Epstein, Mossad and global networks. Who has leverage on Polish elites? Witold Gadowski

Gadowski contrasts Poland's chaotic 2022 open-door policy with even impoverished Lebanon's establishment of filtration camps for Syrian refugees. He warns that without dispersion, diaspora enclaves will become centres for Ukrainian nationalist organisers, agents of foreign services, and a population ready to sell services to the highest bidder. The immediate post-war stage, he predicts, will bring a wave of traumatised, potentially combat-hardened men whose entry must be rigorously controlled. He insists that the war-ending moment must trigger a lockdown of the border, not a further opening, and that a clear system of deportation for those who pose a risk is necessary, however harsh it sounds.

Gadowski recounts how in Kraków, a traditionally centrist/municipal city, the right cannot win alone. He therefore orchestrated a 'coalition from the left to the right' solely to trigger a referendum on the mayor and city council. They have already gathered the required signatures, making the referendum certain before the summer holidays. He founded the 'Obrona Polaków' movement with dozens of local nests that coordinate such actions. He presents this as the core of his 'lokalizm' philosophy – the antidote to globalism, where people act where they can actually grasp the levers of power. He urges listeners to adopt the same model: 'Myśl globalnie, działaj lokalnie.' (Think globally, act locally.)

Gadowski explains that this method enabled him to foresee the 2020 pandemic as a political operation (not a pure health crisis), the 2022 open-border policy leading to a crime wave, and the destruction of Polish agriculture by Ukrainian agroholdings. He stresses that he always brings everything back to the Polish 'patch', because that is what matters most for his audience. The framework prevents falling for abstract globalist narratives that neglect concrete national consequences. He contrasts his approach with the mainstream media's tendency to present emotionally charged stories without dissecting cause and effect.

He describes his earlier belief that Duda would fight for a stronger Poland. After the elections, despite personal connections and the presence of his friends in the presidential chancellery, Duda declined to give him an interview. Gadowski interprets this as fear or disregard, and ultimately concludes that Duda's weakness—preferring good relations over decisive action—was a betrayal of his mandate. He states bluntly that one becomes president not to be liked but to slam a fist on the table and fight for Poland, something Duda never did.

He explains that after years of being labeled a conspiracy theorist for talking about Epstein, he realized that the truly dark material—adrenochrome, satanic rituals, the fate of Haitian orphans taken by the Clinton Foundation—remains unprovable from open sources alone. He states that a proper investigation would require a large, trusted journalistic guild. In the meantime, he puts the material into fiction, where he can depict the horror through characters and let readers feel the emotional truth. This approach, he says, shields him legally: if sued, he can reply 'I am a writer, it's poetic license.'

He insists that the Polish border must not become a 'barn gate' and that the immediate introduction of the Schengen Information System (VIS) and rigorous screening is vital. He believes the current lack of policy is reckless and will lead to a second wave of problems, including a rise in sabotage (which he claims is already 100% carried out by Ukrainian nationals). He calls for filtration and deportation of those posing a threat, contrasting Poland with even war-torn Lebanon, which established filtering camps for Syrian refugees. The absence of such measures, he says, is a dereliction of duty that will turn Poland into a host for a hostile parallel society.

Gadowski references the case of Jonathan Pollard, an American naval intelligence analyst who spied for Mossad, was jailed, then later granted Israeli citizenship and welcomed by Netanyahu, to illustrate how the US-Israel 'ally' relationship operates through espionage and reward. He contrasts the media silence on Maxwell's Mossad ties with the recent trend of mainstream outlets finally discussing Epstein, suggesting the taboo broke only because some want to see Trump implicated. He also draws a parallel to the 'afera podkarpacka' (Podkarpacie affair), which he says served the same kompromat function against Polish elites via SBU/KGB-linked brothers.

He explains that because the Security Service (SB) and Military Information Services (WSI) had a left-wing worldview, the resulting media naturally pushed a leftist agenda. Any attempt to create a genuine right-wing or Catholic television was blocked – he gives the example of Nikola Grauso's local TV stations raided by anti-terrorist units, and the Catholic Church's failure to launch a strong media outlet due to infiltration and kompromat on bishops. He sees the current media, including the normalization of gender ideology and LGBT politics, as a direct product of this engineered landscape. He adds that even now, talking about Panama Papers' link to TVN is taboo, as is the origin of Polsat.