GOAL 🇪🇬

👀 View quoted note →

if you haven't paid your rent with btc are you even a bitcoiner? View quoted note →

👀 View quoted note →

Finally doing an aqiqah for my youngest (yes, we are a couple years late). Been chilling at the butcher all afternoon. About to taste some fresh off the grill 🥩

👀 View quoted note →

Because folks be asking for clarity today I'll do a breakdown of the video. But this will only be a response to the summary Gemini made so if anything is off the blame goes to AI 😹 View quoted note → ✨ Key themes and analysis: • The Islamabad MoU (6:43 - 12:44): The speaker breaks down the 14-point agreement, noting it establishes a permanent end to military operations, includes a U.S. commitment to remove forces near Iran, and signals a shift where Gulf capital (rather than U.S. tunds) will lead regional reconstruction. • The Purge of Hardliners (14:47 - 18:27): Bolsen argues that the recent assassination of key IRGC commanders and leadership was an "outsourced coup" that effectively removed the obstacles to the Iranian pragmatists' strategic goals, with the new Supreme Leader (Mujtaba Khamenei) serving as a rubber stamp for these changes. • The Future of Chokepoints (25:37 - 33:24): A major focus is placed on the Strait of Hormuz. The speaker contends that Iran is asserting sovereignty to charge transit fees, challenging the post-WWIl "freedom of navigation" framework and setting a precedent for other nations to reclaim leverage over strategic maritime chokepoints like the Strait of Malacca. • The Abandonment of Israel (2:49 - 5:12, 33:25 - 36:09): The analysis suggests Israel is being systematically isolated and "jettisoned" by the United States. The speaker highlights that Netanyahu was excluded from the MoU negotiations, indicating that the Zionist ideological project is no longer compatible with the new Gulf-managed regional architecture. • Collective Sovereignty vs. Dependency (38:00 - 41:43): Bolsen defends his thesis that the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) is not simply replicating the Western IMF/World Bank model but is building a genuinely Muslim-led financial architecture aimed at creating collective regional autonomy. The speaker concludes by emphasizing the importance of objective analysis over emotional reactions to news, urging viewers to focus on the "geopolitical physics" and the long-term trajectory of the transition rather than individual headlines. ✍️ Okay, so that was the summary Gemini made. I'll now provide a response to the 5 points that were covered. 1. The MoU - There's 14 points and the devil's in the details as they say. Not going to get into all of them. only 2 were highlighted and that first paragraph is the key to the whole thing. If military operations don't end, then nothing else happens and we return to war. Israel has already said they don't acknowledge this and if you think Trump is actually going to roll back 50+ years of foreign policy then I know of some crypto-currency projects you might be interested in. This is really just a temporary justification paper pushed to walk back American unconditional surrender which is unacceptable from an American position. We will be back to war probably within a year, maybe before the end of this year. Either way the whole MoU is about as valuable as a Trump tweet until paragraph one is implemented. If, and only when that is done do the financial implications start to mean anything. The fact that GCC will be paying jizya to Iran is hard to miss and hard to imagine that framing would be exploited to spark up more conflict later. Right now Chinese funds are leading regional reconstruction and that is more interesting to observe than future potentialities. However, if these future GCC funds to ever materialize this wouldn't technically be any different than the American's paying it since the funds would still be originating from the same western/riba system. The difference is logistical, not technical. And Iran does not need these funds and has been outside the global economic system for decades and (like NK) done remarkably well. Even more so now that Hormuz is fully in their control and they can get revenue from service fees for management. Iranian control of Hormuz is what changed the map and that is really what the 14 points are solidifying. The economics of the reparations funds are still mostly speculative and may take years to materialize (look at Iraq reconstruction for example). With the MoU the American's effectively surrendered Hormuz and with that 20% of the world's petroleum and LNG supply. Again history does not tell us the Israeli's and American deep state will just stand by and let that slide. 2. The Purge of Hardliners - This is the most laughable "theory" I've seen Bolsen champion. It is literally RAND policy from over 20 years ago. And guess what, it failed! The declared goal (if they had a goal) of regime change replaced one Khamenei with Khamenei 2.0 and completely ignores the internal political situation in Iran. Iran is a theocratic republic. The IRGC has not been weakened and the Iranian youth are more pro-Khamenei than supportive of Pezeshkian who likely wouldn't survive a referendum and had to threaten resigning in order to get gain support for the MoU. In addition the "proxies" still exist. Hezbollah and AnsarAllah both still exist and Hezbollah was basically included in the MoU as well. None of that equals the hardliner purge Bolsen wants to imagine and most importantly that position is the RAND position (and openly the Zionist position as well). This is one of the reasons I find Bolsen a propagandist, because he is subtly getting you to agree with the ideas and plans of the opposition. 3. Future Chokepoints - This part is the core analysis of the outcome of the war. I don't need to repeat what I said earlier about Hormuz but the idea that "freedom of navigation" existed is an illusion. Post-WWII water-way navigation was controlled and maintained by the Americans but it came at the price of the USD and IMF loans. Covid proved that the Americans no longer controlled these logistics enough to prevent catastrophe this is simply a consequence of that. Malacca could well be another in a few years. Same with Taipei. American knows this and is already pivoting to confront China in the Pacific and Russia in the Arctic. All this is pretty straightforward. The main thing I'm highlighting is that shipping has never been "free". It comes at a cost and requires regular maintenance. What we are actually moving to is going to be greater efficiency, but this will be for those that can afford it first before it trickles down to everyone else. Even more important than these chokepoints is control over raw assets and compute. Iran isn't really a big player in this game so that is an important consideration in why so much attention gets put on them (and I'll leave that as an open question for contemplation). 4. Abandonment of Israel - This is again delusional. Israel refusing to be involved in the MoU has nothing to do with them being abandoned by America. This is again a Zionist talking point. The American and Israeli networks are so interconnected that we are about to legally recognize it in the next NDAA. This legislation has bipartisan support and could codify the military partnership within a year. Furthermore, Israel continues to expand in cyberspace. This is the domain I have consistently pushed as having been ignored in geo-political analysis. The MoU and results of the war have done nothing to change this digital relationship and the GCC remains occupied while Iran has held it's ground. I maintain that until this issue of cyber space is addressed in the same way as physical space, there is no final solution. 5. Sovereignty vs Dependency - This is Bolsen's thesis which I fundamentally disagree with. Primarily for the reason above (that he has failed to account for the domain of cyberspace) but also for the reason that I see no evidence that the GCC is doing anything fundamentally different than simply replicating the west (and the failed EU project in particular). Aside from digital sovereignty which I've already addressed there is the issue of financial which does not exist. Paying jizya to Iran is a replacement strategy, not collective sovereignty. It may be a step toward a relationship with Iran that could benefit the GCC in the future but I've observed the emotion on the ground and there is a lot of enmity in the air that makes me think any hope of that will need another generation to play out. But with the foundation of the GCC still resting solidly on the USD nothing has really changed. This MoU is surrender of not just the Americans but also the GCC (at least the Qataris for sure). Honestly, if I were Khamenei the easy win is to take from Putin playbook and continue to apply slow pressure on the GCC and slowly bleed them dry like has happened to Ukraine (and by proximity the EU). However, it seems he has some compassion to let us all have some space to reflect before the next round begins. Anyhow, y'all know I'm a bitcoiner so with that in mind I'm also still waiting for the GCC to get on the bitcoin standard. Oman and Iran made the halal move. I pray the GCC follows quickly (bear market is an idea time). That's all. In the spirit of clarity I'll also state my emotional biases are that I am American, I have family in Egypt, and a best friend who is Persian. Take from that what you want but personally I feel it has enhanced my perspective beyond my academic training. Again, my core problem (beyond the obvious Zionist propaganda) is that Bolsen fails to do "geopolitical physics" because he does not account for cyberspace. He's still functioning like we live in a Newtonian world when we've been past that for over a century. Call me a Zoomer but Bolsen is so 1900s. Anyhow, if you liked this and want to hear more of my geopolitical thoughts then check out this piece I did with SAIF from last year. nevent1qgs0xv59y9lfw6keetc9gez94kqs0kuc7evk0nwwdn8ytesd5q8wx2sqypewlxk9e3pmcf6p4vlxnestadmyhdhsmdwl894hsvy7kaw57vnpzmp6c7h

confirmed zionist 😹 View quoted note →