Christianity is back at the centre of American life, but not necessarily in the way most believers imagine. Churches are fuller, Christian language saturates politics, and faith-based identity has become a mobilising force once again. Yet beneath this revival lies a more unsettling reality: for decades, U.S. government agencies have treated religion not as sacred ground, but as strategic terrain.
This is not theory. During the Cold War, the U.S. State Department and intelligence agencies, most notably the CIA, recognised theology, doctrine, and religious institutions as instruments of influence. Faith was studied, guided, and at times quietly reshaped to serve geopolitical aims. The goal was rarely to destroy belief outright; rather, it was to domesticate it, align it, and render it strategically useful.
DOCUMENT: CIA’s use of journalists and clergy in intelligence operations – Select Committee On Intelligence Of The United States Senate One Hundred Fourth Congress, Second Session, July 17, 1996 (Source to download full pdf: US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence)
Initiatives like the Doctrinal Warfare Program illustrate the scale of this engagement. Churches with mass followings, moral authority, and transnational reach were not simply tolerated; they were targeted for influence. Orthodox congregations in the U.S. and abroad were monitored to ensure alignment with Western interests. Catholic seminaries became conduits for doctrinal shaping, funding networks, and leadership development favourable to U.S. objectives. Even Protestant and Evangelical movements, decentralised and spontaneous, were quietly steered through cultural engagement, philanthropic networks, and selective amplification of certain voices.
Sincere people seeking truth, purpose, and transcendence found themselves caught in influence systems they neither designed nor understood. Their worship, community, and faith became tools in a broader psychological and cultural battle they never consented to.
Doctrinal Warfare: When Theology Became a Battlefield
The CIA’s Doctrinal Warfare Program, particularly its work with Roman Catholic institutions, offers a rare glimpse into how intelligence agencies approach faith. Unlike cinematic portrayals of spies manipulating events, this program operated through subtler, more effective channels.
Influence was exerted via:
Funding pipelines and philanthropic foundations, directing resources to seminaries, clergy travel, and publications
Theological conferences and academic exchanges, creating opportunities to propagate ideas aligned with U.S. interests
Publishing houses, journals, and media networks, shaping what doctrines and interpretations were elevated
Selected intermediaries, often clergy or theologians, who could subtly shift discourse without appearing coerced
The program’s goal was not to dictate belief directly but to frame the boundaries of acceptable belief. Anti-communism, Western liberal ideals, and American exceptionalism were integrated into theological narratives. Over time, certain interpretations were elevated while others, particularly liberationist, socialist, or anti-Western emphases, were sidelined.
This structural influence was not limited to Catholics. Orthodox churches in the diaspora, particularly in Eastern Europe and North America, were monitored for political alignment. Protestant and Evangelical networks, decentralised and emotionally charged, presented different challenges. Leaders resisted hierarchical oversight, yet strategic use of media, donor support, and conferences quietly aligned these movements with larger political and global objectives.
The CIA and allied agencies like the Israeli MOSSAD also monitored global religious developments, from Latin America to Africa, mapping networks of clergy, seminaries, and youth movements. Influence became a form of psychological warfare: it did not coerce, but conditioned; it did not command, but subtly steered. And it thrived where people least expected manipulation, within trusted communities, sacred spaces, and moral authority.
VIDEO: David Wemhoff discusses his book John Courtney Murray, Time/Life, and the American Proposition: How the CIA’s Doctrinal Warfare Changed the Catholic Church. (Source: thkelly67 | Youtube)
Calvary Chapel, Charismatic Leaders, and the Power of Movements
Few movements illustrate both the promise and vulnerability of modern American Christianity like Calvary Chapel.
Founded in the mid‑1960s by Chuck Smith in Costa Mesa, California, Calvary Chapel emerged amidst the counterculture and the Jesus Movement. Smith welcomed surfers, hippies, and spiritual seekers alienated by both secular culture and institutional religion. Informal, emotionally open, culturally adaptive—and extraordinarily successful—it grew from a small congregation into a network of more than 1,800 churches worldwide.
Despite the ongoing debate about whether Calvary Chapel was created by individuals controlled by intelligence agencies or by charismatic individuals, the movement demonstrates a lesson intelligence agencies recognised decades ago: youth-driven religious networks are powerful instruments of social, political and cultural influence.
Figures like Lonnie Frisbee, a magnetic and unconventional evangelist, helped ignite the Jesus Movement and played a decisive role in Calvary Chapel’s early expansion. Frisbee’s countercultural persona, preaching on beaches, leading communal outreaches, and drawing thousands of young converts, was a force institutions could admire, attempt to understand, but never fully control.
Similarly, Paul Cain, a prophetic figure in charismatic networks, influenced theological subcultures with a focus on vision, revelation, and spiritual authority. According to reports, Cain was also a consultant to the Paranormal Division of the Central Intelligence Agency and the FBI. Like Frisbee, Cain became controversial, not because he was a confirmed intelligence operative, but because charismatic authority challenges hierarchical control, making it both influential and unsettling.
Calvary Chapel and these figures illustrate a key pattern: movements can grow organically, capture attention, and mobilise communities, making them valuable, and sometimes threatening, to political and intelligence structures. While the direct manipulation claims and the CIA militant connection remain debatable, historical examples like the Doctrinal Warfare Program prove that states do seek to shape religious institutions at scale, often through indirect methods rather than overt control, hence the lack of evidence thereof.
From Pews to Power: Evangelical Politics, Israel, TPUSA, and the Cost of Capture
By the late 20th century, Evangelical Christianity had evolved into a political powerhouse. Networks that began as spiritual awakenings now functioned as engines of political mobilisation, with youth-oriented, media-savvy outreach bridging the gap between churches and the political arena.
TPUSA and Charlie Kirk
Organisations like Turning Point USA (TPUSA) drew from these ecosystems, churches, conferences, campus ministries, and donor networks that had been shaped by decades of cultural, doctrinal, and ideological influence. Faith-language blended seamlessly with nationalism, free-market rhetoric, and civilizational anxiety, mobilising millions of voters.
The 2024 U.S. presidential election highlighted the real-world impact: Evangelical networks were decisive in returning Donald Trump to the White House. For believers, this was framed as a moral imperative or spiritual duty. For observers, it revealed how religious movements could be strategically leveraged within political frameworks.
The assassination of Charlie Kirk, co-founder of TPUSA, shocked the nation and intensified national reflection. While there is no direct evidence ( at least not yet), linking churches or religious movements to the attack, the public reaction underscores a critical truth: powerful social networks rooted in faith become conduits of influence, whether intended or incidental.
As unsettling as it may be for the US government, it is worth noting that an intense social-media rift has emerged between TPUSA and podcaster Candace Owens, with competing narratives and accusations fueling distrust of official accounts surrounding the Charlie Kirk killing at UVU. Interestingly, some critics, Candace Owens among them, contend that the assassination of Charlie Kirk carries the hallmarks of a sophisticated intelligence-style operation, raising uncomfortable questions about whether certain figures within TPUSA may have been more deeply entangled in the events than the public has been led to believe. A decentralised, global network of self-styled citizen journalists is currently crowdsourcing footage, timelines, and open-source data, arguing that gaps and inconsistencies warrant deeper scrutiny beyond mainstream reporting. This phenomenon has amplified public pressure on agencies such as the FBI and on TPUSA to clarify unanswered questions and reconcile discrepancies in their account of the events of September 10, 2022.
Much like the unresolved shadows that followed the JFK assassination, Charlie Kirk’s killing has placed intelligence agencies, the military, the FBI, and even foreign actors like Israel at the center of a fraught public controversy, not through proven culpability (at least not yet), but through the swirl of suspicion and unanswered questions that inevitably surround the death of a defining religious and political figure in the American conservative sphere, leaving many to ask whether this is coincidence or something more troubling left unexplained.
Christian Zionism and Israeli Influence
No discussion of modern Evangelical power is complete without considering the strategic relationship between U.S. Evangelicals and the State of Israel.
This alliance is public and well-documented. Evangelical Christians, especially in the United States, became one of the most reliable pro-Israel voting blocs, influenced not just by policy arguments but by theological frameworks, Christian Zionism, which frames Israel as divinely central to biblical prophecy.
Israeli political leaders and advocacy organisations have cultivated this alignment via:
Pastors’ conferences in Israel
Evangelical media networks and tours
Donor networks and lobbying partnerships
Organisations such as Christians United for Israel (CUFI) mobilise millions of voters, influence Congressional votes, and amplify foreign policy priorities. During the Trump administration, these networks helped drive decisions like the Jerusalem embassy relocation, Iran policy shifts, and strengthened U.S.-Israel alignment.
Yet this partnership is not uncontested. Younger conservatives and Evangelicals, particularly those aligned with independent thinkers like Charlie Kirk, increasingly question whether faith-based loyalty to foreign policy interests undermines America-first priorities. This generational tension highlights a growing divergence within conservative Christianity: between inherited religious-political alliances and emerging calls for national sovereignty, prudence, and domestic priority.
Moreover, the case of Turning Point USA illustrates how foreign influence can intersect with faith-based movements to shape political power. TPUSA’s open alignment with pro-Israel advocacy networks, from educational trips and conferences to donor engagement, demonstrates how theological and ideological commitments can be leveraged to advance strategic interests. This organisational alignment and associated messaging reveal a clear pattern of external actors using popular religious and political networks to sway domestic policy and voter priorities in the United States. This dynamic mirrors broader trends seen in movements like Calvary Chapel, where charismatic leaders and faith communities, intentionally or not, become conduits for shaping societal and political behaviour, highlighting how belief can be instrumentalised as a tool of influence. Believers are constantly reminded by pastors such as Garid Beeler, of VISION Calvary Chapel in Irvine, CA, that they need to unconditionally embrace the so-called God’s plan for Israel, which in their eyes legitimises Israel’s occupation of Palestine, and the subsequent genocide, on the basis that the Lord specifically gave the Hebrews the land thousands of years ago.
Believers as Collateral in the Machinery of Influence
The story of institutional capture is not about disloyal Christians or malign churches. It is about power exploiting vulnerability.
The State Department, CIA, and allied actors like Israel did not invent faith crises, but they mastered the art of steering movements. They understood that belief motivates action, doctrine shapes identity, and institutions built on trust are uniquely vulnerable to manipulation.
Jay Dyer’s analysis, which we are featuring today, frames this landscape without demonising believers: faith itself is not the enemy, but it has been treated as a resource, managed, redirected, and at times hollowed out by forces whose goals are strategic, political and financial, rather than spiritual.
If Christianity is to withstand this era with integrity intact, it will require discernment, humility, vigilance, and, of course, the ability to separate the Gospel from the machinery of power. The war was never against believers, but belief, as an institution, has been under attack all the same.
Jay Dyer writes about the historical and geopolitical factors of state and private interference in ecclesial and religious affairs…
Institutional Capture Explained: The State Dept, CIA & Orthodox, Roman Catholic & Protestant Churches
The notion of state interference in the life of the Church is well known to students of Church history: Arian Emperors, Imperial support for iconoclasm, the Frankish and Germanic control of the papacy, as well as the investiture controversy should all come to mind. These famous scandals demonstrate the persistent cunning on the part of the state to install, influence and control religiosity in the realm, and to students of geopolitics this should also come as no surprise. What is odd, however, is that when this concept arises in modern discussions, it is relegated immediately to the domain of “conspiracy theory,” unless of course you are talking about the KGB and NKVD relationship to Russian clerics in the 20th century.
It only turns out to be a “conspiracy theory” when one points to the US State Department, the CIA, various foundations, NGOS and academic institutions (often closely linked to the intelligence apparatus) – all of whom openly seek to alter and change Orthodox theology, as well as the theological positions of the Roman Catholic and Protestant communions. First, it is worth noting that missionary work is a classic espionage cover: Obviously, I don’t mean all missionaries are spies, but that it has famously been a useful cover for espionage work, which is precisely why Russia has recently banned groups like the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Scientology. These entities can be used as a form of soft power or even more covert intelligence operations. Similarly, classic cover for foreign operations of this sort has used aid organisation cover, such as the Red Cross or USAID.
In fact, even mainline publications regularly report this fact, though it seems to be lost on so many, especially among the intelligentsia who pride themselves on grasping the practicality of realpolitik. Christianity Today writes:
“Many of America’s first spies were missionaries or came from missionary backgrounds. Often enough, they were the only Americans who had lived abroad—not just among locals but as locals. While other American spies learned about the world through books and couldn’t really grasp its full range of quirks and complexities—“like tourists who put ketchup on their tacos,” as Sutton puts it—missionaries spoke several languages and knew the subtle differences between local dialects. They understood local cultures and faiths from the ground up and knew intuitively how to navigate between them. They knew, in short, “how to totally immerse themselves in alien societies.” But they always identified first and foremost as Christians and as Americans, and when they were called to serve the nation, they did not hesitate to do so.”
This was not unique or new; Orthodox monastic spies were also used by British intelligence in the infamous case of “Father Dimitrios”:
“The story of Father Dimitrios, or David Balfour, who turned out to be a British spy in pre-World War II Greece, is a fascinating yet relatively little-known chapter in modern Greek history.”
Father Dimitrios, the monk with the voice of an angel, turned out to be a spy for the British Intelligence Service. That’s a shame because the mission and wartime actions of the British priest could make a nail-biting spy novel or film.
From 1937 to 1939, the English spy, wearing his priest’s robes and his long, bifurcated beard, performed his ecclesiastical duties close to Greece’s royal family. His relations with King George II, the successor to King Paul and Princess Frederica, were especially close. His access to the royal palace undoubtedly gave him access to valuable information.
British Intelligence must have learned a great deal about the Greek royal family during these crucial prewar years. King George II was a paternal first cousin of Queen Elizabeth’s husband, Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh.
Members of the royal family often confessed to their beloved priest. At the same time, Balfour, under the cover of Father Demetrios, forged important acquaintances with high-ranking military officers and politicians with the blessings of the palace.
During World War 2, for example, dozens of missionaries were using their clerical cloaks as their espionage cloak, spying for the Allies. Time Magazine explains:
“His [Protestant Missionary Alfred Eddy] most audacious undertaking included a plot to “kill,” as he described it, “all members of the German and Italian Armistice Commission in Morocco and in Algeria the moment the landing takes place.” In a straightforward and matter-of-fact memo, he told OSS head William Donovan that he was targeting dozens of people. He additionally ordered the executions of “all known agents of German and Italian nationality.” Never one to mince words, he called the proposal an “assassination program.”
To orchestrate his bloodthirsty plot, Eddy hired a team of Frenchmen. He planned to frame the executions as a “French revolt against Axis domination.” “In other words,” he explained to Donovan, “it should appear that the dead Germans and Italians were ‘the victims’ of a French ‘reprisal against the shooting of hostages by the Germans and other acts of German terror,” and not an OSS operation.
At about the same time that he was recruiting French hitmen, he wrote to his family about the sacrifices he was making for Lent. He described the Easter season as “abnormal” this year. “I am certainly abstaining from wickedness of the flesh,” he confessed. With his wife thousands of miles away, that was not too difficult. “I haven’t even been to a movie since Lisbon, I don’t overeat anymore, and I allow myself a cocktail at night, but never before work is all done.”
And,
“American intelligence leaders had stumbled upon the fact that missionaries make great spies. They have excellent language skills, they know how to disappear into foreign cultures, and they are masters at effecting change abroad. But while missionary spooks believed that their wartime work was necessary, they also wrestled with the moral ambiguities inherent in their actions.”
This is just one example among countless, but it serves to illustrate the point – in this case, the supposed man of the cloth is engaged in assassination missions. A fortiori, the US Government would also see the power in utilising religion for the promotion of Americanism. During the Cold War this was ramped up to extreme degrees as CIA operatives and strategists like C.D. Jackson allied with media magnate and Skull & Bonesman Henry Luce – of Time Magazine, to recruit various prominent academics and Jesuits like John Courtenay Murray to help ensure the Vatican and in particular the Second Vatican Council, would include in its dogmatic degrees new doctrinal statements that were amenable to Americanism. This unique style of interference was even highlighted by a congressional investigation in 1996 into the CIA’s use of ministers and journalists here (including Peace Corps Volunteers).
This was combined with separate operations from Helliwell, Angleton, Donovan & Colby to utilise Opus Dei, the Vatican Bank and drug running for black operations funding in the now infamous Operation Gladio, which also saw the See of Rome aligning itself with organised crime to supposedly “save the world from communism.” However, as Catholic lawyer David Wemhoff has demonstrated in his masterful and unparalleled 800-page, vastly sourced tome, John Courtney Murray, Time/Life Magazine and the American Proposition, Jackson’s now declassified “Doctrinal Warfare Program” led the Roman Church into the hands of new masters at the US State Department and the CIA.
Indeed, this is precisely why Pre and Post-Vatican 2 popes, from Pius XII to Paul VI to John Paul 2 were meeting with Colby, Kissinger and William Casey on a consistent basis during the Cold War. And, if you are a perceptive reader, you can already piece together the blackmail and compromise operations that the world has seen through the Epstein saga were simply a window into how these institutions were similarly blackmailed and compromised, which is why there have been so many scandals in the Roman Church concerning pedo crimes, and likely relates to why Benedict resigned.
In regard to the Protestant Churches, the Rockefeller family is quite proud of, and openly brags about their influence and dominance of the Protestant religious world, through their donations and tax-free foundation offerings. These offerings, of course, come with strings attached, such as the decision to push the newly formed “social gospel” concept of the early 20th century. Eventually, the Rockefellers were creating entire seminaries and universities dedicated to the promotion of David’s influences from Keynesian/Fabian and Austrian economic theory, as well as Malthusianism and eventually technocracy, through the recruitment of Zbigniew Brzezinski after the publication of his seminal 1970 text, Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era.
Few know David Rockefeller himself spent time in intelligence work and transferred this knowledge of networking and banking operations into his business ventures, as he discusses in his Memoirs. In fact, Brzezinski’s book also includes chapters discussing the role of the Post-Vatican 2 Roman Catholic Church in the promotion of Americanism and technocratic hegemony. It should also be noted that the Rockefellers didn’t merely have an interest in steering the Protestant and evangelical churches into liberalism and modernism, but also set their sights on Rome and Orthodoxy, as Wemhoff notes.
For the Orthodox World, the price of siding between two thieves came at a high cost, as the Orthodox England blog notes, concerning the place of the Russian Orthodox Church between the KGB and the CIA. Similarly, it has recently been declassified that the OSS placed pressure on the Patriarch of Constantinople, as the CIA said:
“In an OSS interoffice memo dated March 26, 1942, an intelligence agent named Ulius L. Amoss wrote this to a fellow OSS agent named David Burns:
The Archbishop was extremely pleased at having met and lunched with you. He has told me that the entire facilities of his organisation are at our disposal. He put it in these words: “I have three Bishops, three hundred priests and a large and far-flung organisation. Everyone under my order is under yours. You may command them for any service you require. There will be no questions asked, and your directions will be executed faithfully. Please tell Mr Burns for me that this is so.”
A month later, on April 25, the 56-year-old Greek Archbishop attempted to enlist in the U.S. Army. He was turned down.
A few weeks after that, on May 14, Ulias Amoss, the same intelligence agent who wrote the March 26 memorandum, wrote a letter to Athenagoras, thanking him for the Greek Archdiocese’s ongoing cooperation, saying, in part, “The care with which your Bishops and Priests have cooperated has impressed everyone and the report that, perhaps, as many as a hundred thousand names will be returned to us is astounding.” On the same day, William J. Donovan himself — the head of the OSS — also wrote to Athenagoras, “The reports and descriptions of Greek-American youth of military age so kindly undertaken by you are coming in in splendid volume. The care with which Your Grace has managed this important service is of great interest to our armed services, and I wish to express my deep appreciation for your loyal and patriotic assistance.”
This special relationship with US intelligence never ended and continues to this day as the backdrop to the actions of the Phanar and GOARCH in the US:
“Archbishop Elpidophoros, the head of the Patriarchate of Constantinople’s Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, was the honoured guest at the National Intelligence University in Maryland earlier this week, where he delivered an address to the U.S. intelligence community.
The university brings together faculty and students from all 18 of the nation’s intelligence communities.
As the Greek Archdiocese notes, the Archbishop’s talk on “Russia’s Weaponisation of Religion in the Ukraine Conflict” was the first-ever address from a GOARCH leader to the U.S. intelligence community. At the same time, the Patriarchate of Constantinople has a long history of cooperation with the U.S. intelligence community, as detailed in documents released by the CIA.”
While it may seem like a far-off footnote in a dusty history book on Byzantium or the Borgia Papacy, the reality of state and private interference (and control!) in religion is a stark reality. The goal of the state is the maintenance and projection of power, simply put. Religion is a tremendous force for control and power in the world, both good and evil, but for the state, religion is simply another domain of human culture for the projection of power, and in today’s world, that is most often projected as soft power.
If you have not read Joseph Nye’s famous essay on Soft Power, I recommend it here. Understanding soft power gives a window into the attitude of the power elite and their perspective on religions and sects as tools – pawns on the grand chessboard, to use Brzezinski’s terminology. One need only think of Brzezinski’s own recruitment and usage of what would become Al Qaeda in the Soviet War in Afghanistan in Operation Cyclone – the usage of a radical religious sect for US objectives – as a classic example.
Congress’s newly minted Epstein Files Transparency Act—a bipartisan law co‑authored by Representatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna—was supposed to leave no room for discretion. It required Attorney General Pam Bondi, who serves President Donald Trump, to release all unclassified Justice Department records related to Jeffrey Epstein within thirty days. Trump signed the bill, but his Justice Department blew the deadline and produced only a small fraction of the documents, many of which were blacked out. The co‑authors have responded by drafting impeachment articles and exploring inherent contempt. Their outrage raises a broader question: why can the executive branch ignore the law with impunity, and why does this seem to happen over and over again?
The impetus for the transparency law lies in the horrific pattern of abuse that Epstein orchestrated for decades and the government’s failure to stop it. Even after survivor Maria Farmer told the FBI in September 1996 that Epstein was involved in child sex abuse, officials did nothing. The latest document release confirms that the bureau was tipped off a decade before his first arrest. Many of the new documents show that Epstein’s scheme went far beyond one man; the files include photographs of former presidents, rock stars, and royalty, and testimony from victims as young as fourteen. Campaigners say the heavy redactions and missing files—at least sixteen documents disappeared from the Justice Department website, including a photo of Donald Trump—betray the law’s intent. The omissions have fueled suspicions that the department is selectively protecting powerful clients rather than victims.
A law that leaves little wiggle room
In addition to the redactions, entire files vanished after the department’s release. Al Jazeera reported that at least sixteen documents disappeared from the Justice Department website soon after they were posted, including a photograph of Trump. Survivors expressed frustration: Maria Farmer said she feels redeemed by the disclosure yet weeps for victims the FBI failed to protect, and critics argue the department is still shielding influential individuals. The missing files underscore that Bondi’s partial compliance is not just tardy but potentially dishonest; the law obligates her to release names of government officials and corporate entities tied to Epstein, and removing those names is itself a violation.
The statute instructs the attorney general to release all unclassified Justice Department records about Epstein within thirty days. This covers everything from flight logs, travel records, names of individuals and corporate entities linked to his trafficking network, to internal communications about prosecutorial decisions and any destruction of evidence. It prohibits withholding information to avoid embarrassment, and allows redactions only to protect victims’ privacy, to exclude child sexual abuse imagery, or to safeguard truly classified national security information. Even then, the attorney general must declassify as much as possible and justify each redaction to Congress. These provisions make the statute stricter than a typical subpoena and leave little room for discretion.
Pam Bondi’s dodgy compliance
By December 19 the department had released tens of thousands of pages but withheld the bulk of the material. Observers noted that many records were heavily blacked out and that the department offered no written justifications for redactions. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche acknowledged that more documents would be released later, effectively moving the deadline. Massie and Khanna argued that this flouts the statute and have drafted impeachment articles and are weighing inherent contempt. Bondi’s department claims it can withhold materials under common‑law privileges, such as deliberative-process and attorney‑client privilege, even though the statute expressly demands release of “internal DOJ communications” and other decision‑making records. Critics argue that by invoking judge‑made privileges to avoid a law that overrides them, Bondi—who reports directly to Donald Trump—puts the president’s political interests ahead of statutory obligations.
Congress’ options, and why they seldom work
Congress has three enforcement tools: criminal contempt referrals, civil lawsuits, and inherent contempt arrests. The first two depend on the Justice Department, which is unlikely to prosecute its own leaders. Inherent contempt—a forgotten power to arrest defiant officials—has not been used since 1935, but Khanna says it is on the table. Past episodes illustrate why penalties are rare. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper lied to Congress about mass surveillance and faced no charges. CIA officials destroyed videotapes documenting torture, yet prosecutors declined to prosecute. FBI agents misused warrantless surveillance authorities, but no one has been held accountable. The pattern is clear: when officials break the rules, investigations are slow, referrals go nowhere, and political leaders quietly move on. As whistleblower attorney Jesselyn Radack noted, there is a double standard: government officials can lie to Congress with impunity while those who tell the truth are indicted. This inversion of accountability encourages lawlessness within the executive branch and chills those who might expose wrongdoing.
Legal experts note that Congress could also sue to compel disclosure or hold Bondi in criminal contempt, but because the Justice Department prosecutes contempt and is headed by the same officials refusing to comply, those routes are circular. The only truly independent remedy—directing the House sergeant at arms to arrest Bondi and hold her until she obeys—has not been used in nearly a century and would provoke a constitutional crisis. This institutional timidity emboldens agencies to treat congressional mandates as advisory and ensures that accountability remains elusive.
What accountability looks like
Khanna and Massie have urged Congress to impeach Bondi or her deputy, use inherent contempt to detain them, and refer the matter for prosecution. Those remedies would test whether Congress is willing to use dormant constitutional powers. Citizens who value liberty should demand action. The same government that lied about weapons of mass destruction, destroyed evidence of torture, and spied on millions now tells us that blacked‑out pages constitute transparency. Without accountability, the executive branch will continue to flout the law. Bondi may work for Trump, but the buck stops with the president who appointed her. If Congress and voters do nothing, future transparency laws will be meaningless, and the war state will remain healthy at our expense.
Accountability requires more than rhetoric. Congress must be willing to reclaim its constitutional prerogatives—by using inherent contempt, cutting funding, or refusing to confirm officials who flout the law. Voters should demand that elected representatives of both parties stop hiding behind national security and confront a Justice Department that acts as if it is above the law. The stakes extend beyond Epstein; they touch on foreign policy, civil liberties, and the very idea of self‑government. When a cabinet official appointed by the president can ignore a clear statutory mandate and the president remains silent, it signals that the executive branch believes itself sovereign. If we shrug, we will continue down the path where laws are for the governed, not the governors.
Citizens who value liberty and limited government should pay attention. When laws are ignored without consequence, the effect is to normalize lawlessness. The Massie–Khanna legislation was not meant to be a suggestion; it was a mandate that passed the House 427-1 and the Senate unanimously. If Congress does not enforce it, future transparency laws will be toothless, and the bureaucracy will continue to protect its own at the expense of truth. In the long run, a free society cannot survive if the government decides which laws apply to its friends and which apply to everyone else. Accountability is not partisan, it is a principle. Without it, injustice will remain healthy and unchallenged, and the rest of us will continue to pay the price.
One piece of information that emerged from the declassified material is seemingly marginal, but nonetheless colorful: a T-shirt from Mossad, one of Israel’s secret services. The press immediately began to label dear Jeffrey a secret agent, without further exploring the reasons for a T-shirt in the closet. While waiting for the next documents to be made public, we will now outline some interpretations regarding that ambiguous T-shirt.
Let’s start with some historical context. The idea that Epstein was connected to Mossad first arose in the 2000s in investigative and alternative circles, but it gained strength after his arrest in 2019 and, above all, after his death in prison, when the public struggled to explain how he had been able to operate almost undisturbed for decades. Commentators and journalists note that, historically, Israeli intelligence has used economic and political networks of influence, creating a context in which Epstein—rich, with access to global elites and involved in sexual blackmail—appears plausible as an “asset.”
Towards the end of 2025, several investigations based on the analysis of leaked or recently released documents—including House Oversight Committee materials and email archives—were revisited and discussed as evidence of repeated contacts between Epstein and Israeli circles, as well as travel patterns and financial flows considered atypical. CNN reported that journalists sifted through more than 23,000 pages of documents and thousands of email threads as part of this broader examination. According to commentators and newspapers that have republished these materials, they reveal “extensive collaboration with Israeli intelligence” or, at the very least, frequent interactions with figures linked to intelligence circles.
Numerous articles refer to personal and financial ties—meetings, communications, and alleged references to money transfers—between Epstein and high-level Israeli figures, particularly former Prime Minister Ehud Barak, as well as entries in diaries and emails that investigators say warrant attention. Common Dreams and some investigative series have highlighted recurring patterns of interaction between Epstein and Barak and have claimed that Israeli operatives or collaborators were long-time visitors to Epstein’s properties; however, the exact origin and interpretation of these documents remain disputed.
Proponents of the Mossad connection hypothesis describe Epstein as a recruited asset or honey trap operative tasked with gathering compromising material for leverage. This narrative, long present in various articles, has been further amplified by partisan commentators and media outlets. Some websites and opinion makers explicitly claim a connection to Mossad, arguing that Epstein’s network of relationships and the alleged presence of Israeli operatives in his residences are typical of intelligence practices.
Prominent Israeli figures have strongly rejected these claims. Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett—who has stated that he had the Mossad under his direct command during his term—has called the idea that Epstein “worked for Israel or the Mossad” “categorically and totally false.” Mainstream publications such as Newsweek and Times of Israel have highlighted the lack of conclusive evidence indicating that Epstein was a formal Mossad agent and have warned against conspiracy theories, which are sometimes intertwined with anti-Semitic stereotypes.
The resonance of the issue has been uneven and often linked to different political orientations: some progressive investigative outlets have insisted on pursuing the story, while conservative figures and commentators have sometimes exploited the accusation for political purposes. Critics warn that this encourages conspiracy theories or anti-Semitic narratives to be used opportunistically. It should also be noted that Israeli politicians, including Benjamin Netanyahu, have on some occasions emphasized media coverage of Epstein’s ties to Israel for domestic political messages, making it more difficult to analyze the motivations.
But that’s not all.
Funds for all
On September 2, 2025, Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna shook public opinion with explosive statements made after meeting with some of Jeffrey Epstein’s survivors during a press conference in Congress: “After speaking with Epstein’s victims today, it is clear that this story is much bigger than anyone could have imagined: rich and powerful people must go to prison. It is possible that Epstein was an asset of a foreign intelligence service.” Her words, captured on video, sparked a media storm: Was Epstein just a predator or something more? Was he perhaps an agent of the Israeli Mossad, tasked with ensnaring global elites for Zionist political purposes? The clues are disturbing and form a picture too coherent to be ignored. In 2025, amid leaks, transcripts, and denials, the time has come to address the issue openly.
The apparatus built by Epstein may still exercise influence on the upper echelons of power today. Steven Hoffenberg, his partner in the Towers Financial Ponzi scheme, went even further. Before his death in 2022, he told reporters that Epstein had confided in him about direct links to Mossad, attributing his wealth and access to high society circles to these contacts. Hoffenberg, who ended up in prison while Epstein remained free, had nothing to gain by lying, if anything, a score to settle.
Then there is the testimony of Maria Farmer, one of Epstein’s first victims (identified as Jane Doe 200 in court documents). Farmer described Epstein’s network as a “Jewish supremacist” blackmail scheme linked to the Mega Group, a private circle of pro-Israel billionaires. She also recounted episodes of racial abuse, pointing to Les Wexner as a central figure. Three independent voices—Ben-Menashe, Hoffenberg, and Farmer—all converge on the Mossad. Coincidence or hidden agenda?
The source of Epstein’s fortune remains unclear. How can a former college student become a billionaire with only one known client? Following the financial flows, the connection to Israel appears clear. Les Wexner, magnate of Victoria’s Secret and co-founder of the Mega Group, gave Epstein a $77 million New York mansion — equipped with a sophisticated surveillance system — as well as large sums of money. The Mega Group, created by Wexner and Charles Bronfman, is known for financing pro-Israel causes. Epstein’s financial career began in 1976 at Bear Stearns, thanks to Alan Greenberg, also a member of the Mega Group, despite Epstein having no credentials other than a background as a physics teacher. We are talking about $77 million.
Court documents indicate that Epstein received over 7,000 wire transfers, some linked to arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi, who in turn was associated with Mossad networks. Ben-Menashe claims that Epstein was involved in Israeli arms trafficking. A 2025 private investigation, conducted by hedge funds linked to the Epstein case, speculates that a substantial portion of his wealth came from Israeli funding. Not charity, but the financing of an intelligence operation.
Epstein’s circle looks like a list of intelligence targets. Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak visited Epstein’s residence dozens of times between 2013 and 2017, as records and photographs show. The two were also involved in founding Carbyne, a technology company with numerous former members of Israeli intelligence. Leaked emails show Epstein connecting Barak with Russian and Israeli figures. In 2004, Barak received $2 million from the Wexner Foundation for unspecified “research” activities. Barak denies any wrongdoing but admits that it was Shimon Peres who introduced him to Epstein.
Epstein possessed multiple passports—a typical feature of clandestine operations—and took refuge in Israel after the 2008 charges, before obtaining an extremely favorable plea bargain. In 2025, Tucker Carlson, during a very harsh speech, openly accused him of being a Mossad agent. Why would so many Israeli officials associate with a sex offender if he were not a strategic asset?
The 2008 plea bargain, which secured Epstein a lenient sentence, is perhaps the most revealing element. Former prosecutor Alexander Acosta later stated, “I was told that Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and that I should drop it.” The agreement also protected accomplices in several states, safeguarding a network that victims, such as Virginia Giuffre, have described as a kompromat factory, with hidden cameras ready to record politicians and powerful figures in compromising situations. This practice is reminiscent of techniques attributed to Mossad, as in the Robert Maxwell operations (which we will discuss in the next “chapter” of our Epstein Saga).
Epstein’s death in 2019, officially classified as suicide, appears to many to be a cover-up, with speculation of unofficial involvement by Israeli intelligence services. In 2025, the DOJ and FBI’s statement on the absence of a “client list” under the Trump administration — which had promised revelations that never came — only reinforced suspicions.
The pieces fit together: Epstein, introduced through Zionist networks, built a blackmail system aimed at influencing political and media decision-makers in a pro-Israel direction. Alleged links to PROMIS software (according to some sources modified by the NSA and Mossad for monitoring) and Palantir, an advanced surveillance company, add further layers of unease. Journalist Whitney Webb speaks openly of a “joint CIA-Mossad operation.” Ian Carroll goes even further, linking this network to events such as the Kennedy assassination and 9/11, identifying a common thread in the Israeli services.
It is true: Epstein’s network also involved Russia and Saudi Arabia. However, the Israeli connections—Wexner, Barak, Maxwell, Mega Group—appear predominant. Is there a lack of definitive evidence? Perhaps. But the smoke is so thick that it is difficult to ignore the fire.
Epstein’s survivors have just announced their intention to publish their own list of names: “We know who abused us. We saw who came and went. This list will be led by survivors, for survivors.”
The state hesitated. The victims did not.
Of course, Israeli authorities reject all accusations. Alan Dershowitz, Epstein’s lawyer and a well-known supporter of Zionism, claims that Epstein would have laughed off the espionage allegations, arguing that he would have used such connections to get an even better deal. But these denials appear fragile in the face of testimony, financial flows, and political connections that all lead to the same conclusion: the Epstein operation has the flavor of an intelligence operation, and the trail leads straight to Tel Aviv.
The most damning evidence comes from those who knew Epstein from the inside, people who risked everything to speak out. Ari Ben-Menashe, a former Israeli intelligence officer, claims that Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell ran a Mossad “honey trap” aimed at blackmailing the world’s elite. He claims to have met them in the 1980s while they were working in arms trafficking under the supervision of Robert Maxwell, Ghislaine’s father and a known Mossad collaborator who died in mysterious circumstances in 1991. Several Israeli prime ministers attended his funeral, with Shimon Peres delivering the eulogy. A mere coincidence? Hard to believe.
American democracy has devolved into a humiliation ritual in which we are expected to pledge support for people who hate us so they can steal our property, molest our children, and punish us for talking about their crimes. In election after election we are pressured to declare allegiance to one morally bankrupt criminal, simply because the other morally bankrupt criminal in the race might be even worse, thus becoming complicit in the election of a morally bankrupt criminal. Casting that vote on an electronic voting machine that even the government’s own intelligence director has admitted is totally hackable only strengthens the power of the ritual. Americans feel dumber every time we feed our choices into the ballot scanner and pray not to be disenfranchised, as if our selections made a difference in a contest that has been limited to the “lesser of two evils” for years. Standing up for ourselves and refusing to participate in such demeaning pageantry is denigrated as un-American, and our sentimental attachment to the democratic ideal masks the understanding that no change is actually possible within a system designed to deprive us of agency, so we legitimize a corrupt system with our participation instead. Like the teenage victims of Jeffrey Epstein, who returned to his mansions again and again even as they felt the humiliating experience draining their life force because they’d become convinced they could expect nothing better out of life, we have grown so accustomed to having our faces rubbed in outrageous and self-evident lies that we are starting to think we deserve the abuse.
Trump voters in particular have had a difficult year. Spooked back in July by a trickle of leaks suggesting he had been closer with Epstein than he claimed, the president raged at his supporters for demanding the release of the government’s remaining files on the case, despite repeated promises to release them during his 2024 reelection campaign. He sent FBI chief Kash Patel — who had also called for Epstein transparency before joining the Trump administration and acquiring his own Mossad handler (you gonna sue me, Kash?) — to inform the public that Epstein trafficked hundreds if not thousands of girls to absolutely nobody, despite copious documentation including an actual client list featuring at least 20 boldface names in FBI possession. The humiliation ritual was an encore performance for Patel, who had already appeared alongside his deputy Dan Bongino earlier in the year in an infamous clip where the pair, looking more uncomfortable than the stars of the average hostage video, reassured the public that Epstein had killed himself after all — case closed!
Having publicly disavowed the support of anyone still concerned how an intelligence operative working for Israel and the US was able to fly planeloads of teenage girls around the world for sex and lend them out to a who’s who of the global elite, maintaining a trove of compromising video footage of the aforementioned, without authorities lifting a finger in protest or (supposedly) finding the resulting videos, Trump spent several months trying to block the release of the files. He only took time out from railing against what was now declared a “Democrat hoax” to relocate Epstein’s partner-in-crime Ghislaine Maxwell, currently serving a 20-year sentence, to a minimum-security facility, in violation of prison sex-offender protocols. He even teased a pardon for the alleged Mossad asset, whose victims remember her as even more abusive than Epstein himself. Trump targeted Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie — perhaps the most respected man in American politics — with his next social media tantrum, condemning him as a “loser” for co-authoring a bipartisan bill to release the files, then turned his rage on Marjorie Taylor Greene, excoriating the Georgia Republican who was once among his most loyal supporters as a “traitor” because she hosted a press conference with a group of Epstein survivors in support of Massie’s transparency bill. The president even announced he’d host his first fundraiser of the 2026 season to reelect notoriously closeted warmonger Lindsey Graham, South Carolina’s Israel-First senator. By the time Trump finally dropped his opposition to the file release — which predictably showed he had been much cozier with the billionaire child trafficker than he’d admitted in the past — he had effectively alienated most of his base with seemingly unforced blunders that made no political sense.
Rosetta Stone
Unlike most political scandals, which only expose one aspect of the machinery behind the scenes, the Epstein case and its incompetent coverup provide all the intellectual tools needed to understand how the sausage is made. Like the apocryphal apple that fell on Sir Isaac Newton’s head and alerted him to the existence of gravity, the revelation that a multinational intelligence operation rooted in organized crime had for decades trafficked teen girls by the thousands as a means to secure global control not only of politics but of science, technology, industry, and the arts, with full knowledge and even cooperation of multiple law enforcement agencies, highlighted a force that most people had never considered was influencing current events. The phenomenon of Jeffrey Epstein — and the others like him who are still blithely ruining kids’ lives to secure leverage over power — finally makes sense of what for many on the dark side of the informational iron curtain had been a hopelessly scrambled puzzle.
This is why the Epstein files won’t go away, no matter how many distractions are dumped into the news cycle. The Epstein case and the ongoing efforts to bury its implications constitute a geopolitical decoder ring allowing anyone to understand how vibrant, thriving democratic societies are reduced to kakistocratic loosh farms with seeming impunity. Seen through the lens of Epstein — the real-world equivalent of the glasses from They Live — the narrative deceptions and limited-hangout misdirections become transparent, the proximity alarms surrounding “dangerous” thoughts are defused, and one can see right into the beady little eyes of the organized crime ring masquerading as a country masquerading as a religion, headquartered in modern-day Israel, that has its tentacles in every boardroom (and bedroom) in the West. While the source of its power was once a closely-guarded secret — journalist Danny Casolaro was famously murdered for investigating aspects of the network, which he called “The Octopus” — it has more recently leaned into the power of ritual humiliation in cementing its dominance, and can frequently be found flaunting its impunity. This is “Big Parasite” (think Big Pharma or Big Oil), an empire built through the covert extortion of resources from its host.
Because the first rule of Pedo Club is you don’t talk about Pedo Club, it’s difficult to determine when this tactic became widespread as a means of coercion. Whitney Webb credits the Prohibition-era Jewish mafia, who used it on the law enforcement agencies that were supposed to be pursuing them, earning years of peace while the mortified cops looked the other way. But it has certainly reached its nadir in modern Israel, where soldiers who gang-rape Palestinian prisoners are celebrated as heroes while rabbis campaigning for peace are arrested for bringing food to starving people. Built by terrorists, criminals, and Nazi-collaborators to provide a secure base of operations and diplomatic cover for their illegal enterprises, forced down the world’s throat through the judicious application of blackmail and bribery, Israel quickly became the ultimate money-laundering front and an extradition-proof haven for pedophiles. It has secured de facto exemption from nearly every international treaty, human rights convention, international arms agreement, and social norm that binds the civilized world, using a muscular and deep-pocketed propaganda apparatus to escape accountability by blaming its enemies and bribing or threatening allies to look the other way. Its victims are preemptively accused of the crimes committed against them so that when they do contact authorities, they appear suspect. Its trained assassins will kill another nation’s citizens anytime, anywhere to remove an obstacle to further consolidation of power, and whenever the central bank needs a top-up, the US and Europe will fight each other for the privilege of handing over their last pennies to the country that has everything (except a soul).
While a Venn Diagram depicting Big Parasite and “The Jews” would partially overlap, it would also show a serious imbalance in power driven by what “ex-Jew” Gilad Atzmon calls pre-traumatic stress syndrome — a pathological reaction to a feared (but nonexistent) trauma. Big Parasite, conflating Zionism with Judaism to justify the existence of its criminal outpost in the Middle East, claims to speak for all Jews while advocating the ethnic cleansing of “Greater Israel” and other war crimes. The resulting international condemnation of Zionist aggression, spun as a surge in anti-Jewish hate by a media establishmentin the pocket of the thugs doing the killing, frightens “the Jews” — who’ve been propagandized from the cradle to believe that everyone wants them dead simply because they’re Jewish — back into the arms of their Zionist manipulators. But while it is undeniable that Jews in the West enjoy some privilege as a trickle-down benefit from their leaders’ influence, it has long baffled me why more of them don’t condemn those leaders’ crimes, at least for self-preservation’s sake, since they reflect so poorly on the entire group. When a serious effort is finally made to rip the Zionist facehugger off Lady Liberty, Americans will remember who it was that pimped her out and then cut out the people’s tongues to stop their complaining.
But Jewish apathy toward going down with the Zionist ship makes more sense as a manifestation of learned helplessness, itself the product of the very real trauma of epidemic child sexual abuse within the Orthodox tradition. Those who try to blow the whistle are ostracized as traitors, so the majority keep silent, becoming complicit in the abuse and even developing a Stockholm Syndrome-like loyalty to the group. The powerful Chabad Lubavitch sect, which counts Epstein lawyer Alan “I kept my underwear on” Dershowitz and Jared Kushner as adherents, is particularly notorious for protecting child abusers, shuttling offenders between cities (a tactic also used to protect Catholic predators within the priesthood), colluding with secular authorities to bury the charges, and ostracizing parents of victims. One popular Chabad rabbi admitted in 2013 that most of the children in its programs had been sexually abused at some point and even defended the practice as harmless, arguing it was up to the victims how they felt about the experience. Tunnels discovered beneath the group’s Brooklyn headquarters in a police raid last year contained stained child-sized mattresses and other kiddie furniture. Ghislaine Maxwell, half-Jewish only on her father’s side, officially converted in prison to access privileges supplied by a Chabad-linked group. The absence of a strong cultural taboo against child predation in many Jewish communities means that even if some amoral entity were to entrap Netanyahu himself in bed with a dead girl or a live boy, it’s unlikely that he would lose the support of diaspora Zionists. Big Parasite itself is thus all but immune to the pedophilic blackmail it has weaponized against the world, and only this can explain its staying power.
Child-Trafficking As Statecraft
Epstein began working for this pedocentric network in the 1980s with the CIA, and by 1983 was working with media baron and Israeli spy Robert Maxwell, according to former Israeli intelligence officer Ari Ben Menashe. While the US and Israel were already running multiple trafficking rings that used underage children to compromise powerful figures as part of their Iran-Contra operations, Israel’s military intelligence directorate Aman had selected Epstein to deal with a more serious threat: the US was considering making peace with the Palestinians and had to be stopped, Epstein was told, with orders to set up his own ring and blackmail presidential candidate Bill Clinton with underage girls. Through L Brands and Victoria’s Secret owner Les Wexner, a billionaire faithful to the Zionist cause with mafia ties hidden beneath his respectable clothing business, Epstein was outfitted with a massive Manhattan townhouse outfitted with state-of-the-art surveillance in every room, a seemingly bottomless bank account, and a low-effort cover story that cast him as money manager for Wexner, who as co-founder of the Mega Group, a “philanthropic club” where 20 of the wealthiest and most powerful Zionists could focus on advancing the cause of Jewish supremacy, had a potentially unlimited amount of power and influence at his fingertips.
Dumb and horny, just like we like ‘em!
While Clinton was such an enthusiastic participant in his own compromising that it’s impossible to say which honeypot (Monica Lewinsky being the most famous) secured his cooperation, a nation that views the peaceful solution to a conflict as a greater evil than child-trafficking has clearly lost the plot. By the time Epstein’s operation was in full swing in 2000, Israel was literally run by (“alleged”) rapists. Ehud Barak, who would later be accused by Virginia Giuffre of raping her so violently she bled for hours and becoming aroused by her terror as she begged for her life, was prime minister, while Moshe Katsev, who would later be convicted of raping one of his employees, was president. That same year, the nation welcomed back Arie Scher, its disgraced vice-consul of Rio de Janeiro, after he was found to be trafficking children to Israeli tourists in Brazil, not only not prosecuting him but handing him a promotion as Consul of Canberra (Australia, in a rare show of good judgment, wouldn’t let him in). Another Israeli child trafficking ring was exposed in 2018 in Colombia, operating with protection from local authorities.
Barak seemed genuinely surprised when his friendship with Epstein, whom he would continue to visit at least 30 times in the US after the pedophile’s 2008 conviction required him to register as a sex offender, became a sticking point for voters during his attempted return as Prime Minister in 2019. Unwilling to believe Israelis had suddenly started caring about rape, especially rape of impoverished shiksas, Barak blamed his opponent Benjamin Netanyahu for ginning up a “poisoned atmosphere” to distract from the multiple corruption charges pending against him. Barak had a point — Israel had officially declared itself a Jewish supremacist state the previous year, abdicating any responsibility to protect its second-class citizens. After a 2024 UN report condemned Israel’s acceptance of the use of sexual humiliation, harassment and torture against Palestinian prisoners, 10 IDF soldiers were arrested for gang-raping a Palestinian man being held without evidence as a Hamas fighter. The backlash was immediate as government officials — led by Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, who called the rapists “heroes” — rallied to secure their release and demand those who ordered the arrest be punished. The soldiers’ lawyers even argued they had acted in self-defense.
Revelation of the Method
Unlike most intelligence agency honeytraps, Epstein’s trafficking ring included a public relations aspect, with glossy media profiles depicting him as a suave, mysterious, Jay Gatsby-by-way-of-James Bond playboy jet-setting around the world with princes and presidents, a bevy of (near)-babies surrounding him at all times. It is absurd to believe that it took a decade after survivor Maria Farmer first reported Epstein and Maxwell to the FBI for the agency to build a case against him even as he carried on with the same behaviors, or that the agency only found time to interview Farmer in 2006 after Palm Beach police made them look bad by charging the pedophile with abusing a 14-year-old girl. When the Palm Beach case landed in their lap as well, they waited until it was resolved in that jurisdiction, then wrote to victims falsely claiming a “thorough investigation” was underway. The agency’s behavior is less baffling given the FBI has been sexually compromised from its very beginnings, with founder J. Edgar Hoover blackmailed out of the gate by the same organized crime syndicate the agency was established to police, forcing him to deny the very existence of the Mafia for years. One can attribute the same motive to Kash Patel’s “who’re you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?” wide-eyed denials of reality.
Nor was the FBI the only law enforcement agency to mysteriously drop the ball on the 52-page indictment. Palm Beach State Attorney Barry Krischer abandoned the charges that could have put Epstein away for life after meeting with his defense team, deciding probation and a psychological evaluation would be sufficient punishment given that the girls were “prostitutes.” Krischer, who retired the following year, was in charge of the state’s Crime Against Children unit, yet had habitually refused to prosecute cases of men raping teenage girls even when his inaction led to further harm coming to the girls. His true motives were likely revealed in the award he would receive 10 years later from the Anti-Defamation League, an organization that was literally founded to protect Jewish pedophile and murderer Leo Frank from justice after he was found guilty of murdering his 13-year-old factory employee Mary Phagan. Bellowing the quiet part out loud, the ADL’s “Jurisprudence Award” is supposed to recognize “an outstanding contribution to the legal profession and to the community at large, while exemplifying the principles upon which the Anti-Defamation League was founded.” It certainly did that last part.
Palm Beach police chief Michael Reiter kicked the case up to US Attorney Alex Acosta, who also fumbled it, agreeing with Epstein’s lawyers to an infuriating no-prosecution deal on a single charge of soliciting a teen prostitute that would allow him to serve just 18 months in jail with day release. Victims were not told of the agreement, in violation of federal law. Acosta would later admit when he was interviewed by the Trump transition team for a cabinet post that he had been ordered to back off Epstein because “he belongs to intelligence,” but this was apparently acceptable to the incoming administration, which appointed him Secretary of Labor. Only when the public learned of the interaction was he pressured to resign.
Epstein had briefly considered fleeing to Israel like so many pedophiles before him in order to escape conviction, even complaining to friends that an “antisemitic conspiracy” in Palm Beach was to blame for his prosecution, a notion other Palm Beach Jews who didn’t spend their days molesting children found ludicrous. But instead, he embraced his new routine, leaving his cell each day to go to “work” and sneaking girls into his “office,” and served just 13 months of his sentence. He ignored the requirement that he register as a sex offender and was never asked to, nor did his wealthy and powerful friends drop him over his conviction.
As an asset of both US and Israeli intelligence, insulated in the personal wealth of mafia-affiliated Mega Group billionaires, surrounded by the wealthiest, most influential, and most powerful people he and Maxwell could lure into their nest, a retinue of nymphets obediently attending to his every need, Epstein likely believed that truly “getting caught” was impossible and thus resumed flaunting his lifestyle after weaseling out of the 2006 charges. Indeed, it’s the flaunting of the crime that makes for such an effective humiliation ritual. Confronted with such a towering miscarriage of justice, it is impossible to believe in the integrity of the US political system, and the destabilization of society advances by leaps and bounds.
Sex Slaves Breed Thought Slaves
The reason for the treason
Only by recognizing the role of sexual blackmail and the networks that run it can Americans understand the generational betrayal that has reduced our political system to just another asset-stripping mechanism. Decades under the thumb of Big Parasite have withered the US from a proud world power to a desiccated husk, one unethical compromise at a time. Dignity and patriotism left the building when, fresh off a starring role in the assassination of JFK, Israel persuaded his successor Lyndon Johnson to look the other way as it attempted to sink the naval intelligence ship USS Liberty, killing hundreds of Americans to drag Washington into its war with Egypt. Johnson, repeatedly blocking rescue efforts so as to leave no survivors to tell the truth about the attack, inaugurated a traitorous tradition that subsequent presidents have followed religiously. Israel will be permitted to violate everything from international law to the laws of physics, while the US will stand by to enforce its lunatic demands. Americans, reduced to serfs on an Israeli plantation, embraced the scam of Christian Zionism to try to make some moral sense of the situation, a coping mechanism the Israeli lobby has eagerly exploited with propaganda campaigns aimed at turning American churches into recruiters for what is ultimately a self-effacing death cult. As the US’ national debt spirals uncontrollably alongside its foreign aid bill, it is a wonder Big Parasite has not instituted a debt forgiveness program that allows Americans to offer up their nubile young daughters as payment. What do you get the nation that has everything, besides shame?
Only when the role of institutionalized pedophilia as the driving force within the halls of power is taken into account does the behavior of American politicians, uniting in lockstep to tear up the Bill of Rights so Israel’s feelings aren’t hurt, make any sense. Mere avarice or lust for power cannot account for the anti-human, shortsighted cravenness that defines the political class. Warehouses full of video recordings of these people and their associates schtupping 14-year-olds can.
When a State Department official praises Israel over the US and brags about sporting a Star of David necklace despite being Italian, it’s not because they don’t understand optics. When the Democratic Party commits political Seppuku by embracing a “hug Bibi” pro-Israel strategy in the middle of a genocide, it’s not because they love the wildly corrupt Israeli PM more than their jobs. When BlackRock-controlled brands like Bud Light and Jaguar clamber on board the LGBT bandwagon in the most tone-deaf way possible, offending their entire customer base and tanking their stock price with commercials that constitute aesthetic terrorism, it’s not because they love gay people or hate money. These are acts of ritual humiliation that provide Big Parasite with spiritual nourishment. Many of Epstein’s victims report that he and Maxwell seemed to take as much pleasure in their fear and distress as they did in the sex itself. Like the girls, blackmailed politicians must betray themselves anew with every assignment, cringing through life like a kicked dog knowing somewhere in a nondescript warehouse sits evidence of crimes that could put them away for a very long time. It’s kiss the Wailing Wall or kiss their ass goodbye.
Destroying Something Beautiful
While the media has lazily followed Alan Dershowitz’s lead in characterizing Epstein’s victims as trailer-trash juvenile delinquents barely on the wrong side of the age of consent, Epstein and his associates were in fact very picky about their prey, spending at least as much time strategizing the ruination of the flower of gentile feminity (the absence of Jewish girls from the “sisterhood,” confirmed by Maria Farmer and also notable among the victims of producer Harvey Weinstein, is notable given the ethnic-supremacist ideology of the parasite class) as they did on compromising VIPs — though admittedly it wasn’t rocket science getting a prince or a president to drop his zipper in the presence of underage beauties. They wanted “white girls” who appeared “prepubescent” and demure, according to survivor Courtney Wild, while another report specified their ideal type as “nymphishly thin, with no tattoos.” Maxwell insisted the girls should be “as young as possible.” Not only were they required to be virginal and disease-free (on pain of death), but they were forbidden from drinking, smoking, and using drugs and put on strict diets if they started to gain weight. Academic achievement and artistic talent were a bonus. Youth and beauty were important, but it was purity and innocence they were targeting.
Epstein was ideally placed to recruit girls — and charm their wealthy parents — from his first job, having been installed as math and science teacher at the prestigious Dalton School despite lacking even a college degree in what was likely an intelligence posting designed to position him in New York high society. He leveraged his financial benefactor Les Wexner’s Victoria’s Secret brand to great effect, enticing girls to his townhouse by pretending to be a model scout. At Interlochen Center for the Arts, where he had attended a youth music camp, his name emblazoned on the “Jeffrey Epstein Scholarship Lodge” helped him pick up musicians, while New York Academy of Art’s dean of students Lisa Guggenheim allegedly pimped out her choicest young students to him, among them Maria Farmer, the painter who would first report Epstein to the FBI.
So innocent when she first met Epstein at a gallery show that she actually believed his explanation that the steady trickle of young girls (many in school uniforms) in and out of his townhouse were Victoria’s Secret models on casting calls, Farmer, hooked with the promise of helping her art career, reluctantly agreed to travel to brand owner Les Wexner’s Ohio estate to work as an artist in residence. Trapped on the well-guarded property and verbally abused by Wexner’s wife Abigail, she was kept under constant surveillance and forbidden to eat at the “Jewish-only” country club on the property, losing 20 pounds as she gradually lost her will to resist.
Farmer only snapped out of her despondency when Epstein and Maxwell sexually assaulted her during a visit to the estate. The pair had set their sights on her younger sister Annie after spotting a nude photo of her that Farmer had used for a painting, and Farmer realized she had been bundled off to Wexner’s so that they could have full access to the younger girl. While she ultimately escaped and reunited with her sister, her art career had been destroyed, not helped, by her association with Epstein, who had forced her to turn down a Hollywood painting commission so she could be locked away in Ohio instead. He and Maxwell threatened to cut her off from “art related opportunities,” and she fled the city to get away from them. Despite her pre-Epstein success selling $20,000 paintings and showing in galleries, she stopped painting for 20 years, explaining to Whitney Webb, “They destroyed me on purpose.”
Farmer’s painting depicting Epstein-world as a “diagram” for the clueless FBI
While one can only speculate on how many other talented young girls had their creativity deliberately snuffed out, or why this was so important to Epstein and Maxwell, it is clear that many brilliant works of art, music, and literature that could have uplifted humanity were not made because their creators were made to give up. This has left space for Big Parasite, with its chokehold on the entertainment industry, to aesthetically terrorize the population with soulless mediocrity without having to worry about competition. Under their guidance, music and other forms of popular entertainment have become not a celebration of life but a grooming tool, with Diddy’s “freakouts” only the latest sexual blackmail scandal to surface in an ecosystem that was literally built by organized crime. The sexualization of young girls by popular culture and the normalization of pornography have inspired epic pearl-clutching by politicians willing to look at everything except the source. The role of Epstein’s virgin sacrifices in the runaway success of Big Parasite in its cultural warfare against the West should thus not be underestimated.
Playing the Box
The surest route to long-term compliance with an unconscionable order is tricking the target into active participation in enforcing it, a strategy Epstein himself called “playing the box.” Only when their own participation in the trafficking ring had ceased with Epstein’s death did institutional enablers like JP Morgan Chase and the Virgin Islands government experience attacks of conscience over what they’d facilitated for so many years, though both stopped short of taking accountability and blamed the other for allowing their cooperation to be bought. Journalists who had obediently spiked negative coverage of the pedophile during his life marked his death with disingenuous bewilderment at why the media never looked into the girls.
Efforts to defuse the Epstein bomb by grooming the media were underway long before the pedophile was rearrested and “suicided.” Israeli intelligence operatives poisoned the epistemological well in 2017, priming the American public to reject future political pedophilia scandals by seeding 4chan and other social media platforms with the QAnon psy-op. Q recast Trump — whose mentor had been Roy Cohn, perhaps the most famous sexual blackmailer in US history — as a real-life superhero saving trafficked children from Deep State pedophiles. Smothering its kernel of truth (the rich and powerful are in fact preying on children on an industrial scale) in a bath of bullshit (JFK Jr faked his death and is coming back any minute now! here’s Hillary Clinton in a snuff film!), it suggested Trump was only pretending to sell out to the Deep State while secretly outflanking them in “5-D chess” ordinary folks weren’t smart enough to understand. The narrative punch was further spiked with promises that hundreds of sealed indictments dropping any minute now would send Hillary Clinton and other prominent Democrats off to Guantanamo Bay for life, and the cryptic post format encouraged followers to waste hours hunting for hidden messages, effectively making them participants in deceiving themselves. It should surprise no one that both QAnon itself and the 4chan /pol/ board where it originated were confirmed as Israeli intelligence honeypots earlier this year, with half of all /pol/ posts originating from IP addresses in that country. The Q narrative was tailor-made to pacify millions of Americans with hopium — why rise up against the government when there was a chance the “white hats” within the administration might be engaged in deeply heroic feats of child-rescue behind the scenes? — while ensuring the Epstein revelations would be met with yawns and disbelief by “real” journalists.
Who wouldn’t want to be associated with this?
Victims were also tricked into complicity with their abuse with the order to recruit other girls for pay, a dynamic that ensured their silence and kept many in Epstein’s thrall for months or years. What Palm Beach police described as a “sexual abuse pyramid scheme” was far more effective than threats alone. Many girls dutifully came back with friends, needing the money or believing the false promises of career advancement that had lured them to the property in the first place, even as they gradually lost their will to resist under repeated assaults by Epstein and Maxwell. These encounters were designed to humiliate and strip the girls of agency, and the pressure to recruit other girls blurred the line between victim and perpetrator so effectively that some opted to remain silent out of fear of prosecution, a valid concern given the aggressive legal tactics of Epstein’s defense team. Courtney Wild, who recalls bringing as many as 80 girls — all underage — to Epstein for $200-$300 per girl during the three years she spent in his orbit in Palm Beach, says the money kept her out of homelessness, but at a price. When she met Epstein at 14, she was an A student and captain of the cheerleading team despite a troubled home life. Deemed too old for the predator’s tastes at 17, she drifted into stripping and began using drugs, eventually spending time in prison while her abuser continued feeding on her peers.
The same model of grooming that saw Epstein’s victims evolve from shocked repulsion at the public sex acts performed on his properties to reluctant participation and ultimately to gathering juicy details on the VIPs they were loaned out to can be observed in any society under parasitic exploitation. A wet-behind-the-ears politician initially appalled at the feeding frenzy of lobbyists bidding on his integrity will soon be hooked on their money, perhaps even coming to enjoy the quarterly debriefing with the “AIPAC babysitter” the Israeli group has apparently assigned to everyone in Congress except Thomas Massie. Americans who protested George W. Bush’s illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 didn’t even raise an eyebrow when his successor Barack Obama, Nobel Peace Prize in hand, began bombing five more countries, and later freaked out when Trump threatened to end the war in Ukraine. Repeat an atrocity enough times and it becomes business as usual.
All Wars are Pedos’ Wars
It’s hard not to compare Epstein’s girls — thrown away once they aged out of jailbait, having given their best years in servitude to masters who saw them as “trash” — with the (mostly) male victims of the US military-industrial complex. These, too, are often left broke and broken on the streets after too much killing has rendered them “unfit for polite society” (in the cringeworthy words of Pete Hegseth). War historically harvests the cream of the generational crop, sacrificing the strongest and bravest boys to enrich a ruling class whose own children always dodge conscription, and while voluntary service has lowered the profile of such systematic abuse, poor kids with no prospects are easily enticed into joining the armed forces the same way girls were sucked into Epstein’s world: promises of good pay, good education, and the opportunity to achieve their dreams. Through the ur-humiliation ritual of boot camp, they become aggressive little golems eager to wipe their asses with international law (and their own self-preservation instincts) for America’s Best Friend, blasting brown civilians until they end up losing a limb or their mind and get sent home, the realization finally dawning that they’ve been used and thrown away. Reading US Third Air Force Commander Lt. Gen Richard Clark tell the Jerusalem Post (once owned by Robert Maxwell) that US troops would be ready and willing to die for Israel, how many veterans felt like General Patton, horror dawning that they have defeated the wrong enemy and doomed the world? Certainly, Israel’s continued existence as a nuclear-armed ethnostate determined to achieve the ultimate loosh harvest by conducting the world’s first live-streamed genocide in Gaza — gorging themselves on the suffering not only of the Palestinians but of everyone who watches the violence knowing that it’s funded by their tax dollars and that there’s nothing they can do about it —is not going to leave many survivors.
While war for its own sake is beloved by Big Parasite, it too has a parallel pedocentric motive: extracting foreign nations’ nubile natural resources for financial and sexual exploitation through UN “peacekeepers” and private military contractors. Sex trafficking by UN peacekeepers is so common it has its own Wikipedia article. The peacekeeping force seems tailor-made for predators, as they are not governed by local laws, and their home country is unlikely to follow up on a claim against them by a foreigner halfway around the world. Abusers caught in the act are merely sent home. The UN has promised to beef up accountability for decades, but no change has been forthcoming, suggesting the widespread child rape is a feature, not a bug. In Haiti, where Hillary Clinton infamously intervened in 2010 to reduce the sentence of missionary Laura Silsby after Silsby was caught attempting to kidnap 33 children from the country, rape by peacekeepers has become so common that a 2017 investigation found only one woman in 12 who’ve been raped by a UN peacekeeper even bothers to report the abuse anymore, knowing nothing will be done. Wars and natural disasters both provide an ideal environment for stealing children, as populations are displaced and authorities distracted while the presence of foreign do-gooder operations is seen as normal, even desirable, by outsiders.
Because private military contractors are not subject to US or military law when operating overseas, they are extremely popular with intelligence agencies in need of plausible deniability for their black ops. They have also become synonymous with human trafficking. The CIA’s preferred contractor Dyncorp was forced to fire several employees in Bosnia in 1999 after two separate whistleblowers revealed the company was operating a sex trafficking ring with the help of the Serbian mafia, flying girls as young as 12 from Serbia, Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, and Romania into local brothels and sex clubs where they were trafficked to Dyncorp personnel as well as UN, NATO, and human rights NGO workers. Dyncorp was involved in all areas of the operation, forging documents, smuggling the girls through checkpoints, and tipping off brothel owners to raids. Despite an abundance of evidence that included the company’s Bosnia site director making a home video of himself raping two of the girls, no one was prosecuted, the girls were sent back home, and Dyncorp even kept its contract to provide police forces to the UN. However, the whistleblowers were fired. The plane Dyncorp used to bring the girls to Bosnia shared a tail number with a helicopter owned by Epstein, who was known to have purchased his own Yugoslavian sex slave Nadia Marcinkova during the civil war.
In 2004, Dyncorp contract workers at an airbase in Colombia filmed themselves molesting local kids and distributed the video in the streets of Bogota, suggesting self-blackmail may be de rigueur at the company as a form of mutually assured destruction. Another incriminating video leaked online in 2010 showing Dyncorp employees who’d been contracted to train the Afghan police force enjoying lapdances from a young boy dressed as a female. Pizzagate princess Hillary Clinton herself helped squash the story, though the scandal would ultimately leak again in a Wikileaks cable dump. Sex trafficking by military contractors is so common the Pentagon’s effort to ban it (presumably due to the bad publicity) was shot down by industry lobbyists.
In the glorified money laundering operation that is Vladimir Zelensky’s Ukraine, an entire generation of men has been sacrificed so the parasitic elite can indulge their perversions. White Angel, a paramilitary offshoot of the Israeli-funded neo-Nazi group Azov Battalion, has trafficked tens of thousands of children out of the country under orders from Zelensky’s government, taking advantage of demoralized and confused parents’ willingness to hand over their kids to “any person in military or police uniform” amid the fog of war. Paid $2,000 for each stolen child, the state-sponsored predators were deployed daily in villages across eastern Ukraine in a bid to strip its assets before the inevitable Russian victory, given orders to use violence against parents who would not voluntarily hand over their kids. Ending up an Israeli billionaire’s sex slave might actually be the more desirable of the options open to kidnapped Ukrainian children, however — many were allegedly sold for parts, with organ trafficking such big business in the country that the Verkhovna Rada literally legalized organ theft in 2021, removing the requirement for consent from a donor or relative. While the people of Ukraine have long since soured on their corrupt government, it is clear Zelensky and his puppet-masters are unwilling to permit the end of the war because of the sharp drop in income it would entail.
While Big Parasite consolidated itself under the cover of “Israel” when that nation was created, taking advantage of international sympathy towards Jews post-WW2 to ethnically cleanse its new home with shocking viciousness, it has always been a global network whose only real loyalty is to itself. Organized child sex trafficking is not a recent innovation. An attempted crackdown on “white slavery” in Eastern Europe in the late 19th century raised familiar questions regarding impoverished female victims’ agency in the sex trade, tolerance and even regulation of the trade by the authorities, and the ethnic dynamics of Jewish traders trafficking Polish and Galician nubiles — often tempted with promises of “real” jobs and wealthy husbands, or at least financial freedom — to slave auctions and Middle Eastern harems, their earnings heavily taxed or confiscated. Like Alan Dershowitz, modern apologists for the white slavers argue that desperate families’ willing sale of their daughters — some of whom might have already had sexual experience — in order to pay their debts constituted consensual prostitution, dismissing the stereotype of predatory Jewish slavers as a blood libel because Polish and Galician pimps existed as well and that if Jews hadn’t stepped in to run the sex trade with better business acumen, it would still have existed. Epstein, who bragged about buying “sex slave” Nadia Marcinkova from her parents in Yugoslavia, would be proud.
Pedo-Futurism
Palantir’s Alex Karp, giving a biiiiiig welcome to the technocratic dystopia
It is not only our present that has been hijacked by this criminal gang, but our future. Seemingly driven by the same pre-traumatic stress syndrome that leads them to see a Shoah in every shoelace, agents of Big Parasite have flooded the communications and technology sector with backdoored equipment and spyware so completely that surveillance is the expectation, not the exception. It is not an exaggeration to say that their quest for omniscience created the modern surveillance state, and that this process has been driven, enabled, and protected by sexual blackmailers. Robert Maxwell sold backdoored PROMIS communication software to 42 governments including the US in the 1980s, opening up the mother of all eavesdropping channels. Ghislaine’s sister Christine sold Chiliad datamining software to the FBI to enable its “War on Terror” through aggressive surveillance of Israel’s enemies, guiding US foreign policy off a cliff. Palantir, the CIA-funded pre-crime program that was recently handed centralized control over all US government systems, began as an extension of PROMIS and has blossomed into a dystopian surveillance behemoth whose executives openly boast about killing people and telegraph their allegiances by reminding the world that they “defer to Israel.” Ghislaine’s other sister Isabel opened the door to Big Parasite’s takeover of the internet by convincing Silicon Valley investors to pour funding into Israeli startups in the 1990s, leading to the success of companies like Commtouch, now a ubiquitous and hidden part of email systems used by Google and Microsoft (whose founder, Bill Gates, has been a friend of Epstein since the 1990s). Israeli startups acquired by US tech giants can easily take control of the company’s direction from within without disturbing the public-facing image of the company as all-American, and this has become standard operating procedure for Israel’s military intelligence Unit 8200, which has turned industry giants like Microsoft and Intel into espionage bonanzas even as their products degrade in quality, burdened and bloated with snitchware. When Netanyahu reminded smartphone users that they were “holding a piece of Israel,” he was not exaggerating — Israeli companies like Pegasus, Candiru and Ehud Barak’s Epstein-funded Carbyne911 have perfected the transformation of personal communications device into personal surveillance device.
Every elite sex trafficking scandal that becomes public is reported in a vacuum, as if there have not been hundreds if not thousands more not mentioned here. Evidence of similar rings can be found anywhere humanity’s baser instincts are exploited. Every time we fail to interrogate the “why” of these scandals beyond “powerful men are into forbidden fruit” and keep silent out of fear of offending the boot wedged firmly on our necks, we are giving our agency over to these predators. As long as there are assets left to strip, Big Parasite will be there, luxuriating in our cowardice while it grows fat off our distress. Epstein may be dead and gone, but the network that created him is still screwing us all.
Newly-declassified files show President John F Kennedy’s alleged assassin Lee Harvey Oswald was monitored for years by James Angleton, the CIA’s infamous veteran counterintelligence chief, right up until the President’s death. In this context, freshly-released FBI documents indicating Oswald was removed from Bureau watchlists six weeks before Kennedy’s assassination, despite being judged a high security risk, at the express direction of Angleton’s staff, take on a distinctly disquieting character. Was Oswald a target of, or participant in, Angleton’s illegal domestic spying operations?
In June 1953, a memo was circulated among senior FBI officials, its subject line: “Central Intelligence Agency – information received from James Angleton”. It documents how the CIA’s counterintelligence chief had over the past year “been very cooperative and… volunteered voluminous information of interest to Bureau.” Such was the vast and sensitive intelligence yield, it was considered necessary to establish dedicated, strict internal protocols for handling and storing material provided by Angleton to the FBI.
This was “particularly” vital in respect of information Angleton received and passed on to the Bureau from Mossad, his “primary source” of intelligence among “numerous foreign sources and channels” he maintained worldwide. The memo went on to outline how Angleton handled “special cases of a various nature”, and was “usually given considerable freedom and leeway in directing the operations of his unit.” Angleton was “responsible only” to the CIA’s Director, and his staff were “responsible only to him.”
James Angleton testifies to the Senate Intelligence Committee
The memo noted approvingly how “much of the information” provided by Angleton “consists of the actual reports” he received from his sources. This was of significant advantage to the FBI, as the agency was able to “better evaluate the information instead of waiting for the delay and processing through normal channels in the CIA.” Angleton also “frequently” kept the Bureau apprised of Agency activities overseas, “which the CIA sometimes camouflages with some of its cloak and dagger techniques.”
Angleton’s extensive cooperation bought him enormous goodwill within the FBI. He successfully leveraged this in January 1958, when the Bureau serendipitously “flushed out” a scandalous, illegal spying operation targeting US citizens conducted by the CIA’s counterintelligence unit. A memo that month shared between senior FBI officials records how the Bureau was seeking to establish a program to monitor all mail being sent to and from the Soviet Union by American citizens, only to discover Angleton was already doing precisely the same thing.
Angleton in turn learned his scheme had been busted, so approached the Agency’s FBI liaison agent on a “personal basis” to outline the program. He claimed he would be fired if Langley caught wind of his disclosures to the Bureau. Angleton explained how the interception program was “one of the biggest and most secret operations being conducted by CIA,” and “extensive and expensive”. An “elaborate array of IBM machines” catalogued and conducted “complex scientific examinations” of all mail gathered.
In all, “two or three hundred CIA employees” were “exclusively engaged on various facets” of the operation, which cost “well over a million dollars a year” – roughly $11 million today. Angleton said the effort’s “sole purpose…was to identify persons behind the Iron Curtain who might have some ties in the US and who could be approached… as contacts and sources for CIA.” The operation was purportedly a “success”, with numerous valuable assets cultivated.
While FBI higherups questioned whether the effort “invaded our jurisdiction”, it was concluded Angleton’s unit had a “legitimate right” to conduct the mission. Moreover, the Bureau could avoid “the inherent dangers” of conducting a parallel mail intercept program – including “the sensitive nature of it, its complexity, size and expense” – by simply demanding the CIA counterintelligence unit hand over their operation’s vast intelligence yield to them.
Lee Harvey Oswald first came to Angleton’s attention in November 1959, due to news reports of his defection to the Soviet Union the previous month. Thereafter, all mail Oswald sent to and received from the US was opened and read by the CIA, until he returned home in May 1962 with his Russian wife Marina. Angleton’s monitoring of the minutiae of Oswald’s life persisted until Kennedy was killed.Multiple separate CIA operations collected intelligence on the President’s alleged assassin throughout.
‘CIA Project’
The CIA counterintelligence officer who monitored Oswald’s mail was Reuben Efron, part of a personal spying network constructed by Angleton from Jewish émigres from the Soviet Union, outside of formal Agency structures. Eerily, Efron attended a February 1964 hearing of the Warren Commission – officially charged with investigating JFK’s assassination – at which Marina Oswald testified. His presence was noted in an official volume of the investigation’s proceedings, but his employment by the Agency was unmentioned. Was he there on Angleton’s behalf?
This is but one of many mysteries related to Oswald that Angleton’s closed-door testimonyto Senate investigators in June 1975 failed to resolve. During his grilling, Angleton had little to say about Kennedy’s assassination, despite being repeatedly probed about “the Oswald situation”. Questioned whether the CIA kept records on Oswald, Angleton prevaricated, “they have a file… I think more than one.” He offered scant further information, beyond claiming the supposed lone nut shooter was likely a Soviet operative.
When asked if there was a “connection between Oswald and the FBI”, Angleton elliptically acknowledged “there was a tremendous flap in the Bureau” following Kennedy’s assassination, and “confusion” the FBI “had not turned over, or had not taken enough initiative in turning over, all the information on Oswald to the local police” in Dallas. Angleton neglected to mention the FBI informed his counterintelligence unit one week prior to November 22nd 1963 Oswald was living and working in the city. By this time, the file collated by Angleton on Oswald ran to 180 pages.
Angleton was even more dishonest when testifying to the House Select Committee on Assassinations in October 1978. Asked point blank by a senior investigator if, to his knowledge, “Oswald [was] ever the subject of any CIA project,” Angleton lied, “no”. Coincidentally or not, he was then asked whether he knew Reuben Efron, and his responsibilities. Angleton responded in the affirmative, explaining Efron’s duties related to mail interception. Angleton was uniquely well-placed to elaborate that Efron was monitoring Oswald’s mail, in an operation he personally oversaw.
Angleton was grilled about his counterintelligence unit providing Israel with technical support for constructing nuclear weapons. He denied the charges, but under questioning admitted Tel Aviv may have conducted clandestine operations to source nuclear material in the US. Asked if he possessed “certain knowledge” of Israeli efforts “to acquire nuclear secrets in the US,” Angleton pleaded, “Do I have to respond to that?”
Kennedy entered office in January 1961deeply concerned about Tel Aviv’s nuclear ambitions. ACIA assessment the previous month concluded a “major purpose” of Israel’s Dimonanuclear plant was “plutonium production for weapons.” The assessment outlined numerous grave outcomes of Tel Aviv acquiring nukes. Chief among them, exposure of the program would inevitably cause “consternation” in North Africa and West Asia, potentially prompting “threatened” Arab and Muslim states to turn to the Soviet Union for military assistance.
Perhaps spurred by this prospect, from day one of his Presidency, Kennedy made harmonious relations between Washington and Israel contingent on regular U.S. inspections of Dimona. Under intense pressure, Tel Aviv’s then-Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion finally allowed inspections in May 1961. Extensive efforts were conducted to camouflage areas of Dimona dedicated to research and development of nukes. Resultant assessments concluded the facility was solely concerned with nuclear power generation. Kennedy was unconvinced, however. In May 1963, he dispatched an ominous private telegram to Ben-Gurion:
“The dangers in the proliferation of national nuclear weapons systems are so obvious that I am sure I need not repeat them here… We are concerned with the disturbing effects on world stability which would accompany the development of a nuclear weapons capability by Israel… Development of a nuclear weapons capability by Israel would almost certainly lead other larger countries, that have so far refrained from such development, to feel that they must follow suit.”
‘Intelligence Operation’
The House Select Committee on Assassinations’ (HSCA) failure to interrogate Angleton over Israel’s nuke ambitions is all the more inexcusable given the contents of anApril 1978 interview, conducted by Committee researcher Gaeton Fonzi with journeyman CIA officer Joseph Burkhalter Smith. Declassified records show Smith made a number of striking disclosures about Angleton’s role and influence within the Agency, and relationship with Tel Aviv. He suggested there was suspicion at the CIA’s highest levels Angleton may have been involved in Kennedy’s assassination, or at least concealed shadowy counterintelligence operations related to the world-changing event.
Smith enjoyed a close relationship with William Colby, who headed the CIA September 1973 – January 1976. A relative dove, Colby was forced out and replaced by George H. W. Bush, due to his candid public criticisms of the Agency’s record, and drive to break open the US intelligence community to greater scrutiny. Henry Kissinger aggressively pressed for his removal,fulminating how every time Colby “gets near Capitol Hill, the damn fool feels an irresistible urge to confess to some horrible crime.”
It is uncertain whether Angleton, Colby’s avowed nemesis, also played any role in Colby’s ouster. Smith claimed “Colby’s problems within the Agency stemmed largely from the conflict he had” with the CIA’s obsessively secretive counterintelligence supremo. Colby was totally in the dark as to what Angleton and his team were doing at any given time. Smith relayed how Colby had said of Kennedy’s assassination, “there could have been operations that Angleton’s staff was running that he wouldn’t even tell the Director.”
Smith went on to record how Angleton’s staff did “strange things”, and “handled all Israeli operations,” despite this not falling under their official purview. This “had a strange effect” on CIA operations in West Asia, “because unlike in other divisions where station chiefs kept each other informed, Angleton wouldn’t pass information to other stations in the Arab countries unless ‘he felt like it’.” It was also a mystery to Smith how Angleton “got all his power”.
Nonetheless, Smith testified Angleton had a “special relationship” with Allen Dulles, the longtime CIA director fired by Kennedy over the 1961 Bay of Pigs fiasco, subsequently appointed to the Warren Commission. Smith also described an “incredible” cult-like ethos among Angleton’s Agency adherents. Universally convinced the CIA had been heavily penetrated by the KGB, they were “confirmed believers in the world Communist conspiracy theory” – to the extent of suspecting the Sino-Soviet split was “a great deceptive operation.”
Asked by Fonzi “to be speculative” as to whether Lee Harvey Oswald could’ve been “a deep cover agent for the Agency,” Smith suggested Oswald may have “worked either for the Soviet Division, which ran operations in the Soviet Union, or the Counter Intelligence staff.” Angleton’s team was furthermore “very interested in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee”, alongstanding target of the CIA and FBI, to the extent “getting a penetration into it would have been a high priority effort.”
After moving to New Orleans in April 1963, Oswald set up a one-man chapter of the FPCC. In an apparent attempt to attract new members to the group in the virulently anti-Castro city, which was heaving with Cuban exiles, Oswald publicly distributed leaflets promoting the group. He hired random members of the public to assist with the effort, which lasted only 15 minutes, but just so happened to be captured on camera by a local TV station.
Oddly, when testifyingto the Warren Commission, Oswald’s half-brother John Pic was “unable to recognize him” in pictures of the leafleting event, raising the prospect Oswald wasbeing impersonated. Even more curiously, as Fonzi noted in his discussion with Smith, some of the leaflets listed the address of Oswald’s FPCC chapter as 544 Camp Street, which housed “some kind of intelligence operation run by Guy Banister, a former FBI agent.” Smith responded, “there were a lot of former FBI men on Angleton’s staff.”
Today, journalists, researchers, and concerned citizens have no choice but “to be speculative” about how and why John F Kennedy was killed, and by whom. The newly-declassified documents offer only further questions – but they all unambiguously point in James Angleton’s direction. His multifaceted role as master of the CIA’s vast Oswald file, chief of Agency relations with Israel, and potential enabler of Tel Aviv’s nuclear weapons program all appear interlinked. And these operations in tandem may account for what occurred on November 22nd 1963.
Following a batch of newly released emails from Jeffrey Epstein, the late child offender, it appears thus far that U.S. President Donald Trump is innocent of any wrongdoing. So why is he acting so suspicious?
On November 12th, the Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released some 20,000 emails from the files that suggested Donald Trump may have known more about Epstein’s underage sex-trafficking activities than he previously admitted.
In an email exchange between Epstein, who committed suicide in prison in 2019 while awaiting trial, and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein notes that an alleged victim had “spent hours at my house” with Trump.
“I want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is trump,” Epstein wrote in an April 2011 message to Maxwell, who is awaiting trial from federal prison in the United States.
“[Victim] spent hours at my house with him,, he has never once been mentioned,” he continues.
“I have been thinking about that…” Maxwell replied.
In another email between Epstein and journalist Michael Wolff from 2019, Epstein writes that [Victim] mara lago… [redacted]… trump said he asked me to resign, never a member ever.. of course he knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop.’
While the email exchange looks tantalizingly close to some form of guilt on the part of the U.S. leader, it is not a smoking gun. That’s largely because the redacted ‘victim’ mentioned in the above email messages is none other than Virginia Giuffre, who was 17 years old when she was lured away from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club to work for Jeffrey Epstein.
Giuffre, who committed suicide in April, was deposed in November 2016 as part of her lawsuit against Ghislaine Maxwell. In the course of the deposition she maintained that Trump never attempted to have sex with her. She also responded under oath that she never saw Trump at any of Jeffrey Epstein’s residences.
Over the years, Trump and Epstein had rubbed shoulders in elite social circles in New York and Florida. In a 2002 interview with New York magazine, Trump said he had known Epstein for 15 years, calling him a “terrific guy” who was “a lot of fun to be with.”
In that same interview, Trump added, “it is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”
So, if there is nothing more to the story between the disgraced billionaire pedophile and the American president, why are Trump and other top officials so reluctant to release the remainder of the files to public scrutiny? (The White House said the emails “prove absolutely nothing”).
Is the U.S. leader covering for himself or for others in the knowledge that there may be far more incriminating revelations in other messages? The answer appears to be obvious and self-evident, but whatever the case may be, Trump is putting intense pressure on Republicans to block release of the remainder of the files now in possession of the Justice Department.
CNN reported that the White House summoned representative Lauren Boebert – one of four Republicans in the House who have signed a special discharge petition to release the files – to a meeting in the Situation Room with the attorney general, Pam Bondi, and FBI director, Kash Patel, to discuss her position. Trump failed to get a reversal from Boebert, as well as other lawmakers contacted by the White House, including South Carolina Republican Nancy Mace. But the administration had other cards to play, it seems.
Perhaps Republicans and Democrats alike were of the opinion that a conveniently timed government shutdown – the longest in history, in fact – would make the public forget about Mr. Epstein. If that was the goal it also failed. After the government reopened for business, the late swearing-in of the Democratic representative Adelita Grijalva brought the number of signatures on the discharge petition to the magic number of 218 required to force a vote on legislation demanding the release of all files on Epstein within 30 days.
Meanwhile, the U.S. president’s efforts to portray the files as part of an elaborate ‘Democrat Hoax’ is not working among his MAGA constituents, many of whom cast a vote for Trump specifically on the grounds that the files would be made public. In July, much to the anger and frustration of the Republican base, the Justice Department released a memo that pointed to a “lack of evidence” to continue with the investigation.
“This systematic review revealed no incriminating ‘client list,’” the memo said. “There was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions. We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.”
“No further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted,” the memo continued.
If the Trump White House was of the opinion that the American people would forget the Epstein case, they were sadly disappointed. They smelled a rat and they would not rest until the matter was brought to its final conclusion.
“The best-case explanation for the Trump administration on their mishandling of the Epstein case is rank incompetence,” said Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, in a statement. “But the much likelier explanation is that Trump and wealthy people around him have things to hide.”
Will those hidden things be brought to the light of day? Unfortunately, it seems very unlikely. Even if the discharge petition passes the House, it still needs to get through the Senate and be signed by Trump, who certainly does not want to be seen as the person left holding the hot potato. The question remains: how much will the Republicans suffer at the ballot box if they continue to ignore the Epstein case?
The FBI told us Thomas Crooks tried to kill Donald Trump last summer but somehow had no online footprint. The FBI lied, and we can prove it because we have his posts. The question is why?
The recent assassination of Charlie Kirk was done by professionals. The FBI story is full of holes and experts agree that he was not shot by a high-power rifle, something our corporate media refuses to report. That would have knocked his head off!
This is not a detailed report of his assassination, but how it matches the proven method used by teams of professional killers, which includes setting up a lone nut patsy.
_______________________________________
“Analysis Solves Kirk Case”; a retired pathologist explains why Kirk was not hit by a high-power rifle bullet; Chris Martenson; September 26, 2025; • Analysis Solves Kirk Case—Evidence Points …
“Valhalla VFT” channel; a retired Green Beret soldier with several videos about the magic bullet; / @valhallavft
“Charlie Kirk Assassination: Narrative vs Reality”; a great short video summarizing the odd stories about this killing; RangeDayBro; October 4, 2025; • Charlie Kirk Assassination: Narrative vs R…
The FBI has officially ended its partnership with both the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), following years of mounting concern over the influence of partisan organizations in shaping federal intelligence and domestic “extremism” policy, which has resulted in online censorship.
FBI Director Kash Patel condemned the SPLC’s direction, describing it as a “partisan smear machine” and calling its involvement in federal intelligence work unacceptable.
He pointed specifically to the group’s so-called “hate map,” which has long been used to label mainstream conservative and Christian organizations as equivalent to violent hate groups.
“Their so-called hate map has been used to defame mainstream Americans and even inspired violence,” Patel stated. “That disgraceful record makes them unfit for any FBI partnership.”
The bureau confirmed it no longer shares information or maintains any intelligence products from the SPLC.
It has also cut off contact with the ADL, a group that, while ostensibly focused on combating antisemitism, has frequently advocated for censorship of speech it deems problematic, particularly online.
Both organizations were previously consulted by the FBI in identifying and monitoring alleged extremist threats.
That practice came under fire after the bureau’s Richmond office cited the SPLC in a controversial 2023 memo suggesting that traditional Catholics could be tied to radical activity.
The document called for agents to cultivate informants within Catholic churches.
The backlash led Patel to publicly reject the use of ideologically driven outside groups in FBI operations.
“I made it clear that the FBI will never rely on politicized or agenda-driven intelligence from outside groups—and certainly not from the SPLC,” Patel said. “All ties with the SPLC have officially been terminated.”
Originally known for battling white supremacist groups through litigation, the SPLC has since shifted its focus toward labeling conservative advocacy organizations as dangerous.
Over time, its “hate map” has become a blacklist used by corporations, financial services, and online platforms to restrict access and support for those groups.
More recently, the group listed Turning Point USA shortly before the assassination of its founder, free speech advocate Charlie Kirk.
The SPLC has maintained that not all Christian groups are included in its listings. For years, it pointed to Focus on the Family as an example of one that was not. That changed in 2024 when Focus was added to the map.
The ADL supported the STOP HATE Act, which seeks to pressure online platforms to remove “disinformation” and what it calls “hate speech.” The bill’s language raises obvious concerns about vague definitions and potential abuse.
Both organizations have held sway not just over federal agencies, but also over powerful private institutions.
Amazon, Eventbrite, Hyatt Hotels, and PayPal have all relied on the SPLC’s hate designations to determine which groups can use their services.
The now-discontinued AmazonSmile program excluded organizations listed by the SPLC, while major charitable foundations have blocked funding to those targeted by the group.
Federal agencies under the Biden administration have also shown a willingness to coordinate with the SPLC.
In a 2021 donor meeting, the group’s then-president said that many agencies had proactively reached out to solicit its input on shaping domestic terrorism policy.
That cooperation continued even after the SPLC labeled the parental rights group Moms for Liberty a hate group in 2023, followed by a briefing with the Department of Justice.
In my first column after the events of Jan. 6th, 2021, I criticized those who called the protest a “coup,” pointing out that, “Some of the same politicians and bureaucrats denouncing the ridiculous farce at the Capitol as if it were the equivalent of 9/11 have been involved for decades in planning and executing real coups overseas. In their real coups, many thousands of civilians have died.”
The media at the time played up the violence committed by a relative few at the protest to stoke a national outcry and demands for “justice.” More than 1,500 Americans were charged over the incident and nearly 500 were imprisoned, including outrageous prison sentences for relatively minor crimes like entering the Capitol building through doors opened by the police, and filming the event.
While most Democrats and Republicans in Congress harshly denounced the January 6th “insurrectionists,” a few Members displayed the appropriate skepticism over accepted government narratives. Rep. Thomas Massie, for example, was relentless in his search for answers to a simple but critically important question: How many of the “insurrectionists” were actually undercover FBI agents and other law enforcement officers and what role might they have played in inciting the violence.
Massie grilled then-Attorney General Merrick Garland several times, but Garland would not budge. He refused to say whether there had been any undercover federal agents in the crowd, though of course he must have known.
Last week we learned a little more of the truth. With the release of the FBI’s long lost “after action” report, we now know that more than 250 undercover agents were in the crowd. According to the report, they were given roles including crowd control that they were not suited for. Some agents cited in the report complained of political biases in the Bureau against conservatives. What other tasks might have been given to a “politicized” FBI undercover team?
In addition to the undercover agents, there were more than two dozen paid informants in the Jan. 6th crowd. Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), who chairs the subcommittee investigating the matter, asks an important question: “With that many paid informants being in the crowd, we want to know how many were in the crowd, how many were in the building, but I also want to know, were they paid to inform or instigate?”
Were they paid to inform, or to instigate? That is a good question. We do know that the event was used by the incoming Biden Administration to demonize and persecute the political opposition. There is no telling how many Americans would have liked to use their First Amendment guarantee of free speech to criticize the Biden Administration but were silenced by fear of persecution, or worse. It’s easy to conclude, seeing so many arrested and handed long sentences for non-violent “crimes,” that it’s better to keep quiet. At the time, the US was still in the grip of Covid tyranny, where speaking out against “the Science” could get you “cancelled” or worse. This was another way to silence people who were not “going along with the program.”
In the end, January 6th, 2021, was a coup of sorts. It was a coup against the First Amendment. The lesson for all of us is that if we do not regularly but peacefully exercise our First Amendment guarantees we will definitely lose them, regardless of who is in power.
I had the pleasure of appearing on Charlie Kirk’s program a few times over the years and I always found him to be polite, respectful, and genuinely interested in ideas. Even in areas where we might not have agreed, he listened carefully. He was a strong advocate of free speech and he made a career of trying to convince the youth of the value of free speech and dialogue regardless of political differences.
At the young age of 31 years old, he had already founded and ran the largest conservative youth organization in the country and as such he had enormous influence over the future of the conservative movement and even the Republican party. As I discovered during my Republican presidential runs, the youth of this country are truly inspired by the ideas of liberty, peace, and prosperity.
I do not believe we have anything near the real story about the horrific murder of Charlie Kirk last week. The narrative presented by the FBI and other government agencies is wildly contradictory, with an ever-changing plotline that makes little sense.
Some individuals close to Kirk have reported that his foreign policy position was shifting away from the standard neoconservative militarism in favor of a more non-interventionist approach. Tucker Carlson recently recounted that Kirk had even gone personally to the White House to urge President Trump to refuse to take military action against Iran. He was rebuffed by President Trump, Carlson informed us.
Likewise, conservative podcaster Candace Owens, who was a close friend of Charlie Kirk, has stated on her program that Kirk was undergoing a “spiritual crisis” and was turning away from his past embrace of militarism and in favor of America-first non-interventionism, particularly regarding the current unrest in the Middle East.
Was Charlie Kirk murdered – directly or indirectly – by powerful forces who could not tolerate such a shift in views in such an influential leader? We don’t know.
If anything, those seeking to prevent the ideas of peace from breaking out would wish to cover it up, as they have done in so many past political killings. As I recounted in my most recent book, The Surreptitious Coup: Who Stole Western Civilization?, the turbulent 1960s saw several killings of major US figures, including JFK, RFK, and Martin Luther King, who were challenging the status quo and pushing for a shift away from the Cold War confrontationist mentality.
The real assassins of these peace leaders from last century were nihilists who did not believe in truth. They only believed in power – the power that comes from the barrel of a gun. Rather than compete in the marketplace of ideas they preferred to snuff out any challenges and therefore decapitate any possibility that our country could take a different course.
More than sixty years after the murder of President Kennedy, the vast majority of the American people do not believe the official story of how he was killed and why. Truth will eventually break through even when the wall of lies seems impenetrable.
If it is true that Charlie Kirk was preparing to shift his organization toward a foreign policy embraced by our Founders, the killing was even more tragic. But no army – or assassin – can stop an idea whose time has come. That may be his most important legacy. Rest in peace.
There is a new 9-11 documentary entitled CODEX 9-11 by Brad Zerbo, a former skyscraper layout engineer and investigative journalist, that does a superb job of bringing new information to light. I thought I would break down some of the top revelations from the documentary:
In what many believe to be the “dry run” for 9-11, a military war game takes place on June 1-2nd, 2001 which uses remotely piloted drones to simulate an attack by Osama Bin Ladin. The war game features Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) that are remotely piloted by a C-130 in the exercise, similar to what is believed to have happened on 9-11, where the original Boeing 767s were landed and replaced by other remotely piloted aircraft that were crashed into the WTC complex and Pentagon.
In what appears to be a “Funny Ha Ha,” by the perpetrators, the two UAVs in the exercise were numbered “9” and “11.” The “9” UAV was scheduled to be airborne at the exact same time (08:30-09:30am) as the 9-11 planes were allegedly hijacked and crashed into the WTC complex.
The Art Projects that Gave Access to the WTC Complex in the months leading up to 9-11
Gelatin team members on the 91st floor of WTC 1, standing in front of multiple boxes of what appear to be Littlefuse BB18 Fuse Holders that could have been used to wire up explosives in the building.
The documentary breaks down the incredibly suspicious nature of two different “art collectives” being given access to the WTC complex in the year prior to 9-11 where almost every aspect of their “art work” foreshadowed the attacks in another “funny Ha Ha” that will become a recurring theme of other “revelation of the method” mockery by the perpetrators of the attacks.
The first “artist collective” Gelatin/Gelitin, is also the name of a blasting agent used in controlled demolition. Gelatin/Gelitin team members were photographed in their “studio area” on the 91st floor (9-1) of WTC 1 in front of boxes of BB18 fuse holders. Their “art project” was called “The B-Thing” (Bomb Thing?) and their own drawings appear to show one of the towers collapsing. The project, coincidently, provided the excuse to rent a helicopter and survey the WTC complex prior to the event.
The 2nd “Artist Collective,” The E-TEAM (Franziska Lamprecht, Hajoe Moderegger, and Daniel Seiple), coordinated with tenants in the WTC complex to spell out the word “E-TEAM” (Explosive Team?) by using the windows between the 89th and 95th floors of WTC1 on March 29th 2001. Those floors would be, essentially, the exact same floors of the impact zone on the exact same side of the exact same building on 9-11.
While not mentioned in the documentary, in the official photo of the “art work,” the floors on WTC 2 appear blacked out in the area that would be the impact zone for that building.
In addition to the two art collectives having unusual access to the building, there was a suspicious elevator modernization going on where some of the most sophisticated elevators in the world were being modernized by a relatively unknown elevator company, ACE Elevator, which won the contract from Otis Elevator, who had installed the original elevators. Investigators theorize that these three projects, and potentially others, gave the perpetrators access to the building, including the elevator shafts, core columns and service areas within the core of the building, required to wire up the building for the controlled demotion of both towers.
A photo of Akamai CEO Dan Lewin, a “former” Israeli commando of the counter-terrorist unit: Sayeret Matkal, alleged to be the 1st person killed on 9-11 when he was stabbed by Satam al-Suqami, one of the five alleged hijackers of AA Flight 11. In this photo taken the year before, Lewin is sitting in front of what appears to represent two towers prominently wearing a Swatch watch called: The Hijacker.
Dan Lewin was sitting in seat 9B… on Flight 11… 9-11… another funny “Revelation of the Method” Ha Ha by the perpetrators.
In one of the most potent pieces of evidence that I had never heard before, Director Zerbo breaks down the complete impossibility of the numerous cell phone calls from the passengers to their loved ones. In the case of stewardess CeeCee Lyles, whose phone call to her husband was recorded by their answering machine, there is no engine or background noise to indicate that she is on an airborne aircraft.
After telling her husband to “Listen Carefully,” she relates the official story of the hijacking as if under duress.
Right before she hangs up she clearly whispers: “It’s a frame.”
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”
– Voltaire
I have described 9-11 to my kids as a kind of national intelligence test. You either understand the basics of logic, science, physics and history or don’t. You either believe a completely implausible story that violates the laws of physics and doesn’t make any sense, OR you don’t.
The “Official Story” DESTROYED in Less Than 5 Minutes by James Corbett
I know most of my audience understands that the government and media lied to the population about what happened on 9-11. Still, there are many young people who don’t really understand the basics. Here is an executive summary for your kids and grandkids that will bring them up to speed.
Why is it important? With an hour or two of research or watching 1-2 of our recommended documentaries below, anyone can grasp the basic understanding that we have a 100% completely organized crime “government,” including the military and intelligence agencies. This organized crime system is controlling perception through the monopolized media and algorithmic censorship of search and social media to sell the population on false flag terror that was used to steal trillions through the military-industrial complex AND our civil liberties. If you don’t understand these basics, then you aren’t really in the game.
WTC7 was a modern, fireproofed steel-frame building not struck by a plane that collapsed completely and symmetrically into its own footprint at 5:20 PM. The building fell at free-fall speed, defying the laws of physics and displaying all the hallmarks of controlled demolition: Visible squibs, free-fall collapse, molten metal. At 5:00, Fox News, CNN and the BBC began reporting it had already fallen. Whistleblower Barry Jennings reported bombs. Prior knowledge was documented by workers pointing out on video that it would collapse, as well as auditory explosions and symmetrical collapse.
What Really Happened on 9-11: Both towers and WTC 7 were brought down in controlled demolition (WTC 7) & controlled demolition + Directed Energy Weapons (WTC 1&2) organized by US & Israeli intelligence agencies + Pentagon with government & monopoly media cover-up.
One of the best examples of Mockingbird Media, WTC 7 collapses at 5:20. At 5:00, Fox News, CNN, and the BBC begin reporting that the building has already collapsed. In the case of the BBC, their reporter Jane Standley is doing a live shot from NYC with the building still standing visibly behind her as she explains how it was “weakened” by fire.
Etienne Note: WTC 7 appears to have been conventional explosives. In contrast, WTC 1&2 appear to have been thermite/thermate used in the buildings where certain floors were “re-fireproofed” with spray on thermite/thermate to initiate the collapse without visible squibs; conventional explosives were used to begin/accelerate the collapse, and a Directed Energy Weapon (DEW) used to pulverize the remainder of the buildings once they achieved the effect of making it look like a gravity collapse.
By Spencer J. Quinn | The Occidental Observer | January 2, 2026
In short, there is no unique or special case against Nazi barbarism and horrors unless one assumes that it is far more wicked to exterminate Jews than to massacre Gentiles. While this latter value judgment appears to have become rather generally accepted in the Western world since 1945, I am personally still quaint enough to hold it to be reprehensible to exterminate either Jews or Gentiles.” – Harry Elmer Barnes
INTRODUCTION
Anyone still questioning the relevance of World War II revisionism to politics today should realize how often our liberal, globalist elites not only invoke World War II, but also ignore, suppress, or besmirch revisionism. Whenever a mainstream personality invites a revisionist on his program, he gets swiftly rebuked and called a Nazi not only by the Left but also by people presumably on the Right. Recently, Jewish commentator Mark Levin invoked the massacre of German civilians during World War II to justify the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. Clearly, whenever someone questions the authority of our liberal elites, they fire back with World War II. Since Adolf Hitler and the Nazis represent the most extreme form of evil and since globalist liberalism is the ideological opposite of Nazism, any form of oppression and aggression by globalist liberals is justifiable – as long as it’s aimed against so-called “Nazis.” And if you happen to be against liberalism or globalism these days, it’s only a matter of time before you get dubbed a “Nazi.”
Historian Harry Elmer Barnes understood this perfectly over seventy years ago and promoted revisionism in the face of eerily similar oppression and backlash. Nine of his most incisive essays on the topic—written between 1951 and 1962—are collected in Barnes Against the Blackout, which was published by the Institute for Historical Review in 1991. Several important themes run through these essays. First, Barnes wishes to proselytize revisionism, and does so by constantly referencing and summarizing the great American works of revisionism of his day. These include:
Given the suffocating interventionist hysteria of the time, major publishers declined to publish these volumes despite how many of them had been written by prominent, well-respected historians. Either the publishers were ardent interventionists themselves, or they feared backlash from anti-revisionists who wielded great power in America, just as they do today. Except for the Neilson volumes, which were self-published, these works found only two small publishing houses brave enough to publish them… continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.