Blog

‘Sacred’ pyramid built by forgotten civilization in Amazon rainforest may be world’s tallest ancient structure

A strange peak in the middle of the Amazon rainforest may actually be the largest pyramid ever built in the ancient world.

Known as Cerro El Cono, this massive, pyramid-shaped formation is cloaked in mystery due to both its striking structure and the extreme difficulty of reaching it. 

The 1,310-foot-tall, pyramid-shaped hill sits in Peru’s Sierra del Divisor National Park, near the Ucayali River in the Amazon. 

Unlike other mountains, however, this extremely steep peak has a set of distinct flat surfaces – like the Great Pyramid of Giza – which have been covered by vegetation over the centuries.

Moreover, this one great peak sticks out from the completely flat rainforest around it, adding to the speculation that Cerro El Cono may not be a natural formation.

While scientists believe the giant hill is just a geological oddity, possibly a volcano or natural rock formation, local Indigenous tribes revere Cerro El Cono as a sacred mountain spirit which protects their communities, calling it ‘Andean Apu.’

This ancient tradition of worshipping mountain spirits dates back to a time before the Inca Empire, between 500 and 1000 CE, but another theory surrounding Cerro El Cono predates even these ancient myths.

Although the few studies of this area have yet to find evidence to prove it, local legends claim that Cerro El Cono sits on the ruins of an ancient pyramid built by a long forgotten civilization that lived in the Amazon.

Keep reading

Attorney Ty Clevenger BLASTS FBI’s “Weak” Excuses in Seth Rich Case — Demands Congress to Haul FBI Into Hearings: “Patel and Bondi Have Allowed the FBI to Continue its Pattern of Obfuscation and Delay”

Attorney Ty Clevenger is turning up the heat on the FBI—and he’s naming names.

Clevenger has unleashed a scathing rebuke of the FBI’s ongoing stonewalling in the Seth Rich case, accusing the bureau of peddling “incredibly weak excuses” to hide thousands of critical documents that could blow the lid off the Russia collusion hoax and the mysterious 2016 murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich.

The FBI’s refusal follows a pattern of obfuscation. For years, the agency denied even possessing Seth Rich’s laptop—until Clevenger’s legal efforts forced the FBI to admit they had it all along. Yet, the agency still refuses to disclose any metadata from Seth Rich’s electronic devices.

Last month, Clevenger filed a motion in federal court to hold the FBI in contempt for what he calls a “deliberate and willful defiance” of a court order mandating the release of key information related to murdered DNC staffer Seth Rich.

After being met with silence, Clevenger fired off a blistering letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel, torching the Bureau for what he says is a calculated and ongoing effort to conceal critical records about Seth Rich and bury the truth about the discredited Russia narrative.

Clevenger took to X on Tuesday, writing, “The FBI filed a response to our contempt motion in the Seth Rich case, and it raises more questions than it answers. The response offers some incredibly weak excuses for thousands of missing documents, and it contradicts some of the earlier admissions by the FBI.”

The attorney’s April 18, 2025, letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel, first reported by The Gateway Pundit, laid bare the FBI’s possession of critical evidence, including Seth Rich’s work laptop, a personal laptop image, a DVD, and a tape drive—items the bureau initially denied having.

Despite court orders to review these devices, the FBI has stonewalled, offering flimsy justifications for withholding thousands of documents. Clevenger argues this is a calculated effort to protect the discredited narrative that Russian hackers, not Rich, leaked DNC emails to Wikileaks in 2016.

Keep reading

Be Not Enticed To Tyranny: Oppose The Surveillance State

A surveillance state is being erected around the American public at an alarming rate. In many urban and suburban settings, anyone traveling on public streets or sidewalks will have his image captured by the ubiquitous surveillance cameras. A leisurely stroll around the neighborhood, as well as any conversation along the way, might be recorded if the city uses surveillance-enabled street lights. Even our own front yards might not be safe from the prying eyes of the state if a neighbor has a “smart” doorbell that shares data with law enforcement.

Rural areas are not exempt from this intrusion. Automatic License Plate Reader cameras (ALPRs, often contracted under the brand name FLOCK), are being placed on rural highways and on county lines in an increasing number of areas. Audio and video surveillance now cover remote corners of the Amazon Basin. Satellite technology could ensure that, one day, no square foot of the planet is unobserved.

The power of the modern surveillance state is without historical precedent. The argument that “there is no expectation of privacy in public” no longer adequately addresses the huge quantities of data that surveillance apparatus captures, stores, and analyzes.

While civil rights and other niche groups are sounding the alarm about the dangers of Big Brother, critics are surprisingly underrepresented among popular news outlets. When the topic of citizen surveillance is covered at all, these stories are often portrayed as a benign solution to a dangerous problem with the dangers to civil liberties receiving a brief nod, if even mentioned.

So why does the average citizen not have greater concern over these intrusions upon their civil liberties, in some cases even championing it? One answer to that question might be that these systems are a Trojan Horse. While they are dressed up as a gift that will protect society from all that they fear, it is the gift itself that poses the greatest threat.

The use of fear to gain power is a tale as old as time, but our unprecedented access to information has not made us any less vulnerable to it. Each decade of the lives of the modern citizen has brought about its own moral panic with the accompanying “solution.” From the Satanic Panic to the War on Drugs, fear has driven consistent relinquishment of our individual rights over time.

The justification for the modern surveillance state began on Sept. 11, 2001. The fear inspired by those terrible events was the foundation for the unconstitutional provisions of The PATRIOT Act, the advent of real-time crime centers, and the birth of the TSA. Public fear of terrorism enabled the government to impose security measures that would never have been tolerated in the absence of a crisis.

With greater public acceptance of an increasingly Orwellian environment, expanding surveillance from the airport into the streets required only amplifying stories of gang warfare, a problem portrayed as solvable only with the rampant use of cameras. 

Keep reading

Lady Gaga Brazil Concert Bombing Suspect Was Deported from U.S. by Trump

A migrant deported from the United States is the suspected terrorist behind the bombing plot at a Lady Gaga concert in Brazil.

Brazilian authorities revealed this week that they arrested 44-year-old Luis da Silva after he planned to kill Lady Gaga fans at her blowout concert on Copacabana Beach in Rio de Janeiro on Saturday.

The concert was attended by a record-breaking 2.5 million fans and da Silva wanted “livestream the execution of children and set up bombs close to the stage,” per the New York Post.

“He said that the singer was a Satanist and that he was going to perform a Satanist ritual too, killing a child during the show,” Rio de Janeiro Civil Police secretary, officer Felipe Curi, told reporters on Monday.

Brazilian authorities say da Silva was deported from the United States recently for unknown reasons. He was arrested along with a 17-year-old boy hours before the concert and the “pair allegedly used Discord to try and radicalize others, including teenagers, to carry out attacks against children and members of the LGBTQ+ community who were attending the concert,” according to the Post.

Sao Paulo congressman Erika Hilton wrote on X that da Silva led a group that “promoted pedophilia, misogyny and LGBTphobia through social media.”

Keep reading

ATF Removes Anti-Gun Propaganda Display in DC Headquarters, Leftists Say Removal “Retraumatizes” Dead Victims

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has removed a controversial anti-gun exhibit from its national headquarters.

The memorial display, called the ‘Faces of Gun Violence,’ consisted of 120 portraits of individuals killed in gun-related incidents and was installed under the Biden administration and was taken down earlier this year by Trump-appointed officials.

The decision, confirmed by the Department of Justice, marks yet another reversal of subversive gun control messaging embedded into federal agencies during Biden’s term.

The ATF has still kept the anti-gun propaganda video on its YouTube page.

DOJ spokesperson Chad Gilmartin stated that the removal was not a political act but part of broader efforts to “balance agency messaging” with the Second Amendment values affirmed by recent Supreme Court rulings.

The display included images of high-profile victims such as Robert Godwin Sr., who was murdered in Cleveland in 2017, and portraits of children killed in school shootings, alongside slain law enforcement officers. While originally presented as a neutral tribute, critics long argued that the exhibit was a thinly veiled anti-gun propaganda, intentionally placed in a federal law enforcement building to reinforce a narrative in favor of further firearm restrictions.

Gun control activists and Biden-aligned interest groups reacted with outrage. Kris Brown, president of Brady United Against Gun Violence, accused the ATF of being “politicized” and called the removal “a gut punch to every American family affected by gun violence.” Brenda Haymon Joiner, mother of one of the victims featured in the exhibit, also issued a statement calling the action “cruel and deeply disrespectful.”

Elderly left-wing Star Trek actor George Takei, on Facebook, denounced the change and claimed it re-traumatized the victims’ families.

Keep reading

Top California Democrats Fight To Protect Purchasing Sex With Kids

Should it be a felony to purchase an underage minor for illegal sex? 

For most of us, the answer is a very easy yes. This is not a hard one. You will likely encounter three dozen questions today or tomorrow that will be considerably more difficult to answer. Generally, if someone is asked if there should be severe legal penalties for underage sex trafficking, the response is an immediate, unhesitating affirmative. 

Democrats in California feel differently. The state assembly there this past week considered a bill — AB-379 — that would have amended state law to make it a felony to solicit paid sex from “any person under 18 years of age.” In other words, if you seek out and pay a minor for sex — if you engage in child sex trafficking — you would be guilty of a felony.

This should have been an easy move for the assembly; the debate should have taken about 30 seconds and ended with a unanimous vote, passage to the state senate, and a quick signature by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The ink should have still been drying on the bill by suppertime on Wednesday. 

Democrats were not so obliging. In fact, they mounted a major opposition to the bill. By the time they were done with it, the bill’s protections for 16-year-old sex crime victims had been stripped from the measure. Democrats added language claiming it was “the intent of the Legislature to adopt the strongest laws to protect 16- and 17-year old victims.” Which is strange since, when given the opportunity to do just that, they refused. 

What reason could Democrats have for opposing the bill? Advocates in no small part seemed concerned that the measure could disproportionately affect … LGBT Californians. (Really stop and think about that for a minute.) The ACLU of Southern California claimed in part that similar measures “have been used disproportionately against … LGBTQ+ individuals.” Other opponents of the bill claimed that the measure could be used by parents who are upset that their children are in “LGBTQ relationships.”

One group claimed there were concerns “about the way that automatic felonies [could be] levied against older teens in relationships with other minors.” State Sen. Scott Wiener, a longtime LGBT booster, argued on social media that “sending an 18 year old high school senior to state prison for offering his 17 year old classmate $20 to fool around isn’t smart criminal justice policy.”

We should all pause for a minute and consider what is being argued here. At best, Democrats and other opponents of this bill are attempting to defend underage prostitution as a normal feature of young relationships (it’s not). At worst, they are revealing, inadvertently, that LGBT individuals are apparently regular participants in the sex trafficking of minors. 

Which one is it? They should probably decide what their position is and stick with it. But it bears repeating that the bill concerns itself only with paying for sex with minors. Any criticism of this bill in the context of the “relationships” it may affect cannot ignore that simple fact. 

Most functioning adults consider it a very bad thing when underage children are paid for sex, no matter the circumstances. Opponents of this bill are acting as if they are defending meaningful, intimate relationships, rather than innately harmful, exploitative, and dangerous ones. “Think of how this will negatively affect 18-year-olds who bribe their underage friends for sex!” is not persuasive.

Keep reading

Attorney General Pam Bondi Responds to Rep. James Comer’s Bombshell Allegation Regarding the Epstein Files

Attorney General Pam Bondi is speaking out about a stunning allegation from House Oversight Chairman Rep. James Comer (R-KY) yesterday regarding the Epstein files.

As The Gateway Pundit reported, Comer revealed what may be the most damning development yet in the fight to uncover the truth behind Jeffrey Epstein’s sinister global sex-trafficking and blackmail network during an interview with Benny Johnson: the Epstein files may have already been destroyed—and the federal government might be complicit.

Comer, who has spearheaded numerous high-profile investigations into Biden family corruption and the weaponization of federal agencies, made it clear that he believes the Department of Justice no longer has the files, if it ever did. He also thinks the files have already been destroyed to cover up the deep state.

“I don’t think the Department of Justice has (the Epstein files)—or at least the Attorney General does not have them—or she would have turned them over,” Comer told Johnson. “The President ordered them released.”

“The Attorney General ordered them released. We all know they have not been released,” he added. “One of my biggest fears, which I expressed with Kash Patel and a lot of people, including Stephen Miller, going into the new administration, was this: I hope they’re not shredding documents right now. This was a few weeks before the transition.”

Bondi responded to Comer’s bombshell this morning outside the White House after a reporter asked about it.

“The FBI, they’re reviewing, tens of thousands of videos of Epstein with children or child porn, and there are hundreds of victims,” she said while scoffing.

“And no one victim will ever get released,” she added. “It’s just the volume, and that’s what they’re going through right now. The FBI is diligently going through that.”

Bondi then said she would be in touch with Comer.

“I haven’t seen that statement, but I’ll call him later and find out,” she said.

Keep reading

Rep. James Comer Claims Epstein Files May Have Been DESTROYED — Accuses Federal Government of Possible Cover-Up

In a new interview with Benny Johnson, House Oversight Chairman Rep. James Comer (R-KY) revealed what may be the most damning development yet in the fight to uncover the truth behind Jeffrey Epstein’s sinister global sex-trafficking and blackmail network: the Epstein files may have already been destroyed—and the federal government might be complicit.

Comer, who has spearheaded numerous high-profile investigations into Biden family corruption and the weaponization of federal agencies, made it clear: he believes the Department of Justice no longer has the files—if it ever did.

Comer believes the files are already destroyed to cover up the deep state.

“I don’t think the Department of Justice has [the Epstein files]—or at least the Attorney General does not have them—or she would have turned them over. The President ordered them released.

The Attorney General ordered them released. We all know they have not been released. One of my biggest fears, which I expressed with Kash Patel and a lot of people, including Stephen Miller, going into the new administration, was this: I hope they’re not shredding documents right now. This was a few weeks before the transition.

I said, “I hope they’re not shredding documents.” But you all need to go on that first day and try to get all this stuff released, because my fear—based on what I’ve dealt with in investigations and in communication with this deep state apparatus—is that they’re probably in there shredding documents as we speak. So, hopefully someone has a copy of that.

The Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets, led by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL), has been relentless in its pursuit of transparency, but Comer revealed that Luna is “pretty frustrated” by the stonewalling.

And I hope we find out, because our task force, led by Anna Paulina Luna—you’ve had her on your show many times—has done everything. I mean, she’s relentless, she’s persistent, and she’s pretty frustrated right now that these files haven’t been released, even though the President and the Attorney General have ordered them released.

But it’s like I told Anna, the same thing I told Patel and everybody else: you assume that somebody in the deep state said, “Okay, we’ll just put these in a file back here—this incriminating evidence on everybody—and maybe the next administration can do whatever they want to do with it.” That’s unfortunately the way it’s supposed to work, but it hasn’t worked with this deep state.

Comer’s gravest concern is the potential involvement of the federal government in Epstein’s operations.

Keep reading

Palantir Partners with NATO on Controversial AI Project Maven

In late March, the North American Treaty Organization (NATO) Communications and Information Agency (NCIA) and Palantir Technologies Inc. announced a new agreement for the Palantir Maven Smart System NATO (MSS NATO) to be deployed by NATO’s Allied Command Operations (ACO).

Palantir was co-founded by Alex Karp and Peter Thiel, the Technocrat-Zionists who also happen to be Steering Committee members of the Bilderberg Group.

The new deal will see NCIA partner with Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) and Palantir to deliver Maven Smart System NATO to the Warfighter. A move which NCIA general manger Ludwig Decamps says will provide “customized state-of-the-art AI capabilities to the Alliance” and allow NATO to “operate effectively and decisively.”

The Maven Smart System (MSS) uses AI-generated algorithms and memory learning capabilities to scan and identify enemy systems.

Palantir’s MSS NATO makes use of “cutting-edge artificial intelligence (AI)” for core military operations, including using large language models (LLMs) for generative and machine learning.

Shon Manasco, Senior Counselor at Palantir Technologies, said the arrangement with NCIA and SHAPE will “bolster deterrence by deploying an AI-enabled warfighting platform”.

General Markus Laubenthal, SHAPE Chief of Staff, said Maven will allow NATO to be “more agile, adaptable, and responsive to emerging threats”.

SHAPE is the headquarters and commander of NATO’s ACO based near Mons, Belgium.

Keep reading

Neurodiversity Is A Strawman

A dear friend had a beautiful, healthy, engaged baby boy. After his first round of childhood vaccinations he went blind, non-verbal, started head banging, having seizures, lost all engagement, and fell into the abyss of autism. Today that child is 40. He is incontinent, cannot speak or feed himself, and is totally dependent upon his father to survive. 

Another friend had a son and a daughter. The daughter, following her first round of childhood shots, experienced almost exactly the same scenario described above, minus the blindness. At the time my friend did not connect the dots and when it came time for his son to be vaccinated, the child began to seize. In the room, my friend put it together and stopped the rest of the shots. Today, his son is only mildly autistic while his daughter, at 26, is non-verbal, incontinent, and often uncontrollable. Since the son is only mildly autistic, I suppose we shouldn’t look into the cause of his issues? It’s a gift, right? 

A mother (a client in one of the many tragic cases) had a teenage daughter who, after a round of the Gardasil vaccine, suffered a seizure and went into a coma. The young girl had been captain of her volleyball team, top of her class, poised for a full and happy life. Today, at nearly 20, she lives in total darkness because she has seizures every 30 seconds – cannot have any light. The neurodegeneration is unquantifiable. She cannot read or watch TV, let alone go on her first date, go to prom…experience the life she should have and would have. 

Another friend had a perfect, beautiful young daughter who was exceeding all of her milestones. After her second round of jabs, she locked in, stopped talking or making eye contact, developed a severe learning disability, and is still struggling today, at 6. 

She, too, will never experience the “normal” milestones we all would like to see for our children. 

Those stories, anecdotal though they may be, are the tip of the iceberg. 

I could share thousands, each one worse than the next, that would make most people sit in a room and cry forever.

The media machinery has conflated mild spectrum disorder with what I just described above specifically so that people will have the reaction they are having right now. This is normalization of extremes by conflating them with non-extremes so that it’s a step-by-step incremental (and coordinated) attack on those who would expose the root cause of the terrible suffering experienced by so many.

It’s executed so that people like RFK, Jr. are hobbled from doing their job. 

How does questioning the environmental harms and risk factors for autism and/or neurodegenerative disorders threaten or even conflict with the idea of autism as neurodiversity? Spoiler alert: it doesn’t. 

No other disease has people normalizing a spectrum (no pun intended) of symptoms ranging from terrible to non-debilitating in order to argue that it’s actually great. We don’t say there’s a spectrum of neurodegenerative disorder from paralysis to neuropathy and there are benefits to neuropathy therefore neurodegeneration is great. This is normalization at its best. 

Suddenly everyone’s kid is Rain Man. Suddenly everyone is “on the spectrum.” Ergo, it’s normal. Being a little bit weird is beautiful and normal and we are all a little bit weird so that’s not a disorder. This is a psyop and everyone is falling for it. No one is saying there is something wrong with neurodiversity or that we shouldn’t also be looking into that. But when it comes to discovering the contributing factors and co-factors, the environmental insults, and the increase itself in autism to date, we’re not talking about that. We are talking about, and have only ever been talking about, the above scenarios. 

The tactics to muzzle debate and halt real investigation are duplicated across all levels. (This should all sound eerily familiar when we recall the conflation, normalization, media machinations, and strawmen to emotionally activate opposition tactics used during Covid.)

It should be a red flag and alarm every American that pharmaceutical companies have no liability for vaccines and that they have managed to increase the pediatric schedule from 3 to 72 in one generation, and it should alarm every parent to learn that HHS itself draws a hard line in 1989 for autism – the year when vaccine formulation was changed to allow for combinations because in 1986 the vaccine space became a financial free-for-all. 

Unfortunately, the media is adept at keeping dots that should be connected in silos so that most people do not connect them, and there is no shortage of sock puppet “experts” willing to run around doubling down on the narrative. 

The Burbacher Study, if anyone were to know about it, let alone read it, SHOULD have at least sparked research into these potential harms. Instead, the spokesperson for the pharmaceutical industrial complex assigned to discredit parents and advocates, Paul Offit, dissects a strawman in public view…in this case the strawman is ethyl vs methyl mercury.

Allow me to explain how this tactic works and why it’s effective: Offit’s argument (and also the error in his argument) is that ethyl mercury (Thimerosal) clears from the brain faster than methyl mercury. First of all, that’s omitting the fact that there are organic and inorganic types, and for the organic type, Offit is right, but for the inorganic type, he’s dead wrong. Ethyl and methyl mercury are different, that’s true, but they both break down into organic and inorganic subtypes. The Burbacher study shows that the organic form of Ethyl mercury clears from the brain faster. 

The inorganic clearance rate couldn’t be determined because the slope of the rate of clearance is zero. So, according to this study, that form of mercury is in the brain forever. Compared to mercury derived from Thimerosal, both organic and inorganic forms of methyl mercury clear from the brain. Which goes against Offit’s claim that ethyl mercury is safer. At least the inorganic form clears from methyl mercury, but it never clears from ethyl mercury. 

But the real issue is…why are we comparing different kinds of lighter fluid around matches? No kind is desirable. (Strawman identified!) And no one is suggesting we are going to inject people with methyl mercury either…so he’s wrong to make the comparison in the first place. But once he’s made the comparison, he’s also wrong according to the data if you consider the inorganic form. Simply put, the Burbacher study proves that mercury does cross the Blood Brain Barrier. Did we put a hold on this? No. Instead, we did away with animal studies for mercury. 

This is just ONE example of ONE strawman designed and implemented to marginalize and sideline a set of risks and harms (even if that’s minority harm) and, yes, injury. There are too many others to list. For example, why aren’t we looking into the connection between autism and HHV-6? 

Between autism and chemicals like Glyphosate and PFAS and forever chemicals in our air, our water, our soil, and our food? Hint: it isn’t because I just thought of it now in my living room. It’s because bottom lines, and corporate and regulatory capture and corruption to maintain those bottom lines, are valued above human lives – above our children’s lives. 

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Only ONE vaccine has ever been properly tested, and even then, never fully. If you shine a spotlight over one small area on a dark street and don’t find what you’re looking for, do you presume the entire street is free of whatever it is? Do we abandon first principles in order to pour concrete on our confirmation biases and further our narratives? Or do we ask the difficult, complex, and nuanced questions, do the hard work, and search for the truth? It appears that question has been asked and answered in the affirmative for the former. The latter is vehemently opposed. 

The assertion that these issues have been looked into is false. In fact it’s been DISALLOWED thus far, and look what’s happening when we try to look into it now. We have everyone outraged over a strawman that was never the point in the first place. It’s all a smoke screen. Once everyone is distracted and chaos ensues, any actual progress is effectively halted, which is precisely the point. It’s not organic. It’s the model, it’s coordinated, and it works. 

Keep reading