Matt Walsh can’t reject an invitation by Tucker Carlson. He also can’t take a legitimate position on the Jews and Israel, because he works for Little Benny the Big Man. It’s a funny situation for Tucker, because he can just call this guy up whenever he wants and straight-up rat hole him.

This week, Walsh got the rat-holing of a lifetime, with Tucker moving to smoke him out, let loose the hounds, tickle him to tears, and finally, stroke the goat while giggling maniacally.

The fink Walsh was due for a heavy-handed rat-holing because he is indeed, my dearest reader, a rat fink. He is a fundamental part of the Ben Shapiro Jew Machine which is as simple as a simple shed person on serious pills and dreaming of a better tomorrow. The Jew rat Shapiro avoids getting chased into a hole and smoked out (hounded, etc.) by simply not engaging with anyone. He literally will not debate anyone who is going to bring up the points on Palestine. He will also hang up on live callers. His entire life is based around avoiding the hole.

The Shapiro Jew Machine works like this:

• Say basic things that conservatives agree with (mostly just about trannies or other people that literally everyone hates)
• Be a bit edgy and act like you’re doing something brave
• Get people to think “oh, I agree with this guy and I support him”
• Bombard them with Jewish propaganda
• The target who, at least before recently, probably hasn’t thought very much about Israel, assumes that they must also support Israel because the anti-tranny guy supports Israel

This is the single most obvious scam in the history of media scams. But it continues to work incredibly well. Or at least it did before Tucker Carlson came through like a whirlwind and started rat-holing people.

With Candace Owens having bullied Shapiro into firing her, Walsh is the last individual anyone even knows about who is aiding Shapiro in his Jew scheme. He babbles on about trannies (still) and says a bunch of racist stuff. But instead of adding the “I love Israel” part, he has an ostensibly “more masculine” bit where he says “I just don’t care, it has nothing to do with America.” That is of course retarded on its face, given that the United States pays for all of it.

I have never in my life heard Matt Walsh say something that was not totally obvious. He’s not even a particularly good talker. (As I prepare for my show, I can always tell myself, “well, umming or no, I’m already better than Matt Walsh.”) But his curmudgeonly old lumberjack fake persona (seriously, find a picture of him without his beard and then tell me this is a “real man”) is apparently a selling point.

“This is on the other side of the world and it’s not my problem” sounds like a valid perspective. But it simply is not, because no one is talking about that, no one views it that way, and it is not that way. What we are talking about is the fact that the United States, with its biggest military ever and its infinity money, is backing this entire thing. Obviously, it wouldn’t be happening without the funding and military backing of the US. Israel is a small country, whereas Moslems are a quarter of the world’s population and could obviously easily wipe these people out in a few minutes. Egypt alone could wipe them out very fast. Frankly, Hamas and Hezbollah alone could probably do it within a few months of the US cutting the funding.

Therefore, there is no conversation about the war outside of the conversation of the US funding it, because if it were not for US funding, Israel would not exist at all, let alone be committing the most extreme genocide in history on a very public stage. Every issue involving Israel, therefore, is first and foremost an American issue, and therefore it is the responsibility of those involved in American politics to take a hard position on the issue.

What’s more, this is the most consequential issue for America and Americans, as it could literally totally destroy our country. This is without even going into the facts about everything else the Jews are doing in this country, but simply looking at Israel: because everyone in the world understands this is an American issue, the US is becoming a pariah state for its genocide. It is a universally hated country now. People used to love the US. Everyone now views it as totally satanic. This goes beyond simply being spat on as a tourist: this threatens the US economy. Objectively, US support for Israel is making Americans poorer, and that goes way beyond simply the tax dollars dumped into this project, and digs into America’s ability to operate on the world stage while causing total internal breakdown. It is infecting the social order, used as a justification for new forms of censorship we’ve never seen. Further, the US being sucked into a gigantic war on behalf of Israel is not at all outside the realm of possibility.

You cannot simply dance around this as an American political commentator. It is not simply a “cowardly” position, it is a position that makes you look retarded, as if you do not understand the most basic dynamics of US politics, which should make a person ask: “Why then are you a US political commentator?”

Obviously, the whole “support Israel, bigot!” thing is not really working very well anymore. These people are trying other strategies. If you listen to Nick Fuentes, he tells you “Israel is the same as Russia” (he claims without evidence that “Russia influences American policy” and therefore it’s the same as Israel). A lot of these people are talking about Moslems constantly now, because it is a lot easier to get people to hate Moslems than it is to get them to love the Jews. Frankly, Walsh’s “I don’t care, it’s not our problem” is not very popular, even though you would think on its face it would be. It’s because basically everyone, even the poorly informed, understand that when you talk about Israel, you are talking about an American issue.

Walsh is totally full of shit when he says that he “never cared about Israel.” He actually made a point to say “you can go back from before I worked at the Daily Wire and look at my old blog and see I never talked about Israel.” Although his old blog is deleted, we have some of the old posts archived, including this one:

This closes with the point:

But I do have a problem with the fools who would call you a Neo-Nazi because you’d rather that three billion a year stay in American households rather than Israeli politicians’ wallets.

…which demonstrates that, just like everyone else, he understands very well that Israel is an American issue, not a far-away foreign issue. Before senility, people do not generally get less informed as they age, so it is an absolute fact that Walsh developed these new views he has on Israel for financial gain.

He can’t argue that this was some youthful folly either. Aside from the fact that people do not typically lose connection to established facts as their views evolve (rather you perceive the facts to mean something different in light of new facts or a new perception, if indeed your views do change as you age), that blog is from 2013.

Oh wait, jeez. I was about to say “he was already in his forties at the time.” I just looked it up and he is thirty-nine (39) as of this date. What the hell, man? How did that happen? I guess that makes sense in terms of his career trajectory. I had generally assumed that he had some other job, took up blogging as a side thing, and then opportunities appeared. So, he was 27 when he published that blog.

Again, the blog is deleted. But according to his Wikipedia page, he was fired from conservative radio in 2013, not long after that blog was published. Who knows how hard he was going against Israel? The next year, he started working for Glenn Beck’s “The Blaze,” and then in 2017 started working for Ben Shapiro’s “Daily Wire.” And his understanding of the basic facts around Israel were forever changed.

(Note: I assume he must have at some point addressed the issue of money to Israel during the hullaballoo, wherein he’s attempted to ride the fence harder than anyone else, literally working for Ben Shapiro while appearing in friendly interviews with Tucker Carlson. However, whatever the mental gymnastics are on that one, the math is not convincing enough to work in prime time on Tucker Carlson, hence the fact that he didn’t bother to present it. My bet is that if pressed, he says “well, I don’t think foreign aid is a good idea in principle,” in which case someone would respond, “so then why don’t you say ‘my only concern is that the US should stop funding Israel,’ instead of ‘I don’t care’?”)

In terms of Tucker rat-holing him in this episode published on Friday, it could be an exaggeration to claim that he was tickled to tears and that the goat was stroked. It’s a bit of a reference to the old Stormer meme from years ago, which I just looked up.

Check the “Tucker Carlson” tag if you want more. I spent 30 minutes looking at them, with long breaks of laughter. This site used to be so funny. No wonder everyone hates me now.

Tucker made a point to not destroy him. He easily could have TIED HIM UP WITH RUSTY WIRES and PLUCKED HIS BEARD WITH PLIERS after Walsh tried to claim it is not an American issue. Instead, Tucker nicely said that he wasn’t talking about whatever Walsh was trying to frame it as but rather the support of the American right for a genocide.

By the way, the show before this, Tucker interviewed some UN woman about the fact that this is a genocide.

It was clear that Tucker wanted to keep the conversation as friendly as possible, and simply demonstrate his power to Ben Shapiro, i.e., “I’m in ur base, goat-stroking ur doodz.” As a more practical matter, it shows Walsh’s audience that Tucker’s views on Israel are acceptable. Shapiro claims they are not acceptable, that they are outside of allowed discourse, that there are not any circumstances under which US support for Israel can be questioned. So it was a power move, a way to prove that he has sway over all conservatives.

For the record, although I like Tucker, I do not truly trust him at all. In fact, I have a series that I have not published about what I see as his agenda. I don’t think it is likely that he is an intelligence agent, but he is playing a game that goes beyond what he is presenting. He’s deeply tied to JD Vance, who is in turn an agent of Silicon Valley. That whole scene is very dirty.

South Park’s newest season (which was for some reason listed as two separate seasons back to back) was unbelievably bad. I hadn’t watched the show in years, because who even thinks about South Park. I say that as someone deeply entrenched in the adult cartoon world, a very sick man who will turn on AI Futurama in the background and then say “this is good enough to sit down and actually watch in the foreground.” But South Park managed to hype themselves with hatred against the show, and I was interested to see where they went with it. It was indeed horrible. It’s all about Trump. Before this season, they’d signed a deal for $1.5 billion for 50 episodes, which averages out to about $1.3 million per minute. Good work if you can get it.

Frankly, I didn’t even mind that they attacked Trump. I think Trump’s attacks on free speech are a good reason to attack Trump with a TV show. They clearly wanted him to say something about it, though I think so few people are even aware of it that it just never crossed Trump’s radar. However, it was a lot of 1990s edginess, with gay sex and whatever. The whole thing felt very draining, even though JD Vance as Tattoo (from Fantasy Island) was somewhat inspired.

But the thing I wanted to mention was that they had Peter Thiel talking about the Antichrist.

This probably speaks to the extent to which this whole thing is currently embedded in the cultural awareness: that these Silicon Valley people are into something very weird, that they are using “JD Vance” (fake name, btw) as a vehicle to seize power.

If you’re thinking “oh he must not be going to even publish those articles he hyped up, if he was he wouldn’t be talking about it now,” you may be right. I went through them earlier today and it was kind of a mess. The sort of thing where typically, instead of editing, I would just rewrite from scratch. There are a handful of interesting facts which I don’t think are getting enough attention. You have just right out in the open this “Vance” character saying that he’s going to be the next president, and it is not in any way a secret that he’s a creature of Silicon Valley, of the gay guy who is talking about the Antichrist and running an AI spy machine clearly intended to establish the total AI nightmare world I’ve spent years describing, where each individual is targeted by their electronics, manipulated as if they’ve all got their own little Jolly West in their pocket. This ability to manipulate perceptions on a grand scale is much scarier than the police state implications of Palantir (which are scary enough).

It’s highly confusing why more people are not talking about this, and my premise is that it has a lot to do with Tucker Carlson. It’s hard to say the extent to which he is aware of what is obviously going on with Vance. The idea that Tucker is swayed by Vance simply writing a good book (which is not political) and then talking in broad platitudes about “working class populism,” and that this sway is so strong that it causes Tucker to deny the obvious, is hard to believe.

The other question is whether Tucker will throw Vance under the bus before the 2028 election cycle. That would certainly make the most logical sense. It would be crazy for Tucker to do all of this work and then step out of the way for Vance, who has done literally nothing but stand there looking fat, speaking aught but the broadest and most hallow platitudes with the gentility of a eunuch.

Jeffrey Epstein’s relationship with Steve Bannon has shocked a lot of people. Not me, sir. I was already aware of how weird all these people were.

Even if Tucker is just spilling the beans about the Jews as part of a broader plan to implant us all with microchips so Peter Thiel can alter our DNA and turn us into human robots to build his infernal Lazarus machines, it’s still nice to have the whole Jew thing out in the open like this.

If I could say one thing to Matt Walsh: “You ain’t no lumberjack, bruv.”

I’ve been eating massive amounts of cheese lately. And I’ve been dealing with the skin problems that go along with it. I am in fact on the verge of turning into some type of Cronenbergian monstrosity as a result of the amount of cheese I am consuming. And yet, there is no one who is going to threaten to imprison me or blow up my boat because I’m abusing myself with cheese and on the verge of going full Videodrome as a result.

This whole concept of certain drugs being illegal is nonsensical. Where did the government get the right to tell people what they are allowed to put into their bodies? How can a democracy government, which is ostensibly based on the concept of personal human autonomy being a high metaphysical concept, have such a right? Telling people what they are permitted to do with their own bodies in the privacy of their own home is a violation of the most basic principles of human autonomy that are enshrined in the enlightenment philosophy democracy is based on.

Please note: I don’t necessarily support democracy or enlightenment values, and in fact I don’t support them, but I do think if you’re going to have a system based on these things, it needs to live up to its own stated principles, otherwise you just have tyranny.

What makes drug prohibitions extra ridiculous is that you are allowed to consume all sorts of things that will kill you, including sugar and seed oils. To take it one massive step further, the government allows for corporations to put chemicals into your body that you don’t want to be there. There is PFAS in the groundwater anywhere in this country at sea level. I mean, maybe not somewhere out in some forest, but anywhere in the zone of a major metro, there are PFAS in the groundwater. Here’s a map:

So if you have a property, which you “own” – you don’t really own it because property taxes exist meaning all forms of land ownership in the US are actually rentals from the feds, but that’s a digression – you can dig a well, and you will be drinking poisonous chemicals that someone else put into your water against your will. There is no way to produce and distribute PFAS without them ending up in the groundwater, but I never hear libertarians talk about how this is a violation of property rights. It obviously is an extreme violation of property rights. They even have some widely used anecdote about polluting rivers being against the non-aggression principle (NAP). But find one of them saying it should be illegal to produce and distribute PFAS because no matter what they are going to end up in the groundwater of people’s private property.

Further, these chemicals are also in the rain. Almost everywhere in the world has PFAS levels “beyond safe levels” (as if there are safe levels) in their rain. That means it is in all the food you eat. You can’t grow food with PFAS ground water or rain water and not end up with PFAS in your vegetables and fruits. It’s also in meat, because the animals drink water contaminated with it.

And PFAS is just the most obvious. Everything is also filled with microplastics that you have no choice but to consume, and which the government has zero interest in protecting you from. No interest, at all. You hardly even hear it talked about. Bobby Kennedy was talking about it, but now he only talks about “the disease of antisemitism.”

Then you have the coronavirus vaccine that the government tried to force you to take. It was an experimental gene therapy. They wanted to force you to take it. They also try to force you and your kids to take all kinds of other strange vaccines.

And yet, they reserve the right to tell you can’t put chemicals in your body that you, as a sovereign adult person, choose to put into your body, if those chemicals are arbitrarily listed on their “illegal substances” list. This is not reasonable.

Please note: I have in the past been against marijuana legalization and I am now calling for legalization of all drugs, including fentanyl and whatever other boogieman drug. So let me explain my change of opinion on this matter.

First, I should note that I was against marijuana legalization because I think marijuana is the worst of all the drugs. It was also clear that legalization increased use. However, that seems to be a result of it having been illegal to begin with. People will take much more dangerous substances than marijuana because the government tells them they are good and safe. So when the government says “oh we decided marijuana is safe after previously having said it wasn’t,” the public, conditioned to believe the government is their daddy who will decide what is good for them, decide they should start smoking weed because the government says it’s safe now. If it had never been made illegal in the first place, there wouldn’t have been an increase when you made it legal, would there? Because you wouldn’t be making it legal, because you’d never made it illegal.

In terms of the rest of the drugs, I don’t think people think they are safe. Well, maybe people don’t think cocaine is dangerous. People now know ketamine is dangerous because they’ve watched Elon Musk’s behavior and no one on earth has a goal of “acting more like Elon Musk.” Aside from being generally disgusting and weird, Musk thinks he is funny and he is not funny yet he goes around making “jokes” like he is funny and that is the saddest thing of all, and the number one thing no one wants to be, and it’s probable that his use of marijuana and ketamine play a major role in making him like that.

Fentanyl kills all kinds of people, so no one is going to think that is safe.

With marijuana, when they legalized it, they said “oh we decided this is safe, so you, the children of us, the daddy government, are now allowed to safely smoke it.” That is disgusting messaging, and if they are going to legalize all drugs, they should say “look, none of this shit is safe. Most of it is probably safer than the poisons we put in your food or these vaccines we coerce you into taking through threats and manipulation, but these drugs are not safe and we don’t advise anyone to take them, but you’re adults and you can do what you want to do.”

This is the only thing that makes any sense.

The “drug war” has been going on since the 1960s, and there are more people on drugs than ever, and the outlawing of drugs has created a massive, violent industry trafficking these drugs that is a complete nightmare. Now, the peace president is murdering randos and threatening to start a full-on war to protect American citizens from their own choices.

You can’t protect people from their own choices. That is an insane doctrine. And again, all of this other stuff that kills you is already legal. Do you think it is healthier to be morbidly obese because you consume poisoned food that the government refuses to regulate or to do cocaine on the weekends? Obviously, there is nothing less healthy than being morbidly obese. Chronic cocaine use might cause heart problems, and it seems like it does, but not to the degree that obesity does. Obesity causes every negative health outcome.

I would support warning labels. There are warning labels on cigarettes, but none on food products that contain refined sugar/HFCS and/or seed oils (along with the prerequisite doses of PFAS and microplastics), despite those things being much more dangerous than cigarettes. You could put warning labels on OTC fentanyl and the rest of the drugs. That’s fine and fair enough. But beyond telling you these things are unhealthy and not recommended for recreational use, the government should not have a role in telling you what you can and can’t consume.

Conversely, you could also remove the warning labels from cigarettes, so people would stop expecting the government will warn them if something is unhealthy.

Here’s the important part of my legalization plan: along with legalizing the drugs, I would outlaw any and all junkie behavior. I would do a very severe crackdown on homelessness and panhandling and all of the other things associated with abuse of drugs. Vagrancy, loitering, other public nuisance behavior. Like, I’m talking ten year prison sentences for this sort of thing. Because while you do have a natural right to consume whatever chemicals you want, because you’re an adult and you have a right to make your own decisions, you don’t have a right to infringe on other people with society-destroying behavior like living on the streets and begging. Right now, we have the opposite, where the drugs are illegal but all of the bad behavior associated with drug use is legal and seemingly encouraged in many jurisdictions.

Drugs Never Killed Anyone

Conservatives are pretty clear on the fact that guns are inanimate objects and that a gun never kills anyone, but rather a person who aims a gun at another person and pulled the trigger kills someone. The fact that they are not able to apply this same logic to drugs is baffling. Drugs are inanimate objects. If someone dies from drugs, it is because they made the decision to consume the drug in an irresponsible dose.

The oxycontin debacle is an issue of false advertising. Purdue Pharma told people that oxycontin was “safe” for “pain relief,” and it turned out it was engineered and intended to be extremely habit-forming. I can see that this is a problem. It would be similar to a gun manufacturer saying “you can shoot yourself in the head with this gun and nothing bad will happen.”

But regardless of the Purdue false advertising campaign, the oxycontin cum heroin cum fentanyl “crisis” is still not a supply issue. It is a demand issue. You cannot solve a demand issue by limiting supply. At least, I think that is some kind of economic principle or whatever, I don’t actually know, I’m not an economist. But in this specific case, it is just obvious that the only thing you can do in terms of solving demand by limiting supply is drive up prices of drugs which leads to endless petty crime to pay for the drugs. At this point, it is obvious that the supply can’t be completely cut off, or even meaningfully reduced.

Trump has cracked down on the border. It’s sort of irrelevant at this point, since most of the people who wanted to come to America are already here, but he has closed the border. Have drug prices gone up due to this attempt at strangling the supply?

With fentanyl, you have a whole new reality on the supply side. With heroin, you had to grow the shit in Afghanistan and then traffic it to the West. Fentanyl is just made in a lab, and it is insanely easy to make. It costs almost nothing. Right now, it is cheapest to make it in Mexico and then take it across the border, but it is so cheap to make that you could also make it anywhere and then just mail it to the United States. I’ve read that based on the production costs, if you send it through the mail and 99 out of 100 packages get seized, you still make a profit on the 1% that gets through. And people could be making this in the US. They just don’t, because as of right now, it is cheaper to do it in Mexico or to mail it from wherever.

Here’s the thing: if you can’t stop the supply, and you want people to do less drugs, then you need to address demand. What is the demand? Why are there so many people who want to take these drugs? Well, presumably it is because their lives are miserable, and drugs work to help them escape from that misery.

It’s widely known that soldiers in Vietnam did a lot of heroin. Here’s a fun factoid for you: 95% of the boys who were “addicted” to heroin in Vietnam stopped cold turkey when they came home. This obviously proves the fact that this whole theory of “addiction” is a complete hoax. These are not magical substances that take over your body and remove your free will, forcing you to use them against your will.

Here’s another fun factoid. The whole “addiction theory” had as one of its primary pillars a rat study, where a rat was given one water bottle with normal water and one with morphine or cocaine-laced water, and the rat just kept drinking the drug water until it OD’d. Then, in the late seventies – i.e., a very long time ago – someone called Bruce K. Alexander said that these studies of the rat overdosing on drugs all had a situation where the rat was in a small metal cage, completely alone with nothing to do. He hypothesized that if you created a better environment for the rat, the rat would respond differently to the availability of drugs. He created “Rat Park,” where the rats had a cage 200 times the size of the ones used in the original studies, filled with toys and fun things rats like, as well as other rats to socialize with and have sex with, then added the same options of normal water, morphine water, and cocaine water. Shockingly to drug warriors and probably to no one else, the rats did not become “addicts” and kill themselves with the drugs. They would sometimes use the drugs, just for a bit of fun, but they would use them rarely and none of them OD’d. This proved – or at least went a long way towards proving – that the opposite of the “addiction” theory was true, that drugs are not “addictive” in the sense they are claimed to be addictive, and people do drugs because of life problems.

With the oxycontin thing, no one can deny that giving out very strong opiates because someone has a sore back and telling them it was totally safe was ethical. However, who became “addicted”? It was almost exclusively people in small rural towns that had no jobs due to deindustrialization. Without a job, you probably don’t have a wife and kids either, so why not get high? Seriously, why shouldn’t someone in that situation just get high and relax? Imagine you live in a small shithole town, you have no work, you have no wife, you have nothing at all to do: why is it not totally obvious that you would get high?

The current fentanyl crisis is more urban, while the original oxycontin crisis was much more rural, but what is the same is that it is all people who do not feel they have any future. Taking drugs is a choice, and it is a choice made exclusively by people with bad lives. You do not hear stories of well employed and happily married fathers with good diets and gym routines becoming addicted to opioids or any other hard drugs.

It’s worth mentioning that basically everyone in this country is on some kind of mind-altering drugs. Most of them are legal. You can get amphetamine prescribed in a fifteen minute session with a psychiatrist by telling them you have a hard time concentrating, and hardcore tranquilizers by saying you feel anxious. You can take the amphetamines in the daytime and tranquilizers in the nighttime. SSRIs are also still very popular, with around 15% of Americans on them, despite the huge amount of data on how destructive they are, and the whole “chemical imbalance” theory having been completely debunked to the point where no one has the nerve to cite it anymore. Something like 99% of American men use pornography, which, as I’ve explained elsewhere, is not about sex, but is a drug used to flood the brain with dopamine (up to ten times more than other “pleasurable” activities, including real sex).

The reason there is a drug problem in America is that a lot of people have bad lives. They are bowling alone, they are poor, they do not have good family situations. Drug use is also high among famous people, because despite the fact everyone wants to be famous, actually being famous is the most stressful possible life anyone can have. Or, one of the most stressful possible lives. Being an out of work coal miner in a shithole town with no young people where 2/3rds of homes are unoccupied is also very stressful.

If you could stop the supply, that already would have happened. The drug war has been going on for decades now and there are more drug addicts than ever. And attempting to stop the supply is unbelievably destructive, and leads to all of the worst possible outcomes.

What the Heck is a Narcoterrorist?

As you’re no doubt aware, Donald Trump blew up a small gas-powered boat in the Caribbean under the premise that it was carrying drugs to the United States. Or rather, it is claimed that this happened.

🇺🇸 ON VIDEO: U.S. Military Forces conducted a strike against Tren de Aragua Narcoterrorists. The strike occurred while the terrorists were at sea in International waters transporting illegal narcotics, heading to the U.S. The strike resulted in 11 terrorists killed in action. pic.twitter.com/iszHE0ttxQ

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) September 2, 2025

I don’t know that I really believe it happened. I think the video might be AI. Nothing about it makes any sense at all.

Most obviously, you could not drive that boat 2,000 miles to America. That is nonsensical on its face, and it was incredibly surreal to me that this claim was made and that people believed it. I guess most people don’t know much about boats. I know a couple things about boats. But it really doesn’t seem like you would need to know much about boats to know that what amounts to a large dingy with outboard gas powered motors cannot travel thousands of miles through open ocean.

The boat was 40-foot long, reportedly with three outboard motors. Speaking with AI on the topic, the trip from Venezuela to Florida would require between 900 and 2,000 gallons of gas. The AI concluded:

Therefore, a 1,000-nautical-mile range at 90 knots with triple outboards is not feasible with current marine technology due to insurmountable fuel consumption demands.

Although it was obvious to me on its face that this claim of that boat in the photo making this trip, which is 1,200 miles as the crow flies as closer to 2,000 miles in practice, was not at all possible, I did a lot of research, asking the AI and then reading source material, and I can confirm that there is simply no possible way that boat was driving from Venezuela to Florida.

This type of boat can be used in drug trafficking, though not typically directly from South America. Even on much shorter trips, go-fast boats require refueling. If this boat was making the trip, it could have been tracked to wherever it was going to refuel instead of blown up. This reminds me of the “Chinese spy balloon” situation, where instead of downing the balloon and investigating it, proving it was a “spy balloon,” they blew it up so no one could ever prove it wasn’t a “spy balloon.”

Though we don’t know exactly where the boat was when it was blown up, Marco Rubio initially said the boat was headed for Trinidad, which is literally right off the coast of Venezuela.

So, although we are not being told where the boat was, presumably, the fact that the Secretary of State said this (he presumably had been briefed on the location) means that the boat was somewhere between Venezuela and the Trinidad and Tobago when it was blown up. To then say that they knew it was headed for America…

….without providing any evidence or explaining how they know that, is quite remarkable in its absurdity. Like, it is actually unbelievable that they are making this claim, and it is even more unbelievable that people on Twitter are going along with it, and actually using the term “narcoterrorists.”

The other very insane thing about this is that there were 11 people on the boat. Why would you bring 11 people on a drug run? Wouldn’t you want to fill the boat with drugs? I mean, especially given the fact you need to bring thousands of gallons of gas, you would think you would want to keep some room for the drugs.

Finally, it’s worth noting that the president isn’t allowed to just murder people by blowing up their boats in international waters. If they thought they had drugs somehow headed for America, they could have just stopped the boat. There are warships and 4,000 marines and sailors off the coast of Venezuela right now, so there were plenty of people who could have hopped over to this boat and checked out what was going on with it. Just blowing it up with an attack helicopter is fucking insane.

It’s possible that they did just blow up some random boat of people traveling from Venezuela to Trinidad. But I also think it’s possible it is just a fake video they released. Thus far, there are no family members coming out and saying “hey why did you kill my family member on that boat, Donald?” and I think it would be a problem to just blow up a random boat because someone’s family members would complain, and Maduro could bring out the family members to talk about it. So it makes more sense to me it was just an AI video.

You might be saying then: if it was AI, why did they make it so stupid? Why did they show a boat that can’t possibly make that trip, why did they include 11 people on it, which makes no sense? And the obvious explanation is that they want people to go along with something that makes no sense.

People are obliging.

🚨 JUST IN: John Fetterman BACKS President Trump’s evisceration of Venezuelan narcoterrorists

“I fully support confronting the scourge of cartel drug trafficking to our nation.”

This should NOT be controversial! pic.twitter.com/oWx2mOaWiE

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) September 3, 2025

And just like that President Trump now has Democrats mourning the deaths of Venezuelan narcoterrorists. pic.twitter.com/2Ju3vpQEjP

— Bad Hombre (@joma_gc) September 3, 2025

Venezuela has become a hub where Hezbollah, Iran, and cartels run cocaine cash to fund terror.

Narco-terrorists in our backyard.

This is a direct threat to America. Take them out. pic.twitter.com/UE7amLVV9K

— Erica Knight (@_EricaKnight) September 7, 2025

🔥JD Vance just set the record STRAIGHT on taking out NARCOTERRORISTS!

REPORTER: “What legal authority were you guys working under?”

VANCE: “There are people—literal terrorists—who are bringing deadly drugs into our country…Another question?” pic.twitter.com/BqWaI97pk8

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) September 3, 2025

Stephen Crowder says you’re committing treason if you don’t support this.

If you’re bitching about Trump blowing up Venezuelan narco-terrorists, but had nothing to say about Venezuelan gangbangers taking over American cities and flooding our streets with illicit drugs, might I suggest you’re a total moron.

Treasonous might be more appropriate. pic.twitter.com/SlwBiGXEFe

— Steven Crowder (@scrowder) September 3, 2025

There are millions more of these tweets. You can go check.

They are all using this new term “narcoterrorist.” No one had heard of this a week ago, now it is just being thrown around like it’s an established thing. This is more face-numbing stupidity. “Terrorism” means using violence against civilians to a political ends. The goal of narcotics trafficking is to make money. There is nothing political about it. They are using the word because legally, it gives them more power to act under the Patriot Act. (It also sounds much scarier, I’m sure.) Though it is still definitely illegal to just blow up random boats in international waters.

Was Cocaine Even the Problem?

I thought we had a fentanyl crisis, not a cocaine crisis. I thought the whole thing was that “Mexican cartels” were running fentanyl and also China was somehow responsible. But if it’s now about cocaine, that is in itself confusing, but Venezuela is not a cocaine country. They are now going around claiming Maduro is running a drug gang?

I’ve looked it up, and I can’t even find Venezuela mentioned in anything about cocaine. Government studies and a CSIS report agree that 98% of cocaine in the US comes from Colombia, with the other 2% coming from Bolivia or Peru.

I’m sure some of the Venezuelan gang members that flooded the country under Joe Biden’s open borders policy were dealing cocaine in America. But those were people Maduro let out of prison to come to the US. Biden announced an open borders policy, and as is reasonable enough in my estimation, Maduro opened the prisons and sent all his country’s gang members to America. The US had been threatening him with regime change since he took power, and if you’ll remember, under Trump 1, Macro Rubio and Mike Pompeo were doing this insane thing where they picked some random guy and said he was the real president of Venezuela. It was just as bizarre as the rest of this stuff.

Sometimes it feel like nothing even makes sense, no? Honestly, I don’t blame people for just shutting down and shutting off, because there is just this constant flow of utter nonsense, delivered with total seriousness, and it can truly make one feel like they are going insane. I have a bit less sympathy for the Trump people who are cheering on all of this lunacy. I guess I have some sympathy for the average person who is caught up in it, as they are just dumb and helpless and being abused. But these conservative commentators are the absolute scum of the earth. Stuff like the above Stephen Crowder tweet is truly unforgivable.

Clearly, Trump’s people want some kind of “win,” and someone, presumably Marco Rubio, is claiming that they can pull off a regime change in Venezuela. There are 4,000 marines and sailors off the coast now, in warships. You can’t do a regime change with that army, and you don’t need that army if you’re going to try to do an assassination. If you wanted to do an assassination, presumably you would not want it to be completely obvious that you did it, and if Maduro gets assassinated while there are American warships hovering around, it will be obvious who did it. So, who knows what the plan is. I guess they are just trying to create some kind of panic in the country.

It is infuriating that the declared fight against Sino-Mexican fentanyl is now a fight against cocaine in a country that doesn’t produce any cocaine. Because I follow this stuff close enough to understand it is all just lies, I don’t worry about being driven insane by it, but it is so outrageous it is difficult to maintain composure. The fact that I am one of the only people who is actually going to be able to explain these things in a clear and concise way that people can understand, and I am completely out of the game, makes it all the more frustrating.

It seems that the overwhelming majority of Americans get some kind of sadistic thrill from the government killing people. Everyone clapped seeing that boat blown up, without having any information, without asking why it makes no sense. Apparently some of the liberals didn’t clap, but they clap when random apartment buildings in Moscow get drone attacked. This probably relates back to the drug problem. People’s lives are completely meaningless, so they embrace depravity. Abusing drugs and sadistically cheering people you don’t know being murdered for reasons you don’t understand are both coping behaviors of very unhealthy people.

This Isn’t Going Anywhere Good

Part of why I cut back on my output on the Daily Stormer is that I really just don’t have very much nice to say. I don’t see any solutions to anything, and I’m not willing to go around pretending there are solutions in order to try to get some crypto donations. This Venezuelan boat bombing, the purely nonsensical nature of it, and the even more nonsensical public response, epitomizes just how far gone this country is. The Ukraine war also does that. As does basically everything else that happens.

The one glimmer of hope I can see is the backlash against the genocide in Gaza, and the backlash against the larger Jewish project in the Middle East. But the thing about that is, “at least people are willing to say they are against mass murdering children” is not super encouraging. It doesn’t prove much.

As the reader is aware, I am hopeful about the US empire collapsing and China taking over as the world’s premier superpower. This is  inevitable in the long term, but there is a high chance things will get much worse before that happens. The fact that the entire leadership in Washington is insane, and that the emerging competing elite in Silicon Valley are even more insane, is not encouraging. The plan right now appears to be to install James “JD Vance” Bowman as the next president, which will allow for a full merger of the Silicon Valley elite with the Washington elite, given that Bowman was groomed by Peter Thiel for this role.

These Silicon Valley people are insane on a whole other level. The “Christian Zionist” cult which had its moment in the spotlight after 9/11 is perhaps made to look sane by the religious cult that controls Silicon Valley. These people believe, legitimately, that they are going to make an “artificial general intelligence” computer super mind that will solve every problem and allow them to live forever and conquer the universe. Thiel, who is a homosexual, is now claiming to be a Christian himself and he is obsessed with the antichrist (???). His heretical Christian doctrine is that God wants us to perfect our bodies on Earth. People believed the “God wants us to support the Christ-killing Jews and murder all these Arabs” heresy, so they will presumably believe this one too.

I don’t see any room for any kind of progress here. Probably, that is why I am still banned, even while so many other people have been unbanned. I think the pro-China message has become the third rail. As long as people are talking about American politics as if they matter, there is no actual threat to the system, because you are engaging the system and giving it legitimacy even if you are against it. All of this material, even the strong anti-Israel and sometimes even anti-Jewish sentiment just feeds into this nonsense machine, while also providing much needed data for the AI super-systems that are being built.

As I’ve said, writing books is going to be a better way for me to communicate while I am still under these ultra-extreme censorship sanctions. I am writing multiple books now, and I think once I get one finished and published, I’ll get to rolling, and be able to pump out the same word count I was putting out on the site in book format. Although I’m clearly a well-established writer, moving to book format is something of a leap, and it’s a process I’m going through.

I just want to make it clear that although I am very negative on most things I would normally have been talking about, I’m optimistic in the long run, and I am seeing a lot of good things happening on the world stage. God willing, most of us will live to see a better future.

Peter Thiel’s losing streak is up. I don’t agree with everything the man endorses, and I don’t think he agrees with everything he endorses, but JD Vance and Blake Masters are going to change the entire game.

Masters is better than Vance, frankly. Masters is woke on Uncle Ted, he’s married to a white women with sons despite some possibly questionable mannerisms, and now he’s dropping the red pills we all wanted to hear: the truth about the root of “America’s gun violence problem.”

NBC News:

Blake Masters, a Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in Arizona who was recently endorsed by former President Donald Trump, said on a podcast this year that “Black people, frankly” are to blame for America’s gun violence problem.

“We do have a gun violence problem in this country, and it’s gang violence,” Masters said on “The Jeff Oravits Show” in April. “It’s gangs. It’s people in Chicago, St. Louis shooting each other. Very often, you know, Black people, frankly. And the Democrats don’t want to do anything about that.”

Masters also claimed Democrats “are weak on crime” and “don’t like the Second Amendment” because “it frankly blocks a lot of their plans for us.”

There are three separate issues here:

• Blacks are the ones doing the shooting
• Democrats don’t want to talk about the blacks
• The blacks fit into a plan that the Democrats have for America

The last one is really the most important.

But Masters – who I am now calling “Master Masters” – didn’t stop there.

During the same podcast, when asked what he thought about President Joe Biden’s Supreme Court nominee Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman confirmed to the court, Masters said she was “a horrible pick” and that she was an “affirmative action candidate.”

Masters did not immediately return a request for comment Tuesday.

Masters has promoted Trump’s false claims that the 2020 election was stolen. He has also repeatedlyechoed the “great replacement theory” — a white supremacist conspiracy theory that there is a plot to diminish the influence of white people in the U.S. — by baselessly claiming that Democrats want to grant amnesty to thousands of immigrants in order to “make them voters.”

Imagine calling that a “baseless claim.” Democrats are constantly claiming that they want to give all of these illegal Mexicans voting rights. They’ve been trying to do this for decades.

Remember the “Gang of Eight”?

But note – please, I implore you to note – they did not claim that Master Masters’ statements about the blacks being at the root of the gun violence epidemic was a “baseless claim.” No one wants to touch that one. And the media didn’t even bring it up until now – months after the podcast was recorded.

No one in the media wants to have that argument, because someone is going to start waving around FBI crime statistics that show that blacks – who are 13% of the population – do 50% of violent crime, and in some cities, well over 80% of gun crime.

No one can argue that or call it a “baseless claim.” Without even looking at the statistics, everyone knows it. No one crosses the street when a group of white guys are walking towards them.

Democrats just simply do not want to talk about this issue at all, as their entire gun control narrative reverses – if blacks are doing virtually all of the violent crime, then white people need to keep their guns to protect themselves from these blacks, and Democrats – who are the ones who have made themselves the protectors of the blacks – need to figure out a way to get their little pets to stop killing everyone.

If blacks were doing 10% more gun crime than whites, you could haggle about it. But when they’re doing 1000% more gun crime than whites, well – someone has to explain this shit.

The burden to explain it falls on the people who are talking about it nonstop.

Peter Thiel is obviously a polarizing character, and I’ve personally not been totally happy with the choices he’s made in the political realm.

However, sometimes he says things that are just obviously true.

And I’m supportive of anyone who supports Bitcoin. And anyone who attacks Larry Fink.

RT:

PayPal co-founder and billionaire venture capitalist Peter Thiel has accused some of the most prominent American financial figures of trying to lock cryptocurrencies out of the mainstream.

Speaking at the Bitcoin 2022 conference in Miami Beach on Thursday, Thiel said that Berkshire Hathaway’s Warren Buffett was “enemy number one.” He described the investment icon as a “sociopathic grandpa from Omaha.”

Next up on the crypto-unfriendly list are JPMorgan chief executive Jamie Dimon and BlackRock CEO Larry Fink.

“These names on my list stand in the way of Bitcoin’s progress. These are the things we have to fight for to get Bitcoin to go 10x or 100x from here,” said Thiel, who has been claiming that digital currencies could supplant the current financial system.

The businessman also argued that traditional investors should be putting money in Bitcoin. “When they choose not to allocate to Bitcoin, that is a deeply political choice, and we need to be pushing back against them,” he said.

Thiel also pointed to the ESG (environmental, social, and governance standards) problem, which is an increasingly popular way to evaluate investments and the impact they have on the world.

“The finance gerontocracy that runs the country through whatever silly virtue signaling slash hate factory term like ESG they have, versus what I would call, what we have to think of as a revolutionary youth movement,” he said.

ESG is just a globalist plot to implement public-private partnership communism.

We see Larry Fink out there saying that he runs all of these companies and he’s forcing them to change the way they operate to bring them in line with “social justice.”

So Larry Fink, CEO of asset manager Black Rock, says he believes in "enforcing behavior":

"Behaviour is going to have to change and this is one thing we ask companies, you have to enforce behavior and at Black Rock we enforce behavior" pic.twitter.com/kdTjlCG1wl

— Joost Broekers (@JoostBroekers) March 25, 2022

Most people don’t even understand what ESG is.

Most people don’t even know what Blackrock is.

This topic is featured in that very good Swedish documentary I posted.

The fact that Elon Musk backed down on Bitcoin and then started doing whatever he’s doing with a gay dog is the main reason I don’t have any faith that he’s going to actually fix Twitter.

He had the ability to do so much for the entire world by going all in on Bitcoin, but then he backed down because Liz Warren said it was changing the weather and causing earthquakes.

Not serious.

Thiel might be more serious than Musk.

But we don’t really have any true heroes.

Except one.

Peter Thiel was one of the only competent public figures supporting Donald Trump.

Just like Tucker Carlson and yours truly, Thiel is looking at his 2020 campaign and thinking, “this ain’t happening.”

Wall Street Journal:

President Trump’s most prominent Silicon Valley supporter, billionaire Peter Thiel, has told friends and associates that he plans to sit out this year’s presidential campaign because he thinks reelection is increasingly a long-shot, people familiar with the matter say.

Mr. Thiel, a venture capitalist and co-founder of PayPal Holdings Inc., spoke at the Republican National Convention in 2016, where he criticized the state of the economy and described Mr. Trump as a man set to rebuild America. One of the few tech leaders to publicly back Mr. Trump that year, he also donated $1.25 million to the Trump campaign and related groups.

In recent weeks, however, in private conversations from his oceanfront estate in Hawaii, Mr. Thiel has said he soured on the president’s prospects, the people said. Mr. Thiel said he believes it is likely that the economy will be mired in deep recession in November, with double-digit unemployment, and that any sitting president would be at a stark disadvantage to a challenger.

Mr. Thiel doesn’t currently plan to speak at this year’s Republican convention, scheduled for Aug. 24-27, one of the people said. Though he may eventually still vote for Mr. Trump, Mr. Thiel hasn’t donated any money to Mr. Trump this year and currently doesn’t plan to, the people said.

One person who speaks to Mr. Thiel about politics says he described Mr. Trump’s campaign as the “S.S. Minnow,” a reference to the ship that ran aground on the television series “Gilligan’s Island.”

It’s a good metaphor. Perhaps the best metaphor ever. It’s more than just running aground.

For those who didn’t grow up watching reruns of the show because it was the only thing that was watchable in the slot before school between 1991-1993, let me tell you: It was supposed to be a three hour tour (a three hour tour). The ship gets completely lost, due to a storm, but also due to the incompetence of the crew. It runs aground while lost at sea, on an island that is totally uninhabited. The crew is completely incapable of figuring out how to get off the island, due to being a bunch of silly goofballs, who were also all completely self-absorbed and incapable of self-reflection.

A Republican ending up with “I let a bunch of black crack dealers out of prison” as his primary accomplishment is certainly comparable to a desert island. What’s more, the MAGA plan was as simple as a three hour tour. It was all just basic populism.

Trump is the Skipper, the disgruntled leader of the crew who can’t ever get anyone to follow his instructions.

Jared Kushner is Gilligan, the retarded first mate who bumbles around.

Ivanka is Ginger, the woman who is obsessed with looking fashionable in the middle of a disaster.

The Howells would represent the conservative boomers who don’t really know what the hell is even going on, but are certain we’re going to get off the island soon.

Mary-Ann, who is the only normal person on the island, represents the masses of Trump supporters, who are a little bit dumb but basically just good hearted folks who want everything to work out; they didn’t sign up to be involved in this weird circus but are taking it in stride.

Tucker Carlson is the Professor, a genius who is always coming up with plans to get off the island but is constantly thwarted by the stupidity of the rest of the inhabitants.

“I let a bunch of black crack dealers out of prison” island is quickly transforming into the island from LOST instead of the island from Gilligan’s Island.

This is all beyond bizarre, and it has taken a turn into dark fantasy with horror elements. We all sense that while there were some interesting elements, the ending is going to be really, really bad.

The rumor mill is claiming that Trump is fed up with Jared, but the fact is that he is remaining as the head of the campaign.

There is simply no way that Trump can win with this insane plan to try to win the black vote. He has to run as far as possible from this harebrained scheme, which seems likely to have been designed to cause him to lose the election.

The fact that letting the blacks out of prison is the single thing he accomplished while president is irrelevant. People don’t know what has been done and what hasn’t been done, and he needs to run a fear-based campaign, telling people they’re going to be slaughtered by the blacks if they don’t vote for him. That is the winning formula here.

“Vote or die” will bring out the vote. If he keeps pushing this thing with black people, people are going to be too angry to vote at all.

This is health food.

How on earth do we keep talking about how much “progress” we’ve got going on in this country when people are literally dying younger?

It’s absurd to say “oh yes, you’re dying faster, but you are having more anal sex than ever before and men are using women’s bathrooms and cutting their penises off at a rate never before imagined.”

Do not even normies see how absurd this is?

Wall Street Journal:

Americans are dying from heart disease at a faster rate, stalling four decades of gains against the nation’s leading killer and driving up the U.S. mortality rate overall.

The death rate from heart disease rose 0.9% last year, according to U.S. mortality data released Thursday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The death rate also rose 3% for stroke, the fifth-leading cause of death in the U.S.

Both changes, which researchers tie in large part to the rise in obesity and diabetes, helped push life expectancy down by one-tenth of a percentage point, to 78.8 years, according to the CDC.

Cardiovascular disease has been the biggest killer in the U.S. for more than a century. But death rates from heart disease in the U.S. have declined nearly 70% since 1969, brought about by antismoking and other public-health campaigns, the advent of medications to control blood pressure and cholesterol, and new techniques for saving peoples’ lives from heart attacks.

The decline in heart-related deaths has been so precipitous, in fact, that until 2011 heart disease was poised to drop below cancer as the leading cause of death in the U.S., researchers say. But then the downward trajectory suddenly slowed at that point and remained slow until the heart disease death rate rose in 2015.

“It’s a definite milestone in the wrong direction, and the concern a lot of us have is that it reflects largely the approximately three-decade-long epidemic of obesity,” said Stephen Sidney, senior research scientist with the Kaiser Permanente Northern California division of research, who led a study published earlier this year that pinpointed the halt in progress against heart disease.

As far as heart-disease goes, the Daily Stormer endorses the paleo diet. I’m working on putting together a bigger guide to this diet plan in the near future, with more information on how to death with losing weight, gaining weight, etc., including intermittent fasting and other aspects of the perfect diet plan.

But look.

People dying faster as a statistic indicates that you have an endemic social problem. Social problems cannot be put down to individuals making bad decisions, because the concept of “individuals collectively make individual decisions in a pattern” is nonsensical. If large numbers of people change their behavior, there is a sociological reason for it that goes beyond personal choices.

25 years of obesity increase

Us and the world

And the government, as we have seen, clearly has no issue with social-engineering programs. If the country as a whole is just making bad diet decisions, programs could be implemented to correct this.

Beyond people allegedly choosing to eat less healthy food, you have the issue of the food itself that is being sold tending to be much less healthy than ever before, which is absolutely a place where the government could intervene and pass regulations normalizing food production in a way that is beneficial to the public.

And yet, no.

Instead we get government programs in support of homosexual anal sex, feminism, forced racial integration, transsexualism and various other abject insanity, while public health is not only ignored, but actively attacked through further deregulation of food safety standards.

We have a situation here which needs to be dealt with, or at the very least, explained.

It would be one thing if we lived in some sort of fully libertarian anarcho-capitalist society. I don’t support that, but then we would have an explanation as to why food safety isn’t being regulated by the government. But we don’t have that. We have a society where the government will literally force you to allow men in women’s bathrooms at you private establishment. You are forced to hire racial minorities and women at your business against your will.

We live in the exact opposite of a libertarian society, and yet if you looked at the way food safety is regulated, you’d think we were living the Rothbardian dream.

To be honest, I’m not especially happy with the guy Trump is currently considering for the head of the FDA. Jim O’Neill, an associate of Peter Thiel that Thiel is pushing for, is a libertarian.

The media is focusing on the fact he would make it easier to get drugs on the market so people could use them at their own risk. That may or may not be a good thing – I don’t really know or care, as I don’t use pharmaceuticals and wouldn’t encourage anyone else to either. And it may be better to just open that up, as the system is so corrupt right now, anything can get on the market if it’s got the right backing, and nothing can get on the market if it doesn’t. I tend to think libertarianism is never the solution to strangling, corrupt regulations and crony capitalism, but who knows.

What I am more concerned about personally is food safety regulations. I haven’t seen O’Neill’s plan for that, but if he’s a libertarian, I don’t imagine I would think very much of it.

We have to regulate the amount of soy, corn and sugar that is being put into processed food. This has become a complete disaster.

All this having been said, much of the problem is in education. People are made to believe that it is healthy to eat whole grains, and it simply is not. In fact, virtually no processed food are healthy or even safe for human consumption. A program to educate people on this fact could go along way.

The government launched a massive campaign on smoking which cut down the use of cigarettes to nearly a third of what it was in the sixties. And this food we’re eating is a lot more dangerous than cigarettes.

However, that program included not just education, but huge tax hikes on cigarettes. If a box of sugar-corn cereal was $35, then I think a lot of parents would start taking the time to cook their kids – and themselves – eggs and bacon instead.

Skip the toast. Potatoes or rice. Also, either fry in the grease from the bacon, or use real 100% butter.

I see no reason why a similar program couldn’t be launched against processed foods, while at the same time passing regulations which prohibit known toxins from being distributed at unsafe levels.

There are obviously a lot of other factors contributing to the health decline in this country. Plastic is a big one. But the biggest is the obesity crisis. And it isn’t difficult to solve.

Donald Trump, we hand this over to you, buddy.