Monday War Room: Rep. Massie Blasts DOJ For Still Withholding Epstein Documents, Bannon Issues Statement & MORE! - FULL SHOW - 02.16.2026
Monday War Room (02.16.2026) dissects the Pentagon’s potential break from AI firm Anthropic, Israel’s West Bank annexation push, and Epstein fallout sparking resignations—Smith demands arrests instead. Europe’s divided stance at Munich, NATO’s 3.5%-5% GDP spending push, and Lindsey Graham’s Iran war advocacy are framed as globalist schemes to centralize power in Israel while undermining U.S. interests. Callers link circumcision to "globalist torture," warn Trump’s advisors may distort dissent, and urge a "Promises Made" rally to halt perceived betrayals, ending with a pitch for supplements amid legal battles. [Automatically generated summary]
I'm your host, Harrison Smith, coming to you live this Monday afternoon.
Hope everybody's doing well.
We got a lot of stories to cover today, a lot of videos to show you from over the weekend.
We'll get to as many as humanly possible.
Probably take your phone calls today as well, but let's begin today as we do every day with our Daily Dispatch.
All right, here it is folks.
Your daily dispatch for Monday, the 16th of February, 2026.
Pentagon considers cutting off Anthropic over safeguards dispute.
Anthropic, the AI company, is possibly being axed by the Pentagon.
Axios reported on Saturday, citing a senior Trump official, that the Pentagon is considering reducing or even ending its partnership with AI giant Anthropic over limits to how the military uses its models.
This comes as Wall Street Journal reported that the U.S. used Anthropic's Claude through a contract with Palantir Technologies in the January 3rd military operation in Caracas to seize Venezuela's Nicolas Maduro and his wife.
It's unclear how the tool was deployed.
Axios and the journal added that an employer, employee at Anthropic, reached out to Palantir counterpart to ask whether and how Claude was used in the operation.
However, an Anthropic spokesperson denied discussions over the use of Claude for specific operations with any industry partners outside of routine technical discussions.
Again, we'll get back into this as there seems to be a lot of contention around Anthropic these days, including the fact that their AI's morality is going to be basically managed by a single woman who is herself not exactly the most moral person.
Meanwhile, Munich Security Conference has the U.S. standing tall in Munich with Europe crying.
The Republicans took it as a chance to go to Europe and reassert our demand that they adhere to at least basic free speech principles as first created in Europe.
And the Democrats used the excuse to go over to Europe and bash America and try to score points for that god-forsaken continent.
Meanwhile, Israel reopens West Bank land registry in a first since 1967.
In a blockbuster move that could shake up the region, the government reopened land registration in Area C of the West Bank for the first time since 1967.
This, of course, is being reported by the Jerusalem Post as an exciting and good thing.
It is, in fact, the next step towards annexing all of the West Bank in flagrant disregard of the demands of Donald Trump, human decency, international law, decent international practice, basic morals, and every other thing you want to talk about just being violated outright.
We'll again get into this a little bit more later.
Meanwhile, Epstein files end careers from law firms to the UK, in the UK, in the Norwegian Prime Minister's office.
The latest round of Epstein files has effectively ended the careers of some of the world's most powerful figures, from captains of industry to prominent attorneys.
Brad Karp, the chairman of top law firm Paul Weiss for 18 years, resigned after his emails with Epstein were revealed in the files.
Kathleen Rumler, top counsel at Goldman Sachs, resigned after her emails with Epstein surfaced, showing their close relationship and her downplaying his sex crimes.
Casey Wasserman, a high-profile Hollywood talent agent who chairs the LA 28 Olympic Committee, said that he would sell his agency after his Epstein ties were disclosed.
And it goes on, but it's not enough.
No, it's not nearly enough.
No, it's just barely a tasting of what should be coming because we don't want resignations.
We want arrests.
And it's not just going to be a handful of people.
It's got to be dozens.
So we'll keep working on that.
But we're on our way, just not anywhere near being satisfied.
Now, we'll be satisfied when we have the whole ice cream cake, not just a little tiny sampler spoon from behind the counter.
Finally, DC Water CEO addresses community in wake of massive sewage spill.
Donald Trump commented on this on Truth Social today, saying that it may be high time to simply federalize the state of Maryland as a section of 72-inch sewer pipe failed and has been spilling hundreds of thousands of gallons into the Potomac River, undoing literally decade upon decade of river conservation because they're all bad at their job.
Because when you elect Democrats, you're electing people that are always bad at their job and the catastrophes always follow.
We've got a lot of other news to get into, including the Munich Security Conference taking place over there in Europe.
The National Review has the headline: Munich Security Conference, U.S. standing tall in Munich.
Europe crying.
Europe is crying.
Kind of.
They're simultaneously crying and trying to start war with Russia.
So we don't know what the hell is going on with them.
Of course, Marco Rubio chose this as a time to, just like JD Vance last year, reassert America's demand that free speech be given at least moderate support from the nations that created the concept.
And he did a great job, Marco Rubio, of using America's power to try to push our actual ideals on the rest of the world.
And of course, the Democrats used the chance to undercut everything America is doing and display their really embarrassing ignorance to the entire world.
I've got like six videos from AOC, and every one of them, she's retarded.
She's retarded in every single one of them.
It's very sad that we have somebody like her representing us on the world stage.
And as much as we'll go to it, it's just, it's a shocking reminder that the people supposedly representing us just literally don't know anything, just about anything ever.
And of course, we've known, I mean, it's been an acknowledged fact that AOC was literally an anonymous waitress that was chosen for her looks by a cabal of Democrat operatives that had identified a particular congressional district that would be vulnerable to a, you know, ethnocentric grassroots campaign, so-called grassroots campaign, actually funded by millions of dollars.
They literally had tryouts and she tried out like an actress.
And she's an actress.
And she'd gotten better at this.
Or maybe she just avoided ever having to speak extemporaneously for the last couple years.
But early on in her career, she would very stupidly go give interviews with people and try to answer questions from them and it never worked out well.
And I remember one particular time, and actually it was a question about Israel and Palestine.
And straight up, it was like one of her first interviews after getting elected.
And she was straight up just like, I don't know what I think about that right now.
I'm going to have to go back and talk to my people and I'll get an answer for you later.
Like, so you're not even like a real person.
You don't, you literally are just a puppet.
And if they don't preload words into your memory drive, then you have nothing to say and you have to go get your talking points first.
Like, that's who these people are.
That's who this person is.
So, we'll show you some videos.
They're very funny, and there's a lot of comments just being like, we've never seen a trip demolish an entire political career like this.
And I, frankly, I'm excited.
I'm excited for AOC to try to run for president or something because we got a little taste of what that's going to be like here.
And I mean, she only talked for a couple minutes, and we've got like all of it.
We increasingly outsourced our sovereignty to international institutions while many nations invested in massive welfare states at the cost of maintaining the ability to defend themselves.
This, even as other countries have invested in the most rapid military buildup in all of human history and have not hesitated to use hard power to pursue their own interests.
To appease a climate cult, we have imposed energy policies on ourselves that are impoverishing our people, even as our competitors exploit oil and coal and natural gas and anything else, not just to power their economies, but to use as leverage against our own.
And in a pursuit of a world without borders, we opened our doors to an unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies, the continuity of our culture, and the future of our people.
We made these mistakes together.
And now, together, we owe it to our people to face those facts and to move forward to rebuild.
Under President Trump, the United States of America will once again take on the task of renewal and restoration, driven by a vision of a future as proud, as sovereign, and as vital as our civilization's past.
And while we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone, it is our preference and it is our hope to do this together with you, our friends here in Europe.
For the United States and Europe, we belong together.
America was founded 250 years ago, but the roots began here on this continent long before.
The men who settled and built the nation of my birth arrived on our shores carrying the memories and the traditions and the Christian faith of their ancestors as a sacred inheritance, an unbreakable link between the old world and the new.
We are part of one civilization, Western civilization.
We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilization to which we have fallen heir.
And so this is why we Americans may sometimes come off as a little direct and urgent in our council.
This is why President Trump demands seriousness and reciprocity from our friends here in Europe.
The reason why, my friends, is because we care deeply.
We care deeply about your future and ours.
And if at times we disagree, our disagreements come from our profound sense of concern about a Europe with which we are connected, not just economically, not just militarily.
We are connected spiritually and we are connected culturally.
We want Europe to be strong.
We believe that Europe must survive.
Because the two great wars of the last century serve for us as history's constant reminder that ultimately our destiny is and will always be intertwined with yours.
Because we know yeah, it was actually a great speech and exactly what needed to be said.
Racial.
Racial would be the other links that he's still not mentioning, which is odd.
You know, we're getting more towards a culture, even just an international media landscape in which white people are not scared to defend themselves.
Still not quite there yet.
It's like America and Europe have all of these ties, cultural ties.
We have historical ties.
It's like, and a religious tie.
It's like, and racial tie.
That's right.
White people, aka Europeans, are a special race.
Isn't that nice?
Isn't that wonderful?
Like, we deserve to be protected and can celebrate our achievements and have interests that are all aligned with one another.
We haven't quite gotten there yet, but we're on our way because the attacks continue to be racially based.
The defense just hasn't quite made it there yet.
And I say that because AOC is having a hard time criticizing Marco Rubio because he said West, and she's very, very determined to demonize white people because she's a vicious, racist, communist idiot.
Let's go to Clip 24 here.
AOC tries to take a swing at Secretary Rubio's address in Munich.
Should we try to figure out what she thought she was saying there?
I don't think she said anything.
I mean, she said whiteness doesn't exist.
Obviously, that's a lie because if it didn't exist, then what would they all be aligned against?
What would give her side unity if you didn't have whiteness as a construct to rage against?
What are you talking about?
Whiteness has to be destroyed, but also it doesn't exist.
White people exist and white cultures exist, but they're not white.
A square is a rectangle.
I know this is going to be a very complicated thing for AOC to try to wrap her mind around.
A square is a rectangle.
Not all rectangles are squares.
Do you understand?
You understand that German culture and English culture, debatably Italian culture, is all white culture.
It's all white.
The nationalities are under the umbrella of white.
She knows this.
She knows exactly what I'm talking about because she hates white people and is trying to destroy whiteness.
And you know that's the case because do you think for a single second, if you said, okay, then let's celebrate German heritage and German nationality and German culture, she'd be like, great.
Let's uplift and celebrate that.
Of course not.
Why?
Because it's white.
Because it's an aspect of white culture and she's against all of it.
So they'll try to break it down and they'll say, whiteness doesn't exist, but Britishness exists.
Britishness is a thing.
You're like, okay, so British pride.
And they're like, wow, what does that mean?
There's no such thing as British people.
There's Anglos, Angles, and there's Saxons.
These are all different immigrant groups.
So, I mean, really, Britishness doesn't really exist.
And this is all just ridiculous lies and just the most blatant outpouring of hate against a race you'll ever find on mainstream media or political speeches.
It's just the hatred pouring forth from their despicable mouths.
Let's go to clip 26 here, AOC.
Oh, no, we went to that one.
Let's go to clip 27, where again, she calls for rules to based internationalism that is, you know, communism.
People posted these clips so much, and there were so many different aspects of stupidity to highlight.
You'll have the same clip posted over and over.
One person's highlighting how just basically incompetent she is.
Another person's highlighting things she said about the cowboys being utterly ahistorical.
Another person is commenting on how, yeah, she's a straight-up communist.
It's all the same clip, though.
She packs in a lot of objectionable and retarded stuff in a very condensed package.
Let's go to clip six here.
This is her giggling excitedly when talking about imposing a wealth tax, only to be shut down by somebody from a third world country that's like, yeah, we tried that.
It ruined everything, lady.
Do you think she cares?
Do you think she is listening?
Of course not.
They have terrible ideas and they will impose them and then they'll cover up the negative consequences of them and tell you you're a hateful racist bigot for noticing.
We don't have to wonder.
They're just going to do it unless we physically stop them.
Again, this is the, if there's one thing we need to get through to our heads, there is no convincing these people.
You can literally sit there and go, we tried exactly what you're suggesting.
Here's how it went.
You can show point by point how it is inevitable that it will fail every single time.
And they don't care.
They're going to do it anyway.
You can't talk to them.
You can't convince them.
You can't instruct them.
You have to defeat them.
Let's go to clip six, huh?
unidentified
So when you run for president, are you going to impose a wealth tax or a billionaires tax?
I don't think that I don't think that anyone, and that we don't have to wait for any one president to impose a wealth tax.
I think that it needs to be done expeditiously.
unidentified
You have the recipe that many Latin American countries applied many, many times, that is some relief in the short term, but end up being, you know, a tragedy for the future.
It's like public expenditure, huge public expenditure, price controls, sometimes wealth tax, and you end up wealth goes away and you have just the tax and you don't have wealth anymore.
That was something that Peronism did many, many times.
So all these recipes then creates a cycle, no?
Then you have this short-term relief, but then goes with inflation, shortage, then you have more poverty, and the cycle goes and goes.
I think what we identify is that in a rules-based order, hypocrisy is vulnerability.
And so, I think what we are seeking is a return to a rules-based order that eliminates the hypocrisies around when, too often in the West, we look the other way for inconvenient populations to act out these paradoxes.
Now, that, contrary to popularly, that was not her being stupid.
That was her being a coward.
What she wants to say is that the rules-based international order doesn't mean shit if Israel gets to violate it at will.
That the rules-based international order is worse than useless when the United States continually defends Israel's worst violation of the most fundamental rules of the rules-based international order.
That's what she wants to say, but she's a coward.
She won't say that.
She wants to dance around the issue by saying there's hypocrisies manifest with certain populations.
It's like you're not wrong.
You're just not saying what you believe because you're scared to, because you're a coward.
Continue to talk a little bit about what is going on in Europe.
As they continue their drive towards constant suicide, for lack of a better word, just absolute, abject suicide.
I got to admit, I'm just kind of like, I'm just kind of bummed at all the news over this weekend.
It all pretty much all sucks.
It all sucks.
And it especially sucks knowing that it's only going to get worse and that the people in charge are just driving headlong towards the most outrageous, ill-advised catastrophes you could possibly imagine.
And I don't know how more people don't see what's actually happening.
I don't understand how you could frame anything the European authorities have done in the last 20 years as even attempting to have a positive outcome for the people of Europe.
Like they've just been engaged in the ruthless deconstruction of their own nations for the past like 40 years.
At this point, I'm not sure there's any way back.
Certainly not with the people that they have currently in power.
And this is very troubling to me.
And make no mistake, they are so desperate to get into a full-fledged war with Russia.
Completely, again, just a terrible idea.
In the month of February, which we're only halfway through, Russia has announced they have taken over 14 different villages in Ukraine.
That's a village a day.
Every day, they're taking over another village in Ukraine as they continue their slow march towards inevitable success.
And we are just prolonging that as long as humanly possible to squeeze the most money out of it and kill the most amount of people that we can.
And that's still not good enough for Europe.
They want to go to full-fledged war.
And like, I really wonder if they have done this math yet.
I assume they have.
And I've assumed for a long time.
Yeah, 345 Ukrainian drones in 24 hours took two villages in 24 hours.
Yeah, the Ukraine is just losing relentlessly.
It's been losing for two years.
There's been no hope for victory since pretty much the war started.
This has all been a gigantic farce.
And like every week, there's some new story about another Ukrainian minister getting out of the country with $100 million of ill-gotten goods because they're literally just looting the country to the maximum degree while killing everybody there.
It's just the most evil thing that's ever happened.
And they want to do it to the rest of Europe.
They want the rest of Europe to be subjected to this.
Like that may be what the Ukraine war was all about in the first place.
I was like, all right, what happens when you take a technically European population and subject it to warfare like this?
Like, is it possible to systematically liquidate the native population so that they can all be replaced by migrants?
It turns out, yeah, yeah, no, that's what's exactly what's happening.
They're doing it very successfully.
Maybe they plan to roll that out in the rest of Europe.
Ex-energy minister detained while attempting to flee the country one day ago.
I'm telling you, it's like every week there's a new person fleeing the country with $100 million, mostly going to Israel, not being extradited for it.
So why do they want to go to war with Russia?
Like, I think their plan is we'll start a war with Russia.
We'll false flag our own population.
We'll blame it on Russia and all of them.
We'll reignite some patriotism.
And we've seen it over and over.
The only time you ever see commercials with nothing but white people, it's military commercials trying to boost recruitment in Germany and England because they really want to just finish off the last generation of men in Europe so they can all be replaced by an endless board of third worlders.
Yeah, he was one of several government figures implicated in an alleged $100 million embezzlement scheme in November.
Yeah, I'm not just saying thanks, guys.
When I say every week there's a new Ukrainian minister fleeing the country with $100 million, every week there's a new minister fleeing the country with $100 million.
These aren't just random thoughts of mine.
These are the results of research and a lot of it.
So I wonder if they have done the math.
Like right now, you see that Hillary Clinton and others are trying to walk back immigration.
Some people are saying this is just because it's the midterms and they need to seem somewhat reasonable.
So they get into office so they can enact even more communistic deconstruction of our entire country.
But I think also it could have to do with they've reached critical mass.
And they go, all right, basically it's unstoppable now.
Basically, the tide has turned.
So now we can pretend to be against illegal immigration or immigration at all because it doesn't matter.
It's already, the demographic bomb has already exploded and we're just suffering through the fallout now.
But like, do they think that the European people are that brain?
I don't think they are.
I don't think they're that brainwashed.
And I think if you actually force them to choose between fighting their own governments or fighting for their governments against Russia, I think they're going to choose to fight their own governments.
But again, it might actually be too late as they've imported millions and millions.
Litch reports something like 45 to 50 million Muslims on the continent of Europe.
And a lot of them are very well armed.
And routinely, every couple of months, there'll be some new bust of some new mosque that has a gigantic weapons cache with AK-47s and explosives and rifles and all just all sorts of stuff stashed away, waiting for the inevitable moment when the European countries decide enough is enough, try to kick them out, and then they'll just conquer it by force.
And that's been the point of all of this the entire time.
So it's not exactly a surprise.
German and UK military chiefs state case for rearming.
The defense chief of Germany's army, General Karsten Brewer, and the United Kingdom's chief of defense staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton, have jointly stated the case for rearming amid the threat posed by Russia.
The top military officials pinned a joint letter published in the Guardian and German newspaper Welt, in which they said there was a moral case to be made for rearming.
Brewer and Knighton said they were speaking not merely as the military leaders of two of Europe's largest military spenders, but as the voices for a Europe that must now confront uncomfortable truths about its security.
The pair said that Russia's military posture had shifted decisively westward, and it was rearming and learning the lessons from its invasion of Ukraine while reorganizing in ways that could heighten the risk of conflict with NATO countries.
The military leader said Russia's military buildup, combined its willingness to wage war on our content, as painfully evidenced in Ukraine, represents an increased risk that demands our collective attention.
Or you could have just stopped trying to encroach upon their territory with NATO for year over year over year, constantly under the threat of Russian reprisal.
When that reprisal finally came, you can't exactly act surprised and say, oh my God, Russia is so dangerous, guys.
Russia is so dangerous.
They attacked Ukraine.
Yeah, after literally a decade of you guys waging war against the eastern provinces in that country.
But they really are desperate to give Putin an excuse to attack Germany or Denmark or Poland or any other NATO country so they can unleash NATO in a full-fledged way.
And NATO itself is reorganizing to achieve this goal.
I'll get to that in just a second.
Let's go to Clip 29 here.
Denmark's prime minister wants NATO to reject red lines and demands strikes deep inside Russia.
There are still red lines when it comes to the weapons they can use to win this war.
And you cannot win a war with the one hand tied on your back.
So, I mean, we need to give them weapons so they can strike into Russia.
We have had this discussion for several years.
We are still discussing it.
I mean, for the last three years on this conference, I have said, why are we not providing them the air defense that they need?
And everybody is doing like this.
They still lack air defense.
You cannot protect the country without air defense.
We know exactly what we need to deliver, including, of course, membership of NATO, because if they were a NATO member now, if we were, I mean, if we had been able to take that decision in Vilnius, we would be in a completely different situation now.
So we know what to do, but first of all, we have to recognize, we have to understand, we have to learn that Russia will not change.
These are bunch of childless twinks, like a bunch of nerds and losers and weirdos that somehow got their grubby little hands on some of the most powerful military complexes the world has ever seen.
And they're just acting like children with them.
Like, thank God Russia has somebody like Putin in charge.
He seems like a serious dude.
He seems like he's not falling for the hysterics that the Europeans are just constantly putting forth.
Look, I'm not telling Putin to like new communic or anything.
I'm just saying, like, where is the problem really coming from?
Why is there so much conflict and chaos?
And why is Europe collapsing at an incredible rate?
It ain't Russia, obviously.
I don't know.
It's just the same thing over and over.
But these people are insane, and nobody's holding them to account.
And they're just driving us headlong towards World War III.
They've been doing it the entire time.
The Ukraine-Russia war has been going on.
Like, they are so desperate to get Europe into war with Russia.
And there's absolutely no reason.
There's absolutely no reason.
Might be less reason to go to war against Russia than we have to go to war against Iran.
And we got no reason to go to war against Iran.
It's just things that certain people want because they have gigantic global plans to institute a one-world government.
And they need to get rid of the people that are in the way.
So they start a world war.
And hey, the first two worked out so happily for them.
You got the League of Nations under the First World War, and then you got the United Nations after the Second World War, not to mention the State of Israel out of that.
And the Third World War, they want to be the big event before the final reorganization of a one-world government with its capital in Israel, ruling the rest of the world from there.
Like, that's their plan, and they're just moving forward on that.
And it doesn't matter how many people they have to kill.
It doesn't matter how many lies they have to tell or how obvious they are.
Or if at this point they don't even bother telling us lies and they just are doing it.
So we have to stop them.
There's really no other choice.
So again, thank God we have somebody at least decent in office here in America, but I think they're in on it more than I would like.
Let's go to clip number 23 here.
This is Ursula van der Leyen, commissioner of the EU, and her globalist chums talking about how they're intent on war with Russia.
And basically, they're talking about just doing it, whether or not it represents the will of the people or even the will of the majority of the representatives of the people.
Here's Ursula van der Leyen basically saying, we're going to start this war whether you like it or not.
They're literally talking about starting world war.
And they're like, we don't all have to agree.
We can start this war unilaterally.
Then you all are in it.
So maybe we'll do that.
Use a creative interpretation of some of our treaties.
Again, I just don't even know how we got to this point.
But one thing that would probably be of interest to anybody not wanting to go into the Third World War, as long planned, should read this from war.gov, remarks from Under Secretary of War for Policy, Elbridge Colby, at the NATO Defense Ministerial.
This was earlier this month.
He says, as national security strategy and national defense strategy make clear, we are now living through a period of profound strategic change that requires clear-eyed realism and fundamental adaption by all of us.
The world that shaped its habits, assumptions, and force posture of NATO during the so-called unipolar moment following the Cold War no longer exists.
Power politics has returned and military force is again being employed at large scale.
In this environment, the United States is prioritizing the most consequential threats to America's interests, especially in the defense of the U.S. homeland and interests in the Western Hemisphere, as well as reinforcing deterrence by denial in the Western Pacific.
At the same time and critically, the United States and its allies must be prepared for the possibility that potential opponents will act simultaneously across multiple theaters, whether in a coordinated fashion or opportunistically.
These realities compel us to think clearly, soberly, and realistically about how we defend ourselves and how we do so together in a way that is sustainable, sensible, and enduring.
Times have changed, so it's only prudent that we adapt to meet them.
This is not an abandonment of NATO.
To the contrary, it's a return and validation of its foundational purpose.
The alliance was created in the late 1940s to provide a strong, credible, and equitable defense of the North Atlantic area.
Throughout the Cold War, NATO 1.0, as we might describe it, was defined by a hard-nosed, realistic, clear-eyed approach to deterrence and defense.
Allies from the beginning were expected to pull their weight, as evidenced early as Article 3 in the Washington Treaty and the Lisbon commitments of 1951.
Tough conversations about burden sharing were the norm, whether under President Linden, like presidents like Lyndon Johnson during the balance of payments crisis, Richard Nixon during Vietnam and detente, or Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan during the Euro missiles era.
President Eisenhower himself, one of the men most responsible for the Allied victory in the Second World War and the first saucer, it was very clear that NATO's success hinged on our allies stepping up to lead their own defense.
This model was tremendously successful.
It made sure the USSR never saw military aggression against the Western Alliance as a viable strategy.
It thus saw us through the Cold War with peace in Europe, an incredible achievement to which we all must be grateful.
When the Soviet Union collapsed, however, NATO transformed into something else, perhaps what we might call NATO 2.0.
This version of the alliance was typified by a shift of effort and focus away from Europe's defenses towards out-of-area operations and substantial disarmament of the continent, as well as a change in frame from the hard-nosed, flexible realism of Cold War NATO 1.0 to more of a liberal internationalist mindset of the rules-based international order.
It's clear, however, that this approach of NATO 2.0 is no longer fit for purpose, certainly not for the United States, and we would submit not for our allies either.
The times are changing.
We must adapt in terms of how we think about the world and the alliance's role in it, and how we posture to meet it in practical terms.
What's needed now is a NATO 3.0, something much closer to NATO 1.0 than the approach of the last 35 years.
This NATO 3.0 requires much greater efforts by our allies to step up and assume primary responsibility for the conventional defense of Europe.
Nor, I should stress, does it necessitate a one-sided focus on military strength alone?
Rather, in line with NATO 1.0's policy of the Harmel report, it provides for an approach that classically matches such strengthening with diplomatic outreach represented by the dual-track approach of the 1970s and 80s, and today by President Trump's effort to both strengthen NATO and negotiate an end to the tragic war in Ukraine.
To Trump's great credit and the great credit of the Allies, the Alliance took historic momentous steps in 2025 to chart a new course in line with this needed shift.
With the Hague Summit commitments, there is now a shared recognition that the approach typified by NATO 2.0, in which the United States provided the overwhelming share of high-end military power for Europe's defense while European allies on the whole spent relatively little on defense, was no longer sustainable.
More importantly, beyond recognition, we are beginning to see a promising start to demonstrated actions by the Allies to meet the Hague Summit commitment of 3.5 and 5% GDP on core broader defense spending, a level that now forms as national security and national defense strategies may clear a new global standard for our allies around the world.
So, what is he saying exactly?
I think it's pretty clear when he blazes it out as NATO 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0.
NATO 1.0 was an alliance with a purpose.
It was allied and unified against an allied and unified collection of countries on the other side, the USSR, which in and of itself was a collection of Soviet republics, so-called, more like the United States.
And so NATO was sort of the United States of Europe response to that.
And so instead of fighting each other face to face, you had the Cold War era of proxy battles going on all over Africa and Southeast Asia and everywhere else.
And that worked for a little while, but then when the USSR fell, Soviet Union fell, and there was no purpose for that alliance anymore.
They kept it going anyway, calling it the rules-based international order, which, as admitted by everybody involved in the rules-based international order, with Mark Carney's big speech at the World Economic Forum, or wherever it was last month, saying it was always kind of a lie.
It was always kind of a fiction.
Actually, the international rules-based order never actually had the ability to enforce any of its dictates, and it was always just a matter of bigger, stronger countries voluntarily subjecting themselves to the demands of weaker countries who had no ability to enforce their demands, but had to rely on the goodwill of the bigger countries.
And that's unsustainable and unfair and not what a military alliance is supposed to be about.
So now they're trying to reform it, not to make it weaker, not to say, guys, we can finally move on from this Cold War mindset.
Russia is not the Soviet Union.
We do not have a reason to suspect that they're secretly trying to undermine Western values.
They, in fact, seem to embody Western values to a greater degree than we do.
They also seem to embody a lot of things better than we do, including strategic competence and an actual desire to see their people flourish and not be murdered because they vote inconveniently.
So to me, this is sort of a betrayal.
To me, this is a complete reversal of what Trump originally represented.
He would talk about NATO members not meeting their pledges, right?
They're all supposed to be giving 3.5 to 5% of their GDP, or I think it was just 3% back before they got the agreement to up it.
But they weren't even meeting that.
They were spending like half of a percent of their GDP.
And so Trump wanted them to simply fulfill their obligation so they weren't relying on America anymore.
Seems like that has been transmuted now into we're going to basically remilitarize NATO and go back to NATO being a military alliance at odds with Eastern Europe and China.
This is the opposite of what we want.
Why would we want to create the condition for a gigantic world war?
That's all that this would lead to.
NATO being phased out would lead to a lot of bilateral or multilateral agreements.
You could have countries making their own little alliances.
It would probably actually end up better than what it is now, which is giant block of Western Europe, giant block of Eastern Europe.
Let's have war between these two groups.
That is obviously the plan here.
And I'm completely against that.
So while they may be still talking about NATO as if it's a vestige of the Cold War and no longer fit for purpose, that's not because they're trying to get rid of it.
It's because they're trying to get it back to what it originally was, which is a vessel for war and not much else.
And NATO was always, that was always the intent.
It was always supposed to be the army of the UN.
And like it was NATO troops that went into Korea during the Korean War, and it was American commanders and American troops.
So they're under a NATO flag.
It was supposed to be an international military force.
Sort of Korea was the only place it was deployed to any sizable degree.
But that, again, is just in complete disregard of just the way the world works and has worked for all of time, that nations go to war with other nations, not some sort of international cabal of nations, picks one nation to do its fighting for them.
It's just unsustainable and nonsensical, but all in line for the eventual absorption or reorganization into a one world government.
So this has always been the plan.
It's been the plan since World War II.
The reason the United Nations and the corresponding military, you know, clone the NATO alliance.
So troubling stuff out of Europe as they really do seem hell-bent on destroying their population one way or another, either by starting wars in the Middle East and inviting all of the insane barbarians to go live next door or just straight up have Russia nuke them all to death.
One way or the other, they will destroy Europe within a couple decades if they're not confronted for the ridiculous overconfidence they have, despite being incapable of even maintaining their own economic outlook, let alone go toe-to-toe with Russia.
We'll talk about Iran next as Lindsey Graham is over there just absolutely humiliating himself and by virtue of his position.
All of us.
So stay tuned.
We'll be right back.
Second Hour of War Room begins in about 90 seconds.
unidentified
don't go anywhere folks to have been upwards of 250 000 young white girls raped in this century very largely by muslim men In 2008, an 11-year-old girl came to the attention of the police after she disclosed that she and another child had been sexually abused by a group of adult males.
Just a few weeks later, she was found in a derelict house with another child and a number of adult males.
Yet she was arrested, 11 years of age.
She was arrested for being drunk and disorderly, and none of the males were arrested.
Have you force identified the police officers involved in that and found out what went on?
The veil is lifting on the UK's festering underbelly of nauseating cover-ups where Labour MPs under Keir Starmer's iron grip just slammed the door on justice for victims of Muslim grooming gangs.
unidentified
The eyes to the right were 111, the no's to the left, 364.
Back in January 2025, the Tories pushed an amendment to the Children's Well-Being Bill demanding a national inquiry into the predatory networks that have ravaged thousands of young, mostly white and working-class British girls, while whispers of Islamophobia fears and political correctness shielded the perpetrators.
But I want to give a special thanks to the APPG on British Muslims for the brilliant work that you do to highlight issues affecting British Muslims and celebrate their achievements.
As leader of the Labour Party, I am utterly committed to eradicating Islamophobia from my party and from society.
And nothing, nothing has shaped my thinking more than our crowdfunded, independent inquiry into the Pakistani Muslim rape gangs.
An inquiry that should never have had to exist.
An inquiry that I created only because the political system itself would not act.
That inquiry has been the most sobering experience of my public life.
Not just because of the awful crimes, not just because of the horrific suffering, but because of what it exposed about the way this country is governed.
Now zoom out to Scandinavia, where the same multicultural madness has turned safe havens into rape hotspots.
Sweden tops the charts at 84.4 reported rapes per 100,000 people, followed by Norway at 42.49.9, with studies showing 92% of severe rapes in Sweden linked to foreign-born offenders.
Yet convictions remain abysmally low.
Just 6% in Sweden prosecute adult cases.
Scandinavia's unchecked borders and elite denial breed predators, turning progressive paradises into hellscapes for women and girls, while real men appear to be non-existent.
Restore Britain, grooming gangs, cause a revolution.
Find and share that video on banned.videoinfowars.com.
And of course, follow us on X at RealAlexJones at Infowars and at AJN Live.
You can follow me at Harrison H. Smith, and we'll be right back.
Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
This is The War Room.
We got a lot more to cover, a lot more videos to show you here in the second hour.
I do want to tell you that we have the biggest sale I'm going to say ever on any site.
I don't know if any site has ever had a sale this big if they weren't going out of business or something.
52% off every item on the store.
I don't understand how we even are making money with this, but you're going to, you should enjoy it, but you should take advantage of it while you can.
42% off site-wide.
It is the mega sale of mega sales on thealexjonesore.com.
So if you like our products and want to stock up, now's the time to do it.
If you've never tried our products and want to try, well, now is definitely the time to do it.
It's especially the time to do it because not only are you getting 52% off every item in the store.
I feel like I have to say that over and over because it sounds ridiculous.
Yes, I'm saying 5-2%, 52% off everything on the store.
It's also the last week where you're entered to win both the Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 and the Ford F-250 Diesel.
Someone from our audience is going to win these cars.
Someone's going to win one, someone's going to win the other, or somebody might win both.
And it could be you.
Why not?
All you got to do is go to thealxjonesstore.com, make a purchase, and every dollar you spend gets 100 times the entries to win both of the cars.
This is a rare event.
It only happens a couple times a year when these two giveaways overlap and you're getting twice as many entries for every dollar you spend.
That's 100 times entries for every dollar.
Plus, you get $10,000 in cash if you win the car.
So somebody's got to win it.
Why not you?
Now is the time.
Go to thealxjonesstore.com slash Harrison if you want to let them know who sent you.
And with that, we go back into the news.
And we still got a lot to talk about here.
And a lot of war being planned around the world, as it seems like our system almost entirely depends on that, on the selling and using of immense, unimaginably large quantities of military armaments.
Lindsey Graham is in Israel right now and is just vibrating with excitement.
He's just giddy as a schoolgirl being over there and planning not just war with Iran, but wars into the future.
The wars of our dreams are about to be obtained by closeted homosexual Lindsey Graham there in Israel, just like I said, drooling and sputtering and giggling to himself about going to war with Iran for some so far like completely inexpressed reason.
Let's go to clip number seven here.
This is Lindsey Graham, senator of South Carolina in Israel.
And by the way, he plans from here on out, he's going to go to Israel every two weeks.
Every two weeks, he'll be in Israel to make sure everything's going well for them.
Okay.
Sorry, South Carolina.
Sorry, there's no time, no time to concern himself with the people that actually elected him.
He's got a tiny country 5,000 miles away to concern himself with.
And between DC and Israel, there's just no time.
There's no time to go back to South Carolina.
Let's go to clip number seven, where Lindsey Graham says, some of you may die, and that's a price he's willing to pay for Israel.
I think the risk associated with that is far less than the risk associated with blinking and pulling the plug and not helping the people as you promised.
You're saying that if we start the war, yes, Iran will be able to respond.
Yes, our men in the region are absolutely going to die for that.
But that's a better choice than the other option, which is not starting the war and not killing our young men to overthrow Iran, because then we're blinking.
Then we're blinking.
Then Iran, I guess, is going to go crazy and try to destroy the United States.
Or are things going to continue as they have been for the last several decades?
See, I think their plan has faltered a little bit.
And I remember explaining this in 2023, like right as soon as they started the bombing campaign against Gaza.
And I got to go back and find some of those old shows.
I've watched them back recently.
And we just, we nailed it.
We just nailed exactly what was happening.
The only thing we got wrong, I went back and I watched some of the shows that we did on like October 9th, October 10th, like right after that, right after the October 7th attack.
And we got two, I'll admit we got two things wrong.
For one thing, I expected Hezbollah and some of the other Iranian proxies, as well as Iran itself, to get involved in a bigger way more early on.
I don't know why they didn't exactly.
In retrospect, when the Pagers went off and a lot of the Hezbollah leadership got liquidated, it may have been a better move for them to have acted more intensely earlier.
I don't know, but I guess we're wrong about that.
Really expected Hezbollah and Iran to get involved in a big way earlier on.
That never happened for some reason.
And the other thing was that we just didn't expect Israel to actually be able to bomb Gaza completely.
Like, well, I'll, I'll have to pull them in later this week.
But I remember sitting there because it was like me and Chase, I think, on October 9th talking about it and going, the only way, like, there are tunnels and Israel doesn't have the manpower to go into the tunnels.
The only way they could do anything is just bombing the hell out of a bunch of civilians.
And they can't do that.
They couldn't do that for as long and as intensely as they needed to.
The world wouldn't stand for it.
Yeah, we were wrong.
I was wrong.
That's what they did.
I mean, strategically, like tactically, that had to be what was going to happen.
I just didn't think that the world would sit by and allow it.
I guess I was wrong.
I guess I underestimated the amount to which Western countries are under the thumb of Israel.
That's my fault.
But we understood exactly where this was going and what this would lead to and how it would ultimately end up with Iran being the big foe that we were trying to destroy.
And it was all obvious from the beginning.
And this is just following that playbook.
But I think they may have stumbled a little bit because early on in 2023, I remember saying, like, October 7th was the attack, and now it's over.
And they have the hostages.
And the reason they brought the hostages, the whole thing about October 7th was there were a bunch of Palestinians that were imprisoned without ever being given a trial.
And they were just prisoners and hostages that Israel was holding.
And so Palestinians, the Gazans, wanted to go and get hostages of their own in order to swap them and get their people back.
That at least was the plan.
And it was over.
Like, there wasn't any further threat to the rest of Israel once that initial attack took place.
And that was fairly obvious.
Like, they were very public about what their plans were.
We're getting hostages.
Now we're holding the hostages and we're going to demand things for this.
But the whole time, every headline and out of the Israeli politicians, it was like, this is going to happen again tomorrow if we don't go right now.
And if we let up for a single second.
And the whole point was to try to create this atmosphere of anxiety and urgency.
So you can't think about what you're doing.
You just have to do it.
There's no time to debate whether or not we should bomb the hell out of Gaza.
It's now or never.
This is World War III.
This is the end of the world.
We have to attack.
We have to, we have to, we have to.
And by maintaining that super high level of urgency, they were able to do a bunch of stuff that cooler heads would have never allowed them to do.
And I think they wanted to just like keep that going for as long as possible until they can take out Iran.
And they were kind of doing that last year with the nuclear thing.
Oh my God, they're a nuclear weapon.
They're two days away.
We have to go right now.
But like, it's just not working and nobody's falling for it.
And so now it's just like, well, we could either not attack them and our soldiers would be safe and we could probably come to some sort of agreement.
And sure, it would mean that Israel is not able to become the, you know, unipolar hegemon of the Middle East.
But, you know, there can be a, there can be a level of peace and there can be some normalization of relationships.
Like that's one option, or we can bomb them and attempt to overthrow them and initiate what promises to be several decades of pointless bloodshed and wasting thousands of American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars of American money, all for the service of the state of Israel.
So like these are our options, and they're choosing that latter option, but there's not like the intensity and the urgency that they would rather have maintained up till this point.
There is no urgency.
There is no like, we have to do this or else there's nowhere else.
We have to do this or else peace.
We have to do this or else we just don't do it and it's fine.
Not a great argument.
Not a great argument.
I think they've failed to maintain the level of urgency necessary to sweep along public opinion with you as you engage in this retarded behavior, but they're doing it anyway.
So that was Lindsey Graham just outright saying, yeah, Iran's going to kill our boys, but what's the other option?
Not starting a war with them?
That's literally the argument he just made.
I'm not exaggerating.
I don't know if I've ever seen a public statement from a politician more in line with Lord Farquhar from Shrek.
Lindsey Graham just stood up there and goes, yes, some of you will die, but that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make.
For what?
Impunity of Israel on the world stage?
So that there's nobody who can militarily stand up to them as they continue to slaughter innocent people.
I mean, practically 100 people die every day in Palestine because of the murderous activity of the Israeli government under our ceasefire, apparently.
They just want that to be able to continue and they don't want anybody to be able to stand up against them.
Why we're serving them in this?
Well, I think the Epstein files might give you a good idea about that.
Let's go to clip number seven here, Lindsay eight, rather.
Lindsey Graham says, the wars of the future are being planned in Israel.
Oh, how exciting.
unidentified
watch tapering off u.s military yeah we talked about that You've spoken about a trigger timetable.
Well, I think what his plan is to replace the money of 3.7 billion with an investment in new technology rather than just writing you a check, you know, help the IDF.
He wants to create a partnership outside of the aid number.
I like that idea.
The wars of the future are being planned here in Israel because if you're not one step ahead of the enemy, you suffer.
The most clever, creative military forces on the planet are here in Israel because they have to be to survive.
So what we're looking at is that Israel is advancing down the road of new weaponry far beyond us.
And it would be nice to have a process where we could be partners.
And it gives them the ability to focus on this stuff.
But we don't get access to it unless we make a deal with them.
Now, this is in line with something we've been covering for a while, which is the fake out where a bunch of Israelis are now saying, no, we don't want to be given money by America either.
What?
Giving us billions of dollars?
No, thank you.
And they're actually trying to make this argument where they're like, no, that's like a leash America has on us.
We don't want to be dependent on America.
It's an outright lie.
What they want to do to military aid to Israel is what they did with military aid to Ukraine.
Remember, under Joe Biden, when they were worried about Trump getting into office, they went around saying, we're going to Trump-proof aid to Ukraine.
So we're going to sign treaties that guarantee the next 20 years of military aid, the next 20 years of weapon shipments.
So it doesn't matter who gets elected president.
These will be in place and they won't be able to break them because they aren't the ones that sign them.
The Senate signs them or, you know, somebody outside of the executive branch is the signatory on it.
And so this executive branch can't withdraw from it.
And so we're just stuck having agreed to this endless supply of weaponry and money, even if the voters of America don't want it.
They knew we don't want it, so they signed an agreement to allow it to continue.
So that's all Israel is doing is they're saying, no, we don't want your $3 billion in money.
No, thank you.
You keep that.
Instead, why don't you just sign agreements to us so that the money is treated as an investment and it just gets shipped to us automatically?
See, that way, they don't have to ever argue about it or justify it.
The way it is now, every time there's a budget reconciliation, there's a line item that is aid to Israel, and it could potentially become a source of contention.
If ever American politicians feel like standing up to Israel, it would be a point of contention, and it is a point of contention in the wider American public that this happens.
So, what they want to do is take that off the expense sheet and just have it as like a military expenditure that doesn't get voted on and is just sort of included in the wider package of trillion-dollar military budgets that we pass.
So, they're just trying to make permanent the foreign aid that for now has to go through this sort of perfunctory process of getting approved every year by the U.S. Congress.
They want it to not ever have to be approved.
It's just guaranteed forever.
Only it's treated as investment in military technology so they can both take our military technology and our expertise and have us fight our wars for them and then pretend that they're actually helping us by doing that.
I don't know if Lindsey Grand is a traitor or an idiot, but he should stay over there.
I mean, what more could you possibly need to know that Israel is not our friend?
Like, what do we need to do about this?
Because out of all the things that we talk about, some of them are kind of intractable.
Like, Europe wants to kill itself by going to war with Russia.
I don't know how we can convince them not to do that.
They're just retarded.
I'm pretty much on Russia's side now.
I'm just like, Russia, please do something about these people because the European people need to be free from under their yoke.
Like, stuff like that.
It's frustrating.
I don't feel like it's our responsibility necessarily to do something about it.
In this case, this is our responsibility.
We have to vote these people out.
We have to get rid of the Lindsey Grahams.
We have to, I mean, but then you really look at how thoroughly baked in this stuff is.
We have to get rid of like everybody.
I haven't played him very much, but there's a there's some guy, I'm not even sure who he is, but he just goes around the Capitol and just asks people America first or Israel first.
And it's an extremely rare thing that anybody says America.
Half the time, people literally just get scared and run away.
It's crazy.
Maybe I should pull that video in.
There's one in particular, and he just messes with people because people like he'll be asking them in the elevator and they just get off on whatever floor the elevator's on.
The guy filming's like, wait, you're so supposed to be going up two more floors.
Why are you getting off here?
People just run away.
Do you understand what I'm saying?
In the United States Capitol building, if you ask people, do you support this country, America, the building of which we are now in the capital of?
Like, do you support us or them?
And they can't answer.
They're so scared to even entertain the question, they literally run away like chickens.
It's wild.
That's so wrong.
It's so crazy and wrong because not only does it expose the real alliance these people have and like where their actual loyalty lies, but it's in fact they can't even pretend.
They can't even pretend.
They would get in trouble if they just immediately went, I'm America first.
What are you talking about?
That should be the instinctive reaction of every single person ever asked this question.
It shouldn't even be a question.
They should be mad and insulted that it's even asked.
And it shouldn't take any thought either.
A lot of people, it's like America or Israel.
And they're like, well, why would you even ask that?
It's not a question that I have to entertain to you right now.
And it's like, just say America.
Do you see what I'm saying?
That it's not just that they aren't saying America.
It's that they are scared to say America.
Do you understand what I'm saying?
That if they were disloyal to America and supported another country and that was it, and it was like a clandestine thing, they didn't want anybody to know about it.
Then, if you asked them Israel first or America, they would answer America.
Of course, America, absolutely.
They'd be lying, but they would answer immediately because it's like what they're doing is wrong.
But our whole system is so messed up.
Our whole media landscape and everything is so distorted that they're actually incentivized not to answer America.
They're scared to answer America.
So it's not even like a clandestine, like these people are secretly traitors.
Everybody's openly loyal to a foreign country in our Congress.
So much so that they're afraid to even pretend that they're loyal to America above all else.
Occasionally, you'll get somebody.
Occasionally, somebody will go, oh, America first, but it's like Thomas Massey, right?
It's like somebody like that.
So what do we do about this exactly?
If the two years of genocide weren't enough, if just the ridiculous, slavish, dog-like loyalty that our current administration has towards Israel wasn't enough.
If the fact that we are now on the cusp of all-out war with Iran and they haven't even given us a reason to think that it's for America, still not enough.
And then the Epstein files on top of all of it.
It's still not enough for these people to even pretend that they feel a pressure or a need to moderate their slavish devotion to a foreign state.
We're done.
We're gone.
What could be released?
What more could possibly be released that would inspire a break from this nation?
I can't think of anything.
I mean, we've shown you some of the videos, but it's been an entire year since the first ceasefire in spring of 2025 was when you had that cycle, that series of attacks by Israel where they would set up food distribution sites and then shoot people that showed up there.
They were starving Gazans and then murdering them when they tried to get food.
That was a year ago.
And it's just an endless, literally an endless repetition of the most heinous, despicable.
I mean, you're talking about war crimes on an international scale, but you're also talking about what's happening in the West Bank, where it seems like every day there's some new video of some poor Palestinian child being hauled out of his home and arrested by the IDF or an Israeli settler, like dragging around a Palestinian tied to the back of his car.
I mean, it's insane.
It's inhuman.
It's horrific.
And it's just everything our country does is in service of this country.
It is.
So I don't know.
I don't know how much longer it's going to go on.
I think it's up to us.
I think we have to do something about this.
I mean, should we say, like, should we all have an agreement?
Like, if they go to war with Iran, if we actually start war with Iran, can we all agree to meet in DC?
Left and right?
Can we all come together and say, hey, we might have our differences, but on this, we're aligned.
There's no point for America to be fighting a war overseas for the nation state of Israel that both hates us, has all but declared war against us.
I'll pull that video into.
I covered it yesterday on the Alex Jones show Sunday night edition.
But Netanyahu literally gives a speech where he goes, you know, first of all, the American Jews, it's time to fight back for us.
Like, did you just tell every American Jew to go to war with us, with America, on your behalf?
And we're just letting this happen continuously.
So, what do we say?
If we bomb Iran, do we all meet in D.C.?
Should we all meet at the Capitol?
Are we all in?
Should we all go surround the White House if they start war with Iran?
I mean, should we let them know?
I feel like we got to let them know soon they're going to do it.
What do we think?
I'll take your calls on this.
Should we all go meet in D.C. if they start war with Iran?
I think that's a good idea.
Welcome to the front lines of the Infowar.
Let's keep talking about it.
Yeah, you know, I wish there was something original to say.
Like, I wish there was some sort of development that would change how I'm approaching this topic, but I feel like we've been saying the same things forever and ever and ever, and it just continues to be true.
That is, Israel is trying desperately, by whatever means it can, to start a war with Iran.
America is apparently right in there with them, doing this with everything we've got.
Videos out of Israel, people admitting, like, you know, I mean, again, I don't know how people are okay with what we're doing to Iran and like what we think justifies it.
I really don't understand.
We showed the video of Scott Besson, U.S. Treasury Secretary, talking about the method by which, like, you understand, he was a George Soros operative for like 20 years.
His role in the George Soros organization was a form, just like George Soros did all these color revolutions.
Scott Besson was in charge of his like economic warfare department.
Scott Besson was brought into the treasury to wage economic warfare on foreign states, specifically Iran.
And as a consequence of the economic warfare that we've waged against Iran, it inspired all of the protests that were led in many cases and armed to a great degree by America and Israel.
The Starlink communication hubs that we sent in, another couple tens of thousands were caught by Iran a few days ago trying to get them in.
So it's like we're crushing them economically.
We're arming and encouraging their citizenry to rise up.
Of course, we bombed the hell out of them last June, and there was just like that string of assassinations with a couple dozen of their highest level military and science geniuses being blown up in their homes.
And it's just like, but why, though?
But why?
And what do you expect them to do?
The only thing I've ever heard to even try to justify attacking Iran is that they chant death to America.
Wouldn't you?
Wouldn't you chant death to America too?
I mean, chanting death to America isn't exactly an unreasonable response to year upon year upon year of just doing everything we possibly can to make life uncomfortable and unpleasant for the people there.
I say that's the only thing anybody ever says because there's no threat of nuclear power.
There's no threat of them hitting the United States.
If there was a threat of like infiltration and they're here with like stay behind networks and carry out terrorist attacks, like, okay, maybe, but the one thing that would initiate that would be going to war with Iran.
Yeah, luckily, nothing definitive came out.
And again, people who say that Trump is just like 100% devoted to Israel, they aren't looking at the nuance.
And obviously, if that was the case, we would just already be in war with Iran.
Trump is trying to play a game here.
He's trying to satisfy Israel without actually getting into full-fledged war with Iran.
But Israel's pressure is overwhelming and unrelenting.
And essentially, they are threatening to destroy the world if we don't help them.
That's what it all comes down to.
And we've shown the videos of people like Jonathan Pollard, the famous Israeli spy that Trump hardened, bragging about, and this is all the way back in like the Six-Day War, I'm pretty sure, was the Yom Kippur War.
I can't remember which one, but it was America, or I'm sorry, it was Israel fighting Egypt, and America didn't want to get involved.
And so Israel sent them photos of nuclear-armed aircraft ready to go nuke Egypt.
And so then America got involved.
Like, all right, fine.
Either, so that's, and that's always been the arrangement with Israel.
It's either America is going to help us do this, or we're going to use our nuclear weapons.
And so America is just desperate not to have nuclear warfare kick off because if they use nuclear weapons, Pakistan has nuclear weapons, India has nuclear weapons.
It's a cascade event.
As soon as one country uses nuclear weapons, it's all bets are off.
And so Israel basically just has a gun to the world's head constantly.
Russians from Dr. Strangelove or something, they have a doomsday machine called the Samson option that they're constantly wielding.
And I think they're just so insane that people in America are just like, we just have to do what they say because they will.
They'll nuke everybody.
They're insane.
So why, I mean, if I was like king of America, and if I had been for a while, this was some sort of video game or something, and we were playing this, like the first time they did that back in whatever it was, 1973, that would be the initiation on my part of a clandestine program to destroy the Israeli nuclear program because you can't have people threatening nuclear weapons for every conflict.
But that's what Israel does.
I guarantee you that's what they're doing with Iran.
And we've explained it over and over, as was happening in real time.
And even before it happened, we explained, okay, Iran has been has stayed largely out of the conflict on the assumption that they can get some sort of agreement with America having to do with nuclear weapons.
And then when it comes time to actually have that discussion, America slash Israel goes, you know what?
It's actually not about nukes.
It's about ballistic missiles.
You have to give those up, which is impossible.
It's never going to happen.
It's just an impossible to achieve demand, so that we have an excuse to say we tried, and they didn't adhere to our demand.
So now it's war.
But it was always going to be war.
It's always the intention to be war.
They didn't want war.
They wouldn't be behaving the way that they are.
And we can move on, but let's go to that clip of Benjamin Netanyahu here, where again, he's like trying to get blacks, gays, women, and Jews to team up on white men.
And I just don't know why we don't know why we take this.
I'll comment on the other side.
But here's Benjamin Netanyahu telling every Jew in America it's time to fight us.
Because people respect those who respect themselves.
And the minorities that fought back, whether it's the blacks or the gays or women, they fought back.
And what we have to do as Jews, both here in Israel and in the various Jewish communities around the world, beginning with the United States, is to fight back.
Maybe these populations that like you give them everything and then they just turn on you.
And it's like, maybe that was a bad idea.
Maybe we could go back in time.
We've actually fought rather than look around and go, you know, let's give it a try.
Let's give it a shot.
Maybe we don't, maybe we don't know how this works out, but you guys deserve equality just like everybody else.
And we believe you'll make the most of it.
Fast forward 60 years.
And it's just like, we must destroy America from the inside.
Just like, what is your problem?
Honestly.
That's how I feel.
That's how I feel on a human level.
It's like, this is the conversation I'd have with my friend if it was like, dude, I gave you a place to stay.
I'm feeding you.
I'm taking care of your kid.
Like, I'm doing everything for you.
And then I find out you're talking crap about me behind your back and trying to get me fired from my job.
Just like, what is wrong with you?
Because we haven't been enemies up till now, but you seem intent on that.
And it seems like every time you reach out, we reach out our hands in friendship, we're being fools.
We're being absolute unbridled fools.
Maybe it's like time to cut that crap and just take the declaration of war for what it is and accept.
And I don't see a lot of pushback from this.
I don't see a lot of people going, oh, Netanyahu doesn't speak for me.
No, where's it?
I don't see it.
I see a lot of people going, oh, yeah, who knows?
Well, it's kind of true, though, actually.
Trump says Netanyahu wants a good deal with Iran, says nuclear talks this time are different.
Oh, Netanyahu wants a good deal with Iran?
Well, great.
Let's put him in a box and send him there and he can negotiate.
Lindsey Graham, Donald Trump, multiple people recently.
Lindsey Graham had another from the speech where he's just like, well, Netanyahu told me to tell them this, this, this.
And it's like, so he really is just the president.
Benjamin Nanyahoo is our president.
Donald Trump serves him.
Our Congress serves him.
The Senate serves him.
You know, half of the Democratic Party goes over to Munich to trash talk America, but they won't say a word against Benjamin Nanyahu.
They're too scared to speak up against Benjamin Nanyahu.
He's the real president.
He's the real king of America.
Because when he walks into the Congress, both houses stand up and give him a standing obation for 30 freaking minutes.
No American president will ever receive that type of support from both sides.
Only Benjamin Nanyahu.
He's king of the Jews.
He gets our subservience in our endless solicitation.
Why is the president of the United States making statements saying the president of this other country really wants good talks with Iran, but if they don't get it, then we'll attack.
I don't give a damn what he wants, just like I don't give a damn what the president of Australia or Kimbuk II or Ghana or Mozambique.
Who cares what they want?
They can try to go get what they want.
Why are we so endlessly subservient to whatever?
It just goes on and on.
We don't need to just say the same thing over and over, but it just keeps happening over and over.
So on the eve of a meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netyahu, US President Donald Trump tells Israeli reporter that the Israeli premier, quote, wants a deal with Iran and says nuclear talks this time show promise.
Last time they didn't believe I would do it.
Trump tells Barack Ravid, a reporter with both Israel's Channel 12 and the Axios news site about the American strikes in June 2025 on Iran's nuclear site, just days after the collapse of diplomatic negotiations.
They overplayed their hand, says Trump.
This time around, the negotiations are very different, and we can make a great deal with Iran.
Well, great.
Will we get anything from it?
No?
Well, okay.
The U.S. president avers that Netanyahu is not against U.S. current U.S.-Iran talks, which included a high-level meeting over the weekend in Oman.
He also wants a deal.
He wants a good deal.
Iran, Trump says, also wants to make a deal very badly.
I'm only a little bit kidding at this point, but it's been, I mean, how long?
I mean, how long is this supposed to go on?
How's it been the last two years?
Whatever.
It's just at a certain point, it's like, can we cut the cord already?
Can we cut the cord on the anchor dragging us to the bottom of the ocean so we can swim up and get air?
Can we do that?
We solve all of the endless problems.
There's a graphic over the weekend, and it says one-third of America's naval forces are now arrayed around Iran.
And it's just, you know, an infographic where there's just a little icon for every airplane and every ship and every bomber and every aircraft carrier.
And it just, and you just try to picture in your mind this vast, unimaginable array of like military hardware and the unimaginable expertise.
I mean, every person on one of those ships has been the recipient of like a million dollars of investment, of time and training and everything.
Like, look at this.
And it's like we have Somalis in Minnesota robbing us of $10 billion.
Every couple of days, we got to see a new story about some innocent young mother being murdered in the park.
And that really is the ultimate insult about all of this is that our country is literally collapsing.
Our country is being destroyed in an irrevocable way.
And we have infinite resources, infinite capability, infinite manpower that is going entirely to help Israel murder their neighbors.
And do you know what the ultimate irony of all of this is?
Is that as you hear in the Eighth Front compilation, as you hear in Netanyahu's speeches, they see America as an enemy.
They see America as Rome 2.0.
And this is a rematch for when they got blown the F out 2,000 years ago.
And they're seething about it and want vengeance on us for what Rome did 2,000 years ago.
And so you have to think, is part of their desperation for America to go to war with Iran, it really serves like a multifaceted purpose.
Not only will it help achieve their dream that is utterly impossible for them to achieve on their own, like it just is not, they will never ever, it doesn't matter how good their technology is, doesn't matter how many nukes they have.
The Israeli people could never defeat Iran in a billion years.
They need America to defeat Iran.
So, okay, they're going to use America to defeat Iran.
It's got the silver lining of the fact that a bunch of American servicemen will die and will be weakened as part of this operation.
And then my question is, once America takes out Iran, what purpose does Israel have for America anymore?
Our whole point in their eyes is to serve them in defeating Iran.
Once they succeed in that, and instead of us gaining anything, instead of us having, like, we're going to go bomb Iran, we're going to waste our lives, we're going to fight for them, and then they're going to get it, right?
Then they're going to receive all the benefits from it.
And then the question is, well, then what use is America to them?
At that point, isn't America just a danger?
I mean, they're already talking about how, you know, they're like, oh, we don't want your money anymore.
It's like a leash.
You know, we're sick of being controlled by you.
So they're telling their people they're controlled by America.
They want to cut that leash.
They want to get free from America.
Meanwhile, again, at the end of the 8th front, go watch the last five minutes of the Eighth Front war pinned to the top of my X account.
The last five minutes of it is a bunch of Jewish billionaires, American Jewish billionaires, going, hey, come to Israel.
Don't be a part of the declining empire, America.
Come to the rising empire in Israel.
Why is America declining and Israel rising?
Because these billionaires with their tens and hundreds of billions of dollars worth of investment are taking it out of America and sending it to Israel.
They're now telling you this.
So it seems to me like as long as Iran exists, then Israel has a reason to want America to be around and strong.
As soon as we take out Israel for, or take out Iran for them, we are nothing but a barrier to their greater control.
We are nothing but an impediment to their rise into primary nation status as the new hegemon on the world stage.
Now, if they'll use America to fight Iran, do you think Israel will use China to fight America?
I don't see why not.
You think being born here and growing up here and the constant protestations of how unified our people are would mean something, but it doesn't, obviously.
As they're actively collapsing America, calling it the collapsing empire, as they, the ones causing the collapse, flee to Israel and tell all of their co-ethnics to join them.
Am I the bad guy for noticing this?
And just listening to them and telling you what they're saying.
And yeah, now the headline is like Pentagon says they're preparing for a conflict with Iran that could stretch into several weeks.
You know what that actually means is they're planning a conflict that is going to last several decades.
We can go back and find the reports from 2003 of, yes, the Iraq war will last no longer than a month or two.
We'll be in, we'll be out.
They'll celebrate us as liberators.
We'll have a new, you know, shining example of a nation state left behind.
Fast forward 15 years, the entire place is a hellish wasteland.
We've spent trillion dollars, killed a million people, and it's still just a hotbed of ISIS and insanity.
And they're making the same promises that they did back then.
Only this time, Iran's about seven times larger than Iraq by population.
Its topography is significantly more difficult to navigate, significantly more mountainous and fortress-like.
Their armament, their ballistic missiles are more sophisticated than ours are.
So you're saying the same lies that you did about Iraq.
In that case, it was utterly catastrophic, and we're still experiencing the fallout of the stupidity of that decision.
But we're going to do it again, only this time against Iran, and you don't even have the lie of weapons of mass destruction to encourage us.
We'll move on to some other disturbing, disturbing things that we're learning.
This is from the New York Times.
Homeland Security demands social media sites reveal names behind anti-ICE posts.
The Department of Homeland Security is expanding its efforts to identify Americans who oppose immigration and customs enforcement by sending tech companies legal requests for the names, email addresses, telephone numbers, and other identifying data behind social media accounts that track or criticize the agency.
In recent months, Reddit, Google, Discord, and Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, have received hundreds of administrative subpoenas from the DHS, according to four government officials and tech employees privy to the request.
They spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly.
Google, Meta, and Reddit compiled with, complied rather, with some of the requests, the government officials said, in the subpoenas.
The department asked the companies for identifying details of accounts that do not have a real person's name attached and have criticized ICE or pointed to the locations of ICE agents.
The New York Times saw two subpoenas that were sent to Meta over the last six months.
Tech companies, which can choose whether or not to provide the information, have said they review government requests before complying.
Some of the companies notified the people whom the government had requested data on and gave them 10 to 14 days to fight the subpoena in court.
The government is taking more liberties than they used to, said Steve Looney.
That's a lie, a senior supervising attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union in Pennsylvania.
Well, that's just because the tech companies aren't proactively helping the Trump administration.
This is not new.
The only thing that's new about this is that the big tech companies are actually pretending to, or in some cases, fighting back against the demands.
Remember, under Joe Biden, they weren't just giving over information.
They were happy to censor whoever Joe Biden said to censor.
And they didn't have to give a reason or anything.
They would just go, hey, this person's inconvenient.
Take them down.
Big tech would go, okay, we'll do so.
To act like this is something new and troubling is not entirely accurate, but I don't think it's really what's going on here at all for a couple of reasons.
One, I don't think you need to subpoena the big tech companies to get most of these people.
We've seen videos, we've showed videos, we've seen accounts.
I mean, people are making videos with their own faces in their uniform at work, going, I'm here in, I'm here in Athens, Georgia, and I work at the Waffle House, and I say kill ICE agents.
And it's like, oh, what are you going to do?
You got to get his IP address, do you?
You got to find out what he's talking about on Reddit.
No.
So this is what I don't understand.
At this moment, to this day, there are still thousands and thousands of activists on the street hunting down ICE and interacting with him.
You aren't arresting them, but you're telling me you need to go to Google and Meta and Reddit to get their IP addresses to go after them that way.
Why?
Why?
If you can't do the on-the-ground real-life interference, if you can't arrest those people, if you can't arrest the people who are like kicking out the brake lights of SUVs with a gun in their backpack fighting ICE agents, but you're going to get the IP address.
I think this is about something else.
I don't think this is about actually trying to go after the anti-ICE people.
If they were actually going after the anti-ice people, they would have gone after them by now.
This is not the first step that you would take if that was what you were doing.
I'm also pretty concerned that there were no requests to X. Why were there no requests to X?
Why were there no requests to Blue Sky?
Blue Sky is where most of this activity is going on.
Signal chats are where most of this activity is going on.
Why didn't they subpoena Signal or X or Blue Sky?
I wonder.
I don't trust this.
I don't like this.
I don't think it has anything to do with fighting back against ICE.
If they're actually concerned about putting a damper on the anti-ICE activity, this would be like the hundredth step, not the first.
They'd be going after the people on the ground doing it first of all, and then the people whose names and faces are known to everybody.
And the guy who stormed into the church, the lead guy, the psychopath, he's still out leading marches.
He's got domestic terrorist charges.
All right, welcome back.
Welcome back, folks.
This is War Room.
I'm your host, Harrison Smith.
We're going to take your phone calls at this hour.
I'll go ahead and give out the number.
Call right now.
The number of dial is 1877-789-2539.
1877-789-2539.
You can call in about whatever you want.
I was going to maybe say certain topics, but just give us a call.
Anything that you want to talk about, anything we've discussed today, anything that we're missing, 1-877-789-2539.
Give us a call.
We'll go to those just as soon as they roll in.
We're talking about something I find very suspicious, very unnecessary, and therefore questionable.
Why is the government requesting these big tech companies hand over information about people that are anti-ICE?
If it was to stop the assaults on ICE, there's like a million other things they could do.
This wouldn't be the first move.
I mean, as we speak, there are still middle schools sending students out to fight ICE agents.
And like the kids are getting arrested.
Like, they aren't going after those people.
Those teachers aren't being thrown in jail.
They're not being investigated.
They're literally radicalizing children to go fight ICE.
Go after them.
Go after the dude that stormed into the church and told little kids their parents deserved to die and got arrested for domestic terrorism under the FACE Act, but then got let out and is continuing to lead charges against ICE.
Why don't you arrest the people that are building roadblocks on streets in Minnesota?
Like, you're not doing any of these things.
You're not arresting any of those people.
But what, you're going to go arrest people for talking about it online?
I don't believe you.
I don't believe you.
I don't believe you even need a subpoena to go after most of these people in the first place.
It's almost like, if anything, it's just like convincing the anti-ICE people that they really are like rebels and really are like under threat of the system.
They're looking for us.
They're trying to get.
And it's like, you have no idea.
You have no idea what it's be like, what it is like to actually be an enemy of the system.
You're the most coddled, astroturfed puppets the world's ever seen.
If you were actually against the power structure, you'd never be able to post your comment.
And as soon as you did, you'd automatically have it deleted and then your account would be deleted.
I know because it happened to us over and over and over again.
And sometimes it was the Biden government, Biden administration, sending takedown orders to big tech that they were happy to comply with and never made a stink about, never published to the media, never fought back and said, hey, you've got two weeks to fight the subpoena before we hand it over.
That never happened.
They had portals where the government could just like sign in and just, you know, click the check mark next to names and the big tech company would just take them down.
And they would never tell you that that was why.
And it wasn't until later when people sued or when Trump got elected and the documents came out and showed that, oh, yeah, they really were just absolutely hand in glove complying with the government's demands to take down speech they didn't agree with, didn't like, even if it was true.
You have no idea what it's like to actually be against the government.
And I don't even think this is actually a threat against you.
And again, just the infuriates me, I have to say, it absolutely infuriates me when you have people like the American Civil Liberties Union being like, well, this is too far.
I can't believe it.
The government requesting information from big tech?
We can't stand for this.
If that was what they believed, they would have stood with us 10 years ago when it first started, we first started being subjected to it.
They don't actually give a damn.
They just want a bunch of radical communists to be able to target ICE with impunity.
The department said it had broad administrative subpoena authority, but did not address questions about its request in court.
Its lawyers have argued that they're seeking information to help keep ICE agents in the field safe, which of course they are.
I mean, ICE agents are actually under pretty continual attack.
So it's, but what we've been saying the whole time is like, yeah, you're literally setting up to give the green light.
If our government actually wants to be tyrannical, you're giving them every excuse to do so because you're literally trying to kill ICE agents.
You absolute morons.
The Trump administration has aggressively tried tamping down on criticisms of ICE.
Not really.
And partly by identifying Americans who have demonstrated against the agency, ICE agents told protesters in Minneapolis and Chicago that they are being recorded and identified with racial tech facial recognition technology.
But again, they haven't.
Like, what are they talking about?
They wanted to create a database of people who were arrested for interference, impeding, and assault.
So you're telling me that you've got somebody impeding you right there.
You're a cop.
You don't arrest them.
You're going to put them in a database where you're going to arrest them later.
What?
You see how this doesn't make any sense?
What are they actually doing?
Are they just preparing this for when it will just be used on Americans?
Because that seems to be what's happening here.
I hate to say.
Mr. Loney of the ACLU said avoiding a judge's ruling was important for the department to keep issuing the subpoenas without a legal order to stop.
The pressure is on the end user, the private individual, to go to court.
The Department of Homeland Security also sought more information on the Facebook and Instagram accounts dedicated to tracking ICE activity in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, outside Philadelphia.
The accounts called Monte Co Community Watch began posting in Spanish and English about ICE sightings in June and over the next six months solicited tips from their roughly 10,000 followers to alert people to the locations of agents on specific streets or in front of local landmarks.
So you're telling me that this has been going on for a year and they haven't been able to do anything to stop these people.
It's just a lie.
I mean, I wish it, in a way, I wish it wasn't.
I wish we really did use some of the incredible power of the just enormous surveillance technological array that we have constantly surveilling everybody all the time.
It'd be nice to use some of that to actually go after criminals, both the illegal immigrants that aren't supposed to be here and the dumbass communists that are attacking ICE agents and protesting against the basic enforcement of a fundamental, inextricable law.
ICE is using a new facial recognition app to identify people.
For what?
Are they sending them flowers?
They're using a facial recognition app to identify people for what reason and to what end, I wonder.
None of them are getting arrested.
They're just making a database.
What is the point?
You're photographing these people.
You're feeding their information into a facial recognition database.
You're getting their name.
You're getting their address.
And then you're standing by while they physically attack cops or break the windows out of cop cars or throw bricks at cars as they're driving by.
But at least you have their data saved on a database somewhere.
Well, what good does that do for anybody?
What are you doing?
What are you really doing?
Because you don't need to scan somebody's facial recognition when they're right there.
Yeah, why was Blue Sky not one of these companies named?
I wonder.
Why was an X one of these companies named?
Doesn't mean that they didn't get subpoenas.
It just means the New York Times didn't write about it.
It could also mean that they maybe are sticking with the strategy that they had under the old administration where they don't require subpoenas.
They're happy and eager and willing to do the bidding of the government.
I don't know.
Could be either one.
There's another thing that's very suspicious about this, and it's the fact.
I don't know.
This is just one of those things.
They're building.
They're supposedly building warehouses to house all of the illegal immigrants.
I need the actual story here.
Because it doesn't, again, it doesn't really make any sense what they're saying they're doing.
It doesn't actually comply with basic logic or mathematics or anything of the sort.
Having trouble finding the story.
Guys, see if you can find it.
It's like the U.S. government is about to spend $30.8 billion building housing for illegal immigrants.
And people did the math and they broke it down and they're like, the government's spending tens of billions of dollars to build facilities with 90,000 beds.
90,000 beds sounds like a lot.
30 billion, a hell of a lot more.
So people broke it down and they discovered that we're essentially going to be spending $400,000 a bed to build housing for the illegal immigrants that we're deporting.
A couple questions about that.
One, why would it cost more than my house costs to build a bed to temporarily house illegal immigrants?
Reuters, ICE to spend $38.3 billion on detention centers across U.S. document shows.
90,000 beds they're planning.
$400,000 a bed.
That's a scam.
That is an outright scam.
There's absolutely no way it would cost that much if it wasn't a scam.
$400,000 is literally almost twice as much as I bought my house for five years ago.
So you're telling me, like, here's an idea.
How about instead of temporarily housing 90,000 illegal immigrants?
What if we gave 90,000 young families a free home?
That might be the choice I would make if it was up to me.
And then in terms of the illegal immigrants, you can save money by making them work for it.
It won't cost us anything.
We'll actually make money if you put them in a chain gang and have them break rocks for five cents an hour.
We'd come out on top.
I'd also repurpose the hundreds of thousands of beds that we have already built from 2020 to 2024 to house the migrants on their way in.
I don't understand.
We built entire cities in places like Chicago and New York and Boston.
There are entire cities built, tent cities, where beds just stretch as far as the eye can see.
We didn't weren't even supposed to know about them, except that we had independent journalists jump the fence and go film them.
For some reason, we can't use those.
We can't use those.
So we built the facilities to house millions of immigrants on their way in.
We got to build it all again if we want to get them out.
We can't use those same facilities, that same money, those same buildings, whose entire purpose is to house migrants.
So instead, we're going to spend $400,000 a migrant to oust them.
At that point, just let them stay.
That's too much.
$38 billion to deport less people than Obama?
That doesn't make any sense either.
How did Obama deport more people and not spend $40 billion on new construction?
This is a scam, folks.
Maybe it's just strictly a money thing, so the same people that caused the problem can just make bank off of it to the tune of tens of billions of dollars of our taxpayer money.
Or maybe these are FEMA camps.
Maybe they're going to house Americans.
Maybe it has nothing to do with immigration, and they don't never intend to have it filled with immigrants.
I can't help but think that's the more likely situation because the deportations are not high enough to justify needing all these beds.
We already have massive amounts of facilities and infrastructure to handle deportations that we're not using.
It should not cost and would never cost $400,000 per bed to build these things.
And they're not even going to be finished building them by the time Trump's out of office, so they're not even going to be used under him.
So is this being built for us?
Are these the camps that we're going to be herded into?
You got to wonder.
$400,000.
I just ask you, if you were given the option, if there are two buttons in front of you, and one said spend $40 billion deporting 1% of just the people that came over in the four years under Biden, or if you would rather buy a brand new house free of charge for 90,000 young families, I think I'd go with that one.
I think I'd go with that one.
Just remember, it comes to helping the American people, comes to benefiting us in any way, never enough money.
There's never enough wiggle room.
There's always something in the way.
There's always some judge to tell you you just can't do it.
It comes to what they want to do.
It's infinite money, infinite.
No problem at all.
New detention center model, $38.3 billion, and we'll have a total capacity of 92,600 beds.
Due to the division, it comes out to over $400,000 per bet.
And at the end of it, we'll still have more migrants than we did when Trump first got into office.
Sucks.
Line number four, I see Simon from Florida has called in.
A long time no talk, Simon, although I do have you to credit for the NATO piece that I read earlier about how they're going back to NATO 1.0, I guess.
And I would like to reflect, if I may, upon the Munich Security Conference.
I do think that you and I are both due a slight victory lap for pointing out the emergence of the new New World Order several years before it was publicly confirmed by the great and the ungodly at the World Economic Forum and the Munich Security Conference this year.
But it is well and truly now official.
And rather than reverting to NATO 1.0, if the man with the brains in the corner of the room representing the United States in several of the panel meetings, the undersecretary of war Elbridge Colby is to be listened to.
And I would suggest we need two people to actually hear what he has to say and read his recent speeches.
And he does have an X account where people can follow some of his missives.
And in arrears, the Department of War tend to put out a transcript of his pronouncements as well.
He has officially said that we're going to NATO 3.0, where the Europeans are essentially paying for themselves.
The question is, how do we arrive at that outcome?
And it's not simply them increasing their core defense contributions as a percentage of GDP from the historical rate of 2.0 to 5.0, which is 3.5 of core defense spending plus one and a half on intelligence and dual use infrastructure.
But as a German defense minister who said, in order for them to even catch up, they in reality would need to be spending over 10% of GDP.
And by the way, the goal of 5% is actually by 2035.
So a long, long time after Trump has left office, assuming that he doesn't run for a third or a fourth term, which I'm sure he'd like to do given the opportunity, which he may try and create himself.
But to your point of the new housing for the undocumented to be deported from, it's actually a whole string of disused warehouses.
The main expense is not so much building the accommodation, it's actually fortifying it such that it's a secure compound.
So people can't just walk away, kind of like the facility that Ghislaine Maxwell has been transferred into in your home state of Texas by the Trump administration.
So it is intended to be slightly more secure than where she's currently holidaying, awaiting the release of the other 3 million or so Epstein files.
But one of the most disturbing things of the Munich Security Conference was old Nesferato lookalike Ursula von der Leyen, who announced that we were going to require the end of qualified majority voting,
or rather not the end of it, but the introduction of it and the end of unanimity on defense matters, such that the large core nations of the European Union, such as France, Germany, Italy, and Spain, would be able to force all of the small countries to follow their bidding.
It's worth noting that Secretary of State Marco Rubio went straight over to Slovakia and then Hungary, where he met with Viktor Auburn, who's currently running behind in the polls in a very, very heavily contested Hungarian general election due to occur in just two months' time.
There's a very interesting joint press conference between those two men in Budapest, which is also available on the Secretary of State X feed.
But anyway, it's been a pleasure to speak to you once again.
Thank you for continuing to follow my X feed on Simon from Flory 2.
I would invite you, though, of course, you're free to manage your social media as you see fit, but you haven't actually opened a direct message since November of 2024.
Yeah, you need to check that again because I checked the direct messages today because I know you had tagged me in the speech from Elbridge or whatever that guy's name is.
So I was looking for that.
So I actually went into our DMs today to see if you'd send it to me, but I found it elsewhere.
Everybody should follow Simon from Florida.
I'm very happy to hear from you again.
We only have two minutes left in this segment.
Let me just ask you this question.
What do you make of the talk of like the Board of Peace taking over the UN?
What do you think the UN transformation and the NATO transformation are these, you know, what do these represent?
And what do you think about the talk of like the UN's over, we need a new, you know, combination of what'll be the League of Democracies?
I want to remind you to go to the AlexJonesStore.com.
Right now, you're getting 52% off site-wide, 52% off all the great supplements, the Irish CMOS, the Shilajit Gummies, the badass knives that we have, the really giant trench knives, the cool pocket knives, all of the awesome sweatshirts and hats and t-shirts and all the great apparel.
All of it, all of it, all of it is 52% off until tomorrow.
You have until tomorrow to not only get this massive, really absurd discount, 52% on every product on the store, but also you get two times the entries to win one of the two awesome automobiles we have, the Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 or the Ford F-250 Diesel.
You can win one or both of those.
You get 100 times entries for every dollar you spend, plus $20,000 in cash available to win.
But you got to go to the AlexJonesStore.com slash Harrison.
It's the only way to win it.
Somebody's got to win it.
Might as well be you.
Go to theAlexJonesStore.com slash Harrison to let them know who sent you.
Now, I'm going to go out to your phone calls again.
But I just saw a video that I feel the need to play.
I don't have too much confirmed about this, but this ties into something else I've been meaning to cover, and that is the new formation of a political party in the UK called the Restore Britain Party, being run by a man named Rupert Lowe.
You can go to clip number two here.
So Rupert Lowe, and the parliamentary system is very strange.
It's very bizarre.
You have some parties that exist forever.
You have like the, I don't know, the Tories, and it's like, you read books from the 1800s, and there's a Tory party there.
I assume it's the same one, right?
But then you have like new parties that crop up, and sometimes a new party will crop up and like dominate an election and then just won't exist anymore after that.
I don't really get it, honestly.
But I feel like there's got to be, there's got to be a happy medium between our system and the parliamentary system because the parliamentary system seems bonkers.
It's just like Nigel Farage creates the Brexit party.
It like dominates headlines for a long time and now it just like doesn't exist.
Like, what the hell happened there?
What was that?
So, there's like this, but I like the idea that it's like a new group of people want to do something, they create a party, and here you go, a new party.
There's got to be some happy medium between this like ever-shifting, wild combination of all sorts of parties that don't really mean anything and are constantly changing versus like the rigid Republican Democrat, everything is bifurcated, everything is in one of these two parties and they will never change, and there will never be a third.
It's like, can we not have it?
Anyway, it's all very weird and confusing to me.
But this looks very promising.
This looks like a party unlike ones that have come before because they're actually taking on the existential crisis affecting Britain in a real way.
I mean, Nigel Frage, as good of a politician as he was, and getting Brexit over was really a work of a miracle worker, but he would never even talk about like deportations or remigration or anything like that.
He was like afraid to say that English is an ethnicity that deserves to be protected.
And so, he sort of is not fit for the modern conflict.
He was maybe the perfect guy for Brexit, but now that there's a racial component to it, and you got to be willing to step outside of your comfort zone, he's not the man.
It seems like Rupert Lowe is.
Let's go to clip number two.
This is Rupert Lowe with his message to people in the UK simply saying you don't have to take this.
It would be different if it actually pretended even a little bit to care about them.
Yeah, very, very powerful message.
Rupelo is starting the new Restore Britain Party.
I believe that's what it's called.
Again, they change names so often.
The Reform Party was a different one, I think.
This is a new one.
But I believe it is a member of his party and one of the young guys in Britain who speaks out on behalf of the national interest that's featured in this next video that we're going to show you.
And I don't even know what to make of this video.
It kind of is just sad to me.
But it sort of makes you realize how we got here.
And the real mental illness that's affecting a huge, huge portion of people, especially boomers, especially boomers.
We're about to see boomeritis on full display here.
The boomer condition in all of its raw confusion.
It's very confused.
So let's go ahead and go to this video.
I even thought about starting this video by just like not even telling you what it is.
Just like try to figure out what the hell is going on here because what you're about to see is a reaction completely and utterly out of whack with what we're actually talking about.
So this guy, and I haven't quite gotten confirmation of who this is yet, but I think I have an idea.
And I think it is an activist with the Restore Britain Party.
But he's basically, he's like, he styles himself a little bit like Nick Fuentes.
He's like an online commentator, but for England and Britain, and he wants to see his country saved.
So the mom is hysterically crying on the phone to police saying her son has been radicalized, which and like they're in Britain, like she knows that they'll genuinely, they will genuinely throw her son in prison for like five years, like.
But then the dad is just like raging at him and he actually says, you will not win this war.
Like the moment, the moment where the kid goes, I just want our country to be saved.
What do you want, like?
What do you not understand?
This is not a war that you will win.
I, I got.
I got nothing to add.
I don't think I don't.
I mean, that is just pure insanity.
Kicking your own child out of their house because they don't want infinity brown rapists in your country, that's the line for you.
Those parents were acting more insane than if they just found out their son was a mass murderer.
This is not a war you'll win.
I didn't know people could be that demoralized.
I didn't realize that how bad it's gotten, folks.
You got to talk to your boomers.
You got to sit your boomers down.
You got to have a rational, calm conversation with them.
Okay.
We got to treat it like diffusing a bomb.
Clearly, they are not ready for reality.
This is what happens when you yank somebody out of the cave, right?
Classic story of Plato's Cave.
You just pull somebody out when they're not ready.
They think you're hurting them.
They get blinded by the sunlight.
It hurts.
They're confused.
It's not good.
You have to coax them out slowly and gently.
Remind them of things they used to love.
Hey, remember all those stories you told me about going to this park when you were a kid?
Have you seen pictures of it recently?
Isn't this worse than it was when you were a kid?
It is worse.
Okay.
Why do you think it got that way?
Oh, economics, huh?
Oh, the fascists did it.
Okay, that's interesting.
Good theory.
Maybe I'll propose another theory.
Could it possibly be because everyone when you were growing up was like you and lived like you and had the same roles as you.
And now it's a bunch of women wearing trash bags and men with machetes muttering to themselves.
You know, it's like, have you ever had like a rabid dog?
Like you got to treat them gently, very gently.
I believe that they can be coaxed back, but you can see there, there's no talking to that guy.
There's no talking to that woman.
There's no getting through to them.
They would kill their own son rather than admit that they prefer the country as it was when they were growing up and that it's been made worse by unrelenting mass migration of a bunch of third world ADIQ cousin marriages.
The outcome of cousin marriages coming in and raping and or stabbing and or blowing up little girls.
Like they are so scared of being opposed to that.
You just saw the mental breakdown.
Again, yet again, it's one of these things where when I first read George Orwell's 1984, I thought it went too far.
I thought it was unrealistic.
What a fool I was.
That was beyond 1984.
What we just saw there was something that you would have seen maybe in a Black Mirror episode 10 years ago.
So my thing is, maybe we need to get, like you said, go to Washington.
It doesn't have to be Washington, but get a little Trump-style rally going and call it the Promises Made rally and just start off with all the things he's done, dude, and then ended up with a really disappointed crowd because they're not getting the things that they voted for.
Have some people like John Flynn or Roger Stone or even Marjorie Chader Green.
Like, what I'm trying to think, like, if you could say it in like one line, how would you get this message to Trump?
Because it would have to be something like, Trump, we love you.
We're your supporters and you're effing up here.
Like, it's got to be something that's because it would be so easy for us to go.
And our intention would be like, we got to get through to Trump.
Trump needs to understand this.
He's being fooled.
He like, we are his supporters, but he's losing us.
And here's what he needs to do to get us back on track.
But that could so easily, just like they're doing with the Jump, Jeffrey Epstein stuff right now, be transmuted by the people around him into, oh, they just hate you, Trump.
And they're just out there making noise because they don't like you.
And it's probably, it's probably Hamas and AOC types out there.
You don't need to pay attention to them.
So, you know, how would you, how would you phrase it?
What would the title of the march be?
Like, it would have to be something that just like metaphorically beats Trump over the head with like, we are on your side.
We're not attacking you, Trump.
We are trying to save you here.
Like, what, what would be the name of the march, Ben?
And if every man wants to find evil in America, most men can look down in their drawers and see that scar, and that is, that is absolute evil.
And it's no, it's no, you know, it's no, it's not an accident that circumcision studies where they studied pain had to be stopped for moral reasons because they found that circumcising a child,
and I can go into a lot of detail about this, it causes the child to experience the highest level of pain, threshold, torture.
Okay?
So kids on a daily basis in America are strapped down to what's called a circumstraint.
And then a metal probe is stuck between the foreskin and the head of the penis, okay?
Because it's held together with what's called cynkia, which is what holds your nail, your nail to your nail bone on your fingers.
So it's like removing your fingernails, okay?
And then it's all cut off.
So we don't have, you know, for a lot of people, sex is a spiritual act, okay?
But someone came in and meddled with it in America, okay, before that child could ever experience it for himself.
There have been so many studies that it causes, it causes a lot of problems.
It doesn't solve a lot of problems.
It's just one of those things that, like, I think for our parents and people before, like, and even now, people just do it.
They just think you're supposed to.
They think it's necessary or just traditional or whatever.
But like, there's no reason to.
There is absolutely no reason to do it, except in certain circumstances.
You can always get it done later.
But, you know, kids can't be given painkillers.
So yeah, all of what you're describing is being done with no painkillers.
They give the kid a little bit of sugar water and it's supposed to like overwhelm their brain because they're brand new babies.
But yeah, they strap them down to this thing that straps their arms down, straps their legs down, and they traumatize them in ways that warps the brain for life.
All of these people that you're seeing is called stupidity.
And Dietrich Vonhofer, he died, he was killed in World War II.
He was a minister.
He made a very good observation of how highly intelligent people become wholly stupid.
This is what we're seeing.
And he shows the process of how these intelligent people just surrender, how can I say, their own reliance that their need to their own need to find out the truth, they just surrender it all to some other source or like, you know, the Nazi party or the media.
And the media dictates what they should think.
They stop thinking.
And so Dietrich Bonhoeffer, that's something to be looked into.
And he said something like this: against stupidity, we are helpless.
But I do have some, yeah, I do have some folks.
One of them is I got a treasury of the world's greatest speeches.
And it opens up saying that if truth were self-evident, eloquence would not be necessary.
And so this is great speeches.
And so for President Trump and other people that are in here, there is one quote from somebody in the Red Azance.
And the quote is this: The S alone saw the angels.
The others did not.
So open your eyes.
And this was a quote from Savonarola, S-A-V-O-N-A-R-O-L-A.
So that's a that's something that can be related to Trump.
I'm sorry we're coming to the end of the show here, but thank you so much for the calls.
Thank you all for joining us today.
Please do go to thealxjonstore.com.
You only have a little while to take advantage of 52% off site-wide.
Go to thealexjonstore.com/slash Harrison if you want to let me know who sent you.
unidentified
See you tomorrow folks Lie to you about what's happening now Infowars tells you the truth about what's happening next I see through a rose color darkly.
That means I'm trying to tell you the truth, but I'm not always right just about 98% of the time.
And bad guys of every stripe don't want this show on the air.
But you're the good guys.
You have to decide: hey, this guy's a fighter.
This guy stood up for this.
This guy is an incredible track recorder.
We want to support him.
And then I'm going to sell you something that really works so you love it and you get it again and again.
And Big Lee, our great sponsor, those thelexjonstore.com, no matter what happens, InfoWars, we continue on the Australian network that's been built.
So Keith said, Alex, you keep getting it wrong.
We don't have 84% reorder on Ultra Method Wayne Blue.
We don't have 76% reorder on the supplements average.
You're reading that wrong.
That's on total customers.
We have a 97% reorder from anybody that orders at thealstover.com.
Well, that's a testament to you guys out there supporting us and how great the products are.
Nobody, I mean, a site that has a 20% reorder has seen a successful.
That is you being steadfast supporters, and I want to thank you.
So we're running the biggest sale of the year right now, over 50% off on ultramethylene blue, on the bovine colostrum, on the new methylene red that's proprietary to us, on the Shilohy Complex, the Iris C Moss Atomic Defense, and more.