them cowards and so on. But you know what? The Syrian army has been fighting for 14 years. They're paid on average between 30 to people.

Starting point is 00:39:55 $50 a month. Every terrorist is on around 2000, and that's without all of the profiteering and the taxes that they take from the civilians and the general kind of corruption and theft that goes on, particularly in Idlib or in any of the areas that they ever occupied, right? And Babel Hauer, which was the main humanitarian crossing, according to the UN, was a trading post for HATS. So they had money rolling in thanks to their backers in the EU and Turkey and the United States, etc. The Syrian army had been fighting for 14 years. From 2020, many of them had been decommissioned and then were brought back in, of course. There were a lot of rookie soldiers in there, young conscripts that had been brought in since 2020 and really had no battle experience

Starting point is 00:40:49 at all. And when you've got that kind of scenario and you're faced with overwhelming forces that have been backed by NATO, weaponized by NATO, trained by NATO, have the equipment that has been given to them by NATO member states, either through Ukraine or through Turkey, right? You are facing overwhelming force. Plus then they had the drone technology on top of that. And someone who was actually on the field in Hamar told me that's what's killing us. Like they're just driving holes through our lines because we can't, we don't have the defenses to be able to deal with the number of drones that they're throwing at it. And so then, you know, we know the story.

Starting point is 00:41:36 And Homs, there was a degree of resistance because Hezbollah came into Homs because for them Homs is important because that's the main part of their supply lines from Syria into Lebanon. And there were some Iranian forces still on the ground at that point and Syrian army. So to say that the whole army collapsed is a little bit unfair, I think there were elements that kept fighting. There was a lot of confusion. There was a lot of jamming of signals between the brigades and their commanders and so on so instructions were not getting through.

Starting point is 00:42:15 But ultimately, for me, a deal was made long before this happened, in my opinion. And I think we talked about the fact that for me, there was a very strong possibility that Trump was going to try and do a deal, sacrifice Assad. Because by sacrificing Assad, he's keeping everyone happy. Right. And when I say everyone, I'm talking about the Gulf states,

Starting point is 00:42:42 that have normalized with Israel, whether officially or not they have normalized with Israel. So when you say sacrificing Assad, you mean to deal with Russia? Yeah. Okay. Go ahead. Yeah, because it's the only one that makes sense to me. Mm-hmm. Because Iran, to a degree, you know, I think Iran had genuinely attempted to offer support to Assad. I was told by a number of contacts in Iran that they understood relatively quickly that there wasn't going to be a major stand.

Starting point is 00:43:20 So for them, that meant that they will withdraw because for them to increase their true presence would not be correct. And that's why you saw them saying we need a request from the Syrian government to come in. And then we'll come in. We're perfectly prepared to do that. And everyone here was like, okay, make the request. But it didn't come. I saw reporting around that time that even right before we talked that the Syrian government had actually asked in some cases the Iranian elements to move back and to and to leave the area. So like so right there, do you think that like you said, so there was a deal that was before this?

Starting point is 00:43:58 So that that makes sense and so far up to the point where why wouldn't then Assad have said something? Why wouldn't there be a different response? Because it does seem to be as if there was like unison in the original agreement. to like not have much of a response. But so just kind of connect the dots for me right there. So does that mean that somebody screwed him over somehow and he didn't see it? How do you see that connecting? Well, I mean, honestly, I do have to say I'm still working this one out, right?

Starting point is 00:44:22 I know. Yeah. You're just plain. We don't have all the facts. But that again is my issue with people who react. in a way that is in advance of really knowing exactly what has happened. There may be actions taken that they can't explain. But I'll explain what I mean by this because I think today Reuters put out an article

Starting point is 00:44:57 and basically they were saying, you know, Assad didn't warn anyone. Various members of his close government had asked him for advice and so on and he didn't respond or if he responded, he told them everything. And this doesn't make any sense to me. I agree. You know, if I look at Assad and the problem is now, of course, if you say anything in defense of Assad, we're just back in that area where you're just in a saddest, you know, like this kind of thing.

Starting point is 00:45:28 But I'm looking at this logically. Like how many weeks ago was he at the Arab League summit and shaming the Gulf States? Because everyone was also saying, yeah, well, the problem was that he pivoted towards the UAE and towards Saudi Arabia and he saw the future of Syria with them, not with Iran and not with the resistance. That's another narrative that's being brought into the kind of melting pot. But then why did he shame them at the Arab League summit very recently about the genocide in Palestine? And he was the most, you know, forceful speaker there about what was happening in Palestine and that they needed to be used. and they needed to actually do something rather than just keep talking about it. And this, you know, this is President Assad.

Starting point is 00:46:12 This is how consistent he's been since he was president, really. We've never seen any deviation from him in his public speaking, from the causes that he supports, the alliances that he has, and so on. We've never seen him deviate from this. And we've never really seen Syria deviate from its alliance to Russia since 1946. and for which it's suffered endless CIA and MI6 campaigns to remove governments and coup d'etat and military interventions and so on that have been ongoing for 75 years. Because their alliance with Russia was what they defended for that length of time.

Starting point is 00:46:55 But I think this is part of, and, you know, I kind of, I kind of, I, I, I, I, I do have to say, I don't have any evidence to support this, but I'm just using my logic right now. Why would he act so out of character, having fought for 14 years to defend the country and to defend the people? Why would he ignore his closest advisors and his closest government members and leave them in a situation where they're at risk fundamentally? Unless he is part of the deal is that he's not allowed to do that. Now, why is he not allowed to do that? If I put myself in a kind of Mossad psychology area, that would be the best thing for them to make him do.

Starting point is 00:47:53 Why? Because that increases the demoralization by 100 million thousand times, right? which then completely ends any potential for counter resistance or any kind of resistance against what's happening. And friends of mine are saying, you know, the anger against him in the streets right now is something, they're shocked by it. But as I said, I'm just thinking out loud, I'm just theorizing. I'm not saying that this is definitely what happened. But it's all too odd for me. So I'm just trying to kind of think what might have happened. And I do think, you know, I do think the one who would make a deal would be Russia.

Starting point is 00:48:39 Why? Because Trump is incoming. And we talked about this, that when Trump comes in, everyone thinks they can do a deal. And Trump has been laboring the fact that was his main campaign promise that he would end the war in Ukraine. So even for Trump, there is a degree of importance for him to end the war in Ukraine so that he looks as if he's maintaining his campaign promises. So what if there's a deal made between Russia and Trump that make huge concessions on Ukraine, but Russia gives them Assad and gives them Syria? Of course, it's not only to the U.S. It's Turkey and Israel also. Right.

Starting point is 00:49:19 Well, so this is where the next, and again, to express clearly all theoretical that the logic around it then, why then would Assad play into that? What does he gain from that situation? And so let me, if I will, if I could, let me float what I, based on what you laid out for us last time and your ongoing work and a lot of others like Fia, Fia, Isabella, Isabella, why am I blanking on her name all of a sudden? I always do that. I feel like a mix. I just call her fee all the times. I forget.

Starting point is 00:49:46 But so the, a lot of your guys, you're doing great work out there and trying to be objective and break this down. And so what I kind of, same thing, theoretically trying to piece this together. What made sense to me is that obviously, and I agree, what you've laid out over the year. and of course it could be some long con, you know, lie about what he really is, but he's been consistent about that, you know, I don't believe he is the way that they framed him. I don't believe me. And again, with all the lies of chemical weapons or the prison that you've proved, why would they have to make these things up? If he's the monster, they make him out to be. Now, I come from a very, you know, pessimist government perspective. I think any of

Starting point is 00:50:20 them could end up being something that's a problem, but I would agree that I don't think he is that. So keeping that in mind, I would argue if his actions are being taken that would make him look this way, it would be for something that would benefit the people of the country or in some way be the greater good of the situation. And so what makes sense to me here would be that ultimately there was some kind of an deal that was made. And as you know, this was going on before this point, where I think they were reporting that the Biden had government. And for those out there, you guys already know this, I see the government of the U.S. making these deals, whether Trump or Biden, I think it's the same entity. But ultimately that the agreement was made before

Starting point is 00:50:54 in the interest of having him stop work with Lebanon, right, with Hezbollah. And so, Ultimately, the deal could have been for him to step back from this, potentially relieve himself from power, which is what Sputnik reported early in this, that he resigned, called for peaceful transition. So I don't know whether that's relevant or not, or true or not. But so ultimately that he resigned with the interest of making this an, like, again, I forgot to add that we remember that with Ukraine being added to this,

Starting point is 00:51:19 the Russia has been overextended in that regard. I think when it comes to what's going on with Syria to a degree. So maybe they realize that we can't, we're in a position where we can't protect what's going to happen. So they make a deal to ultimately say, okay, I'll back away as long as there's a peaceful transition and Syrian's going to elect their president, right? And so I could see as much as I don't think the U.S. would ever respect it, the U.S. government entering a deal like that. And then Israel with Turkey blow inside of Syria and start taking over all the territory. And then U.S., which, by the way,

Starting point is 00:51:48 as you remember, the U.S. has been in that position countless times in the past, which I would argue they're just as capable of lying and going in the same direction. But where they do make a deal and Israel just goes, we don't care, we're going to take what we want. And then you, US has to defend that. I think that's happened more than once in the past. So what do you think the likelihood of that is? And that ultimately the US is now hell bent on trying to make themselves look like they aren't being played as usual by Israel and trying to make a seem like this is what they wanted or defending the terrorist group that's now in charge. And that's what and then Assad is left kind of being screwed. I think that what do you think of that? Is it logical?

Starting point is 00:52:20 Yeah, kind of. But I think you also need to remember what they were courting Assad to do. until he canceled the whole thing in 2009, which of course was the Qatari pipeline. Right. And where did the Qatari pipeline run through? It ran through Srir and Turkey. So it makes sense to me that the U.S. would enable Turkey to get involved, for example. And Qatar is the other beneficiary, because ultimately that means they go back to the... And I think today there were a few headlines of Erdogan and...

Starting point is 00:52:58 Qatar are talking about the re-emergence of the pipeline project. Surprise, surprise. So, you know, so I think for the US, that that's a major win for that. But I think also for Israel in particular, you know, of course it serves them. Syria will be plunged into chaos and never ending. It'll basically become another Libya. Right. But to a degree even worse, because not only will you,

Starting point is 00:53:28 will you have the warring factions and the kind of ethnic cleansing programs that are ongoing at the moment. People in Syria are terrified. And, you know, you've got various factions that know that they're going to be a target gathering at the Syrian border to get out. Many of them don't have papers. It's horrendous. Christian churches have been desegrated and, you know, and they're desperately trying to maintain this veneer of respect. but of course like ultimately what are they they're terrorists right you know and and they aren't

Starting point is 00:54:04 going to just have an epiphany overnight and become good human beings and and that's another thing now they're talking about lifting the bounty on uh jollani or whatever his name is now ahmed al-shadha and um and lifting the sanctions and preventing refugees from the minority sax and sateria leaving and coming to Europe as refugees. I mean, that for me is just pure criminality because what they're saying is, no, we'll leave you there to die. We'll trap you there to die.

Starting point is 00:54:36 Yeah, to be persecuted. It's horrendous. You know, when they're, and they're paying, many of the refugees who came were members of the extremist factions who escaped to Europe, not all of them, but many of them. And they're paying them 1,000 euros or whatever the currency is to go back to Syria.

Starting point is 00:54:57 Syria. Like, how does this work? You know, that just means, okay, we'll go back and reinforce the Islamist extremist factions that are now ruling Syria to ensure that you're even more powerful and the minorities that are under threat can't come. Well, an interesting point to making that, too, as well is that this is, it's, it's, the conversation, usually from a U.S. perspective around the border conversation is about the military age males and what that is. And, you know, what's interesting is you can find that here's a example of who who's actually funding and arming and putting this into act, which be the U.S. and Israel and Turkey, I would guess as well, in the context of the actual terrorist entities

Starting point is 00:55:36 being within the refugee element. And ultimately, then what happens is the Syrian people who are actually innocent people in the situation get the brunt of the problem because it's the same cycle everywhere you look. You know, and in other cases, it ends up being, well, even like right now with like the border in the United States or in general, the immigration conversation is It's the average people become the focal point as the enemy when in reality they're the ones being used by this kind of situation. I thought that was just irrelevant to point out. I wanted to ask you about the Assad speech because you would put it out on Twitter in general that if anybody has information about why that might not have been put out and you reference a source inside the Syrian government that had claimed that there was a speech that hadn't gone out. So I wanted your thoughts on that.

Starting point is 00:56:19 Kind of put a pin in this part of the conversation as you referenced about Assad and my point about why he wouldn't have said anything. I think the speech is a really important part of why like the demoralization to it and, you know, why they people are angry with him now who might have otherwise support him. Yeah. And I think, you know, that that's, as I said, a very typical tactic of the Zionists and even British intelligence agents is this kind of mind manipulation game, you know, that they play. And that's why it just started to dawn on me. Well, that would make sense because then that would even alienate. that would reduce any of his credibility, basically, even with people that were close to him,

Starting point is 00:57:01 which then would cascade down into normal society, right? Because effectively, that would mean that he's putting his own people at risk, rather than, I suppose the idea that was being put forward was that he was going to leave in order to prevent bloodshed. Exactly. And you're right. There was originally a deal that there would be a, a transitional government he would remain for six months and then it would get handed over.

Starting point is 00:57:30 Now, potentially, of course, there may have been a scenario where there would have been another Gaddafi. And it could be that whoever made the deal and was managing it said to him, no, like you've just got to go because the risk is too high. And, you know, we don't know. I mean, that's the bottom line. And at the moment, we're just speculating with the information that we have. I can tell you one thing, though. I was going to say the story they're putting forward clearly is not the truth and not the answer to this. I think that's quite obvious.

Starting point is 00:58:06 No, and I think the speech thing, because, you know, I was told that by two people that I know to be sort of very trustworthy as regards information. And it kind of made sense to me that he would have prepared something like that. Right. Now, in the Reuters article, one of his top advisors, apparently, if this is to be believed, he called them to come and help him write the speech. But when they got there, he wasn't there. Right. So that's one aspect to it, you know, because that's the thing. There's so many different narratives going on and floating around now. And people are getting very emotionally invested in it and getting very angry. And therefore, it becomes very difficult to sort of have a, um, a reasonable conversation with anyone about what has actually happened. But I think with the speech, and I was contacted by other people who said they'd seen it on Facebook and then it was immediately taken down. So people are kind of like what is going on, you know, did he make a speech? For me, again, it's still very difficult to believe that he didn't.

Starting point is 00:59:14 I agree. He didn't attempt to communicate with people that he just disappeared. And I think at that point, pressure was put on him to do. so for whatever reasons. I don't know, maybe to save his life, maybe to say, you know, reduce the risk to his family. It could be any manner of things. Like, you know, because I've been speaking to people that even for me disappeared off the radar, there were, there were National Defence Forces leaders that just disappeared from me and have only just reappeared right now. But I don't know what happened to them between the time that it was decided they had to

Starting point is 00:59:52 to just get out and most of them have left with nothing like literally just the clothes on their back so obviously there was an urgency involved right yeah and and and maybe as part of that deal when they realized that that the risk was too great everything had to just end there and then and there right but you know it's as i said what i'm just trying to put stuff to get it's like we lost you again well i'll just add one point on it that i'll hopefully we get you back here that i think that that i think It's, it just the only thing that sticks out to me is something that doesn't line up with this is that why they wouldn't be saying something now. Why wouldn't Putin or Assad or somebody in there, or just those two in particular? Why would they have not, to this point, have said something about that?

Starting point is 01:00:44 You know, even like the, I guess to answer my own question is that I think the point would be, again, completely hypothetical theorizing, is that there must be some kind of factor that's holding that back. whether it's in their interest for some longer play or that ultimately it's because there's some kind of factor that's being used against them, somebody that they're holding or, yeah, who knows? But that is the only way that makes sense to me. I just can't wrap my mind around why at this point,

Starting point is 01:01:08 oh, it looks like we lost or which comes back, that they would not have said something or made that clear by now. Because if it goes that are new to the conversation, it's been reported by Russian media, Russian sources as predominantly, I think, Russian sources that he fled to Moscow and is in, Moscow safely is the narrative. But we have yet to see any video, any statements.

Starting point is 01:01:30 And that's very strange. So I also could be possible that he's not alive anymore. And that's that would indicate, I guess, that Russia would be involved in some way. Again, it's all completely up in the air. But assuming we don't, if we don't get her back, I'm just going to go through a few. We had a few more things we were going to get into. I was going to go a lot longer than an hour today. But we might have just lost her.

Starting point is 01:01:48 Remember that she is, actually, I'm not even sure where she went to. Maybe she doesn't want us to know where she is now because for safety reason. remember she was in Syria and she got out right, right when this was all getting pretty hairy. And she is obviously safe now. But so I'll go through some other points then and hopefully we get her back. What I will do actually since, let me do this real quick. That works that way anyway. So what I'll highlight again and see if we, I'll just kind of wrap through these tabs.

Starting point is 01:02:15 If she doesn't come back, we'll kind of finish up there. I highly recommend you check out the interview we had on the first. Oh, there we go. We got her back now. Sorry. There you are. So all I really had said was that what I found interesting, the one anomaly to what we highlighted there, again, very clearly expressing that this is completely theoretical, is that why neither

Starting point is 01:02:37 Putin nor Assad would have said anything at this point, why they wouldn't have posted anything or shared anything. And all I simply added to answer my own question, hypothetically, is that it would make sense to me that that would indicate that there's some factor that's stopping that, whether this is in their interest to hold it back for some longer play, which I also did consider earlier about whether this is, you know, there was a strategic defeat for the interest of the full resistance, which day by day seems less likely, I'll give you that. But considering that whether there was something larger that they thought maybe allowing Israel to overextend itself, you know,

Starting point is 01:03:07 anyway, the point being that why they wouldn't have said anything now to this point, either that it was in their interest not to, or that maybe there's somebody that's being held or, you know, there's a factor that they can't for some reason, you know, coercion or I don't know. But that's the thing that stands out to me is it doesn't make sense to me why they wouldn't have said something at this point, assuming he's safe in Moscow, which is also potentially not true as well. Yeah. I mean, yeah, I mean, it was interesting in the Reuters article. They said that they reached out to presidents of Saudi Moscow.

Starting point is 01:03:37 I'm not quite sure how they managed to do that. Yeah. You know, and the article was written, I think, by three people, which we commented on earlier was a little bit excessive. I mean, there wasn't an awful lot of actual information in there. But they were pushing. this narrative that basically he'd betrayed all of his closest people. Right.

Starting point is 01:03:57 And left them at great risk. Yeah, I mean, I guess really we just have to watch the messaging from Russia and Iran and potentially from Assad. Or maybe he won't. Maybe we're just not going to see him again. I don't know. Like this is even here in Lebanon, you know, there's this conversations going on all over the place about what actually happened because there's a lot of confusion. And that's the thing that was most noticeable, you know, when the armed, when the terrorist forces were drawing close to Damascus, nobody knew what was going on. I mean, even for myself at one point, I was told I should leave.

Starting point is 01:04:44 The next minute I spoke to someone in Damascus and they said, no, no, it's fine. you know, the president is still here. I'm staying here. I'm not going and so on. So I was like, oh, all right. Then someone else told me, well, there's a ceasefire coming in eight hours. So we've just got to sit tight until whatever time it was in the morning. So I was like, you know, because ultimately I didn't really want to leave because I knew it was going to be, that would be it at that point. Right. And then suddenly it became, there's arms groups all around the house and Israel started bunker buster bombing, all the air defense around me. I was like, okay, no, I don't think we're going to get back from this, really.

Starting point is 01:05:25 Yeah. You know, and then the decision was made to try and make it to the border as fast as possible. But, you know, that confusion was incredibly damaging for people because there was just a vacuum of information. Nobody knew what was going on. everyone was kind of hearing things here and there and making their own judgments and those judgments were not very reliable. So, yeah, whatever happened, it created a very difficult situation for the people in particular. Yeah, I think that, you know, again, if there was a deal made, things like that, was clearly

Starting point is 01:06:06 part of that, you know, the silence, the confusion, the lack of information, like, clearly, like, And excuse me, the who benefits aspect is always an important question to ask. And I think that's very clear in this context, who is benefiting from what's ultimately happening. So again, theoretical, we can leave it there for now since it's, you know, I'm sure we'll see as this goes forward. I wanted to get into a conversation about what comes next. And since we were just touching on this, in case you haven't seen how obvious this is,

Starting point is 01:06:37 right now in Syria, there are, as I even literally titled the show this, Where was it? Right here. As Israel further occupies Syria, Western-backed, ISIS-patch wearing terrorists begin executions. Like, that's how crazy this is, like, literally right in front of us as we speak. And I'll just, you know, it's cut to the chase. You can see it for yourself. You know, you got guys with ISIS patches openly executing people in the middle of Syria.

Starting point is 01:07:03 You can see him right there with ice patch. I mean, and by the way, it's very, it's all, including that image of itself. That's actually from, I checked it myself. That's from what's going on inside Syria right now. And so what's crazy is that not only do they have openly U.S., Israeli, Turkey-backed extremists who are executing people, the religious minorities in the streets, you know, ultimately that this. And, well, actually, before we go past that, we did talk about this in many previous discussions. I just grabbed one. This is from February 11, 2020.

Starting point is 01:07:33 Turkey and U.S. openly protect extremists in Idlib as lies begin to crumble. So, and we briefly touched it before, but just on Idlib itself, you know, for those that don't know the relevance of that. So hiate Cheryl Shams, I understand it was basically, you know, cultivated, if you will, percolate, whatever the right term would be inside of Idlib. And that means that, you know, so the U.S. and Turkey were provably existing in that, in that area, right? So break that down for somebody that wouldn't make sense for, like in Brett McGurk's comments and how that relates to where we are today. Yeah, well, as Brett McGurk described at, you know, what is that, it delivers the biggest al-Qaeda haven since 9-11.

Starting point is 01:08:14 And various other comments were made, like Ambassador Jeffries, who was the Pompeo point man on Syria under Trump, also made it clear that, you know, what did he say, Al-Qaeda is our asset inside Syria. And I'm going back to Jake Sullivan, the email to Hillary Clinton, that Al-Qaeda is on our side in Syria. But, yeah, you know, the control, there weren't so many, there weren't American bases, but as I said, there were 150 Turkish bases in the north and northwest of Syria. 28 American bases in the northeast and kind of central Syria around Manbej, and then the major base of Al-Tanif on the triangle between Iraq and Jordan. And we know that weapons were flowing into HTS for years.

Starting point is 01:09:08 When did the ceasefire come into effect, 2020, which was brokered between Russia and Turkey. And from then on in, those forces were being given the training and the weapons and so on to be able to lead the attack that they did. And really quickly. They were prepared. At that point in time, these were being regarded as terrorists, right? I mean, like, as you said, Brett McGurick saying the largest ice kind of hot spot. And so at what point did that shift?

Starting point is 01:09:37 Or, I mean, even at that point, they were still kind of playing it both ways, right, where they were protecting it, but it was terrorists. So it's like they've, I explain how do they ever get away with this dual game they're playing even right now where they're sort of supporting them. But yes, they're designated terrorists. You know, I mean, we know they're hypocrites. But for someone this is new to, like, how does that line up? Well, I think, you know, again, it's this sort of double game because the fact is that when. they were being bused out of the areas taken out in the green buses from the areas that were being liberated by the Syrian Arab army and their allies. They were still being described

Starting point is 01:10:11 as rebels at that point, right? They only became al-Qaeda when they landed in Idlib. And they weren't, it wasn't sort of a universal labeling of them as terrorists. No, they maintained the description of them as rebels. Or then it became, um, when Jolani formed his kind of, what was it, salvation government, national salvation government in Edlib. And then suddenly they became political opposition. So to a large degree, the American establishment never really altered its view that, I mean, no, no, you know, that are legitimate moderate rebels,

Starting point is 01:10:51 like Timber Sycamore when Obama was funding 500 moderate rebel inside Syria. And lo and behold, all of the weapons and equipment was falling into the hands of ISIS. Right, surprise, right. Not to mention that the moderate rebel themselves were terrorist extremists. Yeah, we're working with ISIS anyway, right from the very beginning, you know. And of course, all of these groups were incubated anyway. They were radicalized by the United States in the CIA black site. And that's the whole point, because the U.S. is weaponizing terrorism since the war on terror,

Starting point is 01:11:27 terrorism globally has grown exponentially. So it's clearly not a war on terror, it's a war of terror against anyone that stands in the way of the US allied agenda in whichever region that they're focused on. Because of course, these same terrorist factions are reappearing and are being rebranded in Africa, in Yemen, in Libya. I mean, they're just being percolated around the globe wherever the US needs them. And when I'm talking about the U.S., I'm talking about the entire kind of alliance of U.S. hegemony. I remember you and I having a conversation in one of the many interviews of the past, where we laughed at the changing of the name, I believe, to hi, Terrell Schaum.

Starting point is 01:12:11 I forget if it was that one or one of the ones before it, but laughing about, oh, just got a name change and the act, and the corporate media just treats it like something new. You know, it's very transparent. I mean, they just adopt it. And it's also a kind of way of confusing people. It's a way of distancing them from the truth. because most, you know, most people are not going to pay attention to the minutiae. They're just going to go, oh, well, okay, now we're talking about some group called

Starting point is 01:12:35 Hayaterio Ostrom must be different, right? They're not necessarily, and when that name is used time and time again, and then they start to rebrand and Jolani does interviews with PBS and CNN, then people kind of, and now people, I'm sure of forgetting. I'm sure they're being destabilized in their belief. Well, hang on, weren't these terrorists? yet here they are, you know, forming governments and the bounties getting lifted and the sanctions are getting lifted, well, but they must be the good guys. Maybe they've had a change of mind,

Starting point is 01:13:08 you know? You know, I kind of think- It's such manipulation. It really is. I kind of feel, I had a thought of this other day that I get the sense that this is going to go a different direction where, I mean, it is very obvious and maybe, I question whether it's just obvious to us and other people are blinded by it, but I do think it's more obvious than usual. And that ultimately the game is to roll these people out, start by going, yeah, these are the rebels and they've saved Syria, but at the same time they're going, but we're bombing ISIS, which, you know, that's even what's going on. And then eventually they just kind of merged together to where they just go, you know, the Hyatt Trail Shom becomes the villain of Syria as then it rehashes the same game and

Starting point is 01:13:45 we start all back over again. You know what I mean? Where as long as they've got the enemy, they're fighting, I mean, historically, the U.S. ally of today is the villain of tomorrow. That's, it goes as far back as you can look, you know, so I, I, but, I, but, I, but, but I just mean like in a rapid scale is that happening again, you know? But I do wonder if that's why they're so desperate to vilify Assad, even in the eyes of, you know, his supporters within Syria itself. Because because I think also, you know, they have a purpose for HDS and ISIS and all the others. They still have Iraq to go.

Starting point is 01:14:17 They have Iran, potentially. So they still need them to a degree. So I'm not sure we're going to see that until we see the end of whatever, or what, wherever this project is headed. Yeah, good point. Well, let's talk about the supposed, you know, transition government and the election discussion and all of that and get into. So just to it's clear that what we're talking about is the group we were just highlighting.

Starting point is 01:14:41 These are U.S. Western-backed terrorists, not mentioning words, exactly what they are. And so now we're watching these elements just talk about democracy and elections and, you know, diversity and all these, it's really, it's fascinating if it wasn't terrifying. that it's actually happening. So I wanted your thoughts on this as we have, and first they talk about elections, right? So right out of the gate, this is democracy and freedom. And then right on the hell of that, they go, wait, wait, 18 months transition period. And so I just think that's funny to point out that it very rapidly became, give us about a year and a half to continue the not democracy

Starting point is 01:15:16 situation. But I simply pointed out that ultimately, you know, if they were to tomorrow decide, let's say they had an election and the Syrian people, assuming that was what happened, chose to pick Assad. Well, they wouldn't let that happen. So let's not pretend this is democracy, right? Like, it's obvious that that's not the reality. But what are your thoughts on the point of the government, the transition, the potential election? You know, is there any possibility this could translate into something Syrians want? You know, what are your thoughts on it? No. I mean, you know, it's kind of crazy. They've come to power through a coup. Initially, they were talking about it being a transitional government for the period of six months,

Starting point is 01:15:56 which was when they were talking about Assad staying on in a advisory role until he handed over, etc., which I think was always going to be dreamscape. You know, that was just never going to be allowed to happen. And I've seen sort of messaging that they're putting out today to two different extremes. So first of all, they're saying, oh, you know, the poor Syrian people have been suffering without electricity and without fuel and without food and. That sounds familiar. Well, yeah, but without even mentioning the reasons for why they're suffering without fuel and food.

Starting point is 01:16:29 food and electricity and and and or ignoring the genocide over here the exact circumstances in Gaza you know it just you know so it's and and then at the same time they're putting out all these various announcement every five minutes and so now they're talking about they're going to go after journalists that in their view supported the Syrian government crimes so so suddenly without any kind of you know judicial process people are being executed they're being hung, they're being hunted down, they're being massacred if they're from the wrong minority sex. They're being persecuted. And, you know, journalists now who might have been patriotic during President Assad's presidency and who were against the terrorist forces backed by the West,

Starting point is 01:17:23 suddenly become traitors. I mean, this is a kind of a terrifying inversion of reality. Right. Right. Well, not only an inversion. And nobody is going to stop it. That's the problem. I was going to say, not only an inversion of reality, that it's, I mean, it's, it's the obvious point is that you have this, this framing from the Western media and partisan element that this is somehow the Syrian people being saved or even like the very least that maybe it'll be worse, but this is what they get the bad guy out of the way. You know, and it's just right on the heels of this, it's exact opposite. Like nothing they're framing is, you know, they're, they're hanging people in the street.

Starting point is 01:17:59 They're killing a religious minorities right in the open. And so it kills me that they can even pretend to frame this as something other than, you know, what we've always been. At the very least, what they're telling you, you just got saved from. You know, I just, I mean, that's the same old point. I'm just griping, I guess, at the fact that it's so frustrating that it continues to happen. Go ahead. Yeah, and it's fully supported by the mainstream media, of course, you know. And the thing is that, you know, the extraordinary,

Starting point is 01:18:29 thing is that yes, you've now got the BBC and CNN and they're bolstering their image and making everything look normal. Executions are normal. This is what happens after, you know, after a so-called revolution, you get the executions, you get the guillotine, you get the gallows, you know, and I'm just thinking if this were the other way around, if this were Russia doing this, for example, all hell would be like those. But there's never ever going to be any recrimination for these groups that are being backed by the West and are committing crimes and were committing crimes before. That's it. They're going to go scot-free until, of course, they become redundant to the U.S. agenda, as you rightly mentioned. And then suddenly they'll become the target.

Starting point is 01:19:19 That's the same point about Hightrell-Sham, right? I mean, you guys, there's a bounty on their heads. they've committed crimes you guys have been telling us that for a decade and now they just say different words and so what about the time is coming off you know now they can lift the bounty because now they're an official government right but to your point though what about all the crimes they've committed thus far they just vanish because they changed their name you know it's you're it's well taken it's it's ridiculous and in the journal i mean good good no no i was just going to also say you know how long before the syrian people are kind of saying even amongst themselves Oh, God, I wish we had a sad fact.

Starting point is 01:19:56 Well, because we hear this every time. Mubarak, Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi. Sadly, most people regret that it happened and that they're gone because the chaos and the terrorist vacuum that their country is flung into is far worse than anything that came before. And are they really going to fix the electricity? How? Is the US suddenly going to give them all the oil from the northeast? Yeah, maybe once Israel's bombing.

Starting point is 01:20:23 all the infrastructure. Yeah. I mean, that's, you know, the absurd, the point is that they're destroying everything that would allow life to exist in Syria. So it's pretty obvious that they have no interest in keeping it safe for people, you know. But yeah, I think what it continues to show is as everywhere else they're acting in the world, they're not doing what they claim they're doing. They're not here to save people.

Starting point is 01:20:42 They're not here to fight for democracy. They're here at their own interest at the expense of literally everybody else around us. And I think that's why we continue to see these, these, you know, stenographers of the West continue to lie. I mean, let's go ahead and finish on this point about the propaganda, because it is absolutely ridiculous the level of what we're seeing. And I'm sure you've covered this already. And I think everyone's already, I mean, as far, I mean, oh, even just over the last couple

Starting point is 01:21:05 days, it seems like this has already been thoroughly broken down, completely exposed as utter nonsense in more than one example. And this is the guy that, you know, they're literally claiming came stumbling, you know, apparently, I mean, I'll just, I'll read exactly what Arnod wrote. He said, this really, really hard to believe. the Air Force Intelligence headquarters where this is taking place has been freed since the 7th of December, so four to five days ago.

Starting point is 01:21:29 So we're asked to believe that the CNN journalist visited a secret prison that's been cleared presumably for up to five days and found someone left behind. And his main point first is that, you know, I'm pretty sure people can't survive for four to five days that water. And, you know, are thousands of examples that even Facebook, or even Twitter caught. You know, he seems to be well fed.

Starting point is 01:21:48 He doesn't seem to be on dirty. So, you know, on that one alone, No, but this one, if this was the Lebanese, he'd come there for hospital treatment. Oh, well, there's that there's not this one here too. That's another one, right? Yeah, and this one apparently was supposed to be kind of similar where they go, you know, there's another person that was kept and the person comes in behind and proves that that's not the case. Like it's crazy.

Starting point is 01:22:11 And I think there was another one where they had the kids talking. And he said, yes, you know, I've been kept in the prison for 14 years. since I was born and the guy says to him, so how old are you now? He says, 10. It's like, what? I see, it's unbelievable. And to be objective, that doesn't have to mean that these things aren't happening, but it's incredible.

Starting point is 01:22:33 And I think your evidence is clearly shown that they're lying about all of this. But that they, my question, my point is always is if they have to manufacture all these lies to sell this narrative, you should at least ask whether that's not really the picture, you know. Here's another one as well. This one was BBC put out. Man found wandering near Damascus after. months in Syrian prison. And Craig Murray came out and said the evidence that Travis Timran was detained at all seems distinctly dubious at the most basic level for a white man who has been locked inside

Starting point is 01:23:02 for seven months in all photos. He's entirely the wrong color. Same as most these people. No prisoner power flabbiness, huge amount of BS coming out of the media right now. It really is incredible. And then I'll just point out as we did a second ago, you know, that they don't seem to care at all about the very, very well-documented evidence of what is actually continuing to happen in U.S. controlled areas in Syria or many other places in general. So if you see, oh, I'm sorry, I'm not actually showing it. That was just the one we mentioned earlier about Amos International. Yeah.

Starting point is 01:23:31 But any other examples you've seen of just like egregious misinformation swinging around because it seems to be pretty common right now? Well, no, I mean, it's just the fact that they're absolutely totally on board with HTS. I mean, they're not even bothering to try and hide it. You know, and when they're accusing us of lack of objectivity or of bias, and we see them literally kind of salivating over an HTS power grab in Syria, it's horrendous. I mean, I actually sent Jeremy Bowen's report when he's following the crowds to a potential execution, and he's relishing it. And I sent it to a kind of a very professional journalist friend of mine. And they said, this is, this is disgusting.

Starting point is 01:24:19 Yeah. You know, this should be condemned. Even in court, this is just appalling. This isn't journalism. You know, and this is one of the so-called senior journalists at the BBC. Because I query if they're journalists or intelligence assets, quite frankly, when they you know the higher level um journalists within state medias and the worst and so on i mean we know that through CNN and and i'm sure there's award what's her name ardua damon i'm surprised

Starting point is 01:24:49 she's not there although i think she's kind of since she sniffed yeah busy smith on the rucksack in edlib i think her kind of you know usefulness went down a little bit but still al-in-claw mccloud i think it was al mcclough for in press news and i believe it was his but I don't want to miss something. Anyway, I think it was Mint Press News for sure, but they put out a great report about Mossad elements finding themselves into positions of influence in corporate media in the West

Starting point is 01:25:19 or specifically the United States. It was definitely Mint Press News. Yeah, I'm proud of thought, but I think the point is that it's very obvious. This happens. Let's two points that I want to end with in general. Your comments on this, there's the idea that there are Turkish citizens

Starting point is 01:25:33 that turn out to be working for the IDF, this report from Al Jazeera, which, by the way, I will also argue, especially with this conversation, Al Jazeera is not somebody who should be taking at base value, but never we should with any media for that matter. But the idea of the overlap of Israel on this conversation, when it comes to Turkey, we mentioned this last time, right? The kind of feigned resistance back and forth between Turkey and Israel and now being reported at the very least that there's IDF members with Turkish nationality that are acting within Turkey, which adds more to the possibility of the deal point you mentioned before. I just thought that was interesting point. Thoughts on that to end as well as where this may go

Starting point is 01:26:08 with Iran. Because you already have Netanyahu, like right now as this hasn't even finished, already going Iran, Iran, Iran. Like, we know that's where this seems to be going. Aaron pointing out how they're already commenting how we can now we can bomb Iran better from this location. They just kind of wrap up on that. Yeah. And I mean, you know, we know that Trump's administration is very anti-Iran. We've had Vance right from the beginning saying, you know, we've got to hit Iran harder than before, etc., etc. But I think, no, I think, you know, where are we heading? We're definitely heading towards potential of war with Iran, for sure.

Starting point is 01:26:50 And for sure Iran is preparing for that. You know, as I said, I think next will be Iraq. They will try and create a corridor through Iraq towards Erbil and towards the border with Iran to prepare for any escalation against Iran. And of course, if they can do that, if they're closer to Iran right now from a launch pad in Damascus or from anywhere in Syria, really, because pretty much all of Syria is now related to Israel, to one degree or another. Turkey, I guess, might at some point be some kind of thorn in the side of Israel, but I don't know. You know, that remains to be seen.

Starting point is 01:27:38 Turkey also, of course, is eyeing up the pipeline that we talked about. And, yeah, I think we're heading for escalation in Iraq and then potentially Iran. Now, I certainly hope not. sadly that does seem to be where this is heading. And, you know, and I worry about, I mean, I think right now what we can see is that this is carrying out a long-term agenda, right? And I think, I think the obvious point is that Israel is, or rather the United States or the West in general, seems to be carrying out Israel's wars.

Starting point is 01:28:12 I mean, I think that's not a hyperbolic statement. And I think that's been going on for quite a long time. And Iran is clearly the last one on, well, I mean, whether we don't want to talk about the seven countries, five years, whether that's, legitimate or part of something else. The point is that we can see Israel's been aiming at Iran for a very long time. And with Trump's incoming administration seeming to pull back any resistance on that at all, I'm very worried about where that goes. But I, you know, I guess what we have to, the point of what we're doing this for is I'm of the mind as we touched on to begin,

Starting point is 01:28:43 that there is this shifting of awareness around a lot of this stuff. And I think we have long since passed whatever might need to be passed to argue the majority is aware of this. Right. And I think that's kind of clear. So what we need to do to get that to mobilize into some kind of action that drives action, that stops what's coming, that causes them to care that we see what they're doing. You know, I don't really know what that looks like. But I think it's important that we continue to highlight work like yours and continue to highlight the objective nonpartisan information that's coming out because I think it's growing. And again, as I've said before, I think this is kind of rapidly being reduced into a position where that just won't matter anymore.

Starting point is 01:29:23 think this is part of it. I really do. I think this kind of dovetails with the globalism idea, even technocracy. You know, I see this all interconnected. So on the way out in general, if you have any, hopefully positive notes for us, like, you know, any thought what I just mentioned, you know, just kind of leave us with something to, you know,

Starting point is 01:29:39 what your thoughts are and where this goes and anything else? Yeah, I mean, what I have been seeing is, you know, they haven't really changed their MO, you know, when I was talking about the cancellation of Christmas for many Christians in Syria. I was immediately under attack that I was lying. And it was what was interesting with a number of people that were coming up with headlines from a few years ago about how churches in Idlib, for example, were desecrated and

Starting point is 01:30:07 so on that Christmas was canceled in Idlib under Jolani. So why would it be? Right. So it's interesting that I'm not necessarily needing to defend what I'm saying. And, you know, he tried to post something about, one of the Christian towns that I'm probably closest to in Syria, Al-Skelbia, and they had just sent me a load of videos showing the desperation of one of the churches there. So while he was kind of trying to say, no, no, no, no, everything's fine.

Starting point is 01:30:36 We've been speaking to the priests, and, you know, we've agreed they can put up there, whatever it is, 53-foot Christmas tree, etc., trying to make themselves look inclusive and, you know, moderate. And then I'm getting sent at the same time video showing the dam. to one of the churches in Skelbia and the fact that many people from there have actually flood. People now at the moment are trying to deal with the situation they have. And of course that is being exploited because when you've got videos like this, are they content to be having to take instructions from terrorist groups that four years ago, five years ago were besieging their town and murdering their children with mortars?

Starting point is 01:31:22 on a daily basis. No, of course they're not, but they're afraid. Well, you know, and this is a good point to make in general that, you know, so here you're highlighting something that is historically clear. I mean, Netanyahu and Israel bombed almost, I mean, every Christmas, as far as I can remember, Syria, it's a very common thing. But so they come in and call you a liar for pointing out that this is happening, and this is a good point to make where here, yes, you can show them saying words, yes,

Starting point is 01:31:47 that sounds good. Yes, we'll do this. But here is your actual evidence as a journalist doing, Well, here they are destroying the church that we're talking about. You know, and so this is a good kind of ending in an analogy, I guess, of the reality. People can say a lot of things, politicians, terrorists in Syria, and the people that want to support, you know, that gain from it will lie and say whatever they want. The point here is for you to take the, do your due diligence, show discernment. Don't fall into whatever narrative works for your partisan side.

Starting point is 01:32:17 Look to people like Vanessa who are actually doing the work and showing you not what they're saying they're going to do, but what? what they're doing. You know, I mean, it's amazing that we even have to make that point. But I think the Twitter files element of all this today, which, you know, I use that point often, but I think people understand what I'm getting at, you know, that instead of source material, it became screenshots of source material, you know, and it's this this is this slow decline. And so, again, I just really value your work and all this on how people will continue to go to your website, which I'll include down below and all the work you're doing, you know, it's just, I'm glad for you out there and people like you, Vanessa. So thank you for joining me again.

Starting point is 01:32:50 No, thanks for having me on Ryan. And as always, as always, everybody out there, question everything. Come to your own conclusions. Stay vigilant. This starts, and it's really fascinating to go back. It starts in 1996 with Netanyahu, who wrote a book called Fighting Terrorism. And the thesis of the book is quite straightforward and very dangerous. He says, you know, there's Hamas, there's Has,

Starting point is 01:33:20 blah, they oppose Israel. It's not good for us to fight them directly. That won't work. What we need to do is topple the governments that back them. So what we need is regime change throughout the Middle East. And he actually gave a long list of seven countries that included Syria, Libya, Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, and Lebanon. And systematically, the United States has done Netanyahu's bidding for almost 30 years now, going to war with every one of them, except for the big one that Netanyahu so much longs for, which is the war directly between the United States and Iran. About 10 days after 9-11, I went through the Pentagon, and I saw Secretary of Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the joint staff who used to work for me. And one of the generals called me in.

Starting point is 01:34:24 He said, sir, you've got to come in. You've got to come in and talk to me a second. I said, well, you're too busy. He said, no, no. He says, we've made the decision we're going to war with Iraq. This was on or about the 20th of September. So I said, well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda? He said, no, no.

Starting point is 01:34:44 He says, there's nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq. He said, I guess it's like we don't know what to do about terrorists, but we've got a good military and we can take down governments. And he said, I guess if the only two you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail. So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan, I said, are we still going to war with Iraq? And he said, oh, it's worse than that. He said, he reached over on his desk, he picked up a piece of paper. He said, I just got this down from upstairs.

Starting point is 01:35:18 Committee of the Secretary of Defense's office today. And he said, this is a memo that describes how we're going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and finishing off Iran.

The Last American Vagabond - Vanessa Beeley Interview - The US/Israeli-Backed Regime Change In Syria & Its Zionist Beneficiary

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.