Please Take Seriously IRGC Plots To Assassinate Senior U.S. Government Officials

Madame President: Your Friday morning briefing...As Friday starts, we have hostilities going full force between U.S. forces, the IRGC, and several Middle Eastern countries, including Jordan. Numerous additional IRGC leaders have been "flatlined." There is a virtue to that old saying: "Be careful of what you wish for, you might get it." When it comes to assassinations, the Israeli Mossad is the best in the world. I have been praising this agency for 31 years. They have shared their skills with US forces. A lot of Iran's senior leadership is dead. Inexperienced people have taken over. There are splits into several different factions among the surviving leaders. In my opinion, the current situation makes it impossible to reach a diplomatic solution with Iran. Many different and serious news sources, including C.N.N. and News Nation, have reported that a contract has been put out on the lives of President Trump, Vice President Vance, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, and General John D. Cain. Back channel sources sympathetic to the U.S. and Israel fear that they are on this hit list. I have seen no substantial confirmation of this. Past Iranian efforts to assassinate high-level leaders were simply a large reward promised to anyone who "does the dirty deed." Now there is an indication of an evolution where Iran, which has good relations with drug cartels, has hired drug cartels to carry out the killings. Over the past few centuries, when a major world leader was assassinated, some mentally unbalanced person "got in a lucky shot" or bomb blast that did the work. Israel has shown itself to be the only country witht the competence and resources to kill world leaders. They proved this with the assassination of Ayatollah Khamenei in Iran. With serious drug cartels "coming to the assassination party," we have a very dangerous new element. (Recently, almost a ton of Iranian heroin was seized in Poland. This shows the close relationship between Iran and the drug cartels.) These criminal organizations have huge financial resources. They have access to the most modern weapons short of nuclear weapons. They probably have hired Ukrainians to provide them with the most advanced drone technology in the world. A highly sophisticated drone swarm could overwhelm the best U.S. security systems. Chris Cuomo hosts a daily discussion program on the Sirius Network. A very learned person being interviewed warned that world leaders could be attacked with drone swarms. The cartel leadership taking on such a project would not doubt that "all heaven and earth would fall on them" if they were successful. Some back channel sources say that such acts would provoke nuclear retaliation against Iran and some cartel resources. The first challenge that authorities would face after such an event would be to prove who did it. The investigation could take months. Hard proof would be difficult to obtain due to the opaque and deadly nature of these cartels. Please bear in mind that the U.S. government has been tempted several times to send military forces into Mexico to attack the cartels. Each time, they have backed off after having seen estimates of the casualties they would suffer and the angry response from the Mexican government. We are entering a very dangerous time. I take the current Iranian threats against US leaders seriously. They have been incompetent in the past. Now we have major drug cartels that are very competent.

My Fourth Of July Message

The 250th Anniversary of the U.S. is upon us! Yesterday afternoon, Elena and I waited with great expectation for the beginning of the World Cup match between Argentina and Cabo Verde. We were brimming with confidence. It was going to be an easy victory for Argentina. Elena got a surprise delivery from UPS. It was a gift from me. It was the same shirt that each Argentina player wears on the field. We had a huge and unpleasant surprise. The game lasted 120 minutes instead of the normal 90 minutes. It was a ferocious and hard-fought battle. The humble people of that little island became David taking on Goliath. They almost pulled it off. Argentina won 3-2. I always warn people: never underestimate an opponent! Now we come to this special day. Many people claim that the founding fathers were all elite white males who owned slaves. In reality, some were, and some were not. Each man knew that if he failed, his life would end on the gallows. I hear all sorts of talk about slavery, racism, putting native Americans on reservations, internment of Japanese in World War II, forever wars, etc. After hours of agonizing thought, I focus on the great movie actor Kirk Douglas. He was born to a Jewish family in Ukraine. Had he not gotten out of there, he would have died in one of Stalin's famines or been killed by the Nazis. Think of all the wonderful performances on the screen we never would have seen. In Christmas of 1988, my second job was at a center that helped homeless people get back on their feet. A surprise speaker came to talk to the people with little hope. It was the famous movie actor Kirk Douglas. He was just as handsome and charming in person as he was on the screen. He told the people something surprising when he said the following: "Many decades ago, I was in the same position that you are in. I got mad and decided to do something about it." In September 1996, I found myself in the same position that Kirk found himself in long ago. Super Grok told me many years later that I had a 1/3 of 1% probability of emerging from homelessness to a life of prosperity. (Heck, I had a better chance of becoming an astronaut.) I remembered Kirk's words from long ago. I got mad. I decided to do something about it. I also thought of the words of former President Barack Obama: "Yes we can!" It was a long battle; I emerged from homelessness on July 17, 1999. In 27 years, I have never come back. Elena began life "one click away from the slum" in a very poor Buenos Aires suburb. Her family could not afford a car or a television. Their drinking water came from a well. She ended her career as a successful and respected doctor in Northern California. My former domestic partner Antonieta was born in a Guatemala slum of an unwed mother. She came to this country. She had a good career. She married a wonderful man. She has two beautiful daughters. She lives in a nicer house than our house. Everybody, me and many other people like me, are what this country is all about! We came from poverty, beat the odds, and have had a great life. Elena thinks that we are a little tiny minority. I beg to differ. There are millions of us! Please eat some healthy and unprocessed food. Get some life-renewing exercise. Get some rest after a week of hard work. Most importantly, tell someone close to you that you love them. (I have already done that!) -JackW

Argentina vs Austria-World Cup Action At Its Best In Dallas, Texas

We are back at home safely. This trip was an education for me. Argentina has the most devoted and ardent soccer fans in the world. A couple of centuries ago, Charles Dickens wrote a classic book, "A Tale of Two Cities." I am going to briefly give you a tale of two cities this morning: Dallas, Texas, and Arlington, Texas. Sunday morning, Elena and I found ourselves in downtown Dallas around ten in the morning. Even at that early hour, Argentina fans were starting to congregate in the principal downtown park, which is like a long walking trail. A huge flat screen television was already showing soccer games. When the Dallas Museum of Art opened at 11:00, Elena and I toured the museum. It was impressive. It was amazing to see the museum full of people wearing Argentina soccer shirts. The sports fan also appreciated culture. After the museum tour, Elena and I emerged onto the street. Hundreds or perhaps thousands of Argentina fans were now on the streets. All sorts of food trucks and souvenir vendors were seen. Some fans from Spain and Austria were also spotted. Things were peaceful and mellow. We went to lunch at an excellent Tex-Mex restaurant. The restaurant was full of upper-middle-class and wealthy Argentine fans. These were the people with actual tickets to the game coming on Monday. What was amazing was that many Argentine fans of humble means found the way to travel to Dallas. They did have tickets to the game. They would watch the game on the big screen television in the downtown park. What a beautiful moment full of love. Law enforcement stayed discreetly in the background. They let the party go on. It reached its height at five in the afternoon. So many people came that the major Dallas freeways were clogged as if it were rush hour traffic. The next day, Elena and I boarded a trolley at nine in the morning that took us to the stadium where the game between Argentina and Austria was to be played. The crowd at the stadium was counted at 70,649. There was a massive law enforcement presence from the Arlington Police Department, with officers in full battle dress and often riding around in ATVs and other military vehicles. A helicopter prowled overhead. I am sure there was a large contingent of law enforcement and intelligence officers in plain clothes. The stadium was an engineering marvel. It was covered on the top with a highly efficient air conditioning system. Elena and I rode escalators up five levels to find our modest seats. We had a pleasant surprise. The seats assigned to us were comfortable. We had a marvelous view of the field below. Argentina perfomed brilliant in the second half. They scored two goals and won. Lionel Messi set a FIFA record for the most goals scored. What a beautiful and unforgettable time.

Austin, Texas Has Created Affordable Housing

Austin, Texas, has built a substantial amount of affordable housing (and overall housing) through a combination of aggressive zoning reforms to boost overall supply, targeted subsidies and incentives for income-restricted units, voter-approved bonds, public-private partnerships, and streamlined permitting. This multi-pronged approach has helped it lead the U.S. in affordable housing production in some recent years while significantly increasing total housing stock. pew.org Massive Overall Housing Supply Increase (Market-Rate + Affordable)From 2015–2024, Austin added ~120,000 new housing units — a 30% increase in its housing stock (far outpacing the U.S. average of 9%). This surge, including many market-rate apartments, helped drive down median rents (from ~$1,546 in late 2021 to ~$1,296 by early 2026). pew.org Much of this came from land-use reforms that made it easier and more profitable to build:HOME Amendments (2023–2024): Allowed up to 3 units (including duplexes/triplexes/tiny homes) on single-family lots and reduced minimum lot sizes (down to 1,800 sq ft in Phase 2). This enabled "missing middle" housing and more attainable homes on existing lots. enotrans.org Reduced/eliminated minimum parking requirements and eased other restrictions (e.g., compatibility standards, setbacks). better-cities.org Affordability Unlocked (2019 onward): Density bonuses, height increases, and waivers in exchange for setting aside a high percentage of units as affordable. This program significantly boosted production. kut.org These changes encouraged private developers to build at scale, with many "affordable" units emerging naturally from increased supply (especially in Class C/older buildings).Targeted Affordable (Income-Restricted) Housing ProductionAustin led the nation in new affordable units in 2024 with 4,605 built — more than double 2023 levels. Projections suggested strong continued output. kut.org Strategic Housing Blueprint (2017): 10-year plan targeting 60,000 units affordable to households ≤80% of median family income (MFI) by ~2027. Progress reached ~37% of the goal by 2023, with strong gains in some districts and near transit. austintexas.gov Voter-approved bonds: Multiple General Obligation bonds (e.g., $250M in 2018, $350M in 2022) funded land acquisition, rental/ownership development, rehabilitation, and programs. These provided direct subsidies and gap financing. austintexas.gov Density bonuses, tax incentives, public-private partnerships (e.g., with Housing Authority of the City of Austin), and federal/low-income housing tax credits supplemented local efforts. huduser.gov Other Supporting FactorsStreamlined online permitting (Austin Build + Connect) sped up approvals. Focus on transit-oriented and "Imagine Austin" centers/corridors for equitable distribution. Nonprofit and for-profit partnerships (e.g., Habitat for Humanity, developers like NRP Group). Broader Texas context: No state income tax, business-friendly environment, and pro-growth policies attracted developers. Results and caveats: Rents and some prices have moderated despite population growth, proving supply works. Challenges remain for the deepest affordability (≤30–50% MFI) and equitable geographic spread. Not all new units are subsidized "affordable" — much of the relief comes from filtering and competition in the broader market. pew.org Austin's success stems from aligning supply-side deregulation (to unleash private building) with targeted public investment (for deeper affordability), rather than relying on one alone. This model has been studied as a practical example for other growing cities. For the latest data, check the City's Housing Department scorecards or reports from Pew, HousingWorks Austin, or Yardi Matrix.

FPV Drones Are Unstoppable

https://drive.google.com/file/d/16Q6uH8-iipCXmzCtz3wQCzs9x5HVVX-a/view

The Most Important Lesson I Have Learned In 77 Years of Life

Let us do something uplifting and fun on Sunday. It starts with a simple question: In all the years of your life, what is the most important lesson that you have learned? My most important lesson begins with the 1984 film Starman. For those curious, here is the IMDB link to the film: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088172/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0_tt_8_nm_0_in_0_q_Starman An alien spacecraft enters Earth's atmosphere. It is immediately detected by US radars. Jet fighters are scrambled. One jet fighter gets an incredible, lucky shot. The spacecraft is badly damaged. Its pilot executes a crash landing in a rural area of Wisconsin. The alien alights from the spacecraft. He activates the autodestruct. A big fire follows. The alien takes shelter in a nearby house. He does a fast scan. He discovers that the house is occupied by a young widow. She has recently and unexpectedly lost her beloved husband. He begins a metamorphosis to become the dead husband. While this process is underway, the widow comes out of her bedroom with a gun in her hand. She is mesmerized by the process underway. When it finishes, she finds her beloved husband facing her naked. Right at this point, the movie transitions from a routine science fiction film to a beautiful love story. When the alien asks her to define love, she answers that it means caring about another person more than you care about yourself. She agrees to come with the alien as he travels from Wisconsin to Winslow, Arizona, to be at an extraction point to return to his home planet. The couple falls deeply in love. The alien has never experienced romantic love before. He thinks it is beautiful. They become intimate. The widow gets pregnant with a human child despite a previous medical diagnosis saying she could never get pregnant. When the couple reaches Winslow, Arizona, they are detained by the US government. A young scientist from SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) starts the debrief. The alien convinces him to let him go so he can return to his home world. He then says these words to his love interest and the young scientist: You humans, are at your very best when things are the worse. That is the most important lesson I have learned in 77 years of life!

The US Wins The Drone War With An Innovative New $35,000 Draone

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4VF6YmABu8

The Kissinger Tapes

The Kissinger Tapes The Kissinger Tapes New Book by Tom Wells Features Kissinger ‘Telcons’ Obtained by Archive Secretly Recorded Phone Conversations Shed Light on Kissinger’s Foreign Policies, Strategies, Personality and Efforts to Deceive Colleagues and Journalists Transcripts Detail Nixon White House Abuses, Wiretapping and Watergate Published: Mar 19, 2026 Briefing Book # 919 Edited by Peter Kornbluh For more information, contact Peter Kornbluh: 202-994-7000 or peter.kornbluh@gmail.com Subjects Covert Action Human Rights and Genocide Policy Making and Diplomacy Political Crimes and Abuse of Power Secrecy and FOIA Soviet-U.S. Relations Regions South America Southeast Asia Events Argentine Dirty War, 1976-1983 Chile – Coup d’État, 1973 Operation Condor, 1975-1980 Vietnam War, 1954-1975 Project Chile Cold War Henry Kissinger Indonesia Southern Cone Vietnam Tom Wells Tom Wells William Burr Archive Senior Analyst William Burr led the project to obtain the Kissinger telcons The Kissinger transcripts book cover The Kissinger Transcripts: The Top-Secret Talks with Beijing and Moscow Feb 1, 1999 Washington, D.C., March 19, 2026 - On August 10, 1973, National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger placed a call to Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird to complain about U.S. officials who were participating in congressional hearings to investigate the secret bombing of Cambodia. As the Nixon administration’s cover up was unraveling, Kissinger was angry that “these @*%&* over there are acting as if it happened on the moon”; he demanded that Secretary Laird defend the original Nixon/Kissinger decision to launch clandestine attacks on Cambodia. “I mean, we saved American life,” Kissinger argued in a phone conversation he was secretly tape recording. “There were North Vietnamese troops there. The government of the country we were bombing were asking us to do it. What the hell—one sometimes thinks we are in a madhouse.” The candid and revealing Kissinger-Laird conversation is one of hundreds included in The Kissinger Tapes: Inside His Secretly Recorded Phone Conversations, an edited selection of Kissinger telephone conversation transcripts—known as “telcons”—by historian Tom Wells. Published this month by Oxford University Press, the 620-page book provides an essential history—as told in Kissinger’s own words—of his tenure as national security advisor and secretary of state during the Nixon years—1969 to mid-1974. An early review of the book in Foreign Affairs said it offers “unparalleled insight into the premier diplomat of the twentieth century,” bolstering Kissinger’s “reputation for brilliance, wit, and strategic thinking” while also revealing “his proclivity to backstab and battle nonstop with senior colleagues; his manipulation of and lying to journalists; his mistrustful relationship with Nixon, an equally facile liar; [and] his self-described preference for ‘brutal’ behavior.” In Wells’ telcon selection, Kissinger literally speaks to those issues, providing hundreds of pages of revealing evidence into his policies, strategies, personality and the rampant abuses of power that defined his stewardship of U.S. foreign policy during the Nixon years. Among the key themes that emerge from the telcons: ** Kissinger and Nixon’s complete disregard and indifference to human rights and human suffering: The book includes numerous conversations, particularly between Kissinger and Nixon, on human rights abuses committed with U.S. support. In a March 1971 conversation, for example, Kissinger and Nixon discussed a cable sent by U.S. consul Archer Blood in East Pakistan detailing the massive slaughter of hundreds of thousands of civilians being committed by the U.S.-backed Pakistani military dictatorship in what is now called Bangladesh. “We’ve had a bleeding [bleating] cable from our consul in Dacca who wants us to put out a statement condemning what the West Pakistanis are doing. But of course, we won’t consider it,” Kissinger tells Nixon. “Oh, for Christ’s sake,” responds the President. “Well, he’s just one of those pansies,” Kissinger states disparaging his own diplomat. “And he says condemning them?” Nixon asks. “Yeah, for genocide,” Kissinger responds. “Well, now, remove him,” Nixon orders. “I want him out of the job.” March telcon ** Kissinger was a pathological liar and veteran manipulator: In his introduction, Wells cites a top Kissinger aide, Helmut Sonnenfeldt, as stating that “Henry does not lie because it is in his interest. He lies because it is in his nature.” The book contains dozens of examples of Kissinger’s efforts to deceive colleagues, friends and especially journalists to influence their coverage. “The man lied the way most people breath,” as Wells quotes Seymour Hersh who, as a New York Times reporter, was on the receiving end of Kissinger’s duplicity. In one July 1973 conversation where Hersh sought information on the falsified official reports designed to hide the secret Cambodia bombing, Kissinger repeatedly denied knowing anything about them. The telcon transcripts reveal that three hours later Kissinger called his deputy, Alexander Haig, to basically brief him on how he had attempted to deceive Hersh. ** Kissinger spent considerable time attempting to influence the press: The Kissinger Tapes record numerous conversations with the leading journalists of Kissinger’s era—CBS reporter Marvin Kalb, Time magazine’s Hugh Sidey, columnist Rowland Evans, and ABC News celebrity Barbara Walters. At one point Kissinger called Walters to seek public relations advice on a “nightmare” book by a French journalist who had become smitten with Kissinger. “I read it and I thought, you didn’t kiss her, you didn’t touch her. You were as nice to her as you are to me or any reporter,” Walters told him. “I am a hell of a lot nicer—I like you,” Kissinger responded. More than any other collection of documents, his recorded conversations with leading journalists reveal how the top tier of the U.S. media related to those in power. Walter-Kissinger “Henry Kissinger’s phone transcripts touch on every important issue of his day and provide a panoramic view of his tenure in power,” notes Wells, who sifted through thousands of pages of transcripts to compile the book. “They shed new light on the many controversies of Kissinger’s era while throwing his personality and character into sharp relief,” Wells added. “Kissinger never intended for his phone transcripts to be public, and it was only due to the prolonged legal efforts of the National Security Archive that he was forced to relinquish them.” Kissinger falsely designated the government-created telcons as his “private papers” and took them when he left office in late 1976; he subsequently used them extensively to write his three-volume memoirs. In January 2001, the National Security Archive presented a legal complaint to both the State Department and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) demanding that they recover the 20,000 pages of Kissinger telephone conversation transcripts. Facing a potentially successful lawsuit, lawyers from the State Department approached Kissinger and negotiated the return of those papers in mid 2001 and early 2002. Led by Kissinger project director Bill Burr, the Archive then filed a comprehensive set of FOIA petitions for the declassification of the records. Our FOIA requests resulted in the declassification of over 15,000 pages of transcripts in August 2004, generating headlines around the world when the Archive began posting them on our website. Dr. Burr subsequently edited a major digitalized, indexed, collection of the telcons, The Kissinger Transcripts: A Verbatim Record of U.S. Diplomacy, 1969-1977, that was published as part of the award-winning Digital National Security Archive series. “One of Bill’s many great legacies is the recovery of the Kissinger files,” Archive director Tom Blanton emphasized in a memorial to Dr. Burr who died on December 11, 2025. “Thousands of Kissinger memcons and over 15,000 of his telcons are now on the public record, all because of Bill Burr. A permanent scholarly tribute. A permanent accountability tribute.” Burr’s colleague Peter Kornbluh said The Kissinger Tapes book is proof that the telcons are an invaluable gift to history that keeps on giving. The book “provides an incomparable compilation of Henry Kissinger in his own words,” Kornbluh said, “and a verdict of history on his controversial foreign policies.” The Documents 1 919 Document 1 White House, Telcon, Kissinger and Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird, 21 November 1969, 3:50 p.m. Nov 21, 1969 Source Nixon Presidential Materials Project, Henry A. Kissinger Telephone Conversations Transcripts, Chronological File, Box 3, File 3, 083-084 A week after investigative reporter Seymour Hersh broke the story of the My Lai massacre in the New York Times, Kissinger calls Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird to make sure they have a “unified line” to respond to the scandal. Laird has gruesome photographs that were appearing in the press; he and Kissinger agree the Pentagon will not distribute the photos in their possession to the press. Plainly appalled by the massacre but anxious to avoid having the Pentagon tarred by an atrocity, Laird was inclined to sweep it “under the rug.” Kissinger warns him that cannot be done. 2 919 Document 2 White House, Telcon, Kissinger-Nixon conversation on Archer Blood “Genocide” Cable, March 28, 1971 Mar 28, 1971 Source Tom Wells Collection In this conversation, Kissinger advises President Nixon that he has received a cable from the consul in Dacca, Archer Blood, reporting on the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of civilians in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), by the U.S.-backed Pakastani military regime. In a now famous dissent channel report known as “the Blood telegram,” the consul recommended that the Nixon administration condemn the repression which he suggested could be “genocide.” Referring to Blood’s message, Kissinger says, “We’ve had a bleeding [bleating] cable from our consul in Dacca who wants us to put out a statement condemning what the West Pakistanis are doing. But of course, we won’t consider it.” “Oh, for Christ’s sake,” responds the President. “Well, he’s just one of those pansies,” Kissinger states disparaging his own diplomat. Nixon then orders Kissinger to fire Blood. 3 919 Document 3 White House, Telcon, Kissinger Conversation with President Nixon about Soviet Ambassador Dobrynin, bombing North Vietnam, and Planned Summit in Moscow, April 15, 1972 Apr 15, 1972 Source The Kissinger Transcripts: A Verbatim Record of U.S. Diplomacy, 1969-1977 After a visit from Soviet Ambassador Anatoli Dobrynin, Kissinger calls Nixon to report on their conversation. He repeatedly disparages Dobrynin for “slobbering over me,” even as the U.S. is bombing North Vietnam. “He was slobbering so much,” Kissinger gloats to Nixon. “Here we are bombing the capital..of one of their close allies. According to the peacenik textbook, he should be yelling and screaming.” 4 919 Document 4 White House, Telcon, Kissinger Conversation with Barbara Walters, June 17, 1972 Jun 17, 1972 Source Tom Wells Collection Kissinger holds a lengthy conversation with high-profile ABC News journalist Barbara Walters. During their discussion he asks her for media advice on how to respond to a newly published “tell all” book, Dear Henry, by French reporter Danielle Hunebelle, who claims that Kissinger romantically told her “I am your slave.” Kissinger refers to Hunebelle as “a nightmarish girl,” and Walters calls the book “the worst piece of crap I have ever read.” “I read it and I thought, you didn’t kiss her, you didn’t touch her. You were as nice to her as you are to me or any reporter,” Walters tells him. “I am a hell of a lot nicer—I like you,” Kissinger replies. 5 919 Document 5 White House, Telcon, Kissinger conversation with Nixon advisor Leonard Garment about the unfolding scandal of Watergate, April 21, 1973 Apr 21, 1973 Source Tom Wells Collection As the Watergate scandal unfolds, Kissinger talks to White House advisor Leonard Garment about the cascading scandal. “This is without a doubt the most depressing period that I know in our history,” Kissinger tells him. “It was almost beyond my belief. It was beyond my emotional belief. Because another thing that is bound to come out now—one has to assume Watergate could not have been an isolated incident.” According to Garment, “it was part of a long, wide range of events,” some of which Kissinger is aware. 6 919 Document 6 White House, Telcon, “The President/Mr. Kissinger 7:00pm., June 1, 1973 [Discussing wiretap scandal] Jun 1, 1973 Source DNSA, Nixon Presidential Materials Project, Henry A. Kissinger Telephone Conversations After the FBI wiretap scandal breaks into the media, Nixon orders a report on wiretapping under previous administrations. He calls Kissinger in anger to tell him: “Let’s get away from the bullshit. Bobby Kennedy was the greatest tapper.” He accuses the former attorney general of tapping the phones of 300 people in 1963 and tells Kissinger that he is going to publish the names of the individuals Kennedy had placed under surveillance. “And let the[se] assholes know that they’re going to get this, Henry.” Kissinger responds: “I think you should.” “They started it,” Nixon reiterates. “They want to have a g[ood] fight; they’re going to get one, Henry, you understand.” 7 919 Document 7 White House, Telcons, Kissinger conversation with Seymour Hersh, July 17, 1973 Jul 17, 1973 Source Tom Wells Collection New York Times reporter Seymour Hersh calls Kissinger to find out if he has authorized a set of falsified military reports on the secret bombing of Cambodia. Despite Hersh’s efforts to cajole Kissinger into admitting his involvement, Kissinger repeatedly claims ignorance. “The first time I heard of false reporting was in a Monday newspaper,” Kissinger tells Hersh—mendaciously denying prior knowledge of an operation for which he was responsible. 8 919 Document 8 White House, Telcons, Kissinger conversation with Alexander Haig, July 17, 1973 Jul 17, 1973 Source Tom Wells Collection Three hours after attempting to deceive Seymour Hersh about his involvement in the falsified military reports on Cambodia, Kissinger calls his deputy, Alexander Haig, to brief him on the sham story he told Hersh. “Why should we even tell Seymour Hersh anything?” Haig declares. “Well, you can take that attitude, but I can’t,” Kissinger replies. “I knew about the [falsification] operation. Well, anyway, if he calls you, at least you know what he wants.” 9 919 Document 9 White House, telcon, Kissinger Conversation with William Safire and John Crewdson of the New York Times regarding the FBI wiretap on Safire, August 3, 1973 Aug 3, 1973 Source Tom Wells Collection New York Times columnist William Safire calls Kissinger as part of a Times investigation into the wiretapping of Safire. Safire’s colleague, John Crewdson, presses Kissinger to admit that he ordered a wiretap on Safire’s phone. Although Kissinger picked the 17 individuals he wanted the FBI to tap, he obfuscates throughout the conversation, claiming “I did not request any wiretaps at all.” Instead, he implies that “the authority was from [Attorney General John] Mitchell.” 10 919 Document 10 White House, Telcon, Kissinger Conversation with Secretary of Defense Laird on Cambodia Bombing, August 10, 1973 Aug 10, 1973 Source Tom Wells collection As the U.S. Congress holds hearings to investigate the secret bombing of Cambodia, Kissinger makes an effort to browbeat Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird into publicly defending the White House’s controversial decision to expand the war in Indochina. He calls Laird to complain about the lack of support from other U.S. officials who are testifying during the hearings. “I mean, we saved American life,” as Kissinger tries to convince Laird. “There were North Vietnamese troops there. The government of the country we were bombing were asking us to do it. What the hell—one sometimes thinks we are in a madhouse.” 11 919 Document 11 NSC, Telcon, Kissinger Discussion with Nixon on the coup in Chile, September 16, 1973 Sep 16, 1973 Source The Kissinger Transcripts: A Verbatim Record of U.S. Diplomacy, 1969-1977 In their first substantive conversation following the military coup in Chile, Kissinger and Nixon discuss the U.S. role in the overthrow of Allende and the adverse reaction in the news media. When Nixon asks if the U.S. “hand” will show in the coup, Kissinger admits “we helped them” and that “[deleted reference to U.S or CIA] created conditions as great as possible.” The two commiserate over what Kissinger calls the “bleating” liberal press. In the Eisenhower period, he states, “we would be heroes.” Nixon assures him that the people will appreciate what they did: “let me say they aren’t going to buy this crap from the liberals on this one.”

The US Marines on Kharg Island

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy5IpUnk4-E

Kharg Island In Detail

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4T7eIU0KLw

The U.S. Marine Corps Invades Kharg Island-A War Game Simultion

Yes, a US Marine Corps invasion of Kharg Island would almost certainly succeed in the short term (tactical seizure within 24–72 hours), but holding it long-term against Iranian mainland counterattacks would carry ongoing risks and require reinforcements. This is a pure hypothetical wargame based on current realities as of March 15, 2026: US precision strikes on March 13 already “obliterated” 90+ Iranian military targets on the island (air defenses, radar, naval base, missile/mine storage, runway), rendering Iranian on-island capabilities severely degraded while deliberately sparing the oil infrastructure. The US is actively deploying ~2,500 Marines (elements of the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit) plus the amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli (with F-35Bs, MV-22 Ospreys, helicopters, landing craft) from the Indo-Pacific — exactly the force package designed for opposed shore landings. No public think-tank wargame (CSIS, RAND, etc.) has modeled this exact scenario in open sources, but analogous USMC doctrine, recent strikes, and analyst commentary allow a reasoned simulation. Kharg is a small (~10 sq km) coral island ~25–30 km off Iran’s mainland — close enough for threats but vulnerable to US air/naval supremacy. Wargame Phases (USMC Amphibious Assault Doctrine) Phase 0: Preparation (Already 70–80% Complete / 24–48 Hours Pre-Landing) Further SEAD (suppression of enemy air defenses) and EW jamming (EA-18G Growlers + ship-based systems) to blind Iranian C2, drones, and missile guidance. Mine clearance and remaining coastal threats neutralized by helos/submarines. Naval/air cover from carriers and destroyers establishes total sea/air superiority. Outcome: Iranian Navy already “combat ineffective”; on-island defenses largely gone. Success probability: near-certain. Phase 1: Assault (D-Day – Night or Dawn Landing) Simultaneous helicopter-borne (MV-22/CH-53) and surface assault (AAVs + LCACs from USS Tripoli). Pre-landing naval gunfire, F-35B close air support, and precision munitions. Objective: Secure beaches, airport, oil terminal, and key high ground. Iranian response: Mainland-launched supersonic anti-ship missiles (Khalij-e Fars), drone swarms (Ababil/Shahed), speedboat swarms, and possible residual coastal fire. These are the main risks — but US ship defenses (Aegis, SM-6) + jamming + fighter cover blunt most of them. Duration: 12–24 hours to initial foothold. Phase 2: Secure the Island (Days 1–3) Clear remaining pockets (small IRGC garrison + security forces; civilian oil workers largely non-combatant). Establish defensive perimeter with Marine artillery, anti-air, and rapid resupply. Restore/secure oil export operations under US control (to pressure/reopen Hormuz). Phase 3: Hold & Defend (Ongoing) Continuous US air patrols and strikes on mainland launch sites. Potential need for follow-on Army/ additional Marine forces if Iran sustains attacks. Iranian escalation options: Proxy strikes elsewhere, Gulf oil facility attacks, or attempts to recapture via small-boat raids (low success odds). Would It Succeed? Tactical success: Yes (80–95% probability in 3–7 days). The prior strikes turned Kharg from a “fortress” into a degraded target. A ~2,500-Marine MEU is sized exactly for this kind of limited objective (historical parallels: Grenada 1983, small-island seizures). Analysts note the force can “physically executable” seize the island quickly with organic air/landing assets. Strategic/holding success: More conditional (60–70%). Mainland missile/drone threats persist; some analysts (including Russian experts) call it a potential “strategic disaster” or “trap” if Iran concentrates fire. However, US multi-domain dominance (air, EW, naval escort) and the ability to strike launch sites mitigate this. It would not be a “forever siege” like a full Iran invasion — more like a high-leverage raid/occupation. Casualty Estimates (No Official Numbers Exist — Reasoned Range) These are informed projections based on degraded Iranian defenses, US air superiority, and similar modern amphibious scenarios (not direct analogies like Taiwan wargames). US Marines & supporting forces: 50–300 total casualties (KIA/WIA). Low end if Iranian response is fragmented; higher if a lucky anti-ship missile or drone swarm hits during landing/transit. Ships could take damage, but Marine ground losses would stay limited due to rapid insertion and fire support. No massed Iranian armor or intact defenses on-island. Iranian side: 200–1,000+ (mostly IRGC defenders + any civilians caught in crossfire). Garrison likely small; most losses from initial assault + any failed counterattacks. Prior US strikes reported zero civilian deaths; the operation would prioritize precision. Iranian retaliation during/after: Intensified mainland missile/drone barrages and proxy attacks elsewhere (as already threatened), but overall capacity is reduced after two weeks of war. Key Risks & Caveats Escalation: Oil prices could spike violently then drop if Hormuz reopens under US control (25% probability scenario per some analysts). Political: High-visibility Marine casualties could shift US public support. Iranian doctrine: Asymmetric focus (mines, swarms) remains dangerous despite degradation. In summary, the USMC package now heading to the Gulf is purpose-built for this mission. With the March 13 strikes having done the heavy lifting on defenses, seizure is militarily feasible and likely — but it would be a high-stakes coercive move, not a low-cost operation. This remains hypothetical; President Trump has called seizure “not high on the list” but open to change if Iran keeps blocking the Strait. Real outcomes would depend on exact Iranian remaining capabilities and US rules of engagement at the time.996msExpert

An Invasion Of Kharg Island And Its Aftermath

From 1967 to 1973, there were violent protests all over the US about the Vietnam War. One protest brought one million people to Washington, DC. The war did not end until Congress got mad at President Nixon in 1973 due to Watergate. All funding for the Vietnam War ended. The US involvement in the war came to an end. What keeps the IRGC and all its proxies going is the revenue from oil sales that Iran collects through a brilliant Islamic money moving systems that outsmarts all sanctions. If the oil money were cut off, Iran would rapidly run out of money. They could not continue to prosecute the war and continue terrorist attacks. President Trump has decided to take over Kharg Island. This is the place where all the oil is being shipped to countries like China. President Trump launched a massive air attack against all military facilities on Kharg Island. A US Marine expeditionary force of 5,000 is on its way from Japan to Kharg Island. Their mission is to invade the island and hold it. As you can imagine, the IRGC would mount a ferocious resistance to the US Marine invasion. This landing would be equal to one of the World War II invasions of Pacific islands occupied by the Japanese. I will give no estimate as to what the possible casualties would be. I feel that US forces would prevail at a high cost. I always advise people to think in three dimensions. The big question on my mind is how Iran will react if Karg Island is taken. Here is what Grok thinks: This is a hypothetical escalation scenario. As of March 14, 2026, the US has not seized Kharg Island (correct spelling; Iran’s main oil export terminal, handling ~90-95% of its crude exports) with Marines or ground troops. US forces conducted airstrikes that “obliterated” military targets there (naval bases, missile bunkers, air defenses), but deliberately spared the oil infrastructure. President Trump has threatened to target the oil facilities only if Iran continues blocking the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has responded with tanker attacks, mine-laying, and partial Hormuz disruption, but no full-scale ground invasion has occurred. Additional US Marines and amphibious assets are deploying to the region. A full US Marine seizure/occupation of Kharg Island (to permanently shut off Iran’s oil deliveries) would cross what Iranian officials call a “red line”—an existential economic threat. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which controls coastal defense, naval forces, and asymmetric operations, has already signaled its response through official statements. Here is what they have explicitly threatened and what military analysts expect based on IRGC doctrine: 1. Direct Threats from Iranian Officials (Already Issued) “Persian Gulf will run with the blood of invaders”: Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf warned that any ground aggression against Iranian islands (including Kharg) would cause Iran to “abandon all restraint.” He stated the blood of American soldiers would be “Trump’s personal responsibility.” Regional oil infrastructure retaliation: Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters (IRGC-linked) declared that any attack on or seizure of Iranian energy/oil facilities would trigger immediate strikes on “all oil, energy, and economic infrastructure” in the region belonging to companies with American shares or cooperating with the US. These would be “destroyed and turned into a pile of ashes.” US bases in Gulf states targeted: The IRGC has told the UAE that American “hideouts” (ports, docks, and soldier positions) are now “legitimate targets.” Similar warnings apply to other US-linked sites in the Gulf. 2. Likely IRGC Retaliation Tactics (Asymmetric Warfare Doctrine) The IRGC does not match US conventional power head-on. Instead, it relies on swarms, missiles, mines, and proxies—capabilities it has used since 2019 and in the current conflict: Full Strait of Hormuz closure and shipping attacks: Expect intensified mining (Iran has thousands of naval mines), speedboat swarms, unmanned surface vessels, coastal anti-ship missiles, and drones targeting tankers and US Navy vessels. Iran’s new supreme leader has already vowed to keep the Strait closed as leverage; seizure of Kharg would accelerate this. About 20% of global oil passes here—disruption would spike prices further. Missile and drone barrages on US/Gulf targets: Ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones aimed at US bases in the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia—plus any Marine positions on or near Kharg. IRGC coastal units would likely fire on the island itself to deny US use. Strikes on Gulf oil facilities: Retaliatory attacks on Saudi Aramco sites, UAE refineries, or other US-linked energy infrastructure (echoing the 2019 Aramco drone strikes). Iran has warned it will “set the Middle East on fire” if its oil lifeline is cut. Proxy escalation: Hezbollah (Lebanon), Houthis (Yemen), and Iraqi/Shia militias would ramp up attacks on US interests, Israel, and shipping—already occurring but would intensify. Other tools: Cyber operations, possible attempts to recapture the island via small boat/helicopter raids (though low success odds against US air/naval superiority), and self-sabotage of remaining facilities to prevent US control. Key Caveats Capabilities degraded: Weeks of US/Israeli strikes have hit IRGC bases, missile sites, and command nodes, limiting sustained attacks. Retaliation would be painful but shorter-lived than in past scenarios. High global risk: Analysts (JP Morgan, think tanks) warn that a Kharg seizure would cause immediate oil export collapse for Iran, trigger severe retaliation, and send oil prices soaring with worldwide economic fallout. Uncertain execution: Iran’s responses so far have been calibrated to avoid total war. A Marine landing would be “high-risk, high-reward” for the US but could lead to prolonged asymmetric fighting. In short, the IRGC has pre-positioned its response: economic warfare via Hormuz + direct strikes on US/Gulf oil and bases, framed as existential defense. This aligns with decades of Iranian strategy against superior naval forces. The situation is fluid—any actual seizure would be a major turning point in the ongoing conflict. For real-time developments, official US Central Command or Iranian state media statements are the primary sources.

A US Invasion Of Iran

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KESLN_3LU_4

Governor Spanberger Responds To President Trump's State Of the Union Address

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaKeWhpFMME

If Adolf Hitler Had Died On November 10,1923

If Adolf Hitler had died on November 10, 1923 (or during the chaotic shootout on November 9), shortly after the failed Beer Hall Putsch, Germany's trajectory over the next 20 years (1923–1943) would almost certainly have been dramatically different. The most widely accepted view among historians and alternate-history discussions is that the Nazi Party (NSDAP) as we know it would have fragmented, remained marginal, or dissolved entirely, and Germany would have avoided the specific form of genocidal totalitarianism and aggressive world war that defined the 1933–1945 era. Immediate Aftermath (1923–1925) The putsch still fails disastrously: 16 Nazis and 4 police officers die, Ludendorff is arrested (but quickly released due to his prestige), Göring flees wounded, Hess is captured, etc. Without Hitler, the NSDAP loses its most charismatic orator, organizer, and unifying figure. Hitler was already the party's dominant personality by 1923; his death removes the glue holding the fractious völkisch (folkish/nationalist) right together. The party is banned in Bavaria (and effectively nationwide for a time), as in real history. In our timeline, Hitler used his trial and Mein Kampf to rebuild it into a national force. Without him, no sensational trial speech, no bestselling manifesto, and no "martyr" narrative to rally around. Likely successors (e.g., Gregor Strasser, who had organizational talent in northern Germany; Ernst Röhm with the SA paramilitaries; or Alfred Rosenberg/Julius Streicher types) lack Hitler's mass appeal, media savvy, and ability to bridge conservative nationalists, radicals, and the working class. The party probably splinters into regional völkisch groups or merges into larger conservative/nationalist parties like the DNVP (German National People's Party). Mid-1920s: Stabilization and the "Golden Years" of Weimar (1924–1929) The Weimar Republic survives its early crises more comfortably. Hyperinflation ends in late 1923 with the Rentenmark; the Dawes Plan (1924) brings U.S. loans and economic recovery. Without Hitler's NSDAP polling 2–3% in the mid-1920s and then exploding to ~18% in 1930 and ~37% in 1932, the far-right vote stays fragmented among DNVP, smaller nationalist splinter groups, and perhaps a weaker "völkisch" bloc. No rapid Nazi buildup means the Reichstag remains dominated by Social Democrats (SPD), Center Party, liberals, and conservatives. Governments are still unstable coalitions, but the extreme polarization that enabled Hitler's chancellorship in January 1933 doesn't materialize to the same degree. Antisemitism and revanchism persist (deeply rooted in German society), but without a single charismatic vehicle, they don't coalesce into a mass movement capable of seizing total power. Early 1930s: The Great Depression Hits (1929–1933) The Wall Street Crash and German banking collapse still happen. Unemployment soars to 6 million+; Brüning's austerity policies fail. In real history, the Nazis capitalized massively on despair, promising jobs, national revival, and scapegoating Jews/communists. Here, the far-right vote likely goes to: A strengthened DNVP (more traditional monarchist/conservative nationalists). Possibly a militarist/authoritarian movement led by figures like Franz von Papen, Kurt von Schleicher, or even war heroes like Paul von Hindenburg's circle. Communist Party (KPD) still grows strongly on the left. Germany probably gets an authoritarian but non-totalitarian conservative regime around 1932–1933: perhaps a presidential dictatorship under Hindenburg (extended emergency powers), or a "cabinet of barons" that suppresses both communists and radicals without full Nazi-style Gleichschaltung (coordination/total control). No Enabling Act, no Reichstag Fire Decree in the same way, no rapid creation of a one-party police state. 1933–1943: A Different Germany No Nazi dictatorship: No Hitler means no Third Reich, no concentration camps on the same scale, no Holocaust (though antisemitic policies and pogroms might still occur under a right-wing regime, likely far less systematic/genocidal). Governance style: More likely a semi-authoritarian conservative/military regime (similar to interwar authoritarian states in Poland, Portugal, or even early Franco Spain). Rearmament happens (Weimar secretly violated Versailles anyway), but slower and more cautious. No reckless remilitarization of the Rhineland (1936), Anschluss (1938), or Munich Agreement (1938) in the same aggressive form. Foreign policy: Revanchism exists (resentment over Versailles), but without Hitler's racial ideology and Lebensraum obsession, Germany might pursue limited revisionism (e.g., regaining Danzig corridor via diplomacy) rather than total war. Relations with Britain/France could remain tense but avoid all-out confrontation. No World War II as we know it: The cascade to September 1939 (invasion of Poland) becomes much less likely. A conservative German regime might ally with Poland against the USSR or negotiate spheres in Eastern Europe. If war comes, it might be a more limited conflict (e.g., over Danzig) or delayed until later. Internal developments: Economy recovers via public works and rearmament, but without the extreme Nazi command economy and plunder. Jews face discrimination/emigration pressures, but mass extermination is improbable. Political violence (SA street fights, etc.) is lower without unified Nazi paramilitaries. Overall Consensus from Alternate Histories Most serious discussions (e.g., on AlternateHistory.com threads like "8mm to the Left," Reddit, Quora, and historian speculations) conclude: The NSDAP probably fades into obscurity or becomes a minor player. Germany gets a right-wing authoritarian government in the 1930s, but one that is nationalist-conservative rather than radically fascist/racialist. Europe avoids the specific catastrophe of Nazi Germany: no Holocaust, no WWII starting in 1939, potentially millions fewer deaths. But the underlying problems (Versailles resentment, economic fragility, political instability) don't vanish—Germany might still become illiberal, remilitarized, and revanchist, just not apocalyptic. In short: Hitler's death in 1923 likely butterflies away the Third Reich and the deadliest war/genocide in history, leading to a darker but far less catastrophic Germany through the 1930s and early 1940s. The Weimar Republic might limp on as a flawed democracy, evolve into conservative authoritarianism, or even stabilize somewhat.

President Trump Is Now Seriously Considering Assassinating Ayatollah Khamenei and His Sons

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CtYUY1fTZY

Over 100 Years Ago, A Twist Of Fate Saved Adolf Hitler's Life

This morning, I am going to introduce you to a woman you have not met and never will meet. Helene Elsse Hanfstaengl was an American citizen born on Long Island. She married a remarkable and wealthy German man, Ernst Hanfstaengl. Fate placed her in Munich, Germany, in early Novermber of 1923. Hitler staged a coup to overthrow the Weimar Republic on November 8-9, 1923. After the coup failed, Hitler took shelter in Ernst and Helene's mansion. The Bavarian police knew exactly where he was hiding. On the morning of November 10, 1923, two truckloads of police surrounded the home. They came inside with a warrant for Hitler's arrest. Hitler came running down the stairs with a pistol in his hand. He announced that he was going to commit suicide to avoid capture. Let us stop right there. If Hitler did this in the modern US, he would have been quickly and unceremoniously shot to death. Fate remained on Hitler's side that morning. In our modern world, many women work as law enforcement officers, military units, and private security. They are well-trained in martial arts and hand-to-hand combat. Many women also take private lessons to learn self-defense. Over 100 years ago, it would have been quite rare for a woman to know the martial arts. Helene was that rare exception. She used a judo move to knock the pistol out of Hitler's hands. Please reflect for a moment. If Helene had not been there, most likely the police would have shot Hitler dead, or he would have killed himself. Please imagine how different the world would have been had Hitler died in 1923. Ernst and Helene became disillusioned with Hitler. They made their way to England, Canada, and the US. Ernst went to work for President Roosevelt. Their son served in the US Army Air Corps.

The Latest From Ashleigh Banfield On The Nancy Guthrie Case

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fepDchlTJI

Two Arrests And One Suicide In The Nancy Guthrie Kidnapping Case

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZ7-p4LMSes

The Guthrie Family Will Pay A Ransom To Get Mom Nancy Back

https://thefrankfigliuzzi.substack.com/p/new-nancy-guthries-family-to-pay?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=2960239&post_id=187249646&utm_campaign=email-play-on-substack&r=pxp3m&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email