Blog

The Premeditated and Staged Insanity of War

The first matter of great importance and honest understanding is that there is no such thing as a ‘defensive’ war. What should follow then, is that no war can ever be against evil, given that war is the epitome of evil. Actual justified self-defense by any individual or group of individuals, regardless of the size and scope of the mass, is warranted only to quell a threat, but any war waged by states or nations, is a war against all, and therefore not defensive, but offensive aggression against innocents. If national war could ever be accepted as legitimate, then the individual rulers and politicians seeking to wage war would fight only among themselves instead of murdering innocents and using the children of others as fodder for their warmongering and power-seeking efforts.

Wars are always based on lies and deception. War is born from a political angle, corporate and military industrial complex standpoint, profit-seeking, and power and control aspirations. There is nothing organic about war and those pursuing war. All wars are avoidable; no wars are based on benevolence. There are no heroes or ‘patriots’ in war, wars are never ‘won,’ but always lost where the masses are concerned, and wars are always planned in advance (as well as during and after) and staged in order to achieve nefarious agendas. All wars are heinous and evil because they are done strictly for money, power, and control of people, finance, and geopolitical positioning.

The vile, and immoral depravity of war is achieved by back-door deals among the major players, regardless of the false pretense of good against evil, or the ridiculous ‘enemy’ of the state notion. Since collusion is always present, orchestrated madness is the result. The so-called problems of war, and therefore the so-called ‘advantages’ of war, are intentionally structured to achieve certain outcomes that benefit only the super-rich shadow government, the ruling class and its political pawns, and its banking and corporate heads. A mostly secret hierarchy controls the entire system, which is vastly compartmentalized, so that this secret society of power is always protected and held harmless.

Wars, in large part certainly, have allowed for a massive concentration of wealth in the hands of the tiny few of less than 1% of the population. This is not due to ‘capitalism,’ as some would suggest, because the core of real capitalism is free markets, which do not exist. The U.S., while showing many aspects of socialism and communism, (forget democracies and republics as they are stepping stones to totalitarianism) is actually more a war-mongering fascist state. I think this is without question at this time in history. But that should not be a surprise, as we currently live in a coordinated international fascist system that is bent on becoming the ultimate fascist State; a world run by the very powerful few, who are mostly hidden oligarchs seeking international technocratic rule.

Keep reading

No Kidding… DOJ Says There’s ‘No Serious Dispute’ Fired FBI Chief Comey’s Seashell Post Could Be Read as Trump Threat

Of course, it was.

The Justice Department defended its criminal prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey in court filings Tuesday, arguing there is “no serious dispute” that his Instagram photo of seashells arranged to read “86 47” could be understood as a threat against President Donald Trump, according to reports from the Associated Press and The Hill.

Prosecutors in the Eastern District of North Carolina urged a judge not to dismiss the case, saying a jury — not the court — should decide whether the May 2025 post constituted a “true threat” against the president’s life, The Hill reported. Trump is the 47th president.

According to The Hill, the government’s filing stated:

“The issue presented is who should answer the ‘true threats’ question. … Comey seeks to take the question away from the jury before the government presents any evidence (or even allegations setting forth its theory of the case. No authority supports his attempt to shortcircuit these proceedings.”

The filings represent the government’s most detailed explanation to date of its indictment, the Associated Press reported. They came in response to defense motions seeking dismissal on grounds that include vindictive prosecution and that the post did not amount to a true threat.

The government also invoked Comey’s crime novel “FDR Drive,” released days after the post, to bolster its case, according to NBC News. The filings describe the book as centering on a “far-right wing media personality” whose foes are killed after “he singled out his enemies by name and suggested ‘something should be done’ about them.”

Keep reading

FBI Caught Withholding Documents in Seth Rich Case

Ty Clevenger again caught the FBI lying and hiding documents in the Seth Rich case.  This is not the first time.

It is believed that Seth Rich is a pivotal key to the Russia Collusion coup attempt of the first Trump Administration.

The Deep State DOJ and FBI have gone through extreme efforts to cover up any information they have on Seth Rich.  Rich is who many believe transferred DNC emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 election.  He was a Bernie fan who worked in the DNC at the time.  He was reportedly upset with what the DNC was doing to Bernie.  On July 10, 2016, Rich was found shot in the back due to what law enforcement labeled a burglary, and yet his wallet, phone, and watch were left on his person.  This is at the time WikiLeaks began dropping damaging DNC emails that showed the inner workings of the Hillary campaign.

It is believed that Seth Rich forwarded emails from Podesta to WikiLeaks. 

We all know without a doubt that it is a lie to claim that the Russians were involved in the transfer of these emails.  There is simply no evidence that Russia was involved, and there never has been evidence that Russia was involved.

Hillary wanted to deflect attention from her email scandal and the contents of her emails.  She also wanted to punish whoever sent those emails to WikiLeaks.  This is why many believe Seth Rich was murdered.

Keep reading

Cop Fired After Allegedly Using Flock Cameras to Stalk Former Boyfriend – She Abused System 166 Times

A South Carolina police officer has been fired for allegedly using a Flock camera system to check on an individual with whom she had had a relationship.

Ellie Anna Hammond, 24, was fired on Aug. 3, the Mauldin Police Department said, according to KOCO-TV.

A department representative said no comment on the action would be coming, because it’s “a personnel matter.”

Hammond was fired due to alleged misconduct between March and July, according to documents from the South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy.

During that period, Hammond was accused of accessing the Flock camera system 166 different times to track a vehicle that belonged to an individual with whom she once had a relationship.

Every time the system was accessed, a reason was provided, but the documents said those reasons were bogus.

The reasons were variously listed as a warrant check, traffic infraction, or welfare check.

Keep reading

‘Ghoulish’: Harvard paying $53 million for selling ‘heads, faces, brains and hands’ from corpses on black market

A court settlement has been reached in a “ghoulish class-action” lawsuit over the sale of body parts – from bodies donated for medical research – by a former morgue manager at Harvard.

And it has the school paying out $53 million to the families of the deceased.

A report from the New York Post explains a state court judge in Boston has preliminarily approved the deal in the legal action that resulted from the schemes of Cedric Lodge, the disgraced former Harvard morgue manager.

He was arrested back in 2023 and later was sentenced to eight years in prison for stealing and selling organs and body parts of cadavers donated to the school.

“As far back as 2018, Lodge had been stealing body parts — including ‘heads, faces, brains, skin and hands’ — which he’d then bring to his home in New Hampshire and sell with his wife, prosecutors said, shipping them to buyers in Pennsylvania and elsewhere,” the report explained.

His wife, Denise, was given a year in jail for her role.

School officials called Lodge’s actions “despicable abhorrent, and a flagrant betrayal of our values as a medical community.”

Keep reading

DOJ Issues Grand Jury Subpoenas Whether “Other Dan Sullivan” Entered Race to CONFUSE VOTERS Against Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan

The “other Dan Sullivan” controversy just exploded into a full-blown federal grand jury investigation.

The Justice Department has issued grand jury subpoenas as investigators examine whether Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., the Democrat-friendly Alaska candidate running against Republican Sen. Dan S. Sullivan, entered the race to confuse voters and divert support from the incumbent.

The Department of Justice is examining whether the retired Petersburg teacher entered the race specifically to confuse voters, siphon support from the incumbent Republican, and boost Democrat Mary Peltola in Alaska’s ranked-choice system.

Potential charges under review include wire fraud and conspiracy to deprive Alaskans of a free and fair election process, a civil rights violation.

The subpoenas, first reported by NBC News and confirmed by Reuters, compel information from witnesses linked to Dan J. Sullivan’s operation.

The former teacher, who registered as a Republican only days before filing, has denied any intent to mislead voters. Critics call those denials laughable.

Dan J. Sullivan filed for the U.S. Senate seat just before the June deadline. Almost immediately, Republican officials and the National Republican Senatorial Committee flagged him as a “sham candidate.” Evidence piled up fast:

  • He had no prior Republican affiliation and switched parties right before launching.
  • He initially requested to appear on the ballot as “Dan S. Sullivan” — matching the incumbent’s middle initial — before correcting to “Dan J.”
  • His campaign website used a color scheme and design strikingly similar to Sen. Dan Sullivan’s.
  • He worked with a progressive consultant who had previously supported Democrat Mary Peltola.

Alaska Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher decertified him in mid-June, ruling the candidacy was “filed with a purpose to confuse or mislead” voters and compromise the ballot’s fairness.

State courts later reversed that decision, ruling election officials lacked authority to judge “good faith” beyond constitutional qualifications of age, citizenship, and residency. The Alaska Supreme Court upheld putting him back on the ballot.

Keep reading

The DSA’s War On Wealth

Communism is on the rise in the United States and has now entered otherwise mainstream Democratic Party politics.

The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is on track to increase the number of its members in Congress from two to at least six in January, possibly more. That’s not including Sen. Bernie Sanders, who calls himself a democratic socialist.

A DSA member named Francesca Hong just came within striking distance of becoming the Democratic nominee for governor of Wisconsin, one of our largest and most important states. Hong was narrowly defeated in the Aug. 11 primary by Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley.

Don’t be confused by those calling themselves socialists. A few may be well-meaning middle-of-the-road Democrats who favor the Scandinavian socialist model. But others are wolves in sheep’s clothing – communists who use the socialist label to hide their real intentions.

What’s interesting is that many of the new socialists don’t even try to hide their radical leanings. They publicly call themselves socialists and are proud of it.

After the fight against communism in the U.S. in the 1950s and the U.S. victory in the Cold War by the early 1990s, most Americans might assume that communism is no longer a threat to the American way of life and the U.S. political system.

That’s a mistake.

Communist and Marxist ideas are alive and well in the U.S. and are thriving in universities, think tanks, foundations, the media and other institutions that Americans typically think of as having better motives.

The Evolution of Revolution

This ideological infiltration may follow Marxian economics, but the method used by the new communists was anticipated by the Italian communist Antonio Gramsci, who wrote in the 1920s and 1930s.

Gramsci agreed with Marx’s goal – the abolition of private property – but he thought the way to achieve it was not through violent revolution but through a long-term struggle for control of society’s cultural and political institutions.

Decades later, this strategy came to be described as “the long march through the institutions.”

In other words, communism would not necessarily win by direct confrontation but by a gradual infiltration of education, culture and governance and the decline of critical thinking.

U.S. institutions would become ideological boot camps and propaganda outlets that would gradually convince Americans that communism, dressed up as “socialism,” was the better path.

From there, it would be a simple task to tear down traditional constitutional structures by getting rid of the Senate, the Electoral College and an independent judiciary.

Top-down communist control would be the final step. No revolution required. Just long-term rot like the proliferation of mold or termites.

For a powerful example of this process, consider the recent controversy surrounding the Smithsonian Institution and testimony before Congress by Anthea Hartig, director of the National Museum of American History.

The dispute centered on whether America’s national museums have increasingly emphasized slavery, race and inequality at the expense of the country’s founders and achievements. Hartig defended the museum’s approach and told lawmakers that it does not take sides in America’s political debates.

The Smithsonian’s treatment of Benjamin Franklin, for example, emphasizes his history as a slaveholder. Yet Franklin was also one of the great scientists and founders of the 18th century and, later in life, became a leading abolitionist.

He served as president of the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery and, in 1790, petitioned Congress to work toward ending slavery.

Franklin also became the nation’s first postmaster general, helped establish an early fire insurance company and helped found the institution that became the University of Pennsylvania, where I attended law school.

The real issue is one of emphasis: whether America’s national museums should primarily celebrate the country’s achievements or increasingly focus on slavery, race, inequality and other failures in the American story.

That debate is worth having because institutions shape the way Americans understand their own country.

Keep reading

‘Flashing Red Warning Sign’ for Lawmakers: Poll Shows Voters Reject US-Israel Military Integration

A new poll of US voters published on Tuesday offers a warning for congressional lawmakers backing a plan to deepen military ties between the United States and Israel, finding that a clear majority of voters oppose the proposal – which some critics have called “treasonous.”

The Data for Progress survey of 1,217 likely US voters – conducted August 3–7 for Demand Progress and the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU) Policy Project – revealed that 61% of respondents oppose legislation in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2027 that would integrate Israeli weapons companies into the Pentagon at a level exceeding that of any other country. That figure rose to 78% among Democrats and 73% among independents.

“This poll is a flashing red warning sign for any member of Congress who supports the defense authorization bill,” Demand Progress senior policy adviser Cavan Kharrazian said in a statement. “A clear majority of voters do not support further integrating the Israeli military and Israeli military companies into the Pentagon, which the NDAA is set to do.”

The Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted last month 216-212, mostly along party lines, in favor of a record $1.15 trillion NDAA. The military spending bill contains Section 219, a provision that would create a US–Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative, accelerating joint defense research, development, testing, and integration of technologies including artificial intelligence, missile defense, and counter-drone systems.

Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) submitted an amendment to strip Section 219 from the NDAA. The measure failed to pass.

Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who voted against the NDAA, described Section 219 as “an outrageous threat to our country’s security and autonomy.”

The Senate version of the military spending authorization bill has a related provision – Section 1217, the United States-Israel FUTURES Act – and the two chambers will need to reconcile their NDAA legislation before the final language is decided. Reconciliation is not expected to occur before November at the earliest.

“It’s time for Congress to listen to the American people for once, and not the same voices who always want to cut Israel a blank check,” Kharrazian said. That “blank check” has totaled more than $174 billion in non-inflation-adjusted aid since the modern state of Israel was founded in 1948.

Keep reading

Your Bank Data Could Become A Profit Center – And You’ll Pay the Price

A forthcoming federal rule on open banking may allow banks to charge new fees for access to consumer data, a move critics say would harm consumers and runs counter to other parts of President Donald Trump’s agenda.

Open banking allows consumers to authorize banks and other financial institutions to securely share their financial data electronically with third-party providers.

Why now?

The White House was reviewing the anticipated rule from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau as of last week, according to reporting by Bloomberg Law. The rule would help shape the federal framework for open banking in the U.S., building on a broad provision contained within the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010.

Dodd-Frank was passed to enhance transparency and accountability and strengthen consumer protections in the financial industry after the economic crisis of 2008. The law is just under 850 pages long, and Section 1033 – which provides the legal basis for the open banking ecosystem that has evolved in the U.S. – was not one of its central provisions. Section 1033 is about one page long and it ensures that Americans have the legal right to access their own financial data upon request. Financial institutions must provide consumers’ financial data relevant to the sought-after financial product or service in “an electronic form usable by consumers.”

The law gives the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau broad authority to define and standardize this process, which is partly why affected industries have anticipated federal rulemaking on open banking for more than a decade.

The Biden administration issued the long-awaited rule in late 2024, which required banks to provide data directly to third parties authorized by consumers and prohibited banks from charging third parties fees for accessing the data, among other provisions. Banks pushed back, suing the bureau claiming it was exceeding the authority it was granted under Section 1033 and challenging those provisions in court.

Banks have said the rule would require them to build and maintain costly interfaces for third-party access while preventing them from being able to recoup those costs.

Last summer, JPMorgan Chase & Co. submitted proposed fees to data aggregators like Plaid for accessing Chase customers’ financial data.

The Trump administration has said the Biden administration’s rule was unlawful, “arbitrary and capricious” and began working on a rewrite of the rule last August. The lawsuit is essentially paused until the new rule is released, and the court ordered that enforcement of the Biden rule be stayed.

The Trump administration’s version reportedly includes a provision that would allow banks to charge volume-based fees to fintech companies to access consumer financial data, meaning banks could begin charging fintech companies once they make more than a certain number of requests for customer data.

Who pays the price?

News that the Trump administration’s rule would include a data-rationing provision prompted numerous objections from fintech companies and consumer advocacy groups, who argued that if banks didn’t pay for the data sharing, consumers ultimately will.

“Inevitably, if [the cost] is on the third party, it’s going to go back to the consumer,” said Todd Zywicki, a George Mason University law professor who formerly led a CFPB task force on federal consumer financial law and served in a leadership role at the Federal Trade Commission.

A third party is really a false choice, according to Zywicki, and between consumers and banks, he thinks banks are the much better option.

“The bank already has built-in incentives to collect the data, keep the data safely, use the data, and under law would already be required to share the data with consumers for them to be able to use it to shop for themselves,” Zywicki told The Center Square, “To then say, OK, now you have to also let Plaid access my data or Mint access my data, so they can go find me a better savings account than recommended to me or suggests this product instead of that product just strikes me as the only way to really make sense on this.”

The five largest banks in the U.S. reported a record-worthy second quarter. JPMorgan reported its highest quarterly profit in history, Goldman Sachs had its best second quarter ever, and Citigroup enjoyed its best quarter in a decade. Bank of America also posted strong results, while Wells Fargo beat Wall Street expectations. Collectively, they brought in $49 billion in profits.

Zywicki and other sources who spoke to The Center Square also maintained that banks have already done much of the work to build an open banking ecosystem and any costs they might incur to share data with more third parties would be relatively small.

“Banks already are collecting and holding information securely… They’ve already got to share the information for free with the consumer. It’s just a matter of whether a third party can get the information on behalf of the consumer,” Zywicki added.

But there’s another cost to consumers that could be even greater than any immediate impact on their wallets, advocates warn, and that’s the cost of continued fervent fintech innovation.

“We have already seen the nation’s biggest banks take advantage of regulatory ambiguity to impose fees and throttle access. Further uncertainty could stop the next great startup from forming and prevent consumers from accessing affordable financial products,” said Miranda Margowsky, head of communications for the Financial Technology Association.

Fintech innovation can do more than help consumers manage their finances. Startups like Carefull, a fintech company that analyzes customers’ financial activity for unusual patterns, can help detect warning signs of dementia or cognitive decline, potentially years before a clinical diagnosis.

“The goal here is to create a competitive framework where… small banks, for example, or fintech providers, or whoever can compete against the big banks that are currently holding the data,” Zywicki said. “It’s not really much of a fair playing field if banks can continue to use this information to market their [own] products.”

Keep reading

How Secretary Bessent Is Going Full-Hegseth Retard to No Avail

Six months after Trumpy & Bibi launched Operation Epic Fury against Iran on February 28th, the so-called kinetic campaign has settled into a costly stalemate, at best. And a de facto military defeat as a practical matter.

In fact, what began as another furious “shock and awe” military offensive designed to quickly and fatally degrade Iran’s nuclear program, missile forces, leadership, and regional power projection capability has instead produced:

  • no regime change.
  • no collapse of Iranian governance.
  • the severe depletion of American high-end munitions.
  • badly damaged US forward bases across the entire Persian Gulf (Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan)
  • significant personnel casualties, including 18 dead and 400 injured US servicemen.
  • Massive Federal budget costs now approaching $100 billion and rising rapidly.

Even more importantly, this misbegotten war has handed Tehran a durable pretext for restricting maritime traffic through and around its territorial waters and the Strait of Hormuz (SOH). That is, with virtually inexhaustible supplies of homemade missiles, drones and other tools of sabotage, Iran has been handed what amounts to a global economic Kill Switch.

Keep reading