I’m been writing bitter screeds for a week or so now. Decided to skip it. It’s not going for anything. Bitterness is for loss. If there’s nothing to be saved, there’s nothing to be lost.

I do not mean some “all is dust in the wind” thing. Much more literal. Yes, after Trump was shot and they turned him into a savior figure, I said he would win in a landslide as a manufactured mythical figure (I still don’t believe the shooting was real, but hey, whatever, maybe just a neat coincidence). And yes, I did my best to keep the site alive with donations.

These were both completely futile things. No one was going to listen to me and like, cancel Trump’s election to stop WWIII. And not enough people were ever going to donate given the restrictions (almost the entirety of the last 4-5 years was paid for by one guy).

This is the way of things. The world goes to war. The Daily Stormer shuts down.

I barely have control over the quality of my bath towels. I have seized control of the radio in this room however. We will be listening to The Cars discography until I decide it stops, and I have a four-pound antique Japanese ashtray which will be buried deep within the skull of anyone who challenges me on this.

We control so very little. Think of the things you control. Write them down. Things that you really control. Things that people (other than police with guns) could never take control away from you. Sadly, that list doesn’t even include your kids. It’s mostly what video games you can play and what you can do at the gym.

Anyway, no one wants these stupid musings. There were two issues.

The first is the war:

• Israel somehow surrenders (or negotiates something that virtually all Israelis would view as a surrender)
• Israel uses nukes

These are the two options.

The first is so unlikely as to be almost completely dismissed. It is like listing “winning the lottery” on your five-year financial plan.

The plan, as it were, was to throw Iran into sectarian violence. Neither the Azaris nor the Kurds have moved, and have clearly signaled they won’t. So what that means is that the US can continue dumping “dumb bombs” and killing hundreds of thousands or millions of people, effectively creating the greatest Mujahideen force the world has ever seen.

And then eventually Israel will start sending nukes, I guess just trying to kill everyone or whatever, and then I have no idea what happens. No superpower, or any other country besides the US, will tolerate this, but Israel has too many nukes for anyone to really do anything.

You will hear stupid shit about how the US could send ten thousand marines to open the Strait of Hormuz, and this is nonsense. They have to have a beachhead of tens of thousands on the Iran side, and they would just get wiped out by ballistic missiles. Trying something retarded like that would make this debacle all the more embarrassing, and serve no purpose but to further embolden the Mujahideen.

The IRGC are not Arabs. Organizing independent cells of Mujahideen to act all over the region, all over the world, is something they’ve been meticulously planning since the invasion of Iraq. The mountainous nature of the land makes it very easy to avoid dumb bombs and very easy to cross borders.

This whole thing is so fucking retarded, the only possible move, planned by Bibi, who is not retarded, is some large-scale false flag inside of America which justifies an extensive nuking.

I don’t know what this means for you, but I do know it is impossible it means nothing for you. So, figure out what it means. Try your best to deal with it.

Among other things, it’s an impossibility that this ICE and NG paramilitary force built up in the US won’t be used to target “antisemites.” (As you’ll recall me explaining in an exasperated manner, that was the whole point of the program.) If I were you, I wouldn’t post too much. Seriously, why? Your tweets aren’t going to stop ZOG. Grow the fuck up, retard.

Oh, and the website. Shutting it down permanently at the end of the month.

Ideally, we’ll be able to keep a backup on Tor, as well as get the whole site on a torrent. I’ll do what I can.

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.

As we get ready for the next round of the Iran war, Western governments need to come up with an explanation as to why we are going to war for Israel beyond “shielding Jews from blowback as a result of their genocide in Gaza.”

Enter: “Iranian backed terror.”

You have probably heard the claim in various Jewish media that Iran is a “state-backer of terrorism.” However, this claim, when dissected, does not refer to ISIS or al-Qeada style terrorism, but rather is a reference to Iran’s funding of various militias around the Middle East. For example, the media categorizes Iran’s support for Hezbollah and the Houthis as “backing terrorism.” Whatever you think of the militias Iran does back, this is something different than blowing up buildings or running people over with a big truck in Europe or America.

There have been some shaky claims of Iran sponsoring bombings in Saudi and Argentina in the 1990s, and in 2012, India said Iranians tried to kill an Israeli diplomat with a bomb. The same guy was accused of doing a bombing in Thailand, however, and after being extradited to Thailand from Malaysia, the Thai authorities refused to charge him and released him to Iran.

All of this is to say that this week’s accusations by the Australian Prime Minister that the Iranian government was behind the bombing of a synagogue and a Jewish deli in Australia are something different than we’ve seen before. The Melbourne synagogue was bombed on December 6th of last year. The Sydney deli, which burned up last October, was not even originally investigated as foul play by the cops. No one died in either “attack.”

As those who study the Jews are all too aware, Jewish very often commit hate crimes against themselves. Even before terrorism was a thing, Jews would regularly burn down their own properties to collect insurance money. The term “Jewish lightning” is in the lexicon to refer to anyone burning down their own property for the insurance, as Jews were so famous for this behavior (similarly to how a non-Jewish person viewed as greedy might be called “Shylock”).

It’s maybe worth noting that sense the bombing, the rabbi from the synagogue in question has been on a donations tour, and with the announcement it was Iran, is on another tour asking for even more free money.

What’s more, if these were indeed intentional attacks from someone, their timing, in the middle of the Gaza genocide, could mean that literally anyone could be responsible. Although Moslems would probably be more likely, it is not hard to imagine a non-Moslem outraged at the scenes on TikTok doing something like this. On its face, blaming the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps for the bombing of a random deli and synagogue in Australia sounds ridiculous, and it seems they would be some of the last people on the list of suspects.

Even if you believe Iran was responsible for the attacks they were accused of in the 1990s and then the 2012 events, those were all political or military targets. The idea of a serious military organization ordering random restaurants and synagogues in a random country blown up is silly. Iran is capable of sending rockets at Israel, they are capable of cutting off Israel’s access to shipping lanes. It makes no sense they would sink to street level random acts of random violence, which would not need any central planning.

Further, the fact that the firebombing would not need to be centrally planned means that it would be impossible to trace it to Iranian authorities. What would even be the claim? That they found text messages from a general in the IRGC? And that it took them nearly a year to find these text messages?

The identities of the accused have not been revealed, but the claim by the government is that they are street criminals who also committed other crimes who the IRGC hired through their networks to carry out these very serious firebombings that had no political purpose and where no one even died.

Here’s the Thing

This announcement by the weasel Prime Minister Anthony Albanese that Iran ordered the bombing of these random civilian locations in a white, Western country has been a top news story all over the world. Although no one is likely to look too deeply into it, because again, literally no one died, this gets the idea that “Iran is funding terrorist attacks on civilians” into the minds of the masses of the people.

With the attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001, the FBI had previously coordinated an attempted bombing of the same buildings in 1993 as a kind of precursor. Then you had the second attack, with the airplanes, lead to an invasion of Afghanistan. Then, in the weeks and months after 9/11, someone was sending Anthrax all around to media and government people, which is when the media/government started talking about Iraq as working with the al-Qeada. In 2008, they then said it was actually some random white guy that did the anthrax. He was, conveniently, already dead.

This is the note that was with the Anthrax sent to Tom Brokaw:

The FBI never really bothered to try to explain why a white guy would do that.

But refencing the Anthrax mailed around, Colin (pronuonced “Colon” for some reason) Powell brought white powder as a prop to his UN presentation on the need to. invade Iraq,

There was an ongoing triangle of disinformation and fake news passing from the New York Times, Dick Cheney, and Fox News. They were accusing Saddam of all kinds of things, just like they are with Iran right now, but the core of it was Cheney’s “Sinister Nexus of Terror.”

You still had the steam from 9/11 when they did the Iraq war less than two years later. But with Iran now, are we really supposed to do a massive war because of October 7th? Or is there going to need to be something more significant to motivate people?

I would very much expect that this Australian cafe and synagogue is the beginning of something bigger. With 9/11 and the Anthrax, when people were saying “oh they can’t be false flags, the government wouldn’t do that,” it was like “well, they started fake wars and killed like a million people, so why wouldn’t they blow up some buildings or send some powders?”

Looking back now, it feels like the “12 Day War” (the term they are using for the back and forth between Israel and Iran that involved Trump also dropping bombs on Iran) was a kind of probing event, where they wanted to see what Iran had. I think they were possibly a bit surprised at how capable Iran was. They were not the superpower capable of wiping Israel off the map that Scott Ritter had told everyone they were, but they were able to hit Israel and with missiles and cause real damage, and it was going to be impossible for Israel to keep going much longer before they were running out of their interceptor missiles.

Israel’s view on Iran has not changed, they are saying they are going to attack them again, and there is no way they can do it without the US, and involving the US on a large scale will probably take more than some all caps Trump tweets.

Obviously, at this point, huge numbers of people are going to be saying “false flag,” even if it is something on the scale of 9/11. So I don’t claim to know how this would work. If I was Donald Trump, I’d be worried the Mossad was going to assassinate me and blame Iran. That would get all the Trump supporters behind a war and it would leave leftists confused as to how they should feel, because if they said “false flag,” they might feel like they were defending Trump. Also, there has already been a “foreshadowing” event where Trump was allegedly scraped on the ear. And, I would add, that a personality like Trump getting shot would just generally be a bigger shock to the world than a bombing, which we’ve all already seen a lot of.

Or maybe I’m wrong and there is already enough noise and there doesn’t need to be some big event to justify further action in Iran. I guess the issue is that I don’t know really what it would take. If there needed to be an Iraq style invasion, then you would need some pretty big justification. But no one understands the logistics of this war. Like I said, I think the first thing was a test as much as anything.

But there are a lot of questions.

If there was large scale bombing of Tehran, could they do a “regime change” from the air? If so, could they keep shooting rockets without a “regime”? How stable is the domestic situation in the country? How do the Arabs, Azeris, and other minorities feel? (I think we know how the Kurds feel, lol. But the others, who knows? I don’t know. I do know that Persians are barely half the population.) Are there terrorists that can be moved in through Azerbaijan? What happened all those terrorists in Syria now that their guy is in charge? Can they be moved through Iraq and into Iran? It’s much more mountainous in Iran.

This is a lot different than when ISIS was able to just roll around wherever on the flats in the Iraqi/Syrian desert.

The mountains also provide a lot of cover for hydra-type break-off groups to operate if the government falls or is at least incapable of operating normally. I’m sure they have caves loaded up with drones and cheap missiles, and as we saw in the 12 Day War, the cost of shooting them down is too much for Israel to absorb. Even if they have infinity money from Big Daddy Donald, they can’t make that many interceptor missiles.

Those are some of the big questions. There are more questions. I’m sure the people with in intelligence have better estimates than I would be able to come up with as to what the answers to these questions might be, but I think even US/Israeli intelligence can’t give definite answers regarding most of these factors.

What I do think is that slowly drilling away at it until the armor cracks like they did with Syria is not a potential strategy given that unlike Syria, Iran can hit Israel with missiles. So I’m sure what Bibi wants is the full force of the US military to be brought to bear in a full invasion type war. And for that to happen, it is most likely that something very extreme would have to precipitate it.

I was on a roll with the Epstein articles and I have a really good one that was almost finished. But I was fasting and then stopped and I think I got refeeding syndrome. Terrible runs for days now. It was only a five day fast, I didn’t think refeeding was an issue, but yeah, it turned into a big mess.

Anyway, I’ll finish the Epstein thing tomorrow or whatever, but now this Thai-Cambodia thing has blown up and I’m going to sloppily post a forum reply I wrote, just so I’m posting something.

A forum poster wrote:

You know, Anglin predicted all this.

What article was it, a few years back, where he said “we are effectively in World War 3. World War means ‘world at war’. We will see more countries acting on settling old grievances unrelated to the ‘main’ war” ?

I think it was a lot of articles. It was sort of one of my main themes the last few years.

This is basically India-Pakistan 2, though less complicated. Thai is 100% the aggressor here. The UN and the whole world recognizes the disputed area as Cambodia, and there isn’t a moral justification in the way there is with Kashmir (Kashmir is 97% Muslim, whereas Preah Vihar is as far as I know 0% Thai, although Thai/Khmer is less defined since it’s solely a language, with same genes/religion).

Anyway, you can argue who started the India-Pakistan thing, in this current case, Thai just all of the sudden started mounting forces on the border then killed a Khmer soldier in May, then the PM of Cambodia leaked a phone call of the party gurl PM of Thai apologizing and calling him “uncle,” then she had to resign and Thai got angry about the leak and made moves last week.

Right now, the issue is Cambodia used old BM-21s to respond to Thailand and (presumably accidentally, these are not precise systems) blew up a 7/11 killing like a dozen people. Then Thais who crossed the border got their legs blown off by landmines, which Cambodia claims (at least plausibly) were Pol Pots mines, not new mines. So now Thai is saying that although it is an objective matter that they started the whole thing, they have to take revenge for the 7/11 and landmines by… no one knows what exactly. Are they saying they’re going to occupy the disputed territory?

Anyway, Cambodia for obvious reasons is crawling with Chinese military, but China hates getting involved in anything, and they definitely do not care much if Thailand wants to steal a hundred square kilos of land.

But it is what I predicted, yeah, where there is so much war everywhere, everyone is like “well, we can do that too.” Thailand started this for domestic reasons, they have a lot of problems, but it seems that Cambodia escalated with the release of the call because it’s a lot better for them domestically than it is for Thailand (just basic rally round the flag), and also, they know there can’t be a real war because of the Chinese visiting forces in Cambodia. “Visiting” being sort of a euphemism. I don’t even know if the Chinese use that term, it’s an American term for the occupation of Germany/Korea/Japan/Philippines/etc. Of the American occupations though, Korea is the only one that wants it, while Cambodia wants as many Chinese soldiers and equipment in their country as is possible.

I think this is going to be solved soon, but just like with Pakistan-India, you’re putting a band-aid on a bullet hole. Thailand is going to have to back down and basically tacitly admit this was all their fault and totally unprovoked (or rather, provoked by the French 100 years ago). And at any time the US can go to Thai and be like “hey we’ve got a bunch of planes and missiles and shit, you want to go to war with the Chinese in Cambodia?” and Thai will say “we thought you’d never ask.”

Further Information

That was the reply, but since this is an official post on the official site, I should maybe add some background information. Preah Vihar is an ancient Hindu temple which is of course now used as a Buddhist site like all the ancient Hindu sites in Indochina. When the French left Cambodia (which they occupied while not occupying Thailand), they drew a border for Cambodia. Before the late 19th century, there wasn’t really borders in the modern sense in the third world, and a lot of these border drawings were a disaster (look at Africa or many Middle East countries). In Cambodia it was pretty easy, as Khmers were a cohesive group so you weren’t forcing a bunch of different ethnic/religious groups to live under a single government. But there was never a clear border before, and both sides wanted the temple in the border region. The French gave it to Cambodia and then the UN repeatedly said the French border was valid and Thailand should respect it.

There is a lot of stuff about the fact that the ruling families in Thailand and Cambodia were getting along pretty well until the Khmer PM (technically the old PM, father of the current PM, but still the primary authority in the country) leaked the call which appeared to show that the 38 year old party gurl Thai PM not only admitted Thailand was at fault, but also admitted she didn’t have control over her own military. It’s hilarious he recorded this call then just immediately posted it online, and it certainly revealed the nature of the situation, but the party gurl’s father, who is arguably the most powerful man in Thailand, viewed this as a personal betrayal, and has actually stated publicly that this whole thing is now personal. Saying “I’m settling a personal score” is a weird thing to say when dozens of people are now dead. Or at least it seems weird to Westerners.

There are 72 million people in Thailand and 17 million in Cambodia, and neither country has nukes, meaning it isn’t exactly like Pakistan-India. (It was so funny when Pakistan said “when don’t have the rocket systems to send these nukes anywhere but at you – they are only for you.”) But the strategic importance of Cambodia to China (not to mention the billions in investment) means that in some sense, Cambodia has the upper hand. Despite the fact that the US frames China as “aggressive,” their last military action was in 1979 – to protect Cambodia from a Vietnamese invasion. (For the record, the US has been in dozens of conflicts since 1979, making it pretty cartoonish for them to accuse China of “aggressiveness.”)

With as passive as China is, they’re not going to let Cambodia get actually invaded in a serious way by US-backed Thailand. And the fact that Thailand is the aggressor – having started it unprovoked and then literally gone around saying it’s a personal vendetta – means that China doesn’t really have to worry about optics in the way they do in a lot of other places. It’s unfortunate the 7/11 got blown up, but it’s pretty obviously an accident, and it was done after Thais had already bombed Cambodia. Further, Cambodia is saying Thailand is using cluster bombs, which is probably true (people lie in wars but in this case, Thailand’s actions are so egregious and obvious that no one on the Khmer side needs to lie – they could have said the 7/11 bombing was a false flag and didn’t, just said it was an accident). The UN will presumably investigate the cluster bomb claims as well as the claims that the mines were Pol Pot’s and not new mines. Just based on facts though, it’s really unlikely they are new mines. They were on the Thai side of the border, so the idea that Cambodia is sending special forces to mine the Thai side while the whole (relative small area) is swarming with soldiers and drones is sort of a ridiculous claim. And again, Thailand, by everyone’s admission, started this. So blaming them for anything is silly.

I mean, I’m the anti-Jew-Faggot Empire guy, so I want to do a full disclosure and say of course I support the Khmer side against the gay marriage, legal weed, US-aligned Thai side. But I’m just giving you facts here. No one, including the Thais themselves, claim that Cambodia started this. Again, there are parallels to Pakistan-India, but in that case, both sides could make claims the other side started it. In this case, Thailand had political problems, and just up and decided to mount their forces on the Khmer border and start talking about retaking territory that has been determined a part of Cambodia since 1907.

So, I’ll just repeat: it’s very unlikely that this will spin out of control in the immediate future. Donald Trump has made threats about tariffs, and every country responds to these, but the bitterness is not going to go away when the conflict stops, and it is yet another place on the planet where war could break out in a serious way, and definitely would break out if there was any serious conflict between the US and China.

These simmering and potentially hot areas exist all over the world. No government is really happy with their borders, and in general, the majority of populations of countries will always support their government in a war.

Finally, I just want to point out the obvious: if the US actually believed in a “rules based order,” they would be sending infinity weapons to Cambodia to defend their sacred border and the CIA would be all over reddit calling for “volunteers” to go fight to defend the sacred border.

In actual reality, borders are not sacred in any way, virtually all of them are completely arbitrary, with the least arbitrary being those that were settled by wars that ended in serious defeat of the country with the counter-claim, such as the US Mexico border, where the Mexicans got so wrecked that no one can seriously question the validity of the border. But borders are a new thing, historically, and they exist for purely practical reasons. The claims after the Russian invasion that “borders are sacred” was the weirdest nonsense ever, especially from the US, which did Kosovo and was, at the time Russia invaded the Ukraine, trying to do Kurdistan. And, should I even have to say it, is the biggest supporter of Israel, which is the least border-respecting country on earth. When Assad fell last year, Israel annexed a further 400 square kilometers of Syria.

A world order cannot be run by a country with no principles and no attempt at fairness in regulating international disputes. The UN, for all my criticisms of it, is a place where all countries can meet and hash out these kinds of disputes, but the US simply refuses to recognize anything they say as meaning anything. We need a new world order, where conflicts are not solved by slogans and dumb emotional bullshit. There is no logical reason that with the nature of technology and international trade that war should even exist at all anymore (with maybe the exception of really primitive areas of Africa, but even then, third parties should be able to mediate conflicts in a way that is satisfactory to all parties).

The problem is that the US is the current Big Boss and it is run by Jews who like war because they don’t respect anyone’s right to self-determination, believing that they are God’s chosen ones and therefore have a divine right to decide how everyone on earth behaves, and with therefore use both social engineering programs and violence in order to enforce their vision of a world shaped in their own image.

Donald Trump has turned against Thomas Massie for some reason. Very cleverly, however, he is tweeting opposite messages about him and making sure different parts of the voter base sees the tweets.

He is using Palantir AI to make sure different parts of his base see different tweets.

First, he tweeted – or “truthed” – out this one:

Then, realizing that many in the base would not like that tweet, he posted a second tweet which he will use AI to show to other people who are against the Jews:

Obviously, I agree with the second tweet, but I think it is very cynical to US AI to make sure different groups see different tweets with opposite messages.

I thought we were for transparency in MAGA??

Massie appeared on Theo Von this week (Theo is the realest). You can see his own views.

Personally, I would rather primary Trump than Massie, and I think when Trump fails to primary Massie, and when there is huge support against Trump and for Massie, it will be a big wakeup call as to just how much the base hates Trump’s insane allegiance to the Jews.

I think we’re going to see it long before that, in fact.

The midterms are going to be a complete disaster and probably everyone is just going to vote for Hamas agents like Zohran. I would vote today for any Hamas candidate over Donald Trump.

By the way, just so you understand: that second Trump tweet is a joke I made up for humor purposes. The first tweet is real. Trump is really saying Massie is not America First because he’s not Israel First and according to Trump, it’s the same thing and anyone who questions that is against him.

We’ll see how that goes for him.

I suspect it won’t go great.

I am primarily concerned about domestic social issues. That is what I prefer to write about. Primarily, I hate women and like to share that message of hate with the world. However, for many years now I have been compelled to write about geopolitics because there is so much gibberish flooding the public space regarding these issues that it appears to be a moral obligation for me to add my piece.

I am all too well aware that I am the only English speaking person who can say anything intelligent about China. But I never viewed myself as the sole voice of reason on the Ukraine-Russia situation. Yet, I go away for a few weeks and the public conversation on the right degrades into garbled madness. Following a wild series of confusing events, there are a few quick things I want to put out there and hopefully it will clear things up.

The first and most obvious thing to note is that it was very easy for the American right to be pro-Russia, or at least anti-Ukraine, when the cancer-riddled old coot Joe Brandon was in charge of the US government and serving as the face of Ukrainemania. Right wingers, while sometimes critical of Trump, do not view him as villainous in the way they viewed the rotting corpse Brandon as villainous.

Unfortunately, nothing has changed insofar as the Ukraine-Russia situation is concerned now that Trump is president. Despite a very funny scene in the Oval Office in which trump berated the Jewish dwarf dictator of the Ukraine, the US military has continued arming the country and has continued to support NATO escalating the conflict.

Following along with the theatre that took place during the zelensky meeting, Trump has used rhetoric to give the impression there has been some substantive change in US war policy. Biden publicly committed to the idea that the war would never end, saying constantly that the war should go on forever no matter the cost, while Trump is publicly saying the war should end at some point in the (near?) future. However, even while Biden was saying “endless war forever,” his own officials were acknowledging that it would have to end at some point. Just so, while Trump says he wants it to end, his own officials are saying that sure, it will have to be sometime, but who really knows.

Aside from the change in rhetoric, Trump has vaguely attempted to start a peace process, which Biden refused to even entertain. So, I should give credit where due there. But there is as of yet no reason to believe the peace process will go anywhere.

It’s a bit disappointing for me personally. Although I obviously supported Trump over Kamala, in the run-up to the “election,” I was overwhelmingly negative about the whole thing, and repeatedly stressed the point that though Trump would win, it was only because he was allowed to win (given that we know for a fact that US elections can be rigged), which meant that he wasn’t likely to do much of significance. I did say that I expected him to end the Ukraine war (even if only to free up resources for more adventurism in the Middle East). It now appears that my optimism, as it were, might have been misplaced. (Of course, on the other end, to also give credit where due, he is at least pushing back against Bibi in ways which could turn out to be substantive. Though I’m not really holding my breath on that, I stand by what I wrote last week about the possibility that Trump could move to try to oust Bibi. I also stand by my instinct that it probably won’t work.)

The important thing to understand is that trumps talk of a Russia-Ukraine ceasefire is complete bullshit and every serious person is aware of this. It is not a starting point for peace negotiations, it is not anything at all other than a tactic to try to convince deeply stupid or totally uninformed people that Russia is not committed to peace and is rejecting an olive branch. It is not an olive branch. If there was a deal on the table and Zelensky and Putin had a meeting setup with a draft proposal and Trump was asking for a week ceasefire, okay, but asking for an open-ended ceasefire and then whining when Putin refuses to agree to let the Ukraine rearm for no reason is just childish and dumb.

Russia’s demands have been the same since before they invaded the Ukraine. In substance, they’ve been consistent since the Ukraine, backed by the US, started the war in 2014, but the specifics have not changed since February of 2022 when Putin gave a speech outlining the purpose of the invasion and the goals that would have to be achieved before there could be peace between the two states. There is no room for confusion about what Russia is demanding, and the single most important demand is a serious, carved in stone agreement that the Ukraine will never join NATO. This includes not only a ban on officially joining NATO, but also a ban on being a de facto NATO state through a treaty that does the same thing without official NATO membership. (The current chatter coming from the State Department and from Germany is to make the Ukraine a de facto NATO member without actually calling it that.)

Trump is not offering Russia a peace deal. He is demanding that Russia, which is winning the war, agree to stop fighting so that the US and its allies can rearm and fortify the Ukraine. This is like if a losing football team in the fourth quarter demanded that the game be paused so everyone can rest up and then come back and finish the game tomorrow. It is completely ridiculous.

If Trump were in charge of the United States, and it might be childish to suggest he is but if he were, he could offer a peace deal that meets Russias terms and end the war immediately. If there were a serious peace deal, there would be no need for a ceasefire, because you would have a cessation of hostilities.

Russia is not demanding anything crazy. There would be nothing shameful in simply doing the deal. It would not make Trump look weak or whatever it is people suggest he is concerned about. Trump has spent months now claiming that Putin is planning to conquer the entirety of the Ukraine, and I can tell you as a matter of fact, no one in Russia is going to be mad about Trump signing a peace deal and then going around saying he stopped Russia from marching on Galicia and forcing everyone to use correct Russian grammar and drink Russian vodka (instead of that fruity crap they drink).

I said from the beginning that when the US finally surrenders they will say “we stopped Putin from taking all of the Ukraine,” and that is clearly what Trump will claim and that is fine.

But there is no other room for a “win.” Maybe Russia will cede some of the territory that they’ve officially claimed but don’t currently occupy. I would assume they would do that and the Kremlin seems to have indicated as much. But that can’t be any kind of a big public “win” because no one in the West knows or cares where those lines are.

Russia doing a big bombing campaign this week is sending a signal that they are not playing a game and they are not interested in this ridiculous kiddie nonsense that Trump is pushing. Trump is trying to bully them by claiming they look bad for not agreeing to a ceasefire that allows the sickening pervert Americans and those German sickos to come in and fortify towns again, to ship in more weapons, to train soldiers, and so on.

Trump is offering nothing at all. In part that is because there is nothing he can offer other than the deal that has always been on the table. I have no idea how this is going to play long term with his own supporters. Trump is now taking a position not qualitatively different than that of Joe Biden on the conflict and it’s unclear if his supporters are going to notice that. Probably, if you combine this with things like Dan Bongino and that odious Indian coming out and saying the Epstein suicide was on the up and up, and the ongoing discontent with Trump’s support for the Gaza genocide, Trump is probably going to be facing some pretty serious negativity in the coming weeks and months. The euphoria over the barrage of toothless, symbolic executive orders is probably wearing off.

It seems to me that Trump has enough problems with being perceived as a warmonger and if he has the ability, ending the Ukraine war would be a very easy win for his image, even if it isn’t a “win” in the other sense that he often uses that word.

Issuing a series of threats seems very ill-advised and is definitely not going to lead to any positive outcome for Trump or anyone else.

He can escalate, of course. He can send in US troops to fight Russians. He has that ability. But is that what he wants? If not, then threats are not useful, because Russia is not going to respond to threats. I don’t think they will get mad about them, but they will issue statements about how Trump is very emotional, which just seems embarrassing for Trump. If he decides to escalate the war, then he goes down as the guy who started World War III in the face of the most obvious peace deal imaginable, with the narrative being that he did it because he was unable to control his emotions.

He campaigned on saying Joe Biden was right about Israel-Palestine but just wasn’t extreme enough. Everyone knew that was his position. However he now does seem to be bothered by the fact that all of his supporters, save whatever evangelical boomers are still around, view him as a puppet of Netanyahu who is personally responsible for a genocide. It’s possible he can’t get out of that, as he actually is just totally controlled by Israel. But if he can, why not take the PR win and end the Ukraine war? Why go around spewing gibberish that no adult takes seriously?

For the record, I take Trump at his word that he wants to have a legacy as a peacemaker, and I think if he was a dictator, in complete control of the executive branch of the US government, he would end these wars. I am not against him as a person, and I think people who portray him as being secretly ideologically pro-war are not very serious people. The problem is that his own opinions are totally irrelevant, the only thing that matters being his actions, and all of his actions thus far have shown that he’s no more anti-war than Joe Biden.

It’s great that he’s complained about Bibi and said it’s sad Palestinians are being slaughtered and starved. But Biden also said that. His rhetoric on the Ukraine is less deranged than Biden’s, but his policies are the same. And it’s pretty much the same across the board. It’s great he’s talking about a new Iran Nike deal, but Biden also talked about that. There’s nothing new here, and it’s kind of hilarious that after he appointed Marco Rubio as the Secretary of State, anyone thought there would be anything new.

What is much more hilarious is that the Trump administration’s attacks on the freedom of speech make Biden look like a hardcore civil libertarian. There is a bill in Congress that will put people in prison for ten years if they boycott Israel. I had a conversation with AI about the bill. Laws are very long and purposefully confusing, but AI is able to break this stuff down. (Obviously, you need to check it for accuracy, but I’ve found it is now very accurate when it comes to simply analyzing long documents.) I asked if this bill became law and I was in a store and there was a bar of Israeli soap and a bar of Jordanian soap, and I bought the Jordanian soap because I am against the genocide in Gaza if I could be prosecuted. The AI said no. I think asked if I owned a company, and my company chose to buy the Jordanian soap because I am against the genocide if I could be prosecuted, and the AI said it was possible I could be prosecuted and face up to ten years in prison. The bill has been tabled, but according to the media, this was done single-handedly by Matt Gaetz and Republicans want to bring it back. (Gaetz pointed out that the bill seems to imply every American is legally obligated to buy Israeli products. Again, no one understands the way these laws are written, but in my example above, it seems possible that if my company chose to buy the Jordanian soap, even if I did it arbitrarily, and not because I oppose the Gazan genocide, I could be accused of having hateful reasons for the decision, and thrown in prison.)

We all love Trump. But there is a lot of stuff like this going on that is really not great. I’m glad Elon got thrown under the bus, but compared to some of this other stuff, whatever the hell he was up to seems like small potatoes. Stopping wars and bringing back freedom of speech were two of the most prominent things in the Trump campaign, and rhetoric aside, we are so far getting the opposite on both counts.

But hey. We hope for the best.

Ultimately, we need to not lose sight of why the American people elected Trump in the first place: to protect women’s sports.

Trump’s foreign policy might be the same as Biden’s, he will likely be the president to implement the first hate speech laws in American history, but none of that matters much in light of the fact that we’ve gotten rid of the radical gender ideology that was causing female swimmers to be denied their sports medals.

From the time it became obvious that Donald Trump was going to win the 2024 election, I said that this whole thing was going to be about Israel. We’d be lucky to get a few things from him, but it would be the Israel administration.

However, when he came in, he made a point to push for a ceasefire in Gaza and an Israeli pullout of the Palestinian territory, which couldn’t really be framed as a good thing for Bibi Netanyahu and his war effort, as it was effectively a surrender to Hamas.

On Tuesday, Bibi became the first foreign leader to visit the White House under the new Trump administration, and during a press conference they held together, Trump announced that the US – not Israel, but the US – is going to “own” Gaza, and all of the people living there now will be removed.

“The US will take over the Gaza Strip, and we will do a job with it too,” Trump told reporters.

"The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip, and we will do a job with it, too." –President Donald J. Trump pic.twitter.com/aCqLl9Gwwn

— President Donald J. Trump (@POTUS) February 5, 2025

He said that “if necessary,” he would deploy US troops to the territory. It’s not clear how there could be a situation where that would not be necessary.

“I do see a long-term ownership position and I see it bringing great stability to that part of the Middle East,” he said, adding that Gaza would become the “Riviera of the Middle East.”

He said that the Palestinians living in Gaza would be moved to Egypt and Jordan.

BREAKING: During his meeting with Netanyahu, Trump just said he wants to remove 1.7 MILLION Palestinians from GAZA and send them to Egypt, Jordan, or other countries.

This is ethnic cleansing. No wonder he just pulled the U.S. from the UN Human Rights Council. This is a crime… pic.twitter.com/b8VkVqbOYv

— Brian Krassenstein (@krassenstein) February 4, 2025

These are incredibly shocking statements, which do not even seem to make sense.

What exactly is he talking about doing? Sending in the US military to do a complete ethnic cleansing of the area, and then making it a US colony? What else could this mean?

It lines up with statements made by Trump’s Jewish son-in-law Jared Kushner last year, who called for removal of the population and developing the real estate of Gaza.

Jared Kushner salivates at Gaza’s waterfront property, then urges Israel to “finish the job.” @MikoPeled, an Israeli general’s son turned Palestine activist says this chilling rhetoric echoes Hitler’s “final solution.”pic.twitter.com/830bvfMITg

— BreakThrough News (@BTnewsroom) March 26, 2024

However, at that time, you would have assumed he was talking about Israel doing the development (at least the Israeli state managing it, while most of the money would likely come from American-Jew investors). Calling for it to be turned into a US territory is something no one had even thought of. I had not thought of it. This is very extreme. It is more extreme than helping the Jews to take it over.

As the Jews found out over the past year and a half, it is not easy to remove Hamas. If you then add the mission of removing nearly two million people who do not want to leave, this becomes a massive military operation that will take years.

The rest of the Middle East is also going to rise up against this. Most concerningly, it will trigger a US war with Iran.

No one in the Trump base wants another major Middle Eastern war, other than maybe some evangelical cultists. This is a total Jew thing. The US has zero interest in Gaza, and there is no possible way that the other states in the region can be convinced to go along with this.

It appears that Trump came in with this barrage of executive orders targeting immigrants, trannies, and others for the purpose of hyping up the base so he could drop this Jewish insanity bomb on them.

If this is really the plan, this is going to define the entirety of the four years to come, and many years after that. There is not any quick solution to subduing the entire Middle East, and war with Iran will be much worse than the very long war with Iraq.

This appeared to be an official announcement by Donald Trump of a plan he has formed with the Israelis. But nothing was explained. The reporters did not take the opportunity to get him to elaborate in any meaningful way. I’m sure he’ll be questioned further in the future, but as of right now, this does not make any clear sense.

Obviously, we still need to take anything good we can get from Donald Trump. But this is an unveiling of the direction the administration is going to go in, which is exactly what we expected, given the amount of money Trump recieved from the Jews, and given that the US electoral system is fake and the only way Trump was able to win was that the Jews wanted him to win.

Again, we don’t understand what this means yet, but if it means what it sounds like it means, this is a war that could require a military draft. Iran is a very big country, and there is just going to be violence everywhere in the Middle East when there is video seen everywhere of US troops going in and forcibly marching people out of Gaza.

This is happening at the same time that Israel is making bigger moves in the West Bank, and if you’re going to remove the people of Gaza, there is no reason not to remove the people of the West Bank as well.

After Trump’s statements, Saudi Arabia quickly issued a statement saying that this would make normalization with Israel impossible. If it is actually US troops on the ground forcing out the Palestinians, which is what Trump apparently just said was going to happen, it would cause a total fallout of US relations with Saudi and others in the Gulf.

#Statement | The Foreign Ministry affirms that Saudi Arabia’s position on the establishment of a Palestinian state is firm and unwavering. HRH Prince Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, Crown Prince and Prime Minister clearly and unequivocally reaffirmed this stance. pic.twitter.com/0uuoq8h12I

— Foreign Ministry 🇸🇦 (@KSAmofaEN) February 5, 2025

China issued a statement demanding this doesn’t happen, and the US implement a two-state solution. That is obviously their position, as the Chinese have always defended Palestine, but the reality of the situation is that if the US gets bogged down in a massive war in the Middle East, they are not going to present any threat to China.

The war that Trump is apparently proposing would be the last gasp of the US empire. It would drain it of all remaining resources, and turn whatever remaining support it has around the world into hatred. That’s a good thing.

Everything is going according to plan.

People should read the article I published Sunday if they missed it. It’s about trying to get jobs in the Trump administration. When this empire comes crashing down, we are going to need people inside of the government, with credibility, to reshape a new government, and now is the time for right-wing people to get into these institutions.

It’s going to be a wild ride.

Little Lindsey was no-doubt ecstatic about the job Turkey did in overthrowing Assad and helping his greatest ally.

But of course, this war needs to keep going, and so the shills are calling support for the Kurds against their allies from two days ago, the Turks.

RT:

US Republican Senator Lindsey Graham has threatened to propose sanctions against fellow NATO member Türkiye if it attacks the American-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). A strong supporter of President-elect Donald Trump, Graham argued that sweeping operations against the SDF in Syria would benefit the terrorist group Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) and damage American interests in the region.

The SDF, which is dominated by Kurdish groups, reported over the weekend that it had come under Turkish artillery and drone attacks.

Pan-Arabic news channel Al Mayadeen cited the local SDF command on Saturday as saying that “the Turkish occupation and its mercenaries” were clashing with the Kurdish-led troops around Manbij, a city to the northeast of Aleppo.

Reuters reported on Sunday that the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army (SNA) had captured Manbij and that the SDF had withdrawn. According to Turkish media, the SNA was operating against Kurdish militias that are part of the SDF and are considered terrorists by Ankara.

In a post on X on Sunday, Graham argued that the US “should not allow the Kurdish forces – who helped us destroy ISIS on President Trump’s watch – to be threatened by Turkey or the radical Islamists who have taken over Syria.”

“We have to ensure that the roughly 50,000 ISIS prisoners in northeastern Syria – being primarily held by Kurdish forces – are not released,” he added.

“Turkey has legitimate concerns regarding different groups that reside in northeastern Syria,” Graham wrote, but added that “an ISIS jailbreak … would be a nightmare for America.”

Of course he’s talking about ISIS.

This is really a demonstration of exactly what the US government is: as soon as they finally get their coup, they start calling for war between their own allies.

Nothing can ever be solved. It is intended to just go on forever, while the Jews sweep up the spoils.

Shocking new information has just turned up: giving foreigners security clearances in the highest levels of the American war industry may result in these foreigners leaking information to their country of origin.

Apparently, that can be true even when the person is an adherent of lesbianism.

Jewish Press:

A Pentagon official told Sky News in Arabic that the investigation being conducted by intelligence agencies in Washington into the leaking to Tehran documents of the IDF plan to strike Iran has begun to indicate “suspicion” of the involvement of a senior employee in the Pentagon.

The American official added that the employee suspected of leaking the documents is an American of Iranian origin named Ariane Tabatabai.

Ariane Tabatabai is an Iranian-American scholar of political science, writer, and senior policy advisor to the United States Department of Defense. After the Biden administration took office in January 2021, she joined the US negotiating team in nuclear negotiations with Iran. Between 2021 and 2022, she served as an advisor to Robert Malley, the chief promoter of pushing a deal with Iran at any cost.

It’s quite a hilarious situation.

Surely, it is the most obvious thing in the world that if you are going to war with other countries, planning to completely destroy them, you shouldn’t hire people from that country in your war establishment.

That must go double if you’re employing women, who are not only more swayed by emotion than men, but they are largely incapable of considering the consequences of their actions.

It’s very funny when Jewish agendas sabotage other Jewish agendas. The Jews are the ones pushing this idea that foreigners are exactly the same as nationals, nonwhites exactly the same as whites, that women are the same as men.

Pamala Geller, an unhinged Jewish war shill on social media, is whining about this leak and attacking the lesbianist in question.

Top Iranian Pentagon Official Ariane Tabatabai Is The Israeli-Iran Attack Plan Who Kept Her Top-Level Security Clearance Despite Previous ‘Spying for Tehran’ Accusations

Tabatabai os a long time Iranian operative who who kept her security clearance despite previous ‘spying… pic.twitter.com/c72cmgwy3e

— 🇺🇸 Pamela Geller 🇺🇸 🇮🇱 (@PamelaGeller) October 22, 2024

She is accusing the leaker of “treason” and being a “spy” at the same time. Those things are not compatible. Clearly, Ariane Tabatabai is loyal to her home nation of Iran. Obviously, she is a spy, but it would actually be treason if she was not engaging in attempts to undermine the US government, or was helping them. The fact that she was given “citizenship” in America is completely meaningless. She is a foreigner and she is acting in her own nation’s interests, which makes her a patriot, not a traitor.

Treason /trē′zən/

noun

1. The betrayal of allegiance toward one's own country, especially by committing hostile acts against it or aiding its enemies in committing such acts.
2. The betrayal of someone's trust or confidence.
3. The offense of attempting to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance, or of betraying the state into the hands of a foreign power; disloyalty; treachery

It is nonsensical to suppose that someone from one country can transform into a native of another country. By definition, you can only be a native of your own country. You can support a foreign country, but if that country you declare support for allows you access to secure military information, those people are stupid. No serious country does this.

It is only America and her vassals with this absurd and very Jewish idea of human interchangeability that argues in favor of promoting foreigners into positions of power in the United States.

In part, the goal of the Jews promoting these foreigners is simply to undermine white America. However, moreover, following the establishment of Israel as a nation, it would not have made sense to allow Jews to stay in the United States, if America was following the normal historical view of nationhood.

Apparently, German leftists are a lot more engaged and ethical than American leftists. American leftists don’t care how many Ukrainians die, as long as “Bad Daddy” Putin is inconvenienced in some way.

Or, maybe this difference is based on the fact that the Germans are feeling the heat from this conflict a lot more than the Americans.

CNA:

Thousands of people in Berlin on Thursday (Oct 3) demonstrated against Germany’s military support for Ukraine as it battles to hold back invading Russian troops.

Participants answered a call by a radical left-wing collective to gather in the German capital and brandished placards reading “Negotiations! No weapons!”, “No to war” and “Pacifism is not naive”. Some also held anti-American signs.

One of their main demands was for Germany to stop sending weapons to Ukraine, which Kyiv desperately needs to defend itself from Russian aggression.

The protest came one week ahead of the first state visit by a US president to the European country since Ronald Reagan in 1985.

What?

Joe Biden is also expected to meet with Ukraine’s allies to discuss military support to the war-torn nation, at the US army base in Ramstein, western Germany.

Far-left populist leader Sahra Wagenknecht, who attended the Berlin protest, has long called for an end to weapon deliveries to Kyiv and opposes a plan to deploy US long-range missiles in Germany.

Germany has been the second-largest contributor of military aid to Ukraine after the United States but plans to halve its budget for that aid next year.

…

The state leaders of Saxony and Brandenburg, where AfD came in second, as well as the head of the conservatives in Thuringia, have called for a ceasefire in Ukraine, in an article expected to be published on Friday in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper.

It does seem to be wrapping up.

Everything is pointing in that direction.

But it’s looked that way for a while, hasn’t it?