Did the IAEA Leak Iran’s Nuclear Secrets? The Real Story...

Hello everybody and welcome to Geopolitical Trends, where truth matters. Right now there is, uh, some sort of a shadow war that is being fought over the world's most dangerous weapons—

that's nuclear weapon, that is—

and the UN, United Nations' top nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, is caught right in the crosshair. So you have from viral rumors of a million-dollar Japanese bribe which in my opinion it's not a rumor, to a wild accusation of leaking top secret targets to Israel. The IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency, is facing now a massive credibility crisis. But who is actually telling the truth? And that is why in this video I'm going to push back— I'm going to pull back rather the curtains on the secrets involving this agency as the US has already lost the war on Iran, against Iran. And by the way, it's the IAEA that is pushing for going into Iran inspections. It's not the UN that is asking. This is the IAEA itself. Makes you just wonder. So, uh, I will also, uh, in addition to my own analysis here, I will share some clips with you towards the end of the livestream.

So make sure you stay with me till the end if you could.

So what happens when the only agency, according to some, even though I don't believe in that, uh, the only agency keeping the world safe from a nuclear conflict is completely locked out? So as we speak right now, there is a tense, tense deadlock over Iran's nuclear sites, and sort of the IAEA is pushing for complete access. Skeptics have claimed that inspectors can't be trusted, and rightly so, while others say, oh, they are our only hope. Hope to what? So today, the way I see it is we're going to need to break down this— what— how, how the IAEA operates. Why sovereign nations are terrified sometimes of what they will find, and of course the terrifying reality of what happens if they fail. But beside all this, you put one thing at the beginning, which is a statement from this person right here. That's Rafael Grossi.

I have— sorry, I have them in a picture here when I did the, the disclosure for the community.

One statement from him, here is what he says, and I quote: Our presence is necessary to ensure that the US-Iran agreement is credible. I mean, just take a step back and think about that. Why will the IAEA be the one to decide about the credibility of an agreement? And second thing, during the MOU the talks about the, the signing, the digital, uh, signature of the MOU, Memorandum of Understanding, between Iran and the United States, which was signed in Islamabad. It was no conversation about the nuclear file to begin with. So the next question prompts us as to what prompted IAEA to now push this direction, unless it was getting directions from its patron. That's just me thinking outside the box. So can we really trust it? But if the US is pushing the IAEA behind closed doors to go ahead and articulate or issue statements regarding the need for the inspection, it kind of brings into question as to why, why suddenly when the nuclear file was not part of the MOU to begin with. So, but before I'll delve deeper into this, let me just briefly, briefly describe to you what the IAEA is. I, I don't assume everybody knows. So the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, is the world central intergovernmental forum for the scientific and technical cooperation in the nuclear field. That's all it deals with. It deals with nuclear field. So now it is operating as an autonomous organization to a degree within the United Nations system. It works globally to promote the safe—

that's their mission, as they say—

secure and peaceful use of nuclear technologies. Well, okay, if there is the case, why in its report vis-à-vis Iran has always been not being, uh, uh, objective, that Iran was working on a nuclear— on a civilian nuclear, uh, use, peaceful use of nuclear technology, which was exactly what Iran is pursuing, was pursuing, still pursuing that. So what makes this case different? And that is again what I find it very, very, uh, uh, interesting, which by the way I thank the community for, uh, voting on this topic here because I wanted to make sure this is something you will be interested in. What I found very interesting is that the IAEA chief, uh, Rafael Grossi, says inspector will visit nuclear sites under Iran-US interim deal. Well, wait a minute, that wasn't negotiated during the MOU, so I don't know where he's coming from with this particular statement since he was not in the MOU, at least based on what I read. And that again leads us to think about the current disagreements that exist regarding the IAEA. So I'm going to address this, then I'm going to address the pros and cons for why or why not the IAEA should or should not be in Iran visiting the sites. Then I will highlight the Japanese nuclear waste dump and the role the IAEA played into that. And I will highlight also the leak of the scientists, Iranian scientists, uh, of, uh, through the IAEA. And I show you a picture of the former prime minister of Israel with Rafael Grossi. There will be no need for them to meet, by the way, since Israel and never allowed IAEA to inspect its nuclear site. Why not? And that's again the double standard of the IAEA. So we'll get into that in a second here. So once again, I found the arrogance of Rafael Grossi maintaining that inspections are going to happen. This is what he's saying under the newly signed US-Iran interim deal. Well, once again, it becomes now the war of words. Grossi, Rafael Grossi, that is, points to a signed MOU guaranteeing IAEA supervision, but the nuclear file wasn't discussed. So who gives him the authority to just state whatever and dictate the terms to Iran? And that in itself will lead us to the key question: should Iran even allow IAEA on its territory? And we'll answer that question in a second here. So however, you have an Iranian diplomat and a foreign ministry spokesman, Ismail Bakher, counter that inspectors are not scheduled to visit the key enrichment sites bombed during last year's conflict. That's to me where the confusion is. And it's not a confusion. As a matter of fact, I, I, I take this word back. There is no confusion. Is as clear as daylight. You, the IAEA, have not been given the authority to go to Iran because the nuclear file of Iran has never been discussed or agreed upon during the MOU signature between the United States and Iran. It's as clear as it gets. So the IAEA state that, well, wait a minute, we have to be allowed to visit the peripheral facilities?

Why?

Because we want to ensure the verification gap— no! No, it's not about that; the inspection is about verifying the information whether there was damage to the nuclear facilities like for example Bushehr , Esfahan, you know... That is the reason why the IAEA wants to go then he will report the information to the US and Israel. That's my opinion. They wanted to see whether it was an extent damage to the facility or not, because the US bombing didn't achieve anything. It was, it was because the, the facilities is buried deep beneath the ground. And that is why the IAEA is making this statements as though it has been agreed upon on the MOU when it was not. No, of course you're going to have to take the, uh, the perspective of the experts. Some will say it is not within the right of IAEA to go right now because no agreement has been reached, final agreements between Iran and the United States regarding the war. Others are saying, well, we do have some concerns.

Yeah.

Because this has to do with the, uh, uh, uh, Iran weapons-grade enrichments, you know. Well, it has not been actively resumed. This is where the independent experts worry that the stockpile could be moved to an unmonitored and undeclared site while access is restricted. Well, if that— that's enriched uranium belong to Iran. They can do whatever you want on their soil, on their territory. This is why the US was pushing for their uranium to leave Iran, and Iran saying no. Even Russia volunteered, uh, sort of to hold the uranium on its territory till this issue is resolved. Iran is saying no, this is our sovereign right, which is true.

It's their sovereign, uh, sovereign right to keep the, uh, enriched uranium on their territory. So simple as that.

Now this paved the way for us to ask the fundamental question, you know, can the IAEA be trusted? There are those who said yes, it can be trusted. And again, in this analysis, this brief analysis, I'm going to be providing you both sides of the argument like we always do.

So.

And their argument for why the IAEA should be trusted is because it has technical competence, because the IAEA does not rely on political testimony, which is true. You know, it, you know, it, uh, sort of deploys or utilizes highly advanced tracking environmental sampling.

That's one.

It uses satellite imagery.

That's two. And uses a physical seal to detect nuclear material down to the parts per billion, which is—

I can see the logic going into this. Where I disagree with this argument that the IAEA can be trusted is the— its neutrality. That is where the issue is. As an autonomous agency reporting to both the UN United Nations General Assembly and the UN Security Council. It has historically resisted unilateral pressures from both Western nations on target states to maintain objective reporting. This is what he's saying, but that's not the truth. And I'll give you a perfect example, is Israel. Okay, why IAEA, if it is autonomous and has the right to go verify every country that has a nuclear program, why is it not allowed to access Dimona, for example, or any other nuclear facility in Israel? And why is it pushing for Iran but not Israel? Why IAEA is not making the same statements? We have to visit Israeli nuclear sites to verify compliance. So Of course, they can't do it to North Korea because North Korea kicked them out back in 1994. They said, we're done with you, because they realized they're playing with words in the reports. Uh, North Korea was fed up and said, get out, and never came back. And North Korea pursued its nuclear program, built the bombs, and that's it.

No more issues since then.

And this is again where I push back against those who argue that the IAEA is a trusted entity. So at the same time, IAEA capabilities are limited no matter what. Despite what you hear, they are limited. For example, IAEA has no enforcement power. If it has enforcement power, they would have enforced their way to get into Israeli nuclear sites. Even India didn't allow IAEA to get in. So I, I think also Pakistan makes you just wonder Well, if it is a watchdog, so, but with no enforcement, then what's the point? How can you exert your power only on states that seems to cooperate, but you, you misinterpreting that as weakness?

Like the case of Iran.

Iran is cooperating, has been cooperating with the IAEA before, but the reports coming out of the IAEA after its visit, and I had a chance to read some back then, even before the GCPUA. And I, you know, I'm not a scientist, I'm not a nuclear scientist, I'll admit it, of course. But I, when I read the report, I know what to look for. And now we know where the manipulation of the wording is. And, and, and the IAEA has been playing with words vis-à-vis Iran nuclear program. So, and this is where you understand why it has no, no, no capabilities. It's limited. So, and that gap, this is where the intelligence agencies comes in. And that's why some have argued that, and I'm one of those that argue, IAEA is nothing but the back door, at least for the US, uh, and even Israel at this point, given the information that I came across at some point. And that is why when you think about the fundamental question, what this is centered all about is, should Iran allow IAEA inspector, given the latter's reports were not fair or right? So what do you think? I know to some might say, well, that's obvious question, Dr. O. Still, I still will have to ask the question. In your opinion, should Iran allow IAEA inspector into its facilities?

Yes or no in the chat box. I will greatly appreciate your participation into this.

So now, in this one here, in this particular question, I'm going to provide you both sides of the argument and let you reach your own. So whether Iran should allow the IAEA inspectors back into its facilities depends entirely, entirely, in my opinion, on Iran strategic objectives. That's what it's not— depends on the US, uh, pressure or the IAEA, uh, strong statements or what have you. No, no, it depends on Iran strategic goals regarding the sanction relief.

That's one of the issue that Iran will have to think about.

So, and I'm not saying bowing to the pressure of the IAEA. I am saying thinking strategically.

You don't think emotionally of this thing.

So, uh, because if Iran wants to avoid any military confrontation moving forward, or further military confrontation, that's one of the ways. But make no mistake, Iran will have to make it clear that it's doing this for its own national interest, not the pressure because of the IAEA or Israel or the US. And of course, as you know, it is on the record Iranian officials have always criticized IAEA reports as politically biased or unfair. And I, I, I concur with this statement because the reports— at least I had a chance to read the, the, the, the unclassified version, uh, the wording of it was kind of hinted into where we don't know what Iran is doing, or we need more inspections, or we need to have even greater access into military facilities of Iran. No, no, you're playing with words because you want to get into the secret military, uh, uh, uh, or military secrets of Iran. And if you get access to that, you get to find out exactly the details of, for example, Iran's nuclear— Iran's, uh, uh, ballistic missile program, which is what the Israelis are terrified of right now. So the choice to grant or deny access, uh, is the central now lever in Iran's broader foreign policy objective based on these strategic goals. So I'm gonna share with you two or three points regarding why the arguments for granting access is—

it's, it's the right thing to do.

And I'll share with you the arguments against, or the arguments for restricting access to the IAEA.

I'll share 2 or 3 key points.

So let's start with the first one, the arguments for granting access to the IAEA. The first one that comes to mind is the economic survival of Iran, because with this, with allowing the access, which I do not know if Iran already put this, this requirement or not. For example, if Iran will say we will allow IAEA only if these sanctions are lifted. I do not know that because in the MOU that I read, it was no conversation about the nuclear program, which Iran is saying that's a separate conversation for another day. So the IAEA will have no justification for it to be advocating for wanting or having access to Iran's nuclear facilities. But if we are to think in the economic survival, this is Iran's primary incentive, in my opinion. So because under the US-Iran interim deal, any lasting lifting of economic sanctions is strictly tied to international verifications. But again, That falls under the nuclear file, and the nuclear file has not been discussed in the MOU. So, so refusing IAEA inspector guarantees that crippling economic sanctions will remain in place or trigger immediate snapback mechanisms again. The second one is preventing military escalation. To those who argue in support of the IAEA access to Iran's nuclear facilities following the severe destruction from the June 25th, which by the way, even though it was severe destruction, Iran's military is still standing. Because who end up losing the war is not Iran, is the US. Who end up surrendering, who end up signing the surrender deal is the US, not Iran. So no matter what they say, the, the reality is different. And that's again my point of why we need to really, really, uh, have an understanding of the truth as is, not as the media wants us to believe. So those critics argue that cooperating with the IAEA provides Iran a diplomatic shield. Re-engaging with the watchdog, meaning IAEA, signals peaceful intent, making future preemptive military strike by Western nations or regional adversaries far harder to justify internationally. Again, I find, uh, I have to push back against this narrative of these critics in favor of having access.

Why?

For a simple reason: Iran has demonstrated its military capabilities. Do you think that the US or Israel is going to now try to attack Iran again? It would only be one condition and one condition only, short of a nuclear use of a nuclear weapon. That's the only reason. Otherwise, no, no force can defeat Iran because Iran proved it. So the third element for this, uh, granting access to this is the fulfilling of the signed commitments, which I've IEEA, by the way, is pointing out that both countries signed the 14-point memorandum of understanding, which is true. But, and again, this is where I found the manipulation, and it gets under my skin because I see the manipulation playing with people's minds, the viewers, that is. So people will believe that, oh, it's Iran that is hindering the progress of this peace, whatever, when in reality it is not. It is not. And that's what they're saying. They're saying if Iran seeks permanent, stable, uh, treaty to rebuild, it must honor the baseline requirements of oversight that is technically agreed to in writing. But it was nothing agreed upon regarding the nuclear file, which, by the way, the inspections falls under that category. So I don't understand these critics who are in favor of granting access mismatch the information to justify an objective that has nothing to do with the reality. And that's again, to me, the, the why I, I find the manipulation very aggravating, because I can see it. I can see it. They playing with words. If we are to go with the argument or the argument for restricting access. And again, I'm sharing both sides and you reach your own conclusion. The first one that comes to mind has to do with the protection of sovereignty and the military secret. Every country has military secrets, you know. Do you think the US will allow IAEA to come and let's say, uh, of course I'm not going to disclose some, uh, let's just, let's just go with Area 55. 51. I'm sorry, Area 51. Let's just go with, uh, the, uh, facility in Denver under the airport. Let's go with some location right here in Texas without divulging— those are classified stuff. Do you think the, the US will allow IAEA to inspect if there is a nuclear program there or activities?

No.

As a matter of fact, IAEA will never inspect the US.

Facilities.

And that shows you right there, there is no autonomy in this nonsense IAEA. IAEA will not go into Israel's nuclear facilities. IAEA was only going to Iraq, going to Libya, going to now Iran back then. I don't know about the future. And we all know what happened to Iraq. We all know what happened to Libya. And again, I always use the example of North Korea. So, so Iranian officials, like Foreign Ministry spokesperson, argue that the IAEA should not have access to sensitive enrichment sites damaged in previous attacks. Tehran fears that detailed inspection of these, uh, ruins could expose defensive vulnerability and provide actionable intelligence to foreign adversaries. That is exactly what I was saying at the beginning. The objective of this IAEA is to do an assessment of the damage, how much damage was done to these nuclear facilities, and report that back in a form of report to the outside world. But the details will go to the US and Israel. I know how the intelligence services works. I was in one, and I can see the argument against allowing the IAEA unless the agreement between the US and Iran is finalized. Then we'll have the talk about the nuclear files separately. Iran could be using also this as leverage in final negotiations. Iran operates under a 60-day window right now to negotiate a final deal. But it's not Iran. This is again where the manipulation comes in. It's the US. The ball is in the court in the US, not Iran. Iran has said, we're ready for whatever. So, and that's why by publicly disputing inspector access now, Iran— Iranian diplomats can use the threat of a total verification blackout as a bargaining chip to demand deeper concessions, such as front-loaded sanctions relief or the preservation of the domestic uranium enrichment. I don't know, right? It's, it's a tactic. Iran will have to think about its own strategic interest, simple as that. The third element will be the— for domestic consumption. From Iran's perspective why it should not allow the IAEA, and that one would be domestic political pride. Allowing immediate unfettered access to Western-backed inspectors after a conflict can be viewed domestically as a sign of weakness or of a declaration of defeat. And remember who signed the agreements. The surrender agreement wasn't Iran, it was the United States. Right now, there is rapidly a growing community of us right here dissecting these global shifts together. And to me, that is not just a number on a screen, it's a real movement of people who are actively choosing deep, honest truth over mainstream noise. We live in a world where the real geopolitical realities get buried under some clickbait headlines. But you are here because you want the actual analysis, the structural shift, the defense economics, and the uncompromised facts about where our world is heading. And if this mission matters to you, I want to ask you to hit that subscribe button right now. Your subscription isn't just a follow. It is the fuel that helps this independent analysis break through the algorithms and reach the people who needs to hear it the most. So let's take this global, and thank you for being the backbone of this community. And I do mean it when I say you are the fuel of this community here, because without you there would be no channel.

So I greatly appreciate it.

Now let's think, think about the ultimate trade-off. So I provide you both sides of the argument, and again, it's your decision, and I want you to reach the— I want you to make a decision about this. In your opinion, should Iran allow the IAEA or not? So ultimately, if Iran chooses not to allow inspectors, it protects its immediate military secrets, but on the other hand, it could sacrifice its economy to permanent isolation. That would be the same argument can be made about North Korea. If Iran allows inspectors, it accept—

it will accept a loss of domestic privacy in exchange for trillions of dollars in frozen asset, normalized trade, and a guarantee against future airstrikes, which I don't guarantee.

That's my point. That's my point. Don't ever assume that a deal will be reached. We will not experience this another decade from today. I've seen it throughout my life that this kind of event do happen. Iran has to make sure that doesn't happen again. And this paved the way, uh, for me to address the information that it was the IAEA who leaked the name of the Iranian nuclear scientist to Israel. Of course there are, of course there are statements came out of the, uh, the watchdog in the UN 'Oh, those are just rumors, those are misinformation, those are—' I'm not in the business of that. I am in a business of providing facts to the best of my knowledge as I know them, and I let the community decide for that. And that, if I am to use the term, the rumors that the IAEA leaked the name of personal detail of Iranian nuclear scientists to Israeli— yeah, because the targeting of the Israeli came right after the visits of the IAEA. That's again the way you need to think about these things. So of course there are those who saying, well, this stems from primarily from a massive, uh, sort of geopolitical intelligence disputes between Iran and the IAEA following the 2025 conflict and subsequently, of course, the cyber espionage claims. So And again, there are those who will say— and I'll provide you some images, and I'll provide— and let you reach your own. Uh, here is what Iran is saying. Iran, Iran is saying that in, in June 2025, following the series of Israeli targets operations against Iranian nuclear scientists, Iran media outlets like the Tasnim News Agency and Wana, another news agency also, published reports claiming they had seized secret documents proving, proving IAEA acted as a covert conduit for the Israeli espionage. Once again, I shared the information to the best of my knowledge. Here's the documents that the Iranian provided, the intelligence services provided. And if you're—

to those who read Farsi or Some of them are written in Hebrew, I believe. There are names, there are— I just want to prove, to show you the picture here, so for you to see it. And I have the link also, I will provide the link.

Now the Iran Intelligence Ministry, that's the one that stated this, and because it was an infiltration network inside Israel on behalf of Iran that stolen thousands of classified data. You know, I'm aware of one case of an Israeli was spying on behalf of Iran, was arrested. And these files prove that confidential letters sent by Tehran to the IAEA were routinely forwarded to Israel. That is, again, there are others who are saying, you know what, this also could be the work of the Mossad or the intelligence services in Israel, which I do not deny, because you have the independent security experts, those are not affiliated with governments, uh, even the nonprofit analysts, you know, are arguing, oh, wait a minute, IAEA cannot do this, it will reject doing this kind of stuff. Does not— IAEA does not collect data, uh, of, of this type. And that's the denial. The IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi pointed out a fundamental flaw in this rumor, per se. So the IAEA does not possess the personal detail home addresses or private lives of individual scientists. Well, you don't need that, but you do need a scientist to talk to about whatever level they are dealing with. Suffice it that, do you think that scientists will not have a name? Would it be that hard to get the name of that scientist? And it's so easy nowadays, you know, any, any— ask any intelligence services in the world Tell them to get an info about XYZ, they'll get it, especially when it comes down to highly placed individuals like nuclear scientists. You know, I'm gonna tell you a story quickly here. You know, I ran to a nuclear scientist downtown Sana'a in Yemen, and I was just blown away. What the heck is a nuclear scientist doing in Sana'a? We were drinking tea. Just to highlight to you, it wasn't that hard to find out. That's my point. IAEA might not do that, but IAEA would need to talk to scientists. Simple as that. No, and that is again where, when you have this idea of public emails being exchanged, open source academic, uh, academic panel discussions and information related to Israeli own Sorek nuclear research centers, uh, it begs the question to wonder about something like that. So, and there are those who are saying no, no, no, no, this cannot be because Israel has its own independent intelligence, which is true. Mossad, in this case, that will be the one that is dealing with this particular file Mossad has spent decades embedding its own human intelligence, known as human, uh, network, and executing cyber operations. Like, for example, you remember what happened in 2018, Atomic Archive raid, which directly took place inside Iran. So Israel, in this case, Israel is saying we do not need the IAEA to provide us with the name of the scientist.

But you cannot forget also the name of Azerbaijan, the country of Azerbaijan, which play in the back door into access into Iran.

And that's again where you have to think in terms of, of this internal email that shows the Israeli diplomats and nuclear scholars organizing a U.S. university panel on nuclear energy in the Middle East.

And, uh, this is how you invite scientists.

So because it was leaked, that's what the Iranian media did, did. So, and by the way, it was one particular outlet, it's called Forbidden Stories, and I looked them up. Forbidden Stories exist. It's an international nonprofit journalism network, and you know what their mission is? Is to continue to protect, publish, and investigate work of reporters around the world who have been either murdered, imprisoned, or threatened.

And that was part of where this information came from as well.

So Uh, let me, let me share the link with you of, uh, of why, why— just look at this picture right here. You know who this is, right? On the right, that's Bennett. That's the former Israeli prime minister. This is a meeting took place in 2022. This is how the US and Israel use Rafael Grossi to hijack the IAEA and start a war on Iran.

It was an article written by Benjamin Meida and Nicholas Davis, so I, I had a chance to read it. I'm going to share it with you in the chat box, and you can read it yourself if you choose to. So, to highlight to you that if it is the case, why the IAEA is not allowed inside Israel?

So Now let me talk about the Japan case. There is a Japan state, uh, issue that took place in 2023. You all know about the, uh, the nuclear spill, nuclear waste dumping in the Pacific. Uh, before I'll do this, I need to show you some pictures from inside the nuclear facilities inside Iran.

Here is one. This is Bushehr. This is a nuclear site.

And I give credit of this picture to Saeed Balkhani.

Balkhani. So this is picture there. This has to do with the uranium and all that stuff. So, so I had a chance to come across this, and, and I thought of the community. This is Bushehr facility, so I thought of you just to share this with you, to show you.

Now, for Japan, of course they are saying that, uh, this is nothing but a state-sponsored disinformation, uh, it serves a dual political purpose for Tehran.

But Tehran has nothing to do with this one here, by the way. So Tehran has nothing to do with the, uh, Japanese, uh, uh, uh, issue.

Because the question about Japan is, did the head of the IAEA, Grossi, receive the bribe from Japan to look over the other way regarding Japan's nuclear waste dumping in 2023? Now, now, I read some, and I was aware of the case. As a matter of fact, I did a video, uh, about it back then. And I kind of challenged the narrative that says there is no credible evidence that the IAEA director, Rafael Grossi, received bribes from Japan when I know it was a transfer of €1 million to the IAEA to secure a favorable report regarding the Fukushima water, uh, wastewater release that were investigated at that time. That is again where you, you start to wonder. And again, we're not going to jump to conclusion, but most of the evidence suggests that something went wrong back then with the final report of the IAEA. So which goes back to June 2023. So, and who leaks the information? It was a South Korean media. Online media, and that one called the Sameh.

Uh, I'm gonna put the name in the chat box, you can look it up later on if you want to.

And again, we are not just making up stories here, we reporting the facts to the best of our abilities here. So the, the, the, the Tamsay published an anonymous claim legendaire, an insider has intercepted a confidential 3-page document. The outlet claimed Japan has paid €1 million informal donation. It was as a donation, by the way. It wasn't as bribe just given to the person. No, no, no, no, no. Let's, let's, uh, let's be fair here in the reporting. It was as a donation to the IAEA, but the donation came very critical, very crucial at a time to manipulate the final report language. That's again what I found, uh, the, the, the, the information.

So I'm gonna put a link for you from back then and you can read it because I like to have documentation for all this.

And I'm gonna provide also the link from the Korean site that disclosed this information, and you can read those. And some have argued that the rumor was quickly amplified by regional critics of the wastewater release. Of course, North Korea was the first one. Why? Because North Korea issued official state statements accusing Japan of bribery. That was, that was North Korea first. And guess who was second? Was China. And China, as a matter of fact, their media extensively covered the allegation, this one, to question the agency's neutrality.

That's when I remember I did the video, uh, for the community about this one.

And this is again just to put things in perspective. And why am I bringing this up? Uh, I'm bringing this up, uh, of to highlight that the IAEA is not as independent as they might have you believe. So, uh, it just doesn't work that way, because if it is the case, then why IAEA is not going to Israel to check its nuclear program?

And Israel has a nuclear program. It has been having a nuclear program since the '60s. As a matter of fact, if you only think about the fate of JFK.

Just put the two together and figure out why.

So, and that's again, to me that makes more sense to address this point, but I'm not here to make judgments here. I'm here to provide information and let you decide for yourself.

So before I'll do my conclusion here, I want to just let you know one information. Jayant Bahndari, be here on the 30th at 19:15 Central Standard Time.

We're going to be addressing, uh, the topic of India, except we're not going to do it on this platform, we're going to do it on the other. So I'll, I'll let you know when that time comes. Uh, it's just because you all know, uh, they took down my video last time that I did about BRICS because I exposed something they didn't want to, and the order came down to take down my video unjustly.

That's what I'm saying.

The more people we reach around the world, the more people will wake up to the truth and start hearing the truth and realize where they can distinguish between, uh, facts and fiction, between the truth and the mainstream media, between the, the truth and the lies, and what have you.

So All right, here is my, uh, here is my conclusion for you before I share some clips with you.

There's, there's a few clips for you guys.

So, uh, the, uh, IEA in my opinion is not credible. That's the thing. It's, it's kind of— if, if it has to be, its credibility lies in, in treating all the countries similar way. You don't favor one over the other. You don't turn your blind eye on one over the other. You don't favor one over the other. When you do— and when you do your analysis or reports, you do them objectively. And I don't feel— I don't fear knowing what I know over the past 20 years or what have you, even 25, and knowing what I know about the IEA. I never felt that it is trustworthy. And still hold the same views today. So, uh, even though some would say, well, IAEA remain the best technical defense against secret nuclear weapons, uh, but at the same time, when you think about a watchdog like IAEA without enforcement power, can be sort of blindfolded by any sovereign nation willing to take the risk.

And that's exactly what Israel is doing. Israel is saying to IAEA, forget even mention about our names your inspections.

So, and that is why Iran has to make a serious decision regarding this, because once you cut them off, once you cut off the IAEA once for all, that's it. You embark on a different journey, the same way North Korea did. So, no, because, uh, uh, that's just the way I see it. So, so what do you think? I'm gonna ask you a question and I would like you to share your opinion. If a country cuts off inspector access entirely, should the international community view it as an immediate admission of guilt or a sovereign right to self-defense? So let me repeat that. If a country— that we're not talking just Iran— if a country, doesn't matter, cuts off inspector access entirely? Should the international community view it as an immediate admission of guilt or a sovereign right to self-defense? So let me know your thoughts in the comment section.

I would truly, truly appreciate you doing that.

So let me, uh, let me share, uh, some clips with you first. So we're going to start the first one with McGregor. Take a listen here, please.

I think he's ultimately obeying. I think President Trump is not really president of the United States. I think he's ultimately obeying the orders that's— that are given to him by Mr. Netanyahu and his government. I think that's one of the reasons you've seen so much vacillation. Now, some of the vacillation is a function of Donald Trump's efforts to manipulate the marketplace, uh, that's obvious. But in terms of meaningful agreements, we have none yet. Nor are we likely to see anything in the meantime as long as the Israelis exercise veto power. And Netanyahu has veto power over everything and anything that President Trump does. Now the question is, could that change? I don't know. I would hope so, but thus far I think that's pretty clear. And you've already hit the nail on the head. The Israelis have tended to treat our ongoing hostilities with Iran as something they can exploit to busy themselves elsewhere, uh, finish the job in southern Lebanon, finish the job in Gaza, uh, in pursuit of the Greater Israel Project. But that doesn't mean that they're going to sign on for peace with Iran because they want something that we have not been able to deliver, and that is the destruction of Iran. All you have to do is go back and look at the various goals that we set for ourselves. We started off with this ridiculous notion that there were millions of people in Iran that wanted to dispose of their own government. They sent in the CIA and the Mossad and probably MI6 to try and stir this up. It failed. The government remained strong. And so then the— what was the new goal? Well, it's decapitation. We just have to go in and kill all the leaders. And like most states in the Middle East, Iran will fall apart. Iran is not like most states in the Middle East. Iran is a civilizational state. It's existed for 2,000+ years. Uh, bombing them isn't going to make much difference in the grand scheme of things, but we didn't see it that way. We grossly underestimated them, overestimated ourselves. And that's because we tend to project our feelings and thinking and values on others. And we say frequently in the Pentagon in Washington, well, we wouldn't put up with this. This is something we would never tolerate. And we forget that the rest of the world thinks differently from us. So that failed. The decapitation has failed. The first several weeks of intensive bombing have failed. So now we still are at a kind of pause. It's not a complete pause because we still have violence. We still have exchanges of gunfire and so forth. The question is what comes next? And the only thing left for us is the destruction of the Iranian state and its society. And that's what I always thought it would come down to, because that's really what Israel demands. Israel's strategic position has not really improved over the last several years. It's gotten much worse. They've created more enemies than they ever had in the past. Uh, Iran is not the only capable state out there that can present real resistance to them, but they're afraid that if they don't make an example of Iran, everything in the region that they've tried to create for themselves will be at risk and probably won't survive. So you've got to destroy Iran. I don't think President Trump personally is interested in that, but, uh, I'm not sure he really cares. I think he's beginning to care more, but for reasons that don't have much to do with Iran, that have a lot more to do with us. And we can talk about that.

All right. I just want you to hear this from Colonel McGregor himself. Speaking of Israelis, I'm verifying some information regarding Israeli soldiers that's been going to India for vacation. Makes you just wonder. So I will look into that and report back to you.

Uh, next one is from Albania.

Some of you might think about what this has to do with what we're talking about.

It's, uh, it's an interesting thing because what started as a demonstration against a project by Donald Trump's kids, Ivanka mainly, uh, uh, it turns out to be now an anti-corruption movement for the entire country.

And I found it very interesting because we do have this kind of problems right here. Take a listen, please.

It's of Albania taking to the streets to protest not just Donald Trump, Jared Kushner, and Ivanka Trump, but this has turned into a massive anti-corruption movement. The people of Albania are fed up with the current establishment government in office, and it's no longer just about one Trump resort. It's about a system that has fundamentally failed the residents of Albania, and they are rising up in a way we have not seen in a long, long time. Mind you, this represents nearly a majority of the population in the entire country. Over a million people would be a significant, significant protest, definitely hundreds of thousands of people on the streets. Final tallies obviously won't be confirmed for a while. But it's no longer just about Trump. They're still protesting the Kushners and the Trumps, but now they're protesting the entire government as a whole and turning it into a massive anti-corruption movement.

This is real. So I just want you to be aware of it. Speaking of Kushner, by the way, there are some information being confirmed that Kushner has been getting the money from the Gulf States while playing both sides., during this Iran war. So just very, very interesting dynamics. Next one is from Tucker Carlson, of course, and this one has to do with, uh, what I mentioned to you, uh, last time regarding, uh, uh, Turkey, the video I did for you about a few days ago. So take a listen.

Turkish President Erdogan stated any attack on Iran will be Turkey has just declared a— sorry— full military alliance with Iran. Turkish President Erdogan stated any attack on Iran will be considered an attack on Turkey. We will jointly defend our sovereignty and the oppressed against Zionist expansionism. Israel immediately condemned the alliance as an existential threat and vowed to take all necessary measures to defend itself. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called it the darkest alliance of aggressors in modern history. The United States expressed extreme alarm. With Turkey hosting critical NATO bases, including Incirlik, Washington now faces a nightmare scenario of a key ally aligning militarily with Iran. Pentagon officials have begun activating contingency plans for potential base closures or restricted access. European leaders described the development as deeply destabilizing, while Russia and China welcomed what they called a necessary counterbalance to US dominance in the region. Oil prices surged more than 9% on fears of disrupted supply routes. Global stock markets tumbled With defense stocks in Western nations soaring, the world is now watching to see how Washington, Jerusalem, and other capitals respond to Turkey's historic pivot.

Well, I would say if Turkey really means this, then they should withdraw from NATO, ask the US to leave, and that's it. That's the way.

Some countries wanted to have it both ways, and it usually doesn't end well.

Anyway, just ask India about that.

Uh, next one is about Trump.

Uh, hold on, let me put it up for you here. Oh yeah, this one has to do with our domestic politics.

Something major happened in Congress that he didn't see it coming, and now he is shocked at, at this.

Breaking news, Donald Trump receives the worst news of his life today in a move that has shaken the foundations of power in Washington. The United States Congress has just made a historic decision that has left the entire country speechless. What seemed impossible has just happened. Republicans have joined forces with the Democratic Party to completely block Trump's new administration. The blow has been devastating. Trump, accustomed to controlling his environment with an iron fist, was paralyzed in front of the cameras when he heard the news. His own party betrayed him without warning, stabbing him in the back in a way he could never have imagined. The silence in the White House was absolute. No one dared to speak while outside the media exploded with the news. Congress has just curbed Trump's power with full support. The implications are enormous. His agenda is suspended, his plans blocked, and his political future up in the air. Millions of people are wondering what will happen now. Is the Trump era over, or is this just the beginning of a brutal battle for power? Share before they delete it, because what started as a normal day ended with the presidency reeling before the eyes of the entire country.

Yeah, because basically, uh, what Congress did is that they restricted now Donald Trump's war powers regarding, uh, the war with Iran. So that's basically what this amounts to, and he didn't expect it. He didn't see this coming because he was always assuming. All right, this one here, once again from Colonel McGregor, it's, it's the content of it that is more important for you to hear about. Take a listen, please.

Has him completely cornered. Donald Trump signed a deal with Iran, and now Iran has him completely cornered. Every single thing he's posting about this agreement is being directly contradicted on the record by the Iranian government itself. Let's go through it line by line, because this is one of the most embarrassing weeks of his presidency, and he doesn't even seem to realize it yet. Trump posted this morning that Iran has, quote, fully and completely agreed to the highest level of nuclear inspections long into the future. Here's the problem, Donald. Iran's foreign ministry spokesperson said the exact opposite at a press conference today, stating plainly there are no plans whatsoever for the IAEA to inspect Iran's damaged nuclear sites, and that there hasn't even been a meeting with the agency's director general. Think about that for a second. If the inspections were really happening, wouldn't the head of the IAEA be the first person confirming it? Instead, silence, because it isn't happening. Trump also claimed the unfrozen funds somewhere around $12 billion, are going to be used by Iran to buy American corn, wheat, and soybeans. Iran's response, again from their own foreign ministry: "We will decide how to use our own money based on our own interests, and there is no requirement to buy anything from American farmers." So that's two major claims from the President of the United States that the other party to the agreement is flatly denying happened. Then there's the oil number. Trump bragged that 19 million barrels flowed through the Strait of Hormuz yesterday, calling it an all-time record. It's not. Last year's average was 20 million barrels a day. And here's the part he conveniently left out: most of that oil was Iranian crude headed to Asia, making Iran billions of dollars a day while sanctions on its oil and tankers are lifted. Meanwhile, back home, gas prices are climbing, not falling. Ohio's pushing toward $4 a gallon. Florida's right behind it. Michigan's already passed $4.25. And the Strategic Petroleum Reserve just dropped another 9 million barrels, putting it at its lowest level since 1983— functionally near the bottom of the tank. That's not a position of strength to negotiate from. That's the opposite. And even Rupert Murdoch's own New York Post ran a cover mocking the optics of handing Iran a $10 billion boost before any final nuclear deal was even signed. Iran's president, for his part, isn't playing along with the spin either. His message was simple and pointed: Progress will be measured by actual compliance with the written agreement, not by statements made outside of it. In other words, stop narrating a different deal than the one that was actually signed. And while all this is happening, Iran's been busy. Their delegation went straight from the Switzerland talks to Oman, where Iran and Oman issued a joint statement agreeing to jointly administer navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, including setting service costs, something the memorandum of understanding actually allows. Then it was on to Pakistan, where Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif, the mediator the U.S. is relying on here, said publicly there can't be a double standard where some countries get ballistic missiles and Iran doesn't. He also took a clear shot at Israel, calling out unnamed spoilers trying to scuttle the peace deal. And he thanked Iran's leadership directly for trusting Pakistan to mediate honestly. On Fox, the administration's response to all this contradiction was basically, "Well, that's just what Iran says for its domestic audience." Which is rich, considering that's exactly what critics say Trump is doing for his own domestic audience: dressing up a messy, expensive outcome as a clean victory. And it is expensive. The Pentagon— sorry, the Department of War— just told Congress it needs another $80 billion on top of what's already been spent on this conflict. There are also new details emerging about that F-15 Strike Eagle shot down over Iran back in April, with multiple sources describing a drone formation in the air that moved like a single coordinated organism—dozens of drones interlinked—something that's reportedly made people inside the Defense Department very nervous. Meanwhile, the administration's attention is apparently split between an actual international crisis and a public meltdown over the reflecting pool at the National Mall, where Trump claimed vandals took box cutters to it overnight, despite there being a much simpler explanation involving motorcade damage and a botched paint job. So here's where we are. Iran is making billions of dollars a day, has flatly denied agreeing to most of what Trump claims, has lined up support from both Oman and Pakistan and is putting everything in writing specifically because, in their own words, they know they can't trust what Washington says afterward.

All right, I just want you to hear this for yourself because sometimes content matters a lot. And the last one pertains to World Cup. Yes, I know because we have them right here in Dallas. As a matter of fact, but this one, it's an interesting, uh, one. Before I, before I play it, uh, by the way, there is an incident that happened yesterday because Japan was playing right here in Dallas. Uh, what happened yesterday, a Japanese fan displayed the map. You all know the map of Japan with the, with the circle red. I know, but it wasn't that flag that was played, it was the imperialism flag that was way back in World War. That was the one that was displayed, which in the US it was some conversation. I saw some social media comments regarding that. Some suggested that the mindset of the imperialism within Japan is being, uh, reawakened. I don't know, given what's going on right now between China and Philippines, uh, the tensions that's going on, which I will cover for you next week. As we move forward. Uh, the live— the livestream— the, uh, the, uh, clip I want to play is about Lionel Messi, which, by the way, I don't— I don't see him as, uh, uh, Maradona was far better. So I kind of, uh, I was used to play sweeper, uh, but in my opinion, Maradona was far better than Messi. But that's not about that. This is about what Messi did a few years ago. This is why they say what you do, be careful what you do, because it will always can catch up with you. So take a listen, please.

See, is from 13 years ago, and hope— listen, this picture of Lionel Messi is from 13 years ago, and hopefully his views have changed since.

But this, this is, by the way, kissing the wall in Israel, because as you know, there are a lot, a lot of Jewish in, in Argentina.

This is why Diego Maradona will always be the real GOAT. Messi even admitted that himself, but it's like, why'd you kiss the wall then? Maradona was a committed anti-imperialist his entire life. Here he is after the US invasion of Iraq wearing a shirt that says George Bush is a war criminal. And he wasn't just a liberal progressive either, the man was down with revolution. Here he is hanging out with the Cuban communist leader Fidel Castro and wearing Che Guevara on his shirt. He also attended a soccer game with Hugo Chavez and supported his government, which always stood in solidarity with Palestine. And Messi is an incredible player, but he needs to understand that this is what made Diego Maradona a legend. The fact that he was a freaking amazing athlete and he stood up to the largest and most evil empire on earth. It's very similar to Muhammad Ali. This is what made him a larger-than-life figure who will be remembered forever. I can't believe Messi kissed the wall, man.

Come on.

Yeah, it's, uh, really the point of this is the—

is when you take stand, you take stand when it matters. That's my point. You take stand when it matters. I mean, I've experienced this one right here on, on the channels where he's trying to silence me somehow because, you know, I speak— I'm not saying something outrageous. I'm— all I'm stating is the fact, is the fact. But even for that, the kind of like They can scare you with this and shut down, uh, take down this video, shut down this, put a strike, put this and this and that. What do you think you're trying to do, intimidate me? For what?

You know, there's only one life to be lived, and you take stand for what? You think stand for that? So anyway, I just wanted to share this with you.

I will, by the way, I will be working on the stories for the Philippines and, and China because I see something coming up down the pipe. Uh, on the 30th, I will have Giant Bahandari here at, uh, and we're gonna do it not here, but here in a conversation. We're gonna do it on the other platform because of the topics that I'm gonna be addressing, uh, for that. Uh, before I leave, uh, I want to say thank you to, uh, Harry Lukel. Harry Lukel has been an avid supporter and still an avid supporter for the channel. I remember Harry Lukel from when I started the channel, was one of the the first ones to really support the channel financially with this Super Sticker. So thank you very much, Harry, truly, truly appreciate you. And by the way, uh, your location, I believe, uh, Netherlands is going to be playing, uh, Morocco for the next round. So that will be an interesting, interesting game. So never trust United Arab Emirates, they are snakes. A lot of people will agree with you on that, a lot, a lot will agree. As a matter of fact, uh, most of the— and again, I'm not generalizing, but, uh, when I see the hypocrisy within the Muslim world, makes me just shake my head. So, so I can, I can't believe that one. So once again, thank you very much, Harry. Truly appreciate you, man, for that. Uh, to just want to give you an update about the campaign for the upcoming trip to Asia, uh, to those who wants to support uh, this, uh, trip. It's right here is the link for it. We are still at 49%. I'm really hoping to reach this goal by the end of July because I intend to do the trip in August-September time frame. So to those who wanted to support the, the, the trip, here, here is the, the, the, the link. Our objective is to reach $10,000 by the end of July. So I'm very grateful already to those who were able to support or to donate in support of this trip. I also want to share the link for the channel to those who want— you know the type of information I'm sharing with you, uh, I do a lot of research, I spend time. So if you want to support the channel, you know what's need to be done, and I'm very, very grateful to you. So And as to my books, this is the link for, uh, to those who wants a copy, uh, for my, uh, my, my books, the Saudi book, uh, the Russia, Iran, and American foreign policy. And I am working currently on the, uh, I'm working currently on the China book, so it will be released soon in the time. Uh, and speaking of the books, there was something else I was gonna say. Now I draw a blank on it. Uh, so my books, my, uh, yeah, I couldn't remember. I'm getting old. So anyway, uh, I, as I said, I will be working on the stories for you for next week. I wish you a safe and relaxing weekend, and I look forward to seeing you next week. As always, remember geopolitics impact your daily life, uh, in more— oh, oh, oh, oh, sorry, sorry, sorry, I take that back.

I remembered I'm gonna be doing an exclusive Q&A for the members.

As you know, there are members who've been paying, uh, for the channel here in the channel and all that. I need to do something exclusively just for the members, so I'll, I'll let you know when I set the dates, which will be within a week, week and a half or so. We'll set the date and the time, and I will be happy to entertain all your questions for the members. I look forward to that. So, and once again, uh, if, uh, enjoy this, remember to subscribe, hit the like button. As always, remember, geopolitics impacts your daily life in more ways than one. Till next time, bye-bye.