He argues that we're seeing a bad (but not worst) case contingency plan on the part of the Americans, whose hand was forced by the Israelis. While not a fan of the war, he tries to parse Trump's words in such a way as to see the behind-the-scenes rationale for things. Actually matches up quite well with what we know, or think we know, of how Trump and the administration see Israel and Netanyahu in private (e.g., Tucker's statements, things the C's have said at various times over the past years, etc.).
It was interesting.
As he says (him saying personally), he finds Trump's speaking pretty sickening /disgusting - and more, on the surface, yet below on another level there is something else going on, and this situation should possibly be seen as something else. Some of his example makes some sense.
Going back in the last year, Trump cuts short G7, meets with Putin in Alaska, backchannels with Xi and meets with Zelensky who he must despise, and then welcomes Ahmed al-Sharaa aka al-Julan, aka head-chopper from HTS. On top of that, there is the revolving door of B-yahweh into Congress and the oval office with his constant demands. How does anyone handle this when there are crazies all around (Paula White-Cain, Jared, Cruz and on and on) - does not recognize, does he act the fool and blow his base away, does he blend in and keep your friends close and your enemies closer, is he cut from the same cloth? Then there is the military and other world leaders who have more than disappointed their own citizens. What a mess.
With Joaquin's talk, it puts another dynamic into it all that is hard to decipher. One thing is, that if Trump is constantly backchanneling (and given the stakes he would) with Xi and Putin, and then Trump rushes across the sea with what seems like his whole fleet (i.e., war is coming), was he doing this for other counter reasons, reasons of blackmail. It is indeed the big showdown? That is what Joaguin is looking at.
Dangerous, the understatement.
Try not to view this in terms of Syria:
(Windmill knight) Is the situation in Syria going to escalate to a third world war as some people think?
A: No. But there may be a terrorist dirty nuke or two!
Q: (L) And when you say, "terrorist", we assume that that should be in quotes?
A: Yes
Q: (Beau) If Trump is elected, will he actually change American foreign policy?
A: Will try.
Q: (Pierre) Doesn't mean he will succeed.
(Joe) If you try...
(Pierre) That's better than...
A: Too many variables.
Q: (L) So, too many variables to make a call on that.
(Beau) Yeah.
Taken in conjunction with this regarding the quorum's program change:
(Joe) The resistance that the quorum wanted. In the last session, they said that there was going to be a program change and that it turned out it was going to be the assassination of Trump and that program change needed to happen. This needed to happen because there wasn't enough resistance from the people to achieve balance.
(L) In other words, did it galvanize people?
A: Close.
Q: (Joe) So can resistance mean...
(L) Like resistance to a disease?
(Joe) Well, yeah, in a certain sense. We think of resistance as people on the streets shouting, "Down with this sort of thing!"
(L) Down with your side, down with my side.
(Joe) Is resistance also even more so like you said, awake people being aware, and resistance like an internal resistance?
A: The imbalance was so severe that the STS side risked a severe violation of free will at a level that would have resulted in necessary degaussing from natural factors of balance.
Q: (L) So they were too dirty and devious.
A: Yes.
Q: (L) They did too much for too long and they really violated the free will of the people on this planet.
A: Yes.
For more on nuclear bombs and blackmail, check out Session 9 September 2000 as a whole (albeit 25-years ago). Laura does make the point:
Q: (L) Well, considering the incredible surveillance capabilities of the U.S. government, not to mention possible alien technology, it is hardly likely that any such group would get far in such a plan. Not only that, since there is already a One World Government, and ALL nations are already under the control of the human/alien Consortium, they certainly aren't going to go around blowing up what they already own. So, any information of this kind is purely and simply disinformation designed to confuse and disrupt and distract. Is that correct?
A: Close, and one can buy "low yield" weapons from disenfranchised Russians, but do they work?
January 2003:
Q: Yet, you said the United States would be bombed, and on another occasion you said there would not be a nuclear war.
A: "Bombs" are not all "nuclear." And, there are "natural bombs."
(cold war indentions and all that) and not to be forgotten, although 9/11 is the subject:
Q: (A) I want to ask about the collapse of the World Trade Center. There is evidence of seismicity and unusual pulses that seem to have simply disintegrated matter.
A: Very good observation, but that does not mean human sabotage either. There were certainly "pulses." They were of a "natural" source that was "sculpted" or "shaped" and directed.
Q: What do you mean by a 'natural source?'
A: Energies of the planet artificially collected and disbursed. An artificial earthquake sort of.
Q: But we are still talking about technology. Where is the operational center for this type of thing?
A: 4th density technology.
Q: This we know. But there are human brains involved. What brains are behind this?
A: Did you ever wonder why the pentagon is a pentagon? Hint!
Q: Is that why they specifically included the Pentagon as one of the buildings to be hit in the 9-11 attack; to allay suspicions?
A: Yup!
Q: Are there 4th density sections to the Pentagon?
A: Absolutely. It is a "deep cover" kind of place.
Q: (A) There is this Pentagon, then there is another superpower - Russia - and still another - China...
A: There is only one. The U.S. just happens to be the center.
Jump forward to March 2014 (concerning Crimea and much more):
A: There is likely to be a bit of interdimensional blackmail going on. How likely do you think it is for the "reality creating" US PTB to back down from their natural state of being the world's biggest bully?
Q: (Pierre) Why did those higher entities want the PTB to back down concerning Crimea and Russia?
A: They understand what the consequences are.
Q: (Perceval) So their whole thing is all about control...nuclear or global war, and that's the end of it. They've always wanted to control things and squeeze the people even tighter. (L) Well, the only thing that ever scares or stops a psychopath is a bigger psychopath. Um, I just have the feeling that somehow MOSSAD is involved in all of this business, like maybe even this plane thing. It's just too, um...
A: Maybe they live up to their motto?
Q: (L) "By way of deception, thou shalt do war." So that would suggest that, at some level, MOSSAD is involved with these advisors or interpreters, or somehow... (Perceval) They've said in the past that MOSSAD is near the top of the hierarchy. (L) So, at the top of MOSSAD, there's the interface with the hyperdimensional STS beings, more or less.
A: Yes.
[watch till end]:
