Why it’s Important to Research Both Sides of an Argument

Ben Netanyahu is at it again with war propaganda regarding Iran.
How many times have we heard Netanyahu issue war propaganda, sometimes with catastrophic consequences?
Take out the ‘n,’ add a ‘q’ and you have your answer. Over one-million Iraqi civilians were killed the last time the US fell for Netanyahu’s propaganda.
Today, I want to take you on a journey on why it’s important to research both sides of any argument or event that hits mainstream media. When we pursue our passion, we must simultaneously pursue credibility.
The lies of Netanyahu is a great way for me to show you what motivates me to write, investigate, and what some elements will be going into my contemporary fantasy trilogy, Lord of Columbia.
I like to use various outlets for reading, but I turn to history and my favorite YouTube Channels like Ron Paul Liberty Report and Blackstone Intelligence, both of which have credible links in their descriptions. Also, Jake Morphonios of Blackstone Intelligence has made several videos on how he verifies his research, so it’s a great channel to check.
Let’s take a look into the whole Iranian conflict and what is going to happen.



Netanyahu’s Lies

Benjamin Netanyahu started lying about Iran back in 1992, claiming Iran to be three years away from nuclear weapons. In 1995, Netanyahu wrote Iran would have nukes in three to five years. One year later in 1996, he addressed Congress stating if Iran acquires nukes it’d be catastrophic for the world. He claimed Iran’s nuclear program was advanced in 2002 and claimed Iran to be one to two years away from a nuke in 2009.


It’s important to note Iran abandoned their nuclear weapons program in 2003, which was confirmed by the International Atomic Energy Agency in 2011.


Finally, in 2012, he stated Iran would have a bomb in a few months, which was falsified by Israeli intelligence.
Ben Netanyahu has been anti-Iran since 1992, but as I stated in my opening paragraph, one must look at both sides of the argument. The first side of any argument is rather easy to look up as mainstream media like Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN push identical agendas, just in different manners. Yet, it’s weird they all love to push the warmongering foreign policy agenda.



Donald Trump’s Take

It’s said in each news source, Donald Trump shares similar views as Israel regarding Iran and Syria, views which are shared by ally Saudi Arabia, and the United Kingdom.
It’s clear to remember the US is occupying the most oil rich region of Syria and are also looking to get into Iran for similar reasons.
In an interview on Fox News with Bill O’Reilly, Trump states American troops are on the ground in the Middle East to, “Take back the oil. Once you go over and take back the oil, they have nothing. You have to go in, you have to go in. Well, you bomb the hell out of them and then you encircle it and then you let Mobil go in and you let our great oil companies go in, once you take that oil, they have nothing left.”
Many Trump supporters say he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize.
I don’t know about you, but does a man who’s dropped 40,000 bombs and makes a statement like this deserve to win a Nobel Peace Prize? Something else that jumps out at me here is he states to “take back the oil.”
Is the oil on our land or is it in the Middle East?
What gives America the right to take oil from anyone?
Does this not clarify the Middle East’s animosity toward America?
Trump has been pro-Israel and pro-Saudi Arabia from the beginning. My clarification on this stem as recent as Israel’s bombing of Iranian bases in Syria, killing thirty Iranians. I must make clear America and Israel are invading Syrian territory, but Iran and Russia were invited into Syria by Bashar Assad, making them invited participants in the Syrian Civil War.
We also need to look at the war in Yemen, which Saudi Arabia is using weapons manufactured in and sold by America to bomb Yemenite women and children. Keep in mind, the Syrian White Helmets staged a chemical attack in Syria where they used parents and children as propaganda props to entice animosity toward Assad throughout the world.
But when an American ally actually commits the atrocity, America turns a blind eye in both Israel’s and Saudi Arabia’s case.
Donald Trump’s position is the same double standard Obama, Bush, Clinton, and H.W. Bush held regarding Middle East Intervention.
Imagine if Iran did this to Saudi Arabia or Israel, the US would cry foul, but when Israel and Saudi Arabia do this to Iran and Yemen, it’s barely mentioned.




As seen above, it stresses the importance of accurate research. For myself, I always look into each story, and the second I saw Netanyahu addressing the world regarding Iran and the neocons in America supporting Netanyahu’s claims, I immediately grew suspicious, knowing it was a false flag.
What I want you all to look for is how the European Union, who are avid traders with Iran, and North Korea react to America’s decision regarding the Iranian nuclear agreement come May 12th. If Trump backs out of the deal, as I believe he will, what kind of message does this spread to North Korea?
The neocons and the military-industrial complex know if Trump backs out of the Iranian agreement, North Korea may return to their previous status before negotiations with the South even have a chance to kick off. It’s a story I’ll be following closely over the next couple weeks.