What is the crack with PBD ? Is he really MEK ? Why he does not like Reza Pahlavi?

Here is the recording of our latest session. The destruction of a sovereign nation often begins with a single, unverified lie that is repeated until it calcifies into history. An accusation made without evidence is not an inquiry. It is a weapon. In our latest daily session, we conducted a forensic audit of the narrative that severed the West from its most critical ally in the Middle East. The target was the accepted history of the previous monarchy in Iran as a "torture state." Specifically, we dissected the 1976 Amnesty International report that served as the primary indictment against the regime. The collective analysis revealed a document built not on forensic proof, but on the frustration of access. The report admits to relying on hearsay and the complaints of political prisoners regarding "brands of cigarettes" rather than documented physical trauma. A sharp friction emerged within the discussion regarding the standard of judgment. A member proposed a stance of "historical agnosticism," arguing that a lack of transparency from the security services of the time suggests we should assume a probability of guilt. This violation of the presumption of innocence was met with a ruthless rebuttal. In both law and history, the burden of proof rests entirely on the shoulders of the claimant. To destroy a reputation based on a lack of counter-evidence is a logical fallacy that permits any slander to become truth. The room pivoted to the character evidence of the accused. We reviewed the historical record of a leader who pardoned his own would-be assassins and frequently clashed with his own security apparatus to demand the release of prisoners. To accuse a ruler who viewed his reign as a pedagogical mission of systematic sadism requires a smoking gun. None exists. We concluded that institutions driven by ideological capture have no standing to issue verdicts. When the prosecutor is a known liar, the case must be dismissed. This is not a space for the passive consumption of media narratives. We dissect history with the rigor of a courtroom and the honesty of a confessional. If you are prepared to challenge the comfortable lies of the last century and demand evidence where others accept hearsay, your seat at the table is waiting. View the calendar at this link to join our next discussion: https://www.skool.com/libertypolitics/calendar

Here is the recording of our latest session. History is rarely written by the victors. It is written by the observers who decide which victories fit their preferred narrative. When a revolution fails to validate the worldview of the chattering class, it is simply edited out of the broadcast. In our latest session, the group conducted a forensic analysis of the media blackout regarding the uprising in Iran. The consensus was stark. We are witnessing a geopolitical earthquake comparable to the fall of the Berlin Wall, yet the West is watching golf. The silence from major networks is not a product of ignorance. It is a product of cognitive dissonance. The room identified the core malfunction. The Iranian protestors are failing to follow the approved script. They are not chanting anti-imperialist slogans or burning American flags. They are calling for the return of a constitutional monarchy. They are signaling friendship with Israel. They are explicitly rejecting the values of the Islamic Revolution. For a Western media apparatus trained to view the world through the lens of "oppressed versus oppressor," this is a glitch in the matrix. A pro-American, nationalist revolution is unintelligible to them. Consequently, they pretend it is not happening. One member, a physician, noted that the apathy is not limited to the West. Regional actors like Qatar are equally muted, but for different reasons. A secular, Western-aligned Iran destroys the balance of power in the Middle East. Al Jazeera’s silence is a strategic necessity for the survival of the current Islamist order. There was brief friction when the discussion turned to the future economy of a free Iran. A suggestion was made to dismantle oil infrastructure in favor of green energy. The collective response was swift and merciless. The group argued that imposing Western environmental anxieties on a recovering nation is a form of sabotage. Liberty requires economic sovereignty, and sovereignty runs on energy. The session concluded with a grim realization. The West is not reporting on this revolution because they cannot co-opt it. The Iranian people are dismantling the very ideologies that Western universities spend billions to uphold.

Why all European media is silent...?