Latest / World Ablaze with George Fontes / Huginn & Muninn Intelligence - Iran Conflict, Ukraine War, OSINT, and Misinformation

Transcript

Huginn & Muninn Intelligence - Iran Conflict, Ukraine War, OSINT, and Misinformation · World Ablaze with George Fontes

• 0:00
  okay welcome back world of blazers i have a great guest today i have daniel from hm
• 0:11
  intelligence and um you come highly recommended daniel uh from an acquaintance we have
• 0:16
  hervin thank you very much when he said that you are legit the real deal and um i've been
• 0:24
  listening to your podcast too,
• 0:26
  your daily updates, which is great.
• 0:29
  And I love how you deliver the information,
• 0:30
  but I know that you also go a lot further
• 0:32
  with that in your services through your
• 0:34
  HM Intelligence company you have.
• 0:37
  So hopefully you can help us make sense
• 0:39
  of what the hell's going on with Iran,
• 0:41
  with what's happening in the world.
• 0:43
  I mean, it's basically a big shit show right now.
• 0:47
  Yeah, it's a tall ask.
• 0:49
  Yeah, we can give it a go.
• 0:51
  It's a tall ask.
• 0:52
  We'll see where we go with it, right?
• 0:54
  Um, yeah, firstly, if you don't mind, let's start with the Ron, because that is everything
• 0:59
  that, you know, that's what everybody's talking about.
• 1:01
  Obviously it is the biggest conflict at the moment.
• 1:03
  It's even overshadowing what's been going on in Ukraine for the last four years or so.
• 1:07
  So basically, um, I want, I want, I want to get from your perspective with the Ron.
• 1:15
  Here's the deal.
• 1:16
  Everybody's wondering like, should this war as even, should it even have happened?
• 1:20
  Should we even be there?
• 1:21
  I mean, there's an ideological component to this.
• 1:26
  Obviously, there's a religious ideological component to this.
• 1:30
  But at the same time, there's also an economic component to this.
• 1:33
  Many are saying, hey, it's about time we have a free Iran, for example.
• 1:39
  The people should have a free Iran where they're not oppressed by the Islamic regime.
• 1:43
  But we're also seeing the implications of the actions taken by the U.S. and allies
• 1:48
  and how it's affecting the Gulf states there as well,
• 1:52
  as they're also being attacked,
• 1:53
  which is crazy to see since they are their Muslim neighbors.
• 1:56
  So what are your thoughts on this in general?
• 2:00
  I'm not going to put you on the spot as in saying
• 2:02
  this is exactly what you think,
• 2:04
  but give me your opinion based on the intelligence
• 2:06
  that you are gathering, what you see out there.
• 2:09
  So I think this was, essentially,
• 2:12
  I think the US went ahead with this.
• 2:15
  The Trump administration went ahead with this
• 2:17
  because it was a few things fell into place for them.
• 2:22
  China has just removed their senior leadership of their military,
• 2:26
  so they are unlikely to act.
• 2:28
  Russia has proven that they can't support any of their traditional allies
• 2:33
  while they are occupied in Ukraine.
• 2:36
  And I think Trump has been trying to move, essentially,
• 2:39
  up the board of countries that would kind of like lean towards their side, right?
• 2:45
  He took out Venezuela and now he's taken out Iran.
• 2:49
  So I think that was one of the big factors to him
• 2:53
  and the judgment there.
• 2:56
  Whether they should have done it is not really my…
• 3:01
  Countries do what they're going to do, right?
• 3:04
  Oh, understood.
• 3:05
  The Trump factor is hard to fathom.
• 3:10
  He's kind of proven this in the past and I've said it numerous times now.
• 3:14
  is like he's the wild card that no one can predict.
• 3:17
  And I think he likes that about himself.
• 3:20
  And it essentially puts everybody on edge
• 3:23
  because he's an unpredictable character.
• 3:26
  Yeah, that's kind of why I think they went ahead with it.
• 3:29
  I think they thought Iran's quite isolated at the moment.
• 3:32
  They're degraded.
• 3:34
  I think they thought the civilian population
• 3:36
  were going to be quite open to a revolution
• 3:40
  if the situation was correct.
• 3:43
  following the protests earlier in the year.
• 3:47
  So I think they thought everything had kind of lined up
• 3:49
  and that now was the time to take that step.
• 3:54
  Yeah, I can definitely agree with that.
• 3:55
  It's kind of crazy how people didn't connect the dots
• 3:58
  with the actions taken by the U.S.
• 4:00
  and our own southern hemisphere over here
• 4:03
  and taking out Maduro and controlling that area in Venezuela,
• 4:06
  especially when Iran was making inroads to set up
• 4:09
  their own sleeper cells within that area
• 4:13
  from a place from where they can launch any attacks,
• 4:16
  so to speak, if they wanted to.
• 4:17
  And then there was the China component there as well.
• 4:20
  So just locking that down and making sure there's no,
• 4:22
  you know, actions or adverse actions taken against the U.S.
• 4:24
  from our own Southern Hemisphere was a huge thing,
• 4:27
  which then now you see him taking the actions against Iran.
• 4:31
  So it's almost like he was setting this up
• 4:32
  and people weren't really seeing that.
• 4:34
  And so to me, it looked all connected.
• 4:35
  I could be off, but from what I was seeing,
• 4:37
  that's kind of like just watching the pieces fall in place.
• 4:41
  Yeah, I definitely think they're connected.
• 4:42
  now is pressuring Cuba.
• 4:44
  That's the next step for them.
• 4:46
  Cuba has always been this thorn in the US's geopolitical security side.
• 4:55
  It's an hostile neighbor that sits uncomfortably close to Florida
• 4:59
  and it likes to play host to unfavorable guests
• 5:05
  such as Chinese Intelligence Collection basing themselves out of there.
• 5:10
  So, you know, putting a lot of pressure on them following the fall of Venezuela is a lot easier because they're much more isolated.
• 5:18
  Again, it's just more and more of these countries are preoccupied with other things and unable to help each other out.
• 5:25
  So they're isolating them and trying to remove them from essentially the chessboard of geopolitics.
• 5:31
  Right. And then also the longstanding Russian relationship, right, with Cuba.
• 5:36
  Yeah.
• 5:37
  Um, yeah.
• 5:38
  And it's hard to tell whether or not Russia is really a threat necessarily to the U S but,
• 5:42
  you know, uh, Putin has been very, um, adamant about continuing to provide Iran with Intel.
• 5:48
  Um, and so what you said, you know, I, I think a lot of people haven't said, which is true.
• 5:53
  It's like, this whole thing is just exposed to me anyway, opinion here.
• 5:58
  how much the so-called alliances between Russia, Iran, North Korea,
• 6:06
  right, and China, how strong they really are.
• 6:08
  Who's really willing to act?
• 6:10
  I was waiting to see how China was going to respond to this whole situation,
• 6:14
  but thus far, they really haven't done anything.
• 6:16
  They've kind of just been hanging out, watching everything from up on a ridge,
• 6:23
  so to speak, just looking down, going, okay, let's just see how everything plays out,
• 6:26
  how the cards fall,
• 6:28
  and then they might make a decision
• 6:30
  on what they're going to do next.
• 6:31
  And a lot of people still think that,
• 6:32
  you know, maybe we're just holding out
• 6:33
  to see how they advance on Taiwan
• 6:35
  here in the near future.
• 6:38
  And as far as Russia's relationship
• 6:40
  with Iran right now,
• 6:41
  in exchange for, for example,
• 6:43
  technologies, drones versus intelligence,
• 6:45
  and et cetera,
• 6:46
  do you foresee Russia ever really
• 6:48
  stepping foot into this conflict,
• 6:49
  or do you think they'll always stay
• 6:50
  on the outside looking in?
• 6:53
  I don't think they have the capacity
• 6:55
  at the moment.
• 6:55
  I think they're very bogged down in Ukraine.
• 6:58
  Ukraine has been making some pretty positive step forwards,
• 7:02
  especially in the Zapraginia region.
• 7:04
  There's been quite a few counterattacks that have gone quite well for them.
• 7:08
  I think Russia is definitely feeling the brunt of a long war,
• 7:13
  both economically and just in terms of military capacity.
• 7:17
  They like to say that they still have capacity to fight off their eastern coast,
• 7:24
  but I don't believe this to be the case.
• 7:26
  I think they are probably much more understaffed
• 7:29
  than they let be known publicly
• 7:33
  and that they just don't have the capacity
• 7:37
  to go in and actually support Iran.
• 7:41
  And again, that would be direct confrontation
• 7:44
  with the West, which I don't think they're...
• 7:47
  Right.
• 7:48
  Something they've been avoiding for quite some time.
• 7:51
  Yeah.
• 7:51
  So getting back to the original question of handling for a start,
• 7:57
  let's get back to Iran.
• 8:00
  Is Iran, is this something that is a winnable conflict?
• 8:11
  I don't see how it can be.
• 8:15
  Essentially, if you're looking for like win conditions,
• 8:18
  like what does victory look like?
• 8:21
  Yeah, what is considered a win.
• 8:23
  Yeah.
• 8:23
  Yeah.
• 8:24
  I think that would be complete removal of the current regime
• 8:27
  and a new, more pro-Western regime put into place.
• 8:33
  Currently, that seems unlikely.
• 8:36
  Despite the now three, nearly four-week campaign against the regime,
• 8:43
  there's still a pretty significant security force within the country.
• 8:46
  They still maintain the ability to fire missiles and drones at numerous locations.
• 8:52
  They still maintain long-range ballistic missiles,
• 8:55
  which they fired at Diego Garcia on Saturday morning.
• 9:01
  They still hold significant capacity.
• 9:03
  And this is the conflict they've been preparing for.
• 9:07
  Yeah.
• 9:08
  And, I mean, they're showing their tactics,
• 9:11
  and especially the Strait of Hormuz, was viable.
• 9:14
  This was, and lots of people have been talking about it, this war game that happened in like 2004, where this closing of the Strait of Hormuz was like a significant move by the Iranian, well, the US intelligence officer who was playing the Iranian regime.
• 9:32
  And it essentially crippled the global markets.
• 9:35
  And I think he's probably spot on and he's being proven correct.
• 9:40
  Well, I see what you're saying there.
• 9:43
  So as far as a win is concerned, and let's ask a win for who, really?
• 9:48
  Right?
• 9:49
  For the West, for the people of Iran, for the Middle East.
• 9:54
  But can we not argue that it would be advantageous in the Middle East
• 9:58
  if this regime was actually wiped out?
• 10:02
  The question is, how far is everybody willing to go to do that?
• 10:06
  And at some point, I don't think they're going to just because, you know,
• 10:09
  I think the economic pressures themselves are going to cause, you know, like the U.S., for example, to start pulling the reins on that.
• 10:16
  Because when it comes down to it, when you start hurting pocketbooks, nobody has a stomach to continue and really finish.
• 10:23
  So the big issue to me from what I've seen, and I have studied the history on all of this, especially when the regime took over, they have not, from my opinion, Daniel, they have not been a benefit to the Middle East whatsoever.
• 10:38
  And this has been evident in how they've been attacking their neighbors.
• 10:42
  Now, we can argue that they're only doing so because there's U.S. bases installed within those other areas like Qatar and whatnot.
• 10:48
  But at the same time, it's like they're just saying, look, if you're not with us, you're an enemy regardless.
• 10:55
  And so now we start to question those relationships.
• 10:57
  Well, is it really about the religious context of this?
• 11:03
  Is it really about the Muslim unification or is this really about one nation standing on their own wanting to maintain control, power, and terror in the area versus an actual united Muslim front as they keep trying to portray all these years?
• 11:19
  So I believe you're correct.
• 11:22
  I don't know if we're going to have the stump to go all the way.
• 11:24
  but you know in your opinion what can really be done to truly help the Iranian people which is
• 11:30
  what was told to us is the real reason that we even got involved was to help them you know rise
• 11:35
  up against their own oppressive government do you think there's anything that could be done
• 11:40
  that can possibly you know nudge them to be able to do so because right now I'm not sure that they
• 11:45
  have the weaponry the armaments you know as it is to stand up against the IRGC for example it's not
• 11:49
  going to happen. What in your opinion could be done to help the people though directly?
• 11:55
  I don't know. And I think this is one of the biggest like question marks over the whole
• 12:01
  conflict is like, what is setting the conditions for a revolution to overthrow the regime? Because
• 12:07
  Israel has been conducting like tactical level strikes against individual besiege,
• 12:14
  like command posts and like checkpoints. And that's getting down to the nitty gritty. That's
• 12:19
  like battlefield
• 12:21
  targeting, right? That's as if they were
• 12:23
  using that to eliminate
• 12:25
  hardened positions
• 12:27
  for troops moving through, and yet we're
• 12:29
  still not seeing any signs of a revolution.
• 12:32
  I think one of the other difficulties
• 12:33
  is earlier
• 12:35
  in the year, there was such a large-scale
• 12:37
  protest, and some estimates were around
• 12:39
  30,000 people were killed
• 12:41
  during the reprisals
• 12:43
  and the crackdowns during that.
• 12:45
  The people that came out then were
• 12:47
  likely the people who were
• 12:49
  quite keen and willing to put their life on the line for a revolution.
• 12:54
  They were ultimately eliminated during that uprising So maybe the people that are left are no longer the ones that are willing to take action Good point
• 13:06
  Yeah, actually good point.
• 13:08
  What about the resistance groups out there, like the NCRI basically or the MEK?
• 13:16
  They're not necessarily popular with the older generations of the Iranian people because of
• 13:21
  what they did inciting with Iraq and trying to go against the Iranian regime at the time
• 13:25
  or Islamic regime, but in the process absolutely killed Iranians.
• 13:30
  They've been adamant about trying to push their 10-point plan for democratic Iran,
• 13:36
  but it doesn't seem like they have too much backing or favor from the people themselves.
• 13:40
  Not that I can see anyway.
• 13:43
  Do you think factions like them are going to be able to step in and help whatsoever?
• 13:48
  Because they seem to be, and I've interviewed a few of their members.
• 13:53
  From the outside looking in, they're like,
• 13:55
  well, we just want to see a democratic Iran
• 13:57
  with religion removed from the governing body,
• 14:01
  which makes a lot of sense.
• 14:04
  But I'm not seeing how they're going to be able to implement this.
• 14:08
  And they're behind a few resistance efforts right now,
• 14:12
  even with the war going on, but nobody's talking about it.
• 14:15
  Do you think that, like, for example, the groups like the MEK,
• 14:18
  are they even a factor?
• 14:20
  or are they just too small to even make a difference
• 14:22
  in even helping in the fight?
• 14:24
  And if so, are they the right type of people
• 14:28
  to run Iran, for example?
• 14:31
  Or will it just lead to more of the same?
• 14:35
  I mean, I do feel like they could just be more of the same
• 14:38
  while all revolutionaries talk of wanting free and fair elections.
• 14:42
  When they finally take over,
• 14:45
  things tend to go the other way,
• 14:46
  as we've seen numerous times throughout history.
• 14:48
  I think the other factor is that the IRGC spent 40 years ensuring that they were degraded to basically nothing and propaganda throughout that time.
• 15:00
  So even the moderates within Iran probably do not view them very well, outside of just the fact that the Iranian security services have spent so long ensuring that they don't have the capabilities to conduct any type of operations within the country.
• 15:19
  and whether US clandestine units
• 15:22
  have been supplying these people
• 15:24
  in the build-up to this.
• 15:26
  I don't think there was enough of a run-up
• 15:28
  to start training maybe militias
• 15:31
  within the side of Iran
• 15:32
  that could conduct these types of operations.
• 15:36
  Yeah, there's just not really enough time
• 15:38
  to set the conditions.
• 15:41
  Mounted on top of early in the year,
• 15:44
  they lost all those people.
• 15:45
  They were probably the more willing
• 15:47
  to put their, well, clearly, more willing to put their life on the line for a revolution
• 15:52
  and such.
• 15:55
  Right.
• 15:56
  So, unfortunately, from what you're saying, or at least from the opinions you're giving
• 16:03
  us based on whatever you know, it seems like we're almost hurting the Iranian people more
• 16:08
  than we're helping them at this moment.
• 16:12
  I think it's how it ends.
• 16:15
  And that's the difficult part.
• 16:17
  It's looking like there's a realistic possibility here
• 16:20
  that after a month or two of bombing the absolute crap
• 16:24
  out of every type of infrastructure in Iran,
• 16:27
  we're just going to be left with a more radical,
• 16:30
  more extreme regime that is hardened more,
• 16:35
  like hardened their resolve
• 16:36
  and just more willing to keep the fight on.
• 16:40
  Essentially, if the regime isn't removed by some degree
• 16:43
  at the end of this
• 16:44
  is going to be way worse.
• 16:47
  Like,
• 16:48
  all of the other GCC nations
• 16:50
  are super angry with Iran.
• 16:51
  Of course,
• 16:52
  they've been getting shot at.
• 16:53
  Right.
• 16:54
  Like,
• 16:55
  they're never going to forget that,
• 16:56
  but
• 16:56
  it's just going to drag on,
• 16:59
  I think,
• 17:00
  yeah,
• 17:01
  without their removal of the regime.
• 17:05
  Which,
• 17:06
  which again,
• 17:06
  I don't think we really have the stomach to do.
• 17:09
  I mean,
• 17:09
  it's...
• 17:10
  No.
• 17:10
  And that's where it goes back to.
• 17:12
  Yeah.
• 17:12
  Yeah, unfortunately.
• 17:15
  So what about, like you just mentioned it,
• 17:17
  how the other Gulf states are really upset with Iran
• 17:21
  because they're being attacked.
• 17:23
  I forgot, who said this morning,
• 17:26
  I don't remember if it was Kuwait or the UAE,
• 17:30
  made a statement.
• 17:32
  I don't remember which,
• 17:33
  but they just made a statement to where they said
• 17:35
  that Iranian diplomats are no longer welcome
• 17:38
  within their country.
• 17:38
  They've given them so much time to get out.
• 17:42
  like they said they're done
• 17:43
  persona non grotto
• 17:44
  I can't remember who said that
• 17:47
  I just saw it this morning
• 17:48
  I just popped up
• 17:49
  I don't remember the country
• 17:50
  but basically one of the Gulf states
• 17:51
  just made that statement
• 17:52
  there's been other statements
• 17:54
  of saying hey
• 17:56
  you know if we get more attacks
• 17:58
  we're going to have to step into this war
• 18:00
  and then Iran is also
• 18:03
  just threatened this morning as well
• 18:04
  it just popped up
• 18:05
  that they were threatening
• 18:06
  against the Gulf states
• 18:08
  and the United States
• 18:10
  and saying look
• 18:11
  if you start to target our infrastructure, for example,
• 18:15
  our electrical grids, et cetera,
• 18:17
  that they will go after these other Gulf states in retaliation.
• 18:23
  Now, it doesn't seem to me,
• 18:26
  and I may be wrong because this is not what I do,
• 18:28
  this is what you do,
• 18:29
  but it doesn't seem to me that Iran's being very strategic.
• 18:32
  It seems like they're being very reactionary,
• 18:34
  and I'm not sure they really have a plan
• 18:35
  as most of their leaders have been wiped out.
• 18:38
  Am I reading this wrong,
• 18:39
  or is there something more to it?
• 18:43
  I think this is,
• 18:45
  while it appears there is no plan,
• 18:47
  that's part of the plan
• 18:48
  is kind of the mentality of it.
• 18:50
  Gotcha.
• 18:50
  Is they had designed their units
• 18:53
  and like built plans
• 18:56
  and put them in place that,
• 18:57
  you know, if you lose upper leadership,
• 19:00
  just start shooting.
• 19:02
  Like, it's what it seems like to me anyway.
• 19:05
  And from everything I've read that,
• 19:07
  you know, rocket units were given it
• 19:09
  basically the permission that if you no longer receive instructions
• 19:12
  and you still have rockets, just target whatever you feel like
• 19:16
  and don't really think about it.
• 19:17
  There's been, throughout the weeks,
• 19:20
  there's been multiple different stories of Iran saying
• 19:23
  they would no longer target GCC nations.
• 19:25
  And then within an hour or two, there's been other ballistic missiles.
• 19:30
  There definitely seems to be a massive loss of command and control
• 19:33
  within the forces.
• 19:35
  But I think this is also by design,
• 19:37
  because they knew that Israel and the US would be very strategic
• 19:41
  in removing and eliminating key decision makers within the military
• 19:45
  that they set it up so that they could continue to fight
• 19:49
  and essentially resist so long as they could
• 19:52
  at whatever technical levels they are.
• 19:55
  So, yeah.
• 19:57
  Which also makes making a deal and ensuring oil can transit
• 20:03
  through the Strait of Hamos because you don't know
• 20:05
  what level of leadership you need to talk to.
• 20:08
  There could be tactical level units
• 20:10
  that are just out there dropping sea mines
• 20:12
  willy-nilly in locations that are completely unmarked
• 20:16
  and chips are just going to hit them.
• 20:17
  Even if I run like upper higher levels of Iran,
• 20:21
  say they can pass through.
• 20:24
  Yeah.
• 20:25
  So it's, so it really, in your mind,
• 20:29
  really is an actual tactic.
• 20:30
  So more to confuse, keep people on their heels,
• 20:33
  almost giving Iran time to regroup
• 20:35
  and kind of come up with a proper plan of attack,
• 20:39
  so to speak,
• 20:40
  in terms of what they're going to focus on.
• 20:43
  Makes sense.
• 20:44
  I mean, it seems to be a tactic of theirs
• 20:46
  that they've used many times before.
• 20:50
  Let's talk about the Strait of Hormuz.
• 20:52
  Do you really, in your mind,
• 20:54
  the rhetoric going around
• 20:56
  that has been said that, for example,
• 20:59
  the Trump administration,
• 21:00
  before they made the decision,
• 21:01
  actually did not know
• 21:02
  that the Strait of Hormuz would be controlled and shut down.
• 21:07
  Do you believe that is something to be true?
• 21:10
  Or do you believe that Trump just took a chance
• 21:13
  and maybe made the wrong call on that one?
• 21:19
  So there's something they always talk about in Intel.
• 21:22
  There's either operational success or intelligence failure.
• 21:26
  If things go right, operation staff, the decision makers,
• 21:30
  they take all the glory.
• 21:31
  when things go wrong
• 21:32
  Intel are the first people
• 21:34
  to get blamed
• 21:34
  this is something you get told
• 21:36
  very early on
• 21:38
  within your career
• 21:38
  because
• 21:39
  you're going to run into it
• 21:41
  if there's
• 21:41
  mistakes
• 21:42
  you know
• 21:43
  if the wrong target gets hit
• 21:44
  you always hear it
• 21:45
  oh the Intel was wrong
• 21:47
  the Intel was bad
• 21:48
  the Intel told us
• 21:49
  the wrong thing
• 21:50
  right
• 21:50
  it's the easiest thing to blame
• 21:52
  because
• 21:53
  it's this
• 21:54
  mystical
• 21:55
  like thing
• 21:57
  you can just point the finger at
• 21:58
  yeah
• 21:58
  do I think that Trump
• 22:00
  didn't get told
• 22:00
  no, I think someone somewhere
• 22:03
  would have put forward that as a course
• 22:05
  of action. I think
• 22:06
  it's even evident in
• 22:09
  their operations planning, like some of the
• 22:11
  first sites that they hit were along the coast
• 22:13
  hitting naval units.
• 22:16
  That's what they're there for.
• 22:17
  They're there to try and control
• 22:19
  the Strait of Hormuz. So in their
• 22:21
  own actions, they were
• 22:23
  right at the start of the conflict
• 22:25
  attempting to stop this
• 22:27
  from happening. I just don't think they
• 22:29
  foresaw or maybe the assessments were wrong
• 22:34
  in how capable these forces would be
• 22:36
  at shutting down the straits.
• 22:38
  One of the key components of this
• 22:41
  that I remember hearing about
• 22:43
  was that Iran has a very capable
• 22:45
  shore-to-ship missile,
• 22:47
  so it's not even about naval boats.
• 22:50
  They just shoot missiles from the,
• 22:52
  basically from hidden locations
• 22:54
  within the cliffside
• 22:55
  into the side of ships to sink them.
• 22:57
  So, yeah, it's a very narrow straight of order that's pretty easy to cut off if you especially spent 30 to 40 years preparing for this eventuality.
• 23:10
  Right. And that's something we've seen Iran's proxies use as a tactic also against cargo ships before, you know, from their land to sea, like you said, missiles or rockets that have been used.
• 23:22
  So if we're just looking at that, you know, how could we not assume that Iran themselves
• 23:27
  wouldn't have that capability, right?
• 23:30
  Yeah.
• 23:31
  I think the kind of telltale sign is they're targeting at the start of the operation.
• 23:36
  They targeted coastline defenses and naval units almost immediately.
• 23:42
  So I think they were definitely aware that this was a possibility.
• 23:46
  I just think they don't want to be held accountable for the current fallout.
• 23:51
  Understood.
• 23:52
  It is what it is.
• 23:53
  They prepared, but it didn't seem like they really went all in on it.
• 23:58
  From what it sounds like.
• 23:59
  Or just maybe underestimated the capability of these forces.
• 24:02
  Gotcha.
• 24:03
  Like, they just, yeah, didn't do enough or didn't hit the right locations
• 24:07
  or didn't think they would be able to do what they can do.
• 24:11
  Yeah, and honestly, that seems to make the most sense, this explanation.
• 24:15
  I mean, there's no way that we can say that Trump, for example, was not informed.
• 24:19
  I'm sure he was.
• 24:20
  but maybe they were just, like you said,
• 24:22
  underestimated the situation in and of itself.
• 24:25
  That makes a lot of sense.
• 24:26
  Yeah, I'm sure there's a lot of competing priorities
• 24:28
  and the targetings
• 24:30
  and what things need to be taken into account.
• 24:34
  So since we're talking about the Stratohormus,
• 24:38
  what is your initial reaction and or take
• 24:42
  on Western allies saying,
• 24:46
  no, we do not want to step in
• 24:47
  help the US with this
• 24:50
  mess that was created with
• 24:51
  Strait of Hormuz, France,
• 24:53
  the UK, even Japan.
• 24:56
  Nobody really, we're like, you know what, we're kind of hands off
• 24:58
  on this.
• 24:59
  What is your take on that reaction?
• 25:04
  I'm not surprised
• 25:05
  is my
• 25:06
  very short assessment.
• 25:10
  The longer,
• 25:11
  more winded version is
• 25:13
  like this is just the blowback
• 25:16
  from Trump's
• 25:17
  12 months of rhetoric against those allies.
• 25:21
  He's essentially spent 12 months being like,
• 25:23
  you guys do nothing.
• 25:25
  Essentially, he's ruining his soft power with them
• 25:29
  and then turned around and asked them to try and help
• 25:31
  in probably one of the most dangerous
• 25:34
  and technically complex operations
• 25:35
  that you could possibly do.
• 25:38
  He's essentially asking them to sacrifice people's lives
• 25:41
  because if you sail naval ships into those regions,
• 25:45
  you're going to lose people's lives.
• 25:46
  that's just what's going to happen.
• 25:49
  So if they, as they've talked about,
• 25:51
  want to escort ships through,
• 25:54
  how quickly are those shorter ship missiles going to go from shooting at cargo ships to firing into the side of naval ships pretty quickly And the way they work is they sit just above the water so they can do significant damage and are very hard to stop
• 26:10
  Yeah, I mean, that's a clear to the point assessment of the situation there.
• 26:16
  But the other side of that is, for example,
• 26:20
  these other nations are much more reliant on the use of the Strait of Hormuz
• 26:24
  than the U.S. is, honestly.
• 26:26
  we don't really get much of our oil, for example, from Iran.
• 26:30
  You guys ship oil.
• 26:32
  You're one of the only countries that overproduces the amount of oil you use.
• 26:37
  I mean, that makes complete sense.
• 26:42
  I don't know.
• 26:43
  I think it's just going to become a very painful point
• 26:47
  and drive the price of oil up.
• 26:49
  Another thing that I've been looking at and thinking about recently
• 26:53
  is even when the straits do open,
• 26:56
  the amount of damage that is currently getting done
• 26:58
  on oil infrastructure within that Gulf is significant.
• 27:03
  It's not easily fixed or quickly replaced.
• 27:07
  So even when ships do pass through,
• 27:10
  say it opened tomorrow,
• 27:12
  and every ship that is possibly can leave
• 27:14
  and come and go as they want,
• 27:16
  the time it'll take to fix all that infrastructure
• 27:18
  is going to be months.
• 27:20
  so like i think there's going to be some serious blow on things here oh absolutely i mean there
• 27:25
  are multiple refineries hit and destroyed by iran themselves uh we got the lng um gas plant over
• 27:31
  there was a kuwait that was that was destroyed or actually qatar it was qatar yeah and that what
• 27:38
  it um i think that affected like 17 of their output somewhere around there 17 20 percent
• 27:43
  yeah so and then and of course uh iran's own lng field or refinery was also hit by israel
• 27:51
  and you know netanyahu actually took credit for that saying yeah we did it on our own
• 27:56
  so yeah it's going to be a mess there in terms of uh energy that's able to be you know given to
• 28:02
  the world from that region so it's almost you know and i just thought of this while you were talking
• 28:06
  it's like well kind of like peace is falling into place right going and taking maduro out while
• 28:11
  they have one of the largest reserves of oil.
• 28:14
  America made this deal.
• 28:15
  Alaska, we're pretty much mostly untapped.
• 28:17
  We hardly even use anything there.
• 28:20
  Is it possible that Trump is trying to set this up
• 28:23
  to where people have to go to the U.S.?
• 28:26
  And I mean, that or even Canada for energy?
• 28:32
  I mean, I think there could be a positive,
• 28:34
  unforeseen outcome for the U.S.
• 28:37
  Because you're going to become
• 28:38
  one of the number one suppliers globally.
• 28:41
  I think it would also push a lot of countries to start becoming more self-sufficient.
• 28:47
  So I'm from New Zealand.
• 28:49
  We don't essentially get our own oil.
• 28:52
  We even stopped refining it ourselves just because of the natural,
• 28:57
  like the risk of natural disaster.
• 29:00
  And there's lots of talk in New Zealand now.
• 29:02
  We have some large oil fields and we've never even attempted to try and drill them.
• 29:07
  and there's talk now of trying to drill them
• 29:10
  just to become a bit more self-sufficient.
• 29:13
  I think New Zealand is currently on 50 days of fuel
• 29:16
  because we didn't even hold the global average is 90.
• 29:22
  I think Australia is in a worse position than we are
• 29:24
  and they have no refiners either.
• 29:27
  Another thing someone told me,
• 29:29
  and I don't know how true this is,
• 29:30
  so I should look into it more,
• 29:31
  but is that the refineries in the US
• 29:34
  aren't designed for the oil you guys produce.
• 29:40
  And so it's like essentially US oil is like, is it shale?
• 29:46
  Yeah.
• 29:47
  It's like very thin and very like easy to refine.
• 29:52
  Whereas Venezuelan oil is very thick.
• 29:54
  And your refineries are more designed to refine thicker, harder crude.
• 30:01
  I think it's actually a combination
• 30:03
  because if you look at the history with Venezuela way back,
• 30:06
  I think it was Chevron Corporation, I believe,
• 30:10
  way back that actually helped Venezuela develop refineries.
• 30:14
  And they had a longstanding contract in Venezuela
• 30:16
  with the government going,
• 30:19
  let's just say it goes back a long ways.
• 30:23
  So they were the ones that were helping Venezuela
• 30:25
  actually get the oil and refine it.
• 30:27
  So they actually create a refinery specifically
• 30:29
  for that type of oil,
• 30:31
  the thicker substances you're talking about.
• 30:33
  Later through relationships, dictators, etc., they eventually said, you know what, we're no longer working with the U.S.
• 30:38
  So those refineries that were there and ready to go have been stagnant for a while.
• 30:43
  They're working to bring those back online, basically at Trump's request for sure.
• 30:49
  But we still have refineries to refine our own oil.
• 30:53
  I mean, we have refineries in Texas, off the coast of California.
• 30:56
  We have off the coast of Florida.
• 30:59
  I mean, they're all over the place.
• 31:00
  So we still have that ability.
• 31:01
  The problem that the U.S. has with oil is when, I think under the Biden administration, when he decided, you know, we're just going to drain about 40% of our reserves for whatever reason, which made no sense, which then put the U.S. back into a position of being reliant on the Middle East, for example, which we really, if we're going to be honest, Daniel, the U.S. really doesn't need to be buying oil from anybody.
• 31:25
  I think everybody's playing this long game where they're like, well, let's see who runs out. Well,
• 31:30
  unfortunately, the world's not going to run out of oil. It's a natural substance. It's just,
• 31:34
  it's just, it just comes from the breakdown of natural biological, you know, materials such as
• 31:41
  you and I, our bodies get buried, whatever. It just, it just eventually that's what comes
• 31:44
  out of the earth. So it's not going away. And I think it's very short-sighted for these guys to
• 31:49
  try to play this game. Like, well, we're going to outlast you. Now we have these reserves. Now
• 31:52
  I got to turn to the US.
• 31:53
  Great.
• 31:53
  Well, like you said, New Zealand has places where they can get oil.
• 31:59
  Russia, I mean, many countries can get their own oil.
• 32:02
  How much they have and what they're going to consume versus what they need to buy.
• 32:06
  Now, that is the question, right?
• 32:08
  And that's where we're going to have to make these relationships and make these deals.
• 32:10
  But the US is completely reliant.
• 32:11
  I don't know why between you and I, we play these games with the world.
• 32:15
  We really shouldn't be doing this.
• 32:16
  We should just say, look, Middle East, you're great.
• 32:19
  Oil, you have it.
• 32:20
  We have ours.
• 32:20
  if we need to make whatever relationship we need to
• 32:23
  because of, let's say, geographical locations
• 32:25
  to save money on shipping, etc.
• 32:27
  That makes sense, right, from a business standpoint.
• 32:29
  But outside of that, I have no, from me to you,
• 32:32
  I don't know why the U.S. even gets involved
• 32:34
  in this whole oil debacle.
• 32:37
  And the people that always say that we're in it for the oil,
• 32:39
  I think they don't really understand what's going on.
• 32:42
  We don't need the oil.
• 32:43
  We're there for the dollar.
• 32:45
  We're there to keep the dollar strong
• 32:46
  because it's backing everything.
• 32:48
  And that's really what I see the U.S. being involved in.
• 32:52
  As far as Iran, and again, this is my opinion.
• 32:54
  Like I said, I don't do what you do.
• 32:56
  Like you can go, you dive a lot deeper.
• 32:58
  You get all the information that I don't.
• 33:00
  But the reality is, I think this thing with Iran, with the U.S.
• 33:04
  has been on a 50-year collision course.
• 33:05
  Okay, started when we got rid of the other regime.
• 33:11
  We stepped in, Operation Ajax, whatever.
• 33:13
  You could say it was the U.S.'s fault, but we actually were there at the behest of the British government.
• 33:16
  because of oil on the British government's part.
• 33:21
  It had nothing to do with the U.S.
• 33:22
  The U.S.'s interest over there in the Middle East,
• 33:24
  and I'm sure you already know this,
• 33:25
  was really had to do at the time with the Cold War between us and Russia.
• 33:29
  We didn't want communism to come in and root themselves in the Middle East
• 33:32
  because why give them more areas to control?
• 33:35
  That's why the United States was originally wanting to be there.
• 33:39
  So I personally, Daniel, between you and I,
• 33:42
  I think there's a lot of misinformation,
• 33:44
  a lot of misunderstanding of the history and why we're there.
• 33:46
  it's not always nefarious as people say.
• 33:48
  A lot of it just comes down to money
• 33:50
  or literally keeping out the bad guy,
• 33:52
  at least in the Western nation's eyes, right?
• 33:56
  So that's my take.
• 33:58
  And I'm always open for correction
• 33:59
  because I obviously will miss things.
• 34:01
  I only have so much time to dive into this stuff.
• 34:05
  But as far as Iran is concerned,
• 34:08
  and from my viewpoint,
• 34:09
  I think the big thing for me
• 34:10
  has always been the Islamic regime.
• 34:12
  They have not been a benefit to the Middle East.
• 34:13
  They haven't been a benefit to their people whatsoever.
• 34:16
  Ever since they took over in 1979, they fooled everybody, right?
• 34:21
  They were like, hey, we're going to take care of everything.
• 34:22
  We're going to take care of the people.
• 34:23
  They got in there by manipulating academia and able to get in there.
• 34:27
  Once you've got the students on their side, they do the protest.
• 34:29
  They're the inroads you need to start turning the tide,
• 34:31
  just like we're starting to see in America here, starting in New York, etc.
• 34:35
  And so that's how they got in.
• 34:37
  Now that they got in, they totally turned to 180.
• 34:40
  It's now a very hardcore view of Islam that they're trying to use to control the people.
• 34:47
  And many people would even argue that they don't even believe in Islam themselves.
• 34:52
  They're just using it as a tool to manipulate and control people, you know, while they're
• 34:56
  living, you know, a luxurious lifestyle, all these leaders and clerics, which makes no
• 34:59
  sense.
• 35:00
  So as far as Iran, this conflict is concerned strategically.
• 35:06
  I'm not
• 35:08
  like we have the capability
• 35:10
  obviously America has the capability to
• 35:12
  bomb the hell out of everybody
• 35:13
  at a very accurate way
• 35:16
  on a very accurate level
• 35:17
  but at some point
• 35:18
  the questions come out Daniel
• 35:20
  do you believe that Iran can outlast
• 35:23
  for example the US
• 35:25
  when it comes to the stockpile of missiles
• 35:27
  and armaments that they have to resist
• 35:29
  the US onslaught
• 35:31
  yes
• 35:34
  but I think it's because
• 35:36
  they're just going to hide.
• 35:38
  They think they're going to hide?
• 35:40
  Okay.
• 35:41
  Yeah.
• 35:42
  They've built deep bunkers.
• 35:45
  So are you not buying
• 35:47
  the reports from Iran
• 35:48
  about how much stockpile they have?
• 35:51
  Because they've reported...
• 35:52
  They'll eventually run out.
• 35:53
  Yeah.
• 35:54
  Of course.
• 35:56
  It's not like they're making them right now
• 35:57
  while they're under attack, right?
• 35:59
  Yeah, and they're blowing up
• 36:00
  their ability to bank more.
• 36:02
  Gotcha.
• 36:03
  But I do think they have a lot.
• 36:06
  I think they've probably lied.
• 36:07
  I mean, they've shown they had a lot, right?
• 36:09
  Yeah, yeah.
• 36:10
  And they're just going to become more reliant on less high-tech weaponry
• 36:16
  and go more towards drones.
• 36:19
  Do you think they've shown us everything they have?
• 36:22
  Do you think they have more in terms of technologically advanced weapons?
• 36:26
  No, I don't think so.
• 36:27
  I think they probably,
• 36:29
  their missiles can probably shoot further
• 36:32
  than they stated they could.
• 36:35
  Going back to the Diego Garcia, right?
• 36:37
  Yeah, yeah.
• 36:39
  But then like you look at the accuracy of that
• 36:41
  when it was getting out,
• 36:41
  one just fell out of the sky
• 36:43
  and the other missed.
• 36:44
  Yeah.
• 36:45
  It's like anything,
• 36:46
  the further you,
• 36:47
  it's throwing a ball, right?
• 36:48
  The further you try and throw it,
• 36:49
  the less accurate you become.
• 36:50
  True.
• 36:53
  So let's talk about that real quick.
• 36:55
  So I saw a video you put out about that.
• 36:57
  What is your take on that attack or alleged attack on Dia Garcia, that missile?
• 37:03
  Were they trying to, you think, show the world that, look, we have more range than you think?
• 37:09
  And there was another video out by somebody else that was like, well, maybe it got that
• 37:14
  distance because they didn't have an actual warhead on it or it was a smaller warhead,
• 37:19
  for example, accounting for mass and fuel and everything.
• 37:24
  Do you think the UK should actually be concerned
• 37:27
  with the long-range capabilities of Iran's missiles, for example?
• 37:30
  Or was this just kind of like another one of those,
• 37:34
  what do you call it?
• 37:36
  I wouldn't say a false flag, but just basically another...
• 37:39
  Symbolic.
• 37:39
  Yeah, there you go.
• 37:40
  Symbolic gesture by Iran to say, look what we can do.
• 37:43
  Yeah, I think that was most likely the move.
• 37:47
  I haven't seen the person talk about removing the warhead.
• 37:50
  That would kind of make sense.
• 37:52
  I don't know if they actually believed it would ever hit anything.
• 37:56
  So removing the warhead could give it a bit of more range.
• 37:59
  But essentially, if you wanted to shoot a rocket further,
• 38:02
  you just strap on more explosive, right?
• 38:04
  Give it more fuel.
• 38:05
  There you go.
• 38:06
  I thought, is it rocket physics like pretty simple when you get down to it?
• 38:10
  It's just less weight, more fuel.
• 38:14
  Force thrust.
• 38:15
  Yeah.
• 38:17
  But yeah, I think it was more of like,
• 38:19
  hey, look, we could threaten Europe if we want to.
• 38:23
  Yeah, I don't think they're going to start shooting rockets towards Europe
• 38:27
  because much like Russia, right,
• 38:30
  I don't buy that Russia is intending to attack NATO anytime soon
• 38:35
  because they just don't have the capabilities.
• 38:37
  I don't think they're foolish enough to think they have the ability
• 38:41
  to fight everybody.
• 38:42
  I don't think Iran, at least the upper levels of the Iranian leadership
• 38:47
  are foolish enough to think that they could fight
• 38:50
  the entire world and win.
• 38:53
  Well, we assume, we would hope.
• 38:55
  Yeah.
• 38:56
  That actually brings up that brings up an interesting question because we brought up Russia a few times They preoccupied in the Ukraine And it seems like right now they are reliant on a bit of what Iran can supply to them
• 39:09
  in terms of technologies, especially with their cheap,
• 39:13
  I don't even know how to pronounce it, Shahedz drones.
• 39:16
  Is that correct?
• 39:17
  Yeah, I think that's how you pronounce it.
• 39:19
  Something like that, right?
• 39:19
  I'm horrible at pronouncing Middle Eastern names or Persian.
• 39:22
  So I do believe they,
• 39:26
  Russia now produces them themselves,
• 39:28
  like almost exclusively.
• 39:31
  But then it's pretty unclear
• 39:34
  how much they get in terms of like technology,
• 39:38
  like they need electronics.
• 39:39
  They can still get it from China, obviously.
• 39:42
  But yeah, it's unclear what Iran
• 39:44
  was actually supplying Russia
• 39:47
  and whether this will take a big hit.
• 39:49
  But I do believe they were making
• 39:50
  most of their long-range drones themselves now.
• 39:55
  So you believe it might be possible
• 39:58
  that due to Iran being in the situation
• 40:00
  they are with the conflict
• 40:01
  with the US and Israel at the moment,
• 40:03
  that it's totally preoccupying them
• 40:06
  and they're no longer able
• 40:06
  to really be the partner that Russia needed
• 40:08
  in providing what Russia needs to fight Ukraine?
• 40:12
  I think there'll be a degree
• 40:14
  that it'll have an effect,
• 40:16
  but I don't think it'll be that significant.
• 40:17
  I think Russia has like
• 40:20
  set themselves up pretty firmly to be self-sufficient at this point,
• 40:26
  with imports probably coming mostly from China.
• 40:30
  Gotcha.
• 40:31
  So as far as Iran is concerned,
• 40:34
  it's hard to tell where this is going to go, right?
• 40:37
  Yeah.
• 40:38
  It really is.
• 40:39
  We don't know how far the US, for example,
• 40:42
  or their allies are actually willing to go to stamp out the regime.
• 40:45
  And even then, what does that look like?
• 40:47
  What kind of government is going to be in place?
• 40:49
  Will they be friendly and for how long?
• 40:51
  I mean, it's been proven in the Middle East.
• 40:52
  We don't really see that happen too often.
• 40:56
  But it is interesting to see that a lot of the other neighboring Gulf states have become closer to the U.S.,
• 41:02
  or at least on the surface, after all of this has been happening.
• 41:07
  Could that be a possibility moving forward to where with the stronger relationships
• 41:11
  that the surrounding nations have around Iran has become or begin to have a strong relationship with the U.S.
• 41:17
  that even if the regime survives,
• 41:20
  that they will be able to be more controlled moving forward?
• 41:26
  I think the initial reaction is coming together
• 41:29
  because you're all sharing a collective issue.
• 41:34
  I think that if the missiles stop firing after a period of time,
• 41:38
  I think the GCC nations would start to turn on the US
• 41:42
  and start to risk some of the blame on them
• 41:45
  for starting this, like essentially starting this conflict.
• 41:50
  One of the things that I wrote about
• 41:53
  and thought was quite interesting
• 41:54
  is the relationship between these GCC nations and Ukraine.
• 41:59
  Because Ukraine has sent,
• 42:00
  I think it's estimated to be around 200 people
• 42:02
  to help them with countering drones specifically.
• 42:06
  And I feel like Middle Eastern leaders
• 42:10
  remember who helps them.
• 42:12
  And I think they'll look on Ukraine very fondly
• 42:16
  for sending these people over to help them in their time of need
• 42:19
  and how that affects their relationship with Russia
• 42:23
  because the UAE especially is still like a big,
• 42:28
  not supporter, but it's like the middle point, right,
• 42:31
  between the West and Russia.
• 42:32
  Lots of Russians go there.
• 42:34
  They still help Russia with banking, et cetera.
• 42:38
  And how kind of that relationship works
• 42:42
  falls out out of this,
• 42:44
  like,
• 42:44
  if they start to view Ukraine
• 42:46
  much more sympathetically,
• 42:48
  like,
• 42:48
  Ukraine came and helped them,
• 42:50
  and then they're saying Russia
• 42:51
  essentially try to bully Ukraine,
• 42:53
  how they then react to Russia
• 42:55
  will be an interesting,
• 42:56
  like,
• 42:58
  fallout from this.
• 43:00
  It's just something that I was,
• 43:01
  like,
• 43:02
  pondering the other day.
• 43:03
  No,
• 43:03
  that's an interesting,
• 43:06
  that's interesting to think about,
• 43:08
  actually.
• 43:09
  Because now it's,
• 43:11
  now if that,
• 43:12
  if that prediction or whatever you're thinking about becomes true,
• 43:15
  it,
• 43:16
  it,
• 43:16
  it does,
• 43:17
  it does question what will happen in the conflict between Ukraine and
• 43:20
  Russia moving forward.
• 43:22
  Um,
• 43:23
  yeah.
• 43:23
  You know,
• 43:23
  with that being said,
• 43:24
  Daniel,
• 43:24
  let's,
• 43:25
  let's transition out of Iran because I,
• 43:27
  I,
• 43:27
  I think,
• 43:28
  I think we've,
• 43:28
  um,
• 43:29
  we've hit some points there.
• 43:30
  You've,
• 43:31
  you've cleared some things up,
• 43:31
  especially when it comes to weaponry and et cetera and capabilities.
• 43:36
  Um,
• 43:37
  because right now we don't know what's going to happen.
• 43:40
  We're all predicting correct.
• 43:41
  Correct.
• 43:42
  And if anything has been proven in the Middle East,
• 43:45
  there's longstanding conflicts between tribes, etc., religion.
• 43:50
  I mean, I don't think there's ever going to be any actual resolve there,
• 43:53
  regardless, outside of the Western nations wanting to get rid of a terrorist organization, as they say.
• 43:59
  So I am interested in what you have to say about moving on into Ukraine,
• 44:04
  because that conflict's been going on for a few years.
• 44:06
  I think it's very surprising to many that Ukraine has lasted as long as they have,
• 44:11
  being they're a considerably smaller nation with a lot less resources compared to Russia.
• 44:17
  Where do you think this is going to go?
• 44:19
  Do you think Russia is going to eventually have to break down and say,
• 44:23
  hey, we're just going to have to come to an agreement?
• 44:25
  Or do you think Putin is just so stubborn that he's so bent on leaving the legacy
• 44:30
  of reuniting his modern version of the Russian empire?
• 44:35
  but with that being said
• 44:37
  do you think Russia is going to have to get to a point
• 44:40
  eventually where they're just going to have to back out on this
• 44:42
  and try to come to some kind of a
• 44:44
  peace deal with Ukraine
• 44:45
  it's tough
• 44:49
  right
• 44:50
  Putin's a hard guy to engage right
• 44:53
  yeah
• 44:55
  but one factor that I kind of
• 44:58
  have talked about before
• 44:59
  is for Putin
• 45:01
  this is like
• 45:04
  it's not just legacy, it's life and death.
• 45:07
  Because if he fails here
• 45:08
  and he gets removed from power,
• 45:11
  it's probably his family
• 45:12
  that will also feel the repercussions, right?
• 45:15
  So he has that on top of him.
• 45:18
  He's built his entire empire.
• 45:20
  He has his hidden children.
• 45:22
  He has his families,
• 45:24
  multiple at this point.
• 45:27
  And if his empire, as it were,
• 45:30
  was to collapse,
• 45:32
  whoever replaces him
• 45:34
  this has happened multiple times in Russia.
• 45:37
  They don't let the kids stay around, right?
• 45:40
  They don't let the heirs go peacefully
• 45:43
  into the darkness.
• 45:45
  They clean house, as it were.
• 45:48
  Yeah, literally.
• 45:48
  So I think that's a significant factor in this.
• 45:51
  It isn't just about his legacy.
• 45:53
  Well, that to him is a massive thing.
• 45:56
  There's, on top of that,
• 45:59
  the life of everyone he cares about
• 46:01
  because if he fails here,
• 46:04
  it's probably all over.
• 46:07
  Saying that...
• 46:08
  I'm sorry.
• 46:09
  So are you saying that he's in a position
• 46:11
  where it's all or nothing?
• 46:13
  Yeah, absolutely.
• 46:14
  I feel like, I think he's
• 46:16
  like cornered now.
• 46:19
  He has no good options here.
• 46:21
  If he...
• 46:23
  There's also like the economic factors
• 46:25
  within Russia,
• 46:25
  like the entire economy's
• 46:27
  built around the war now.
• 46:29
  Like they can't,
• 46:30
  essentially can't stop fighting.
• 46:31
  Otherwise, everything collapses.
• 46:33
  It's like a
• 46:34
  a house of cards with the war at the bottom.
• 46:37
  So that's a huge issue for them.
• 46:43
  And how they get out of that, I don't know.
• 46:47
  But then also, what does victory look like for them?
• 46:51
  Because currently, it's not going well.
• 46:55
  And we've recently been seeing more and more dissent, so to speak.
• 47:00
  we're seeing more people stand up and speak publicly and openly about Putin.
• 47:07
  As Russia themselves, as you mentioned earlier about the economy,
• 47:11
  like economically, they're not doing very well.
• 47:13
  I mean, they're stuck in a wartime economy right now.
• 47:14
  So it's not like they could just turn it off anyway.
• 47:19
  So, I mean, could we possibly be seeing at this moment
• 47:23
  the slow march to Putin's demise?
• 47:27
  You think eventually the people are just going to rise up
• 47:29
  and just say, hey, we're done?
• 47:30
  yeah but I think it'll be the
• 47:33
  slowly slowly then all at once
• 47:35
  kind of situation where
• 47:37
  you just wake up one day
• 47:38
  and he's been removed by
• 47:41
  some like other
• 47:43
  oligarch within the Russian leadership
• 47:45
  everyone loyal to him has
• 47:47
  disappeared and then
• 47:49
  we just have a new Russian government
• 47:50
  two days later that's
• 47:52
  basically the same just wearing different
• 47:55
  clothes with a different leader doing the same
• 47:57
  shit
• 47:57
  and that would likely lead to them leaving Ukraine
• 48:01
  but
• 48:03
  there would be some significant repercussions
• 48:06
  there. One of the interesting
• 48:08
  benefits for them
• 48:10
  economically is the conflict in
• 48:12
  Iran. Trump's
• 48:14
  removed all the sanctions on their oil
• 48:15
  so now they can sell it again to certain
• 48:18
  countries.
• 48:19
  They are benefiting there and that's going
• 48:22
  to help their economy. Whether it helps
• 48:24
  it enough
• 48:25
  is unlikely but
• 48:27
  you know
• 48:29
  it's the factors there. Interesting
• 48:31
  what is from the outside looking
• 48:33
  in from someone who analyzes this stuff like
• 48:35
  what is your
• 48:36
  thought on the Trump Putin
• 48:39
  relationship here?
• 48:43
  I think Trump
• 48:45
  thought they were closer than they were. Yeah?
• 48:47
  Okay. Yeah. I think
• 48:49
  Trump's
• 48:51
  style
• 48:53
  is to befriend people
• 48:55
  and build actual solid connections with people
• 48:58
  where they actually truly like each other
• 49:00
  and they help each other and they're friends
• 49:03
  and it's a good, strong bond.
• 49:05
  Whereas he was dealing with an intelligence officer
• 49:08
  who just says what he needs to say to get the job done
• 49:12
  and can look you dead straight in the eyes and lie
• 49:16
  and can also build that friendship.
• 49:19
  But it isn't the same.
• 49:20
  Putin is a very long-lasting…
• 49:24
  He's an intelligence officer.
• 49:26
  He knows what he's doing.
• 49:27
  He played the game he needed to play.
• 49:30
  And yeah, I think Trump thought he had more sway
• 49:33
  with Putin personally than he did.
• 49:38
  Interesting.
• 49:41
  I'm going to have to agree with you there.
• 49:43
  I think a lot of people feel to remember
• 49:45
  where Putin came from, how he came to power.
• 49:47
  He was a KGB operative.
• 49:51
  That's his background.
• 49:52
  He was in East Germany when the Soviet Union fell.
• 49:56
  One thing is like, it's in quite a few books,
• 49:59
  they talk about it,
• 49:59
  is he still remembers being betrayed by the Soviet leadership.
• 50:06
  So they were in East Berlin, I believe,
• 50:10
  and Soviet Union fell apart,
• 50:13
  and they were like calling up Moscow to be like,
• 50:15
  what are we going to do?
• 50:16
  And Moscow just didn't answer the calls.
• 50:18
  So he remembers that betrayal, apparently.
• 50:22
  And it's like, yeah.
• 50:26
  When it comes to Ukraine,
• 50:28
  look, I think, well, first off,
• 50:30
  let me just say that I think I agree
• 50:32
  with your assessment in saying
• 50:33
  this is going to be a long, slow change for Putin,
• 50:36
  especially if he's not successful in Ukraine.
• 50:39
  Question, honest question, by the way.
• 50:42
  How important is it for Ukraine
• 50:44
  to survive against Russia?
• 50:46
  And this isn't me being like,
• 50:48
  I don't have a heart for Ukraine.
• 50:49
  It's just a cold, hard assessment.
• 50:53
  Like, how important is it for Ukraine to survive this?
• 50:56
  Because it seems like most of Europe, honestly, from my perspective, they weren't really keen
• 51:02
  to jump in and help Ukraine from the outset.
• 51:06
  They were kind of on the outside looking and saying, yeah, we might send you some money.
• 51:09
  We might send you this.
• 51:09
  But nobody put their foot down against Russia and say, hey, you're not doing this.
• 51:15
  They could have.
• 51:15
  They could have stopped this a long time ago, but they chose not to.
• 51:19
  So it really comes to question,
• 51:22
  how important is Ukraine as a player in all this?
• 51:25
  Does Europe really care?
• 51:27
  Does it really matter if Ukraine survives this?
• 51:30
  Or is everybody getting behind Ukraine just to try to say,
• 51:33
  yeah, we stand up to Putin, but no one's really doing anything?
• 51:37
  What is your thoughts on this?
• 51:39
  Is Ukraine really as big of a piece as everybody's trying to make it out to be?
• 51:43
  so I think there's like
• 51:46
  the
• 51:46
  I would call it like
• 51:48
  tactical level considerations
• 51:50
  where
• 51:51
  pre the 2022 invasion
• 51:53
  Europe relied on Russian gas
• 51:55
  so
• 51:56
  right
• 51:57
  they
• 51:58
  and Russia played
• 51:59
  this was a brilliant move
• 52:01
  by Persian
• 52:02
  yeah
• 52:02
  to get Europe dependent on cheap Russian gas.
• 52:05
  So they couldn't really do anything
• 52:07
  because they were so fearful of losing all of this energy.
• 52:11
  Right.
• 52:12
  That obviously changed post-2022.
• 52:15
  And now they're a lot less reliant,
• 52:18
  which is great in my opinion.
• 52:19
  Well, some countries are still reliant,
• 52:21
  like Hungary and Slovakia.
• 52:22
  And you still, like currently,
• 52:24
  they're really upset because a key pipeline
• 52:27
  got blown up by Russia
• 52:28
  and Ukraine refuses to go and fix it
• 52:31
  because the last two times they tried, they lost people.
• 52:34
  And Hungary is essentially blaming Ukraine for them not having energy.
• 52:39
  But that's also an issue because he's about to lose his election
• 52:42
  and there's other things there.
• 52:44
  But another consideration, sorry, get out of rabbit hole.
• 52:51
  Another consideration that I kind of look at,
• 52:54
  the way I kind of look at this is there's going to be ramifications.
• 52:59
  maybe not so much anymore because the West has helped Ukraine
• 53:03
  but initially at the start it was
• 53:06
  the way I looked at it was
• 53:08
  if the West doesn't support Ukraine against Russia
• 53:12
  then does anyone rely on the West
• 53:15
  to be supported?
• 53:18
  The US especially.
• 53:20
  People talked about this when the US
• 53:23
  kind of draw down on their support of the SDF
• 53:26
  in eastern Syria or northern Syria.
• 53:29
  is like, is the US a trustworthy partner to go into this with?
• 53:35
  Because if they're going to leave at the ultimate moment
• 53:41
  when you need them the most, then what good are they?
• 53:43
  Why would you work with them?
• 53:45
  Why would you help them achieve their goals in your country
• 53:48
  if they're just going to abandon you when push comes to shove?
• 53:52
  I think Ukraine was a very big test of that,
• 53:56
  whether the West abandoned Ukraine at its moment of need
• 54:01
  and let Russia roll in.
• 54:05
  I don't think the West thought Ukraine would hold out,
• 54:09
  even anywhere near as long as it is now.
• 54:11
  But at the start, I don't think they had that much faith.
• 54:14
  They hadn't really given them that much.
• 54:16
  I think they gave them anti-tank weapons a month
• 54:20
  before Russia rolled the tanks over the borders.
• 54:23
  But I don't think they thought they would hold out this much.
• 54:26
  but they wanted to at least show
• 54:28
  that they were trying to support them.
• 54:29
  And now they actually are.
• 54:32
  And I think there's flow and effects here
• 54:33
  to Taiwan especially.
• 54:35
  China was almost certainly watching
• 54:38
  how the West reacted to the Ukrainian conflict.
• 54:40
  Oh, absolutely was.
• 54:41
  Yeah.
• 54:42
  Engaging that of like,
• 54:44
  how is the West going to react
• 54:46
  if we try and take Taiwan?
• 54:47
  If the West had not stepped up
• 54:49
  and supported Ukraine at all,
• 54:52
  I'd say they probably would have already taken Taiwan
• 54:54
  because if you push,
• 54:57
  if you put them under pressure
• 54:59
  and they don't support,
• 55:01
  then what's stopping you, right?
• 55:05
  Yeah, and I think the amount of support
• 55:07
  that the West gave to Ukraine
• 55:09
  has made China rethink
• 55:11
  and recalibrate how it's going to take Taiwan.
• 55:15
  There's also the actual military changes
• 55:19
  of the conflict of how drones have changed warfare.
• 55:22
  I think Ukraine's ability to innovate and come up with new ways to use these weapons
• 55:28
  has been probably one of the key factors that's helped them win this war.
• 55:33
  Without drones, I don't think they would have won.
• 55:36
  If drones didn't exist as a technology,
• 55:41
  and they had to fight without essentially tank to tank, man to man,
• 55:48
  Russia can steamroll them with just people.
• 55:51
  but they can replace people with drones
• 55:53
  and it gives them a cheap alternative
• 55:56
  to kill Russians in their thousands.
• 55:59
  And I think that also has flow and effects to Taiwan.
• 56:02
  Like we're seeing, is that Audrill?
• 56:04
  Andrill?
• 56:04
  Andrill?
• 56:06
  The defense manufacturing company
• 56:08
  giving weapons to Taiwan.
• 56:10
  Oh.
• 56:10
  And their battle plan and what they've talked about
• 56:14
  is essentially turning the Straits of Taiwan
• 56:16
  into an absolute death pit.
• 56:18
  and drones are the perfect weapon for that
• 56:21
  because they're cheap, fast, hard to stop.
• 56:24
  Right.
• 56:24
  That's okay.
• 56:26
  Those are very good points.
• 56:27
  And I was with you on that from the beginning
• 56:29
  when it came to this conflict.
• 56:31
  And I've said it myself,
• 56:32
  China's watching how we're all going to react.
• 56:35
  And it happened again when the US decided
• 56:38
  that they were going to attack Iran
• 56:40
  because all of a sudden China pulled back again.
• 56:42
  In fact, a lot of the activities
• 56:43
  that were going on over there
• 56:44
  in the Indo-Pacific region kind of just stopped.
• 56:48
  They just kind of halted and like, okay, what's happening here?
• 56:50
  Like maybe the, maybe Trump really is crazy.
• 56:52
  Maybe, you know, maybe he really will do what he says.
• 56:55
  So that's a possibility.
• 56:57
  But yeah, you know, great point about what you said about drones.
• 56:59
  A lot of people overlook how that has changed the face of warfare, you know, because you
• 57:04
  can produce some cheap.
• 57:05
  I mean, Iran has proven that, right?
• 57:07
  And then China, I mean, their capacity to produce cheap drones is, I mean, we can't ignore that
• 57:12
  either.
• 57:13
  So it's going to be interesting to see what that may look like.
• 57:15
  They are.
• 57:16
  Oh, absolutely.
• 57:16
  Yeah, they are.
• 57:17
  I mean, literally.
• 57:19
  So those are all really good points.
• 57:23
  I do, here's, we're going to get off this pretty soon,
• 57:28
  but you know, with the whole thing with Ukraine,
• 57:32
  what I wonder is this,
• 57:35
  do you think the European nations were worried at all
• 57:39
  that if Putin become, well, in the beginning anyway,
• 57:44
  if he became successful and quickly dispatching like Ukraine,
• 57:50
  for example,
• 57:50
  was there any talks or fear that you know of,
• 57:53
  of,
• 57:53
  well,
• 57:54
  if,
• 57:54
  if Russia is hell bent on doing this and this happens quickly,
• 57:57
  what's going to stop them from going to the next territory they want to
• 58:01
  take over?
• 58:01
  Like,
• 58:02
  was there ever that fear you think about Russia just not stopping and just
• 58:06
  continuing to take over territories?
• 58:09
  Cause it seems like Ukraine was kind of the test for that.
• 58:13
  Um,
• 58:13
  I think there's probably the fear of that,
• 58:17
  but it wouldn't be a NATO country.
• 58:19
  I think the next country that they would try and take
• 58:21
  would be Georgia.
• 58:23
  Right.
• 58:24
  You know, they've already taken parts of it
• 58:26
  back in 2008, I believe.
• 58:30
  Maybe like Kazakhstan,
• 58:32
  one of the other star nations afterwards.
• 58:35
  I don't think NATO was truly worried
• 58:38
  they would have taken NATO.
• 58:39
  and then seeing the Russian military's performance
• 58:44
  on the battlefield I think probably reassured them of that
• 58:48
  there's like the Baltic nations quite often talk about
• 58:52
  grey zone activity and they worry that Russia will try and storm over the border
• 58:56
  but I don't think that is a legitimate concern
• 59:01
  like I don't think NATO planners as a whole believe Russia is
• 59:06
  currently intending to
• 59:08
  try that.
• 59:10
  Just because, you know, fighting Ukraine
• 59:12
  has been hard enough. Their military hasn't
• 59:14
  performed to the levels it probably should
• 59:16
  have. Fighting
• 59:18
  the entirety of NATO, with or
• 59:20
  without the US, would be
• 59:22
  a significant task. Like, the German
• 59:24
  military is still massive.
• 59:27
  The rest of the Turkish,
• 59:28
  the Turkish army is huge.
• 59:30
  Yeah. And also
• 59:31
  battle-tested. Like, they fought
• 59:33
  in Syria a lot.
• 59:36
  They know how to fight.
• 59:38
  Yeah.
• 59:38
  I think, yeah.
• 59:40
  I know Poland was very vocal for a long time
• 59:42
  about actually wanting to move in.
• 59:46
  I think Poland probably wants to fight Russia at this point.
• 59:49
  Yeah.
• 59:50
  I've definitely looked at cases.
• 59:54
  Yeah.
• 59:55
  And from people that I've talked to in Ukraine,
• 59:58
  there's a lot of Polish-speaking people
• 1:00:00
  walking about in civilian clothing.
• 1:00:02
  Oh, yeah?
• 1:00:03
  Yeah.
• 1:00:04
  Okay.
• 1:00:04
  A lot of Polish, yeah.
• 1:00:08
  Gotcha.
• 1:00:08
  Well, to them, it's their constant threat, right?
• 1:00:12
  Yeah, yeah.
• 1:00:13
  No, absolutely.
• 1:00:13
  Luckily, they are in NATO, but yeah.
• 1:00:16
  And I mean, they're making their military bigger, stronger.
• 1:00:19
  They're ensuring that Russia never thinks about it.
• 1:00:22
  Yes, absolutely.
• 1:00:23
  That's how you ensure your security, right?
• 1:00:25
  You make your military so damn scary
• 1:00:27
  that they don't even dream of trying to fight.
• 1:00:31
  It's just such an interesting situation to me.
• 1:00:34
  because Russia has always put this perception of big, powerful,
• 1:00:38
  just mechanically sound, well put together, oil machine.
• 1:00:43
  And then we're just seeing how they can't even deal with a country
• 1:00:46
  the size of Ukraine.
• 1:00:47
  Their military, the logistics behind it, everything.
• 1:00:50
  It's like they cannot keep it together
• 1:00:54
  through the degree that they're projecting out to the world.
• 1:00:58
  So it's like how much of a superpower is Russia really anymore
• 1:01:02
  is a question.
• 1:01:04
  But I think that also comes down to actually there's a difference
• 1:01:08
  between operations and exercises, right?
• 1:01:12
  Okay.
• 1:01:12
  Russia for years exercised large-scale conflict,
• 1:01:16
  but they never had to force project large numbers of troops
• 1:01:20
  and maintain logistics in a wartime scenario over a long period of time.
• 1:01:24
  True.
• 1:01:26
  And one thing I think they always talk, like military planners
• 1:01:30
  always talk about it, that logistics is the absolute number one
• 1:01:34
  the most important thing to get right.
• 1:01:36
  And that's what let Russia down at the start.
• 1:01:38
  They just didn't have the logistics capacity
• 1:01:41
  to be bringing up fuel ammunition and more people to the front as fast as they were moving Yeah Their actual tactical level units were able to push forward but they just ran out of fuel because tanks burn through diesel
• 1:01:58
  Guns shoot ammo extremely quickly.
• 1:02:00
  So you very quickly need more stuff.
• 1:02:02
  And if you can't get resupplied,
• 1:02:04
  you're also in the defender's home territory.
• 1:02:07
  So they're just there waiting for you.
• 1:02:09
  This literally just exposes their ability to actually support their own actions.
• 1:02:13
  So it wasn't necessarily the actual units themselves.
• 1:02:16
  Their incapabilities is more about the logistics,
• 1:02:18
  the ability to support what's happening, right?
• 1:02:22
  I think there was also like tactical level failings
• 1:02:24
  of like command and control within their conscripted units.
• 1:02:29
  You know, like these stories from captured soldiers early on
• 1:02:33
  saying like they didn't even know.
• 1:02:35
  They were told they were going on an exercise.
• 1:02:37
  They were put into the back of like troop moving trucks
• 1:02:40
  driven with the flaps down
• 1:02:43
  so they don't even know
• 1:02:44
  where they're going.
• 1:02:45
  Then suddenly all their phones
• 1:02:46
  were taken off them.
• 1:02:48
  They were handed magazines
• 1:02:49
  with live ammunition.
• 1:02:50
  Wow.
• 1:02:50
  And they still thought
• 1:02:51
  it was an exercise.
• 1:02:52
  And then all of a sudden
• 1:02:53
  they're getting ambushed
• 1:02:54
  by Ukrainians.
• 1:02:56
  Yeah.
• 1:02:57
  I mean, that doesn't help
• 1:02:58
  the public support at all either
• 1:03:01
  in Russia.
• 1:03:03
  Well, hopefully this whole thing
• 1:03:06
  gets resolved sooner than later.
• 1:03:07
  I mean, like I said,
• 1:03:08
  it's already been going on
• 1:03:08
  over four years.
• 1:03:10
  I wish the best for Ukraine, but yeah.
• 1:03:14
  All right, let's...
• 1:03:15
  Go ahead, Daniel.
• 1:03:16
  Go ahead.
• 1:03:17
  I was going to say, I just, I fear it's going to be a long, drawn-out stalemate.
• 1:03:21
  Yeah, unfortunately.
• 1:03:24
  And it could be never-ending, depending on how much of an appetite everybody has to help
• 1:03:28
  Ukraine in terms of funding and munitions, right?
• 1:03:31
  So, you know, once that drives up...
• 1:03:33
  They're becoming much more self-sufficient.
• 1:03:36
  They are.
• 1:03:37
  They are.
• 1:03:38
  Well, if anything, this is definitely hard in Ukraine even more.
• 1:03:41
  I mean, this has definitely put them in a position to, you know,
• 1:03:44
  build up their capabilities, understand how to approach and resist
• 1:03:48
  and become, like you said, just a much stronger, tougher nation.
• 1:03:53
  So it's interesting.
• 1:03:55
  But at the same time, everybody wants this to end.
• 1:03:57
  It's gone on long enough.
• 1:03:58
  Putin, something's got to give for sure.
• 1:04:01
  For sure.
• 1:04:03
  Okay, sir.
• 1:04:03
  Let's talk OSINT.
• 1:04:05
  Let's talk.
• 1:04:06
  Let's switch gears here.
• 1:04:07
  One of the things I did want to talk about is after we got through that is we see a lot of these OSINT accounts.
• 1:04:16
  First off, let's define OSINT, right?
• 1:04:18
  Open source intelligence, right?
• 1:04:21
  So a lot of what can be done is based on what is available out there, mostly to the public.
• 1:04:27
  I know there's tools out there that are not necessarily readily available, but you could get them or get your hands on them to help out.
• 1:04:35
  So here it is.
• 1:04:38
  We're just going to talk about what we're seeing in social media and in the media in general.
• 1:04:41
  We have a lot of these so-called OSINT accounts, for example, on social media or these pseudo-journalists who claim that they have OSINT capabilities.
• 1:04:51
  And they're just spreading a bunch of slop and misinformation, right?
• 1:04:55
  can you help everybody understand
• 1:04:58
  how we can identify
• 1:05:00
  who might be a real
• 1:05:01
  OSINT source or OSINT account
• 1:05:04
  to where you know something they can rely on to actually
• 1:05:06
  get info rather than someone who's just copying
• 1:05:08
  and pasting info or just showing
• 1:05:10
  nothing but photos and pictures without any real
• 1:05:12
  assessment or given as you say
• 1:05:14
  the so what behind it
• 1:05:15
  how are we able to decipher
• 1:05:18
  like who the real OSINT accounts
• 1:05:20
  are out there in social media or in media in general
• 1:05:22
  versus those who are just grifting
• 1:05:23
  I know I can see
• 1:05:27
  you've been talking to Kirvan
• 1:05:27
  oh look
• 1:05:29
  I want to be honest
• 1:05:30
  I talk
• 1:05:30
  I've been asking this a lot
• 1:05:32
  even without Kirvan
• 1:05:33
  but when we do discuss
• 1:05:35
  trust me
• 1:05:36
  this does come up
• 1:05:36
  this is his pet peeve
• 1:05:38
  especially this weekend
• 1:05:39
  I feel like
• 1:05:40
  everything I see
• 1:05:41
  on the internet
• 1:05:42
  is him being like
• 1:05:44
  ripping into people
• 1:05:45
  oh I've seen
• 1:05:45
  I've seen him much more active
• 1:05:46
  in his responses lately
• 1:05:47
  yeah
• 1:05:48
  yeah
• 1:05:48
  like over the last
• 1:05:50
  couple of days
• 1:05:51
  for some reason
• 1:05:51
  yeah
• 1:05:53
  Yeah, so open source intelligence is, as you said,
• 1:05:57
  is information that can be collected publicly.
• 1:06:00
  It doesn't require any kind of malicious activity to get.
• 1:06:05
  Well, it can actually.
• 1:06:06
  But it can also involve paid-for things.
• 1:06:08
  So you can still pay for, especially like business information,
• 1:06:13
  things behind paywalls.
• 1:06:16
  It still gets classed as open source intelligence.
• 1:06:19
  How to identify real OSIN accounts?
• 1:06:22
  It's extremely tough.
• 1:06:25
  I think social media is not designed,
• 1:06:30
  X especially, is the worst.
• 1:06:33
  X is not designed for intelligence-type product.
• 1:06:38
  It's designed for news.
• 1:06:40
  This is my biggest issue with the platform.
• 1:06:43
  It's all about who can get things out the fastest.
• 1:06:46
  Yes.
• 1:06:47
  Who's first?
• 1:06:48
  Yeah.
• 1:06:48
  Yeah, and it essentially requires people to copy and paste, reword, copy and paste, go.
• 1:06:56
  Yeah.
• 1:06:58
  How you identify them is probably around just watching them for a while,
• 1:07:03
  seeing what they do, seeing how they operate, what they're putting out,
• 1:07:07
  whether they are providing value.
• 1:07:10
  Because as you said, intelligence is information that has been analyzed
• 1:07:14
  and it provides some kind of so what assessment.
• 1:07:18
  So what does that actually mean?
• 1:07:22
  Yeah, and it should be,
• 1:07:23
  if it's going to be proper intelligence,
• 1:07:26
  it should be like very clear
• 1:07:27
  what is the information that was collected
• 1:07:29
  and what is the assessment parts of it.
• 1:07:32
  Right.
• 1:07:32
  Because otherwise it becomes quite muddled.
• 1:07:35
  And that's where you get like lots of these accounts.
• 1:07:38
  It'll be a mixture of their opinion
• 1:07:40
  and the information that they got.
• 1:07:43
  And then it becomes a bit confusing
• 1:07:44
  as to what is real and what's just their opinion.
• 1:07:48
  that they're adding on to it.
• 1:07:50
  Extremely hard on X.
• 1:07:52
  Don't get me wrong.
• 1:07:53
  I don't really think,
• 1:07:55
  I don't think any of the big accounts
• 1:07:57
  are very good at providing assessments,
• 1:08:00
  providing a so what.
• 1:08:03
  I know Kirvan has a massive issue
• 1:08:06
  with the Ozen defender.
• 1:08:08
  Yeah, that just came up.
• 1:08:13
  I've never spoken to the guy.
• 1:08:15
  I know a guy that helps him out
• 1:08:17
  who does write some good stuff.
• 1:08:21
  But yeah, it's tough.
• 1:08:23
  I don't think social media is designed for it.
• 1:08:25
  I think if you want proper actual intelligence reporting,
• 1:08:29
  you can't really get it on X.
• 1:08:31
  You probably need to be getting it off Substack.
• 1:08:34
  Instagram's better because you can provide
• 1:08:36
  actually written, long-form written content.
• 1:08:42
  Yeah, and to that point,
• 1:08:44
  I think Substack does a better job at that as well.
• 1:08:47
  As far as allowing somebody to be able to write long form articles and notes and opinions, for sure.
• 1:08:54
  But then it's also like, is that what people want?
• 1:08:57
  Because even within actual intelligence customers, most intelligence people, most recipients of intelligence aren't reading the full reports.
• 1:09:10
  The most people that read actual intelligence reports are just other Intel nerds.
• 1:09:14
  Because we're the only people with the time and the effort to actually do it.
• 1:09:18
  Everyone else is just reading the executive summary and moving on.
• 1:09:22
  No, you're right.
• 1:09:23
  You're right.
• 1:09:24
  Yeah.
• 1:09:24
  But that's how your intelligence product should be written.
• 1:09:28
  So I try to have a bluff in the second slide of every post.
• 1:09:34
  It's just like a paragraph.
• 1:09:35
  It's like, if you just read this, you should understand everything that's in here.
• 1:09:39
  You can move on with your life.
• 1:09:40
  Because I know people don't have five minutes to read every post.
• 1:09:44
  Look, if they get 30 seconds.
• 1:09:47
  Yeah, and that's exactly it.
• 1:09:49
  So, I don't know.
• 1:09:50
  It's very hard.
• 1:09:51
  And it comes down to whether people actually want to learn about what's going on
• 1:09:55
  or they're just wanting to get the headlines.
• 1:09:59
  Yes, you're correct.
• 1:10:01
  I've always said people live on the surface of a headline.
• 1:10:04
  Literally live on the surface of headlines.
• 1:10:05
  They don't want to dive any deeper.
• 1:10:07
  You made some good points because it is hard to decipher.
• 1:10:09
  But I am not considering myself, I guess I'm not.
• 1:10:13
  That's not my background.
• 1:10:14
  You guys came from a different, you know, you have the training, et cetera.
• 1:10:17
  But the reality is like when I see an X account that claims to be an OSINT account, it's like
• 1:10:23
  they're not giving you the summary.
• 1:10:24
  They're not giving you like, like you said, here's what happened.
• 1:10:27
  Now, this is what it might mean.
• 1:10:29
  What could, you know, could be the implications of, and you're correct.
• 1:10:34
  You know, you see a lot of opinions, opinion pieces, right?
• 1:10:38
  But let me ask you directly, are intelligence professionals supposed to have an opinion
• 1:10:43
  at all?
• 1:10:43
  I mean, I'm sure you do, but you don't necessarily, you know, put it out there, right?
• 1:10:47
  And the reason being what?
• 1:10:49
  Just to give the information so other people can make their own decisions?
• 1:10:54
  I mean, yeah.
• 1:10:56
  Sorry, was the question, should intelligence professionals like…
• 1:11:00
  Well, it was kind of a two thing there, a two-parter there.
• 1:11:03
  So, it's like, are intelligence people, such as yourself, for example, you guys were trained
• 1:11:10
  to do what you do.
• 1:11:12
  Are you supposed to hold an opinion?
• 1:11:14
  And if you do, are you not supposed to express that opinion out there,
• 1:11:19
  especially on social media?
• 1:11:21
  Or should you always hold that back just so that the information is front and center
• 1:11:24
  so others can form their own opinions or assessments?
• 1:11:29
  If it intelligence it should have an assessment It shouldn be an opinion It should be your assessment Yeah Everyone has bias which is their opinion
• 1:11:40
  Yes.
• 1:11:41
  But it should be your assessment of what you've read,
• 1:11:44
  understood from other things,
• 1:11:45
  and what you think it actually means.
• 1:11:47
  Intelligence should be bipartisan.
• 1:11:50
  It shouldn't have that type of sway to it,
• 1:11:54
  which is pretty common on social media.
• 1:11:55
  Yes.
• 1:11:56
  Yeah.
• 1:11:57
  it's pretty tough.
• 1:11:59
  Do you find it tough to hold back your opinions
• 1:12:01
  also? I mean, that's kind of part of the
• 1:12:04
  question. I just wasn't asking it directly, I guess.
• 1:12:06
  Is it hard for someone like
• 1:12:07
  you, for example? Because
• 1:12:09
  with your experience, everything that you and others
• 1:12:12
  like you see, a lot of you have served
• 1:12:14
  in the military. You've been deployed.
• 1:12:16
  Do you not form an opinion
• 1:12:17
  yourself? Did you find it hard
• 1:12:19
  at times to keep your own opinions yourself while you're
• 1:12:21
  given the information
• 1:12:23
  about the situation out there?
• 1:12:25
  not really
• 1:12:27
  because it's
• 1:12:28
  it's how I've
• 1:12:30
  spent
• 1:12:30
  most of my life now
• 1:12:32
  got it
• 1:12:32
  but like
• 1:12:33
  it definitely like forms
• 1:12:35
  it informs everything right
• 1:12:39
  yeah
• 1:12:39
  because I know like my views
• 1:12:42
  on certain conflicts
• 1:12:43
  around the world
• 1:12:44
  are not the same views
• 1:12:45
  held by most people
• 1:12:46
  especially in this day and age
• 1:12:49
  in the UK
• 1:12:50
  and like
• 1:12:52
  in that kind of realm
• 1:12:54
  I just keep my opinion to myself because there's no point having that argument with these people.
• 1:13:00
  Like that's not going to help anything.
• 1:13:01
  I could sit there and give them a 30-minute absolute berating on why I think certain things are true and correct and right,
• 1:13:10
  but it's not going to change that point.
• 1:13:13
  Understood.
• 1:13:14
  Then there's my assessment on what I think might happen.
• 1:13:17
  But that is purely looking at this has happened.
• 1:13:21
  And so I think this could be the follow on effect because of past form,
• 1:13:27
  things that have happened in the past, how people act,
• 1:13:30
  what human nature kind of feeds in, et cetera.
• 1:13:33
  So anybody looking for real information from an account that would be
• 1:13:39
  considered OSINT should be able to identify that the opinions are not
• 1:13:44
  necessarily included.
• 1:13:45
  It's all about the information.
• 1:13:46
  It's like you're connecting the dots, correct?
• 1:13:51
  Like, based on past experiences, past events, and given what's happening now,
• 1:13:55
  this may be the outcome or the direction things may lead.
• 1:13:58
  Is that a correct assessment on my point or on my side?
• 1:14:02
  Yeah.
• 1:14:02
  Yeah.
• 1:14:02
  So traditionally, intelligence should be laid out in the format of fact,
• 1:14:08
  which is like the thing you have collected.
• 1:14:10
  So in a military context, it could be this intercept mentioned person X going to location Y at specified time.
• 1:14:23
  And then you could have a comment under it, which is additional reporting that supports the information you're writing the report about.
• 1:14:30
  And it could be like person X is a known associate of HVI, yada, yada, yada, known member of the Islamic State.
• 1:14:39
  and then your assessment could be
• 1:14:41
  person X is likely a member of the Islamic State
• 1:14:44
  and he's possibly going to meet
• 1:14:46
  and it should have language in there
• 1:14:47
  that gives you assessment-based language.
• 1:14:51
  So it's likely possible
• 1:14:52
  and it's defined language
• 1:14:54
  that gives percentages on probability.
• 1:14:57
  And your assessment should also be fleshed out
• 1:14:59
  with other analysts
• 1:15:01
  who have also read the same reporting.
• 1:15:03
  It shouldn't just be one person's assessment.
• 1:15:05
  It's generally quite a collaborative thing to do.
• 1:15:09
  You sit down and talk about what you think this piece of information might mean,
• 1:15:13
  and then you provide assessments from there.
• 1:15:16
  You can use other tools and stuff, like logic tools,
• 1:15:21
  to help you make your assessments.
• 1:15:23
  And then you use the language to give these assessments to decision makers.
• 1:15:28
  So when they read it, it can be like,
• 1:15:31
  okay, there's a possible member of ISIS going to this building at this time.
• 1:15:36
  we can now use that to take these actions.
• 1:15:41
  So when it comes to going back to social media,
• 1:15:44
  if people aren't doing these things,
• 1:15:46
  then it's kind of a red flag, right?
• 1:15:47
  Some people should be going,
• 1:15:49
  yeah, these guys are kind of full of shit, right?
• 1:15:53
  Yeah, but I think they're just using the word wrong.
• 1:15:57
  Yeah.
• 1:15:57
  They've taken OZINT because it sounds cool.
• 1:16:01
  Yeah.
• 1:16:01
  And they're using it to describe news reporting.
• 1:16:04
  Yes.
• 1:16:04
  Because all they're doing is they're trying to report the facts,
• 1:16:10
  their opinion of their facts.
• 1:16:13
  Or just trying to get likes and clicks.
• 1:16:15
  Yeah, yeah.
• 1:16:17
  That's it, engagement.
• 1:16:18
  But also, as a person who has grown in an account,
• 1:16:24
  you have to play their game.
• 1:16:27
  Right.
• 1:16:27
  There's no other way around it.
• 1:16:31
  And I've even read books on how social media,
• 1:16:35
  how to grow a social media channel, essentially.
• 1:16:37
  And it's like there's posts that are for people
• 1:16:40
  that already follow your account.
• 1:16:43
  So looking at my account,
• 1:16:46
  every day I try and write one intelligence assessment.
• 1:16:51
  And I take a news story, put it in two paragraphs,
• 1:16:56
  then write my very smart camera.
• 1:17:00
  is now zoomed in on my face.
• 1:17:02
  It's okay.
• 1:17:05
  That's really cool.
• 1:17:07
  Okay.
• 1:17:07
  Looks like you're zooming in
• 1:17:08
  for the rest of this.
• 1:17:09
  Looks like you got
• 1:17:10
  one of those Ozbots.
• 1:17:11
  Is it one of those cameras?
• 1:17:13
  Yes.
• 1:17:13
  Yeah.
• 1:17:13
  Yes.
• 1:17:14
  I'm familiar.
• 1:17:15
  Exactly.
• 1:17:17
  Except now it's not.
• 1:17:18
  It's based on your gestures.
• 1:17:20
  Yeah.
• 1:17:21
  Anyway,
• 1:17:22
  so yeah,
• 1:17:22
  every day I try and do that
• 1:17:24
  and that's for people
• 1:17:24
  that already follow me
• 1:17:25
  so they're already interested
• 1:17:27
  and they're probably
• 1:17:27
  going to put in the time
• 1:17:28
  to actually read
• 1:17:29
  what I've written.
• 1:17:30
  And then you have ways of getting new followers.
• 1:17:33
  And that's where I think you have to play their game.
• 1:17:36
  Like the things that bring new eyes to your channel
• 1:17:39
  are cool videos on the internet.
• 1:17:42
  There's no other way around it.
• 1:17:44
  Yeah, I'm horrible at social media.
• 1:17:46
  I don't play the social media game very well, personally.
• 1:17:49
  I don't have time.
• 1:17:49
  I got other ways I got to make money here.
• 1:17:53
  I mean, let's be honest.
• 1:17:56
  But I appreciate what you're saying
• 1:17:58
  because people got to be able to decipher
• 1:18:01
  who's real and who isn't.
• 1:18:03
  And I get what you're saying.
• 1:18:05
  No, they're using the word OSINT wrong
• 1:18:07
  because they're just regurgitating news.
• 1:18:09
  They're trying to be first at,
• 1:18:10
  look, what happened?
• 1:18:11
  But I just find it wrong
• 1:18:14
  that they're using the word at all.
• 1:18:17
  They should be honest about what it is
• 1:18:18
  because the problem is
• 1:18:19
  it sets the precedent for someone
• 1:18:21
  to look at OSINT in general
• 1:18:24
  for people like you.
• 1:18:25
  They look at it from the wrong perspective.
• 1:18:28
  you know, they think that, oh, this is relatable.
• 1:18:31
  This is the same thing when it's really not.
• 1:18:33
  And to me, it kind of just cheapens what you're doing
• 1:18:35
  because you guys take what you do serious.
• 1:18:37
  And these other people are just trying to write off your coattails, basically,
• 1:18:41
  is what I see.
• 1:18:43
  So, you know, maybe I'm taking a little bit too strongly,
• 1:18:47
  but that's kind of how I take it when I'm seeing these things.
• 1:18:51
  What kind of thought on it is,
• 1:18:53
  all of the pages that I know
• 1:18:57
  to be like actual intelligence professionals
• 1:18:59
  don't use the word OZINT.
• 1:19:02
  They all use the word intelligence.
• 1:19:05
  Yeah.
• 1:19:06
  Something intelligence.
• 1:19:08
  Gotcha.
• 1:19:09
  Because to us, OZINT is another collection stream.
• 1:19:15
  Yeah.
• 1:19:15
  It is just a type of collection.
• 1:19:20
  So I think there's probably a reason
• 1:19:22
  somewhat reasonable way of understanding who
• 1:19:25
  has actually worked in intelligence
• 1:19:27
  because you wouldn't
• 1:19:28
  I think it's becoming a thing
• 1:19:31
  now but like when I
• 1:19:33
  was in the military, OZINT
• 1:19:35
  was only just starting to be a thing and it
• 1:19:37
  wasn't like a dedicated collection
• 1:19:39
  method. It was just
• 1:19:41
  something intelligence analysts
• 1:19:43
  did and then we fused it
• 1:19:45
  with SIGINT or
• 1:19:47
  HUMANT or other forms of
• 1:19:49
  INT. So yeah
• 1:19:51
  and like
• 1:19:52
  that would be a weird way
• 1:19:53
  in my
• 1:19:54
  view
• 1:19:55
  it would be a weird way
• 1:19:56
  to
• 1:19:56
  describe yourself
• 1:19:58
  or you're like
• 1:20:00
  fair enough
• 1:20:00
  all you did was
• 1:20:01
  yeah
• 1:20:02
  I don't know
• 1:20:03
  no I understand what you're saying
• 1:20:04
  I get it
• 1:20:05
  I get it
• 1:20:06
  that's
• 1:20:06
  yeah
• 1:20:06
  interestingly
• 1:20:07
  I know some of these pages
• 1:20:09
  do more than Oznt
• 1:20:10
  which is also funny
• 1:20:11
  so it's like
• 1:20:12
  they also do human
• 1:20:13
  so
• 1:20:14
  calling themselves
• 1:20:16
  like an Oznt page
• 1:20:17
  is like
• 1:20:17
  well okay
• 1:20:17
  almost
• 1:20:19
  in some ways
• 1:20:20
  selling themselves short
• 1:20:21
  because they do other kinds of collection.
• 1:20:23
  Right.
• 1:20:23
  And really quick for people that don't know.
• 1:20:25
  So, we already said open source intelligence.
• 1:20:27
  Human would be human intelligence,
• 1:20:28
  actual human interaction,
• 1:20:29
  getting information from people.
• 1:20:31
  So, it's essentially just in the current context
• 1:20:34
  would be talking to someone online
• 1:20:36
  to get more information about a thing.
• 1:20:38
  Yeah, essentially.
• 1:20:39
  Except probably not so publicly.
• 1:20:41
  Right.
• 1:20:43
  Fair enough.
• 1:20:44
  How about this, Daniel?
• 1:20:45
  So, thank you for that.
• 1:20:47
  I'll clean it up.
• 1:20:48
  Maybe you can help us at this.
• 1:20:49
  I want to get your opinion on how people can better decipher between misinformation, for example, and what's real and what isn't.
• 1:20:58
  I know it's getting harder with the advent of AI becoming what it is.
• 1:21:01
  It's getting very hard.
• 1:21:04
  So there's mis and disinformation.
• 1:21:08
  Misinformation is inadvertently from my understanding is inadvertently misleading So it incorrect essentially by accident From the outset yeah It misleading Yes So it like something that could be somewhat true
• 1:21:25
  but it's in the wrong context.
• 1:21:28
  Disinformation is like actively and knowingly incorrect,
• 1:21:32
  publishing and pushing it, incorrect information.
• 1:21:36
  How to identify it is to try and find things in multiple sources.
• 1:21:41
  In intelligence, we call it all-source analysis
• 1:21:43
  or corroboration, corroborating information.
• 1:21:47
  Yeah, corroborating information.
• 1:21:49
  Yeah, so you would find it,
• 1:21:51
  essentially try and find something
• 1:21:52
  in multiple different sources.
• 1:21:54
  So in all of the articles that I publish,
• 1:21:57
  I try and find it in two to three different newspapers.
• 1:22:02
  I have my newspapers that I read and trust.
• 1:22:05
  And then if I can find a story,
• 1:22:07
  a similar story or the same story on the same topic
• 1:22:09
  in all of them,
• 1:22:10
  then I know I can bring it all together
• 1:22:13
  to make a pretty realistic situation.
• 1:22:18
  It's also knowing,
• 1:22:19
  especially when you're talking about open source information,
• 1:22:22
  it's like who's behind it.
• 1:22:25
  And when you're talking about Auslan accounts,
• 1:22:26
  super hard because you don't know who's behind it.
• 1:22:28
  But like where is the account based?
• 1:22:32
  What kind of biases does the person have?
• 1:22:34
  There's an account called Rash24.
• 1:22:39
  Okay.
• 1:22:40
  something like that.
• 1:22:41
  Crash something.
• 1:22:43
  I'm going to look it up now.
• 1:22:44
  I'll double check.
• 1:22:46
  And you're talking about
• 1:22:47
  on X?
• 1:22:48
  Yeah,
• 1:22:49
  he posts lots of
• 1:22:50
  videos.
• 1:22:52
  He's banned heaps of people.
• 1:22:54
  Oh no,
• 1:22:55
  Clash Report.
• 1:22:56
  Oh,
• 1:22:56
  Clash Report?
• 1:22:58
  Yeah.
• 1:23:00
  Anyway,
• 1:23:01
  really big channel.
• 1:23:03
  809,000
• 1:23:04
  followers.
• 1:23:05
  He is
• 1:23:06
  Turkish.
• 1:23:07
  Gotcha.
• 1:23:08
  Nothing wrong with Turkish people,
• 1:23:09
  but you've got to know.
• 1:23:10
  He's Turkish.
• 1:23:11
  So if he's talking about things that involve Kurds,
• 1:23:15
  he's going to have an opinion.
• 1:23:17
  Yeah.
• 1:23:18
  A significant bias.
• 1:23:19
  And if you look at the way he talks about things that happen in Syria,
• 1:23:23
  he's not subtle about his biases.
• 1:23:27
  The Yut language he uses to describe Kurdish people is pretty derogatory.
• 1:23:33
  So it's pretty clear.
• 1:23:35
  Yeah.
• 1:23:35
  But it's understanding who is behind these things.
• 1:23:39
  Right.
• 1:23:40
  So like, and then there's also nowadays is AI verification, cross-checking.
• 1:23:47
  So like if I'm going to post a video, I'll run it through an AI checker
• 1:23:52
  and it will give me a percentage on whether it's true.
• 1:23:55
  Can you expand on that?
• 1:23:57
  Because so how would the average person, like I don't even know how to do that.
• 1:24:00
  I don't know the tools.
• 1:24:02
  How would someone be able to check AI?
• 1:24:05
  like what tool would you use
• 1:24:07
  to run a video or whatever through
• 1:24:09
  and have it go okay
• 1:24:10
  spit out the results and say yeah this is definitely
• 1:24:13
  AI like how is that done
• 1:24:15
  so there's a website
• 1:24:17
  called undetectable AI
• 1:24:19
  who I'm not sponsored by
• 1:24:20
  fair enough no not at all
• 1:24:22
  and you can give them a link or
• 1:24:25
  a video and it will give you a percentage
• 1:24:27
  likelihood on whether it's real or not
• 1:24:29
  and I just use it every time
• 1:24:31
  before I post a video just to make sure
• 1:24:33
  that it is a real video
• 1:24:34
  how they actually work.
• 1:24:37
  I don't know.
• 1:24:37
  And this is the website
• 1:24:38
  you're not endorsed by
• 1:24:39
  or anything, right?
• 1:24:40
  No, not at all.
• 1:24:41
  No.
• 1:24:42
  It's just a very easy to use one
• 1:24:44
  that I found.
• 1:24:45
  And it seems to be pretty good.
• 1:24:48
  So there are tools out there
• 1:24:50
  for people to use
• 1:24:50
  to be able to do that.
• 1:24:52
  So, you know,
• 1:24:53
  a lot of the problems
• 1:24:54
  we run into,
• 1:24:55
  especially we're looking at
• 1:24:56
  like social media and access,
• 1:24:58
  you know,
• 1:24:58
  people have been conditioned
• 1:25:00
  societally,
• 1:25:02
  you know,
• 1:25:02
  in the world,
• 1:25:04
  not even just America or the UK, like everywhere.
• 1:25:07
  They just don't want to take the time.
• 1:25:10
  Like they just want to look at the phone, glance,
• 1:25:12
  oh, that's what's happening.
• 1:25:13
  And then they're like, yeah, okay, I buy that.
• 1:25:15
  And they just keep going on with their day.
• 1:25:16
  And they take these things as fact.
• 1:25:19
  So if anything, how can we get people to retrain themselves,
• 1:25:26
  for example, to see past the flash and trash,
• 1:25:30
  as I would say, of social media and just go,
• 1:25:33
  you know like hey gas is up ten
• 1:25:35
  dollars and everyone's like oh yeah it's up ten dollars
• 1:25:37
  oh fuck that sucks and then but it's really like
• 1:25:39
  well it's up ten dollars in a small town at this one
• 1:25:41
  gas station owned by this one guy for example
• 1:25:43
  you know they're not really going beyond the headline
• 1:25:45
  is there a way in
• 1:25:47
  in your opinion that people can kind of
• 1:25:49
  retrain themselves to go past
• 1:25:51
  that like get
• 1:25:53
  go past the 30 second attention
• 1:25:55
  span or are we just doomed
• 1:25:57
  to always be stuck in the situation
• 1:25:59
  we are in
• 1:26:03
  no answer
• 1:26:04
  do worry we're doomed
• 1:26:06
  I think so too
• 1:26:08
  unfortunately
• 1:26:09
  yeah
• 1:26:12
  I don't
• 1:26:15
  I actually don't know
• 1:26:16
  hey that's a fair answer man
• 1:26:18
  I mean we're not going to solve all the world's
• 1:26:21
  problems but you know I just see
• 1:26:23
  I just see how you know
• 1:26:25
  unfortunately we've been marching down this short
• 1:26:27
  attention span society like global
• 1:26:29
  society in terms of attention
• 1:26:31
  band, it's like, it makes it so hard, so hard for people to get down to the bottom of the truth.
• 1:26:36
  If we're just relying on media and social media accounts, because everybody just wants to capture
• 1:26:40
  attention within that first five seconds, you know, or 10 seconds. I mean, most people aren't,
• 1:26:44
  aren't even watching 30 second videos all the way through anymore. So it's like, how, how do we get
• 1:26:50
  our point across? Like, how do we, how do we get convinced people? Like, no, I did the work. Here's
• 1:26:55
  what's going on. And then so often they're dismissing professionals like yourself, for example,
• 1:27:00
  because they're like,
• 1:27:02
  yeah, I don't have the time for that.
• 1:27:04
  You're not really getting to the point
• 1:27:06
  within the first five seconds.
• 1:27:07
  How would we be able to get our messaging across?
• 1:27:12
  I mean, can we condense it to that level?
• 1:27:15
  I mean, I think it's also the way things are put across.
• 1:27:19
  Like having a bluff,
• 1:27:22
  having as much information as you can
• 1:27:25
  very early on.
• 1:27:27
  So much like traditional intelligence recipients would get the executive summary of the report,
• 1:27:35
  which is two to three paragraphs or lines, basically.
• 1:27:40
  I mean, yeah, it's not good.
• 1:27:44
  It's hard.
• 1:27:44
  Some of these things are so complex.
• 1:27:46
  Like, how are you?
• 1:27:47
  Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
• 1:27:48
  And people just don't get.
• 1:27:51
  Yeah.
• 1:27:52
  It's extremely hard, mate.
• 1:27:54
  I'm just going to say it.
• 1:27:55
  We're fucked, I guess.
• 1:27:56
  I don't know.
• 1:27:57
  Yeah.
• 1:27:57
  I guess.
• 1:28:00
  Well,
• 1:28:00
  hell man.
• 1:28:02
  Let's go ahead and let's go ahead and call it for now.
• 1:28:05
  If you're okay with that.
• 1:28:06
  Yeah,
• 1:28:07
  absolutely.
• 1:28:07
  Yeah,
• 1:28:08
  no,
• 1:28:08
  I appreciate this.
• 1:28:09
  This was good,
• 1:28:09
  Daniel.
• 1:28:10
  Maybe we can reconnect again later because there's always going to be
• 1:28:13
  something going on.
• 1:28:13
  I'd love to get more updates.
• 1:28:15
  Yeah.
• 1:28:15
  Right.
• 1:28:16
  I would like to get more updates from me down the road for sure.
• 1:28:19
  But Hey,
• 1:28:20
  listen,
• 1:28:20
  I appreciate your time.
• 1:28:21
  Thank you for giving your insight and your,
• 1:28:24
  I'm not going to say opinion.
• 1:28:26
  giving us your assessment
• 1:28:27
  on what was going on in Iran,
• 1:28:29
  what you think on Ukraine-Russia war,
• 1:28:31
  and kind of giving us a better idea
• 1:28:35
  on how we can look past the BS on social media
• 1:28:38
  and really recognize who's really going out there
• 1:28:40
  to give us information
• 1:28:41
  versus those who are just sensationalizing
• 1:28:43
  and trying to get likes and clicks
• 1:28:44
  and just trying to be at the forefront,
• 1:28:46
  but not really delivering anything substantive
• 1:28:48
  in terms of actual material that's beneficial.
• 1:28:52
  So I do appreciate all of that.
• 1:28:54
  no worries
• 1:28:56
  alright let's talk about you
• 1:28:57
  how do people find you
• 1:28:58
  where should they go
• 1:28:58
  to get more Daniel
• 1:28:59
  where do they get more
• 1:29:00
  I think it's like
• 1:29:02
  HM Intelligence
• 1:29:03
  on basically all platforms
• 1:29:05
  mainly on Instagram
• 1:29:06
  my current focus
• 1:29:10
  is that HM Intelligence
• 1:29:11
  dot com
• 1:29:12
  or dot org
• 1:29:13
  I don't recall
• 1:29:14
  oh it's dot org
• 1:29:15
  it is
• 1:29:15
  and the website is dot org
• 1:29:17
  alright
• 1:29:17
  dot com
• 1:29:18
  dot com was about
• 1:29:19
  5,000 pounds
• 1:29:20
  more expensive
• 1:29:21
  whoo
• 1:29:22
  okay
• 1:29:22
  because HM could be
• 1:29:24
  Her Majesty's or His Majesty's.
• 1:29:26
  Understood.
• 1:29:27
  So hmintelligence.org.
• 1:29:30
  And then you have your daily podcast, correct?
• 1:29:32
  That's pretty much everywhere.
• 1:29:34
  Yeah.
• 1:29:35
  It's called The Intel Brief.
• 1:29:36
  It's essentially just me giving off three stories every morning.
• 1:29:42
  It's between six to eight minutes.
• 1:29:45
  Pretty quick, pretty short and sharp.
• 1:29:47
  It has a video that goes with it if you want to see what I'm talking about.
• 1:29:50
  And I give an assessment on each thing I'm talking about.
• 1:29:52
  and also YouTube videos.
• 1:29:55
  So the HM Intelligence on YouTube,
• 1:29:57
  trying to do not long form,
• 1:29:59
  but like more longer form.
• 1:30:01
  So around 10 minute long videos,
• 1:30:03
  looking at different topics
• 1:30:04
  and explaining it that way.
• 1:30:06
  So concise to the point,
• 1:30:08
  get on with your day, right?
• 1:30:11
  Yeah.
• 1:30:11
  And then for deeper dives,
• 1:30:13
  they can contact your company
• 1:30:15
  to get what other services
• 1:30:18
  that you may offer from there.
• 1:30:19
  Is that correct?
• 1:30:21
  Yeah, I'll point you in the right direction.
• 1:30:22
  Gotcha.
• 1:30:25
  Fair enough.
• 1:30:26
  All right, Daniel.
• 1:30:27
  Appreciate it, sir.
• 1:30:28
  Thank you for your time.
• 1:30:29
  Thank you very much.
• 1:30:30
  Awesome.
• 1:30:31
  Talk to you later.
• 1:30:31
  Devils hide behind redemption.
• 1:30:35
  Honesty is a one-way gate to hell.
• 1:30:52
  Bye.