Jan. 31, 2024 - Human Events Daily - Jack Posobiec
48:43
EPISODE 660: POSO VS THE WORLD - GLOBAL MELTDOWN AS DEM BALLOT OP EXPOSED
Here’s your Daily dose of Human Events with @JackPosobiec Save up to 65% on MyPillow products by going to https://www.MyPillow.com/POSO and use code POSOGet $200 off a 3-month supply kit from ‘My Patriot Supply’ when you go to https://www.preparewithposo.com. Give your cells the energy to keep you strong, mentally sharp and healthy. Go to https://www.strongcell.com/POSO and get 20% off today with the promo code POSO.Support the Show.
I want to take a second to remind you to sign up for the Pozo Daily Brief.
It is completely free.
It'll be one email that's sent to you every day.
You can stop the endless scrolling, trying to find out what's going on in your world.
We will have this delivered directly to you, totally for free.
Go to humanevents.com slash Pozo.
Sign up today.
It's called the Pozo Daily Brief.
Read what I read for show prep.
You will not regret it.
humanevents.com slash Pozo.
Totally free.
The Pozo Daily Brief.
This is what happens when the fourth turning meets fifth generation warfare.
A commentator, international social media sensation, and former Navy intelligence veteran.
This is Human Events with your host, Jack Posobiec.
Deliver us from evil!
We were told two days ago by Biden officials that this president does not consult polls or what's popular when he is making policy decisions.
But it's tough to understand what else could be motivating this trip after a year, almost, of ignoring resident requests To come by in East Palestine.
The state of Texas is banning Biden's border agents from Shelby Park.
The city of Eagle Pass.
Former President Trump's name will probably be on the Illinois primary ballot even though voters have challenged his eligibility to run.
An election board in the state unanimously ruling they don't have the authority to keep Trump off the state's primary ballot.
Polk County prosecutors are upping charges against a Mississippi man who police say admitted to destroying a satanic statue at the state capitol.
Prosecutors originally charged Cassidy with criminal mischief.
According to the Des Moines Register, prosecutors now added a hate crime charge this week.
President Biden says he's decided how America will respond to Iran and its proxy forces after three U.S.
soldiers were killed in a drone attack.
For years now, all the big celebrities, Bruce Springsteen, Beyonce, Jay-Z, have all thrown their support behind Democrats, election after election.
While MAGA is stuck with people like Vanilla Ice and one of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.
Does it even matter which one?
Just listen to what alt-right activist Jack Prosobiec said about it today.
We don't have a Taylor Swift on our side, but you know who we have?
We have Kid Rock, we have Ted Nugent, we have influencers.
With the Kansas City Chiefs headed to the Super Bowl, influential MAGA media personalities, they're pushing this conspiracy theory about Taylor Swift, her superstar boyfriend Travis Kelsey, the NFL, the Democratic Party being in cahoots, all woven together here trying to get President Biden reelected. all woven together here trying to get President Biden reelected.
Far-right conspiracy theorist Jack Posobiec claimed that the Democratic Party and other powers are, quote, gearing up for an operation to use Taylor Swift in the election against Donald Trump.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard today's edition of Human Events Daily live from Washington, D.C., today.
Today is January 31st, 2024.
Anno Domini.
Boys, I gotta say, today it's Poso versus the world.
Poso versus the world because I had the temerity, the alacrity, the audacity to call out poor Taylor Swift and to say the Democrats are clearly planning to use her.
Later on in the year as a ballot harvesting operation.
It's just, how are we going to do this?
Folks, we got the New York Times, CNN, The Guardian, Newsweek, TMZ, Yahoo, The Huffington Post, MSNBC, Joy and Weave.
Shout out to Carly Bonet.
And even the Hindustan Times are coming after Poso, as well as a bunch of conserva-swifties out there.
And you know who you are, conserva-swifties.
All so, so, so upset.
Let me explain.
Let me lay this out for you.
I'm going to break it down Barney style.
Here we go.
It's only a three-step thought process, but that's a lot for some people.
So here's step one.
Recognize that this is a PR-driven celebrity relationship.
A lot of people can't get past that.
All right, that's step one.
It's not real.
It is PR-driven.
Number two, the NFL will exploit that for profit and brand equity.
It's already happening.
I think everyone can see that.
American Airlines even changed their flight number from Kansas City to Las Vegas to American Airlines Flight 1989 to coincide with the year she was born, because she's not young, and her tour, her albums, everything.
Step three, Democrats already have the data that their highest percentage of demographic support is white, liberal, unmarried women.
And that overlaps directly with Taylor's audience, which is now multi-generational.
Ergo, converting low-propensity Swifties is a critical ballot-harvesting strategy for the Democrat operation in swing states.
That's why I flew out to Nevada yesterday to talk about this.
And yes, we are going to be running targeted ballot harvesting operations in those swing states.
We might call it ballot chase, we might call it ballot call-up, whatever it is, ballot turnout in those early voting states, whichever the legal process required by that state is.
We're not going to play the game, we're going to win the game.
And so we can see what the Democrats are doing.
I can see what the Democrats are doing.
And I'm going to call it out long before, long before the election, long before, because folks, sunlight is the best disinfectant.
And we're going to have Mike Benz on here in a minute.
We're going to go through even more how the Democrats and the regime have used Taylor Swift many times in the past and are gearing up to again in 2024.
And by the way, who else came out to support Taylor Swift today?
None other than the head of the January 6th committee for two years, Liz Cheney, coming out and saying Taylor Swift is a national treasure.
National treasure or national asset.
Mike Benz joins us next.
Ladies and gentlemen, one of the best ways that you can support us here at Human Events and the work that we do is subscribing to us on our Rumble channel.
Make sure you're subscribed, you hit the notifications so you'll never miss a clip, you'll never miss a new live episode, and we're putting them out every single day of the week.
Taylor Swift is not a PSYOP.
Taylor Swift is not a psyop.
This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.
Jack Posobiec back live, Human Events Daily Mail.
Massive shout out to my friend Benny Johnson for compiling that incredible clip for us about reminding us, of course, that Taylor Swift is not a psyop.
By the way, I'd like to take this time to issue a special announcement to the Human Events audience and to the world.
Yes, I will be hosting the Poso Special Super Bowl Halftime Show Hosted by myself, featuring an A.I.
Taylor Swift.
Yes, the entire halftime will be filled by myself and A.I.
Taylor Swift.
And I can't wait for you all to join me.
But right now, who joins me is not, unfortunately, A.I.
Taylor Swift, but someone who's just as good looking.
It's Mike Benz of the Foundation for Freedom Online.
What have we caught ourselves into?
Because you and I have been sort of tweeting about this Taylor Swift thing.
I've been focused on the ballot operations, which is clearly coming later on in the fall.
I've said, you know, sunlight is the best disinfectant.
See the op, call the op in real time.
Let's get ahead of this and diffuse it.
Before it gains critical mass, you've been tweeting some stuff that you've uncovered on it, and now the entire regime has decided to turn their cannons on us.
Why?
Why are they protecting her so much?
You know, it's amazing because they spent months before this telling us that Taylor Swift was the secret weapon for the Biden administration, and that she could swing the election, and that she was such a critical asset in terms of the fate of the 2024 election.
And then basically a bunch of us said, yeah, she kind of is, and she's being used for this purpose.
And basically because the receipts were so damning, they went apoplectic and said, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.
You can't repeat back to us the words that we ourselves said.
That's misinformation.
And the surround sound on this is just unbelievable.
That Benny Johnson clip you played is absolutely classic because it's CNN, MSNBC, Variety, Forbes, Salon.
It's Wall Street Journal.
It's New York Times.
It's Washington.
Everybody has joined forces to protect this pop star who already has probably the biggest PR shop on the planet.
And what's amazing to me is that this appears to go above and beyond the typical partisan politics of jockeying for influencers and cultural figures.
To me, I consider it to be fair play for the Democrats to try to instrumentalize folks who support them, and for Republicans to try to instrumentalize country music stars or this new Snoop Dogg endorsement for Trump that just broke.
That's normal.
Which, by the way, they're losing their minds on me suggesting that yesterday.
I said, yeah, we should instrumentalize some people.
I rattled off some country stars, like Kid Rock is out there, what other influencers we can.
And by the way, obviously Trump is already doing this with UFC, but go in, get the pro wrestling guys if you can, pick up some of that audience, NASCAR, whatever you can find.
Again, Because we're talking about margin, just on the political side of it, which is where my laser focus is, you know, this is Moneyball.
We're talking about a 10,000 vote Delta in many of these swing states in Pennsylvania, my home state, your home state, also Taylor Swift's home state, by the way.
So it's all of like the Pennsylvania alumni, apparently, and Joe Biden's home state, by the way.
Um, where, you know, we're fighting over the 2024 election.
It comes down to all of us, funny enough.
And the Delta, there was only about 60,000 votes.
So again, we're talking about marginal votes.
I'm not sitting here saying like, oh, the entire election will be decided.
No, of course not.
We're talking about these, the ballot harvesting operations, which will obviously be run because, and are so important now because, oh, by the way, they changed our system of elections in 2020.
Yeah, well, what's also amazing, just to dovetail on what you just said, is the amount of empirical polling work that has gone into the potential magnitude of a Taylor Swift get-out-the-vote campaign and a Taylor Swift endorsement.
It just came out three days ago that there was this large-scale study that appeared to show that a full 20% of Taylor Swift fans, which is basically every girl between the age of 11 and 25 in this country, would would vote however Taylor Swift tells them to vote.
I mean, there was a full poll done on this.
And that is a huge amount in the aggregate.
That's far larger than the margin that you just articulated around the state of Pennsylvania.
But the other thing that really concerns me here is that it seems to go above and beyond simple partisan politics.
And we can sort of get into the sort of Liz Cheney Republican angle of this, but what really started to set off my alarm was, you know, the fact that you had these NATO psychological operations panels and you had Pentagon contractors proposing that Taylor Swift could be quote, Trained to recite messaging to spread, just to spread messaging that she could be basically a trained instrument to recite.
Like, like chat CPT, like an LLM.
Right.
And we know that there's a history of this, uh, for, uh, for all in all sorts of ways.
And in India, there was the big farmers protest where it came out in, uh, in leaked documents that Rihanna and Greta Thunberg were handed, uh, basically tweets to tweet out that they tweeted identically.
And this was a NATO psychological operations panel in 2019 that said, listen... Wait, wait, wait, by the way, didn't that, just on that real quick, didn't it actually come out that, I forget which one it was, it was either Rihanna or Greta, it was because they tweeted out the actual instructions as well as the drafted tweet without the actual... It's so funny, I remember that.
God bless the internet, you know?
God bless them, God bless them.
They think we're not going to be out there catching receipts.
No, and these things live forever.
It's just amazing.
And so to me, though, the Taylor Swift operation appears to go above and beyond simple partisan politics, because you have institutions who are not supposed to be political, who are hopping on board on this.
And not only that, you have apparently, you know, military institutions.
The fact is, you know, the woman who presented that at that NATO PsyOps conference in 2019 worked for Grafika, which got seven million dollars from the Pentagon.
For psychological operations work, essentially.
They started the Grafica as part of the Pentagon's Minerva Initiative, which is the psychological warfare research center of the Pentagon.
And she's proposing to NATO that Taylor Swift can be instrumentalized to basically echo NATO talking points.
And not only that, as part of a get-out-the-vote effort, a EU-wide get-out-the-vote effort, to stop the rise of right-wing populist parties who are NATO skeptical.
So you have, you basically have a kind of military junta plotting in broad daylight the weaponization of the world's largest pop star in order to swing elections all across NATO countries to stop the rise of domestic political groups who might vote for a different war policy.
To me, that is the military taking control, not just of the media, but of our, of our civilian run government, which is frankly pretty terrifying.
And so the idea that, and just to walk people through this again, right, it's very obvious that there's a lot of SEO that's been poured and a lot of equity that's been poured into us.
And people have come to me saying, well, it's just because they want ratings for the NFL.
Of course they want ratings for the NFL.
But when you talk about the NFL as a vehicle, the NFL has been a vehicle for left wing Which, oh by the way, was the Baltimore Ravens who were just playing Travis Kelce, and of course it was Taylor Swift who was at the Ravens Stadium, they call it M&T Bank Stadium now, when all of this went down.
It was also, even before the latest, the George Floyd iteration of BLM, the Colin Kaepernick, right?
Everybody forgets the Colin Kaepernick episode of BLM, which was the kneeling for the flag.
So when Colin Kaepernick was doing it, that was an exercise where it seemed like he was in the wrong at first.
A lot of America was against him.
Donald Trump famously came out against him.
But who was one of the first major white players to come out on the side of Colin Kaepernick?
It was Travis Kelsey, his teammate for the Kansas City Chiefs, the same guy who's pushing the vaccination, the same guy and all of the NFL and ESPN were pushing the vaccination.
And so when I talk about the NFL, and by the way, and maybe you can talk about a little bit about two minutes to the end of the break here, because the mainstream media has lost its grip on moving the needle in America, that's why the regime and corporate America has moved more into the sports world, the celebrity world for their political messaging.
Yeah, that's absolutely right.
And the NFL has a long history with the Pentagon as well.
And, you know, I think one of the things that's been shocking for a lot of people to watch on this is seeing how woke both mainstream media and sports have become and how demonized, you know, many of the typical sort of imagery that that that is mostly associated with 1950s sort of, you know, white heteronormative sort of, you know,
Pin-up classic Hollywood couples has suddenly been blessed, really, for the first time publicly with this Travis-Kelsey-Taylor-Swift relationship.
I think it's jarring for a lot of people to see the media promote a couple like that, especially in the football world and in the sort of pop culture world combined.
And you have this sort of interplay between the NFL and the Pentagon, and the Pentagon's existential
Hysteria right now over the loss of their ability to recruit military made age men into the Pentagon and especially the white recruits who have dropped off after the purge of the Pentagon's basically right wing, you know, mostly white MAGA constituency after January 6th and the hysteria around wiping counterintelligence sort of patriot group associated military members.
And it's almost like, you know, you could see an interest in the Pentagon above and beyond the get out of the boat stuff with infusing the NFL with this sort of, you know, - It's all about going for that middle America market that's been totally turned off by wokeness.
And I called this out when they started running it through Yellowstone.
I called it Yellowstoning because they're going for middle America again.
The same part of America that was totally finally sold to and totally finally reached out to by the MAGA movement and by Donald Trump.
Trump.
More on the Taylor Swift ballot.
Syob coming up.
Mike Benz, Jack.
The Matrix is a system, Neil.
That system is our enemy.
When you're inside, you look around, what do you see?
Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters, the very minds of the people we are trying to save.
But until we do, these people are still a part of that system, and that makes them our enemy.
You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged.
And many of them are so in urge, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.
What were you looking at the woman in the red dress?
I was... Look again.
Are you listening to me, Neo?
Or are you looking at the woman in the red dress?
The training video!
So we talk about the red pill, we talk about the blue pill, the training cycle from The Matrix.
How is Taylor Swift like the woman in the red dress in The Matrix?
And this is exactly how I've outlined it, where Neo is trying to pay attention, yet he's distracted.
He's distracted by what the simulation is presenting him.
He's distracted, he's following along, and then boom!
Agent Smith comes up, gun in the face, bends.
What exactly is the symbolism here, and how is this connected?
Well, I mean, it's kind of perfect, really, because Taylor Swift sits at that perfect dead center between the razor's edge, between Conservatism and liberalism for for young people.
Taylor Swift has all the traditional iconography and symbology of the sort of the Republican traditional values type woman.
You know, she has these that sort of classic blonde with bright red lipstick look.
She's got, you know, wholesome country music songs and songs about, you know, young love to boys who got away or who broke her heart.
None of the swearing or even the instrumentals, these sort of typical sounds of lines that tend to be more associated with left-wing cultural music.
And so she has a huge amount of fan base, which listens to her from the Republican conservative side.
And if she can be used essentially to swing those young conservatives towards a Democrat voting Predilection or and to be able to sort of mobilize and increase the turnout.
of the democrat youth vote then you know she she really is when you when you consider her reach in the hundreds of millions uh that sort of bombshell secret weapon uh that that could be used to tilt an election if uh if audiences were to fixate on her as the bright shiny object that that matrix clips sort of illustrates and ben so talk about a little bit about this this this target because i do see a lot of these people
and there's yes there's the conservative swifties out there and the conservative swifties ngmi but there's there's another group of people who are saying well hold They don't particularly seem to be woke.
As you say, their aesthetics seem to be the aesthetics of middle America.
They seem to, you know, sort of embody these, I think Michael Knoll said, temperamentally conservative values.
And I think he's, you know, essentially talking about this same type of concept.
You know, I've, of course, pointed out that they, you know, they support vaccinations and the double income, no kids, you know, unmarried, childless, you know, go into your 30s with a series of relationships and no fruition.
And yet, you know, oh, you're going to find your six foot five Chad champion at the end of all of that.
But, you know, girl boss, feminist supremacy kind of kind of attitude.
But.
This really is all about kind of eschewing wokeness and going back to targeting that group of middle America.
This is what I called Yellowstoning, when they started using Kevin Costner to promote these Antifa storylines in that show Yellowstone.
Then they did it with Harrison Ford in one of the, I guess, like the spinoffs of Yellowstone.
And Taylor Sheridan, who wrote, you know, the best, you know, I think, unwitting Trump ad of all of 2015, was the movie Sicario, talking about the border and the cartels.
Sicario too and then he goes and it's like well, you know, I got to play the game in Hollywood So I'm going to throw in all this stuff and talk about how America was founded on you know killing the natives etc But what they're doing I think is targeting this part of America that they realize that the woke or the LGBT Type of messaging just doesn't reach Right and what they're doing is is this sort of providing a soft landing for people who are
Aligned in terms of values in a more traditional way in an anti woke way and allowing them to essentially join the You know the sort of Democrat liberal axis while not fundamentally changing their core beliefs In the sense that some you know these there's millions of people who are anti woke in that way or her more traditional and who might Enjoy the sort of social settings of popular music and all the cultural affinities that are associated with that
But to be able to give them a way to essentially tell themselves that they're Democrats because Taylor Swift is just like them she She has the same sort of, you know, goals of what kind of, you know, she wants to date the high school, uh, popular high school quarterback, and she wants to be able to sing and express herself and live that sort of fairytale life.
And she's just like you, except she's, she's a Democrat.
So you can be too.
And it sort of provides this kind of soft exit where a lot of people might say, well, you know what, actually, you know, I can't identify with that politically because it's so against these other strongly held values I have.
But seeing a role model like Taylor essentially look like them, talk like them, dress like them and have those same sort of aspirations, but then simply be on the other side of the line is a very powerful tool, I think, to be able to net those people into that into that political grouping.
But I also am not convinced.
Oh, go ahead.
Go ahead.
Go finish that.
Yeah, I was just going to say, I'm also not convinced that Taylor Swift or Travis Kelsey are true believers in what they talk about when they get activated for political purposes.
Travis Kelce made more on his Pfizer contract than he did on his NFL contract.
That's money talking.
To your point, this is what I'd like to say, and let's show up this tweet from 2020 talking about the mailboxes and the mail-in ballots.
And I said this yesterday in Vegas.
I'll say it again here.
This is about the machine.
I do not care.
I literally don't care who she's dating, not dating.
It has nothing to do with that.
This is about the ballot machine that is currently being built around her.
And oh, by the way, they used it in 2020.
Look at this.
And the fact that she's parroting this complete hoax that Trump was going to shut down the mail system.
Do you remember this from 2020?
They said that Trump was going to shut down the mailboxes.
This was this crazy far-left conspiracy hoax, yet somehow makes it to Taylor Swift's Twitter account with over 600,000 likes on it.
I can't believe you just pulled this up because I had this up on my own screen because I was going to read this out loud.
request a ballot vote early i mean it's all right there it's all right there i i can't believe you just pulled this up because i had this up on my own screen because i was going to read this out loud i'm just viewers audience members i want you in your own head to now attempt to read this bottom tweet in taylor swift's voice trust So imagine that Taylor Swift wrote this for a second.
Try to imagine.
Taylor Swift saying these words, "Donald Trump's ineffective leadership gravely worsened the crisis that we are in, and he is now taking advantage of it to subvert and destroy our right to vote and vote safely, period.
Request a ballot early, period.
Vote early, period." I mean, that is not how Taylor Swift talks.
That is a press release.
The perfect King's English, ineffective leadership, gravely worsened the crisis.
Can you imagine Taylor Swift ever using that language in any context?
That to me is language that was handed to her, press release style, just one month before the, or I'm sorry, just three months before the 2020 election.
Which coincided with right when the early vote registration opened.
Yes, so that's a great point actually, right, because it was the vote early.
But to me, this is an example of if she does believe it, that it's strong beliefs loosely held.
And you could imagine if there was a competing machine with more political clout or more money to throw or more favors to do for her music distribution around the globe, that she would be 180 degrees the opposite way.
If somebody truly held those beliefs, they wouldn't save it for, as you said, right when the ballots open.
They would be infused throughout the inflections of that person's career, which they are evidently not, which leads in a straight line to the conclusion that she's basically turned on by the machine when she needs to be used.
By the way, you know, the New York Times was actually trying to retcon this at one point, and I really got the Swifties upset about it, and they were specifically focusing on her, I guess, allyship of the LGBT community, and they were trying to say that, and again, this is the New York Times, okay?
Do not put this on Pozo and Ben's, and I'm saying that what they were trying to do was to say she's always actually been a secret leftist, and they were sort of, Equating, supporting the left with being LGBT, not just supporting it, but the New York Times wrote this op-ed saying that Taylor Swift was secretly, I guess, gay or bi, and that she was putting coded messages into her songs all throughout, and this is why she couldn't get with men.
This is the classic example of a retcon that you're, like, straight out of 1984, Where they're trying to say, no, no, she's always been this way, and here's the proof, there's secret messages in Taylor Swift's song.
Where that one was even too far for the Swifties, and they were like, no, we're not doing this.
And even for left-wing media.
Left-wing media did not want that narrative being amplified, because her whole utility is being this shining example of sort of, you know, white heteronormativity still having a home in the Democrat Party.
You know, I mean, there was just one of the, which is the main demo that has collapsed in the past decade because of woke politics.
So they want to keep her clean and pristine in terms of her sort of heteronormative image, because that's the, that's the kind of dangle bait to bring that demo back into the Democrat Party.
Right.
So they were, yeah, they were kind of, kind of going off the reservation, freelancing there a little bit.
Ben's, what do you got coming up with?
What are you working on last minute?
Yeah, so, I mean, a million things right now.
So, you know, one of the things that we're continuing to track down is NATO's role in the media and over civilian-run media, the sort of, the complex interplay between the censorship industry, the national security state, and both social media and traditional media.
So, we have a ton of publications that we just published on my foundation's website, FoundationForFreedomOnline.com.
the censorship industry's entry into the Hispanic speaking market to censor conservative Hispanic influencers because of a fear that they're losing the Hispanic vote.
Very big stuff, Matt.
Make sure you go follow Mike Benz over at MikeBenzCyber.
Go follow his rumbles.
Go follow his movie watch-alongs, by the way.
They're really, really cool, really interesting.
Understand how our world works.
And we're going to be talking about the world and geopolitics next.
Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaefer.
Jack, where is Jack?
Where is Jack?
Where is he?
Jack, I want to see you.
Great job, Jack.
Thank you.
What a job you do.
You know, we have an incredible thing.
We're always talking about the fake news and the bad, but we have guys, and these are the guys who should be getting policies.
All right, Jack Posobiec here, back live, Human Events Daily, and folks, got news for you.
Traditional media crumbling.
Why?
Because they're hiding something, and something big.
People are realizing they're being lied to by left and right, even by institutions they thought they could trust.
But you, you've known the truth all along.
You also know that the time to prepare for what's coming Right now.
Get started by going to MyPatriotSupply.com today.
There you'll save $200 on an essential 3-month emergency food kit from MyPatriotSupply.
Over the years, MyPatriotSupply has helped millions of American families prepare for emergencies.
Yours should be next.
Sealed inside their ultra-durable packaging, their delicious meals last up to 25 years in storage and provide over 2,000 calories per day.
Eat right when things go wrong with these 3-month emergency food kits from MyPatriotSupply.
With $200 in savings, you can get enough for each family member.
They deserve your protection.
Go to MyPatriotSupply.com and order by 3pm for free same-day shipping.
MyPatriotSupply.com.
Well, folks, we've talked domestic 2024 politics, but I'm still not over the fact that we lost three soldiers in the Middle East earlier this week.
They were the victims of an Iranian-made drone by one of these Shia militias.
And the fact that this thing was able to defeat our air defense on this base, killing three of our soldiers, should be a wake-up call.
Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaefer joins us now.
Tony, number one, why were we there?
And then number two, and this is a big question, does the fact that these militia groups and the Houthis and everybody else now can defeat our air defense with these cheaply made kamikaze drones, what does that mean for our forced laydown in the region?
So, they're an artifact, Jack, of the by, with, and through strategy that was successful in defeating ISIS.
Remember, Obama left the door open.
Remember the Junior Varsity?
Well, it became apparent that they weren't the Junior Varsity.
They took over huge swaths of land.
And oh, by the way, we armed them!
This was armed.
ISIS was armed because of, you know, remember Benghazi?
Weapons from Benghazi were being shipped by us to those groups.
Operation Timbor Sycamore.
There you go.
So we had to go back and win.
So when Trump came in, he told Joe Dunford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Joe Dunford, go beat ISIS.
I was the guy who delivered the message, by the way, to the chairman.
I was in a meeting with the chairman when Mike Flynn texted me and said, hey, tell Joe to tell us what he needs to go win and beat ISIS.
OK, so we did.
And we documented it, a series called Chain of Command.
It's over my shoulder.
It's on Nat Geo.
It was very effective.
But the problem is this, Jack.
Once we won, once we were done, we had troops in Syria.
And there's all sorts of rationale of why they were there.
But smarter minds than me said it's time to leave.
And President Trump decided and directed those troops should leave because they didn't need to be there.
We had won.
We were able to help restore some level of stability to the region through returning governance.
Ungoverned space is the petri dish for terrorists.
So we were able to do that.
And the Kurds were our allies.
So Trump said time to leave.
Well, General Dunford steps down as chairman.
Mark Milley comes in.
And Mark, amongst other things, refused to follow these orders.
Mark Esper, Secretary of Defense and Milley refused to follow directives from President Trump to pull him out.
Why was that?
Well, I believe that they're still there now.
That's why we have them there, is because there's ultimately a neocon imperative that they eventually want to return to going after and destabilizing Syria and trying to remove the Assad government.
That's why they're there.
They're just kind of waiting and biding their time.
I was told by a senior Pentagon official, once you put army guys somewhere, they start looking for things to do.
And it's true.
Of course!
Yes, of course.
So that's why they're there.
And by the way, the fact that we're still there, I mean, they say that we're there for ISIS, but guess what?
So then they said they were there for ISIS, which, as you've outlined, was propped up and really mobilized and supercharged by our funding and our arms that were supposed to be going to these, you remember the moderate jihadists?
Yeah, no, those moderate jihadists started.
Moderate Islamic extremists, yeah.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Started setting up their own shop and flying the black flag all over the border region.
So then we send our guys over to fight them, and you have all these proxy forces.
But then we say, okay, we'll use the proxy forces to fight ISIS.
Then really staff up and really number up our deployment numbers in Syria and Jordan.
We've got about 3,000 still there to this day.
Not just in this border region, but also up in the northeast with the Kurds.
Now you've got the situation where essentially what we're doing is that the war against ISIS has been over since 2017.
And essentially what you have is the United States forced deployment there defending these proxy groups who lost in their war against Assad.
Exactly.
against ISIS.
And to your point, based on this false hope that maybe someday they can go after Assad again.
And I'm sorry, boys and girls, it just ain't happening.
But then let's get to the second point of this.
Let's get to my second point of this, because, you know, that was all well and good, and you're sending reservists over there from Georgia, and we're also hearing Arizona had a lot of these guys over, Reserve and National Guard, because we thought that we had the air defense that these bases were essentially impenetrable.
You remember what it was like when you were in the sandbox, people would call you a fobbit, because there was this idea that if you were on base, you were perfectly safe, and it was only going outside the wire that really counts.
But you were never perfectly safe.
No.
Yeah.
And here's the, here's the, sure.
But, but I guess my point is these, those missiles were an order of magnitude less powerful than the kamikaze drones that they have now.
So let's go through that.
Yeah.
So what happened?
Colonel John Mills and I were talking about this yesterday on another, another, another network, but John correctly pointed out that the Iranians were able to take down one of our most sophisticated drones in Afghanistan.
They studied it, they figured out how to interfere with the signal, and it brought it down and they captured it.
So they took that technology, Jack, and they developed a series of drones, to your point, that are now very effective in defeating some of our countermeasures.
Now, this attack wasn't simply overwhelming.
They did do what we would call an overwhelmed countermeasure attack against Assad Air Base a few weeks ago.
That one did overwhelm the defenses and were able to get in.
Several folks were injured, to include aviators, some of which are still here in North Carolina in hospitals, because they were very nearly killed.
So that's one method being very effective, overwhelming our defenses.
They're learning from that.
And secondly, in this case, the one that was used here, they were studying our local procedures.
Jack, you understand IFF, you know, Indications Friend or Foe.
Another thing is friendly lines of passage.
Basically, these drones, our drones, use essentially the same static ingress, egress, egress, ingress routes and back and forth, which is stupid.
You should always change them, but people get lazy.
And so the Iranian militia studied these patterns and recognized that we always had the same drone coming back at the same time every night.
And so at some point, they were able to insert their drone in there, a big one, to come in instead of our drone.
And that's why you had the barracks hit in the middle of the night, because the Iranians- I said it was basically piggybacking. - Absolutely, absolutely.
So that's what happened.
So again, this isn't rocket science, Jack.
The things you and I are talking about are things that our forces should routinely be studying to maintain an effective defense posture.
This was a failure at multiple levels, diplomatic, operational and tactical.
There's no doubt here that this could have been prevented.
It should never have happened.
Well, I completely agree that this is, and this is something, you know, I've been speaking to other people about it, you know, who don't have a military background, and they, you know, they're not as familiar with the tactics.
But I guess what I mean to say is, it's guys, look at it this way, right?
When you hear drone strike in the Middle East, the first thing you're thinking of is, oh, the Americans drone striked some group over there that we're fighting.
But now all of a sudden, the narrative has flipped, and it's Americans who are getting drone striked in the Middle East.
That's a sea change, and that's why I said on this program the other day, the 20th century is over, and the United States government needs to wake up to this fact.
Last minute, Tony Chang.
I do.
And we'll go to the next.
Well, no, that's the thing.
It's like we have not prepared defensively.
We use these things offensively for a long time with impunity, not recognizing that people were studying us, people were learning, and obviously we did not maintain our countermeasures at the same pace as our offensive capability was developing.
And now we're paying the price for it.
So it's something that the Pentagon needs to go look at.
Again, Jack, some of us were critical of this.
We were kind of rushing into this without understanding the full ramifications and scope of what we were doing.
And now, unfortunately, three soldiers have died.
I don't think this is the end of it, unfortunately.
No, I don't think so either, and we'll talk more in the next segment, but I really do believe that they've studied our tactics, they've studied our drone launches, they've understood this friendly passage, they've understood exactly how our drones are getting on and off base.
I hope that that's going to be changing soon, but at the end of the day, our troops right now are sitting ducks, and I don't think that a change in tactics is going to change that very quickly.
I think instead what you're going to see is overwhelming of these air defenses and unfortunately that resulting in more dead soldiers while we're still there.
Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaffer continues next.
Long hours.
I'm always listening to Human Events with Jack Posobiec.
Attack Pacific back live, human events daily.
2024, folks, could become one of the most chaotic and stressful years in history.
And that's why staying healthy is so important.
It's why I partnered with StrongCell, a revolutionary NADH supplement packed with all the highest quality ingredients, all geared towards boosting your body's cellular function.
I know this might sound confusing, but it's actually pretty simple.
If your cells are weak, everything is weak.
Think of NADH like fuel for your cells.
When your cells are healthy, every aspect of your body will be stronger and work better.
That's what StrongCell does.
Look, I learned about this product from my buddy, Charlie Kirk, and now StrongCell, we know, has taken the nation by storm.
And by the way, Tanya Tay loves it, too.
So, I take it every day.
It helps clear out the brain fog, gives me natural energy, and now I'm just healthier overall.
Go to StrongCell.com or call and discover this life-changing product.
Right now, get 20% off your first month's order with promo code POSO at checkout.
You're one month away from a healthier, stronger life.
Go to StrongCell.com or order by phone.
Don't forget, promo code POSO, 20% off.
StrongCell.com, promo code POSO.
Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaffer, we're told by the Biden administration that they are preparing a potential series of retaliatory strikes.
Tell us, in your expertise, what do you think that'll look like and what kind of repercussions could we see from it?
Look, John Kirby was asked this directly two days ago in a press conference.
What are they going to do?
What is the policy?
What are you going to do?
And he said, we're going to degrade them.
OK, that's worked real well so far.
And, you know, John Kirby's use of soft language tells me, Jack, that there's no serious effort to actually think this through like a chess game.
It's just like they'll continue to throw things in the direction of the bad guys.
And I'm understanding right now they're using old targeting packages.
That is to say, they're basically taking and dusting things off that they knows nothing's there, but They're making a good show of it.
It's kind of the equivalent, the woke equivalent of a warning shot from a police officer over somebody's head.
And John also said there's a tiered response system.
I don't even want to get into that because it would take too long to try to explain it.
In the end, it means nothing.
So what we're going to see is more completely ineffective use of massive force, expensive force, by the way, Jack, you know, the weapon systems we have cost millions of dollars and yet we're going to see no response.
Which is part of their strategy.
It's part of their strategy.
They want to degrade our tomahawks.
They want to degrade our cruise missiles.
We are being degraded while we think we are degrading them.
This is the exact same thing that happened in Ukraine, by the way, when they said, "Oh, we're degrading Russia.
We're degrading Russia.
We're degrading Russia." Yeah.
Who was it that was sending equipment, artillery shells, operational equipment to Ukraine?
It was all of NATO, right?
So, you know, they said that Putin had said he was going to demilitarize Ukraine.
Yeah, he demilitarized Ukraine.
Then he started demilitarizing everyone else in NATO because we were sending all of our surplus equipment over there, then our surplus Soviet equipment, then our own literal surplus active equipment and artillery shells over there.
We can't replace those things that easily.
These drones, on the other hand, they're easily replaceable.
That's by the point.
Just watch what happens when China starts doing them.
You know, the guys with the biggest manufacturing capacity on planet Earth start making massive drone swarms and surround the island of Taiwan.
Go see how fun that is and drive your aircraft carrier right up to it.
I keep talking about this.
They've already bottled up the entire Red Sea by doing this.
They could do the same thing to the Black Sea.
They have no need to right now because there's not shipping.
But the idea that we're going to degrade them, it's so foolish.
It's so absolutely foolish.
And by the way, it goes back to what Biden actually kind of admitted himself when he said, are the strikes against the Houthis effective?
No.
But we're going to keep doing them anyway!
Exactly.
Yeah.
That is the policy.
It's not effective, but we're going to do it.
Yeah.
No, to your point, Jack, we have to recognize... It's actually all U.S.
policy, by the way.
Yeah, no, it is.
No, we have to recognize warfare is changing, and the Pentagon is typical.
The generals and admirals you and I both know are trying to fight the last war.
It always happens.
They're always fighting, and here we are again, déjà vu all over again, to quote a famous baseball coach.
What do you think is the way forward?
Let's say Trump gets in tomorrow or you get in tomorrow.
What do we do with our forced laydown?
What do we do to actually send a message to these guys?
Four years ago to this month, Trump had a contractor killed in Iraq by an Iranian militia and he instantly Ordered the assassination of Soleimani, General Soleimani, the director of the Quds Force of the IRGC.
That shut down the Iranians for years, until we as a nation decided as a policy point to stop and cut off the hand of Iran.
And that's what the Pentagon said.
Sabrina Singh said last week, as a matter of policy, we know, the United States knows, that the hand of Iran is behind all these attacks.
Cut off the hand And these things will drop off and they're not willing to do that, Jack, because they're trying to get the Iranians to sign some bogus deal that will simply harden the path to a nuclear weapon, not prevent it.
But that's the wackadoodle policies of this administration.
Look, and to your point, by the way, it wasn't just that President Trump was using military responses.
And when he did, it was quite effective, but it was also singularly targeted against individuals.
It wasn't these widespread targeting packages that were going around the world.
No, it was directly targeted to one individual who was a key leader and a key facilitator.
That being said, he was also used at working economic packages by cutting off the funding, which we of course know that Biden reversed right when they came back into office.
And then thirdly, it was the diplomatic package of going to the Gulf states, the Arab states.
You and I used to do interviews about this all the time, talking about how he was trying to set up this Gulf initiative as a counter to neutralize the region.
Right.
So, yeah, the Gulf and Red Sea Accords.
I mean, we were working on that behind the scenes, you know, Jack.
One of the notable things is the economic issue.
Biden opened up the spigot.
Now, I was speaking to a former assistant secretary of defense from the Trump administration on this yesterday.
His estimate is that we freed up or given the Iranians $100 billion to play with right now.
Think about that.
$100 billion.
We gave Ukraine $113 billion.
Look at that.
So we've literally funded both sides of the conflict against us regarding the Iranians, literally.
And the first thing they should do besides go and take out some of the leaders facilitating this, Iranian leaders in the region, which the Israelis are already doing, by the way, they should basically restrict and stop all the funding to go to Iran.
Iran cannot act as the global exporter of terror if they don't have the juice to do it.
And obviously, cut off the funding, Trump would do that.
Go after Iranian leaders who are outside of Iran.
I'm not trying to get us into war with Iran.
I'm not saying, I'm not a neocon.
I'm not trying to say we need to go bomb Iran.
I'm saying you can be as effective using very precise use of force against leaders, making them pay a price.
Jack, these guys are cowards.
These guys are— They don't want to be the ones who are targeted.
The moment you start targeting them, the moment things start settling down.
Trump figured it out, he understood it, and I think that would be the way to go.
Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaefer, where can people go to follow you, get more information, and support your work?
ProjectSentinel.com or .net, and obviously TSpooky on Twitter.
We follow each other, we always interact, and it's always great to join you.
Thanks for being here, Jack, and having me on.
Appreciate it, Tony.
All right, folks, we got Ops upon Ops upon Ops, and we here at Human Events Daily, your humble narrators are walking you through the Ops like a safari guide through the darkest jungle.
