Retired child and adolescent psychiatrist and American expatriate in New Zealand. In 2002, I made the difficult decision to close my 25-year Seattle practice after 15 years of covert FBI harassment. I describe the unrelenting phone harassment, illegal break-ins and six attempts on my life in my 2010 book The Most Revolutionary Act: Memoir of an American Refugee.
Democrat Rep. Ro Khanna (CA) from the House floor read aloud the names of the six men who are likely incriminated in the Epstein files.
The Justice Department redacted the six names of men likely implicated in the Jeffrey Epstein files.
The DOJ recently gave Congress access to the unredacted Epstein files.
A week later, GOP Rep. Massie and Democrat Khanna said they may read the names of the six men on the House floor.
On Tuesday afternoon, Ro Khanna disclosed their names.
“Rep. Thomas Massie and I forced last night the DOJ to disclose the identities of 6 men,” Khanna said.
“Salvatore Nuara, Zurab Mikeladze, Leonic Leonov, Nicola Caputo, Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem, and Leslie Wexner,” he said.
Last year, President Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law to release all files related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation.
As The Gateway Pundit reported, the House overwhelmingly voted for the bill, with only one Republican defector, Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA), voting against the bill, citing privacy concerns for victims of Epstein.
The Senate later approved the bill by unanimous consent.
Manhattan judge Richard Berman unsealed the documents after President Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
The court documents are related to the 2019 grand jury indictment charging Jeffrey Epstein with sex trafficking offenses and the June 2020 grand jury indictment of Ghislaine Maxwell with numerous offenses related to the trafficking and coercion of minors.
“Since July 6, 2025, there has been extensive public interest in the basis for the Memorandum’s conclusions. While the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation continue to adhere to the conclusions reached in the Memorandum, transparency to the American public is of the utmost importance to this Administration,” they wrote in a court filing reviewed by The Gateway Pundit.
Although President Donald J. Trump has amplified his attacks against Kentucky representative Thomas Massie on the basis of deluded claims that he is a radical, un-American liberal who is hellbent on sabotaging his administration, it is the congressman’s continued crusade to expose the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein that shows the actual threat he poses to Trump.
The latest development in the Epstein Files fallout has clearly proven that the Trump administration’s best attempts to continue to cover up the crimes of Epstein and his accomplices are no match for Massie’s vigilance. After granting members of Congress access to view unredacted versions of the Epstein Files in response to the pressure mounted by Massie, the revelations therein have shown the lengths that the Trump Department of Justice (”DOJ”) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (”FBI”) have taken to continue the Epstein cover-up, going as far as to break federal law in an increasingly futile attempt to keep the truth from the American public.
The enhanced political pressure from Massie and California representative Ro Khanna following their success in passing The Epstein Files Transparency Actresulted in the Trump DOJ deciding to allow members of Congress to view unredacted files beginning on Monday morning. Members of Congress have been given limited access to view unredacted versions of the Epstein Files on computers at DOJ offices, provided they give 24 hours’ notice, though they will not be given access to the physical documents themselves.
The DOJ has limited access to members of Congress alone, excluding any members of their staff. Although members of Congress will be able to take notes on any files they view, the DOJ has prohibited them from bringing any electronic devices into their review sessions. Unredacted documents made accessible to members of Congress are also limited to the trove of over 3 million files that have been released to the public, far short of the full scope of the more than 6 million files the DOJ has said it has in its possession.
Despite being given such limited access, the revelations included in what has been made available have led to a monumental shift that disproves the Trump administration’s narrative that the action it has been taken on the Epstein Files has been made with the aim of providing full transparency. According to representatives Massie and Khanna, they have identified at least six individuals incriminated in Epstein’s crimes, two of whom the FBI has officially labeled as co-conspirators, in the limited time allocated to them on the first day of being able to review the unredacted files whose identities have been obfuscated by the Trump administration despite their apparent complicity. Of those officially acknowledged as a co-conspirator is high-profile Epstein associate and billionaire Les Wexner, whose confirmation as such opens the door to criminal charges being brough against against high-ranking members of the Trump administration.
While Wexner’s role in facilitating the crimes of Epstein has been well-established for years, the revelation that the FBI officially acknowledged him as a co-conspirator by 2019 dismantles the narrative woven by the Trump administration that it has not withheld the identities of any of the notorious pedophile’s accomplices. In September 2025, Patel ostensibly did just that when he testified before Congress regarding Epstein.
During his testimony, Patel was asked “Who did Epstein traffic these young women to?” by Louisiana Senator John N. Kennedy. Patel responded, “Himself.” There is no credible information—none—that he trafficked to other individuals.” The revelation that the FBI had confirmed that Wexner was a co-conspirator of Epstein by 2019 suggests that Patel lied to Congress during his testimony. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, knowingly and willingly making a materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement to Congress is a felony punishable by a prison sentence of up to five years.
In response to Massie exposing the FBI’s documented admission of Wexner as a co-conspirator years before Patel testified to Congress that the agency he helms had no credible information of others involved in Epstein’s criminal network, the DOJ went on the defensive in a feeble attempt to minimize the seriousness of this revelation. US Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche offered an explanation to Massie for the sweeping redactions made by the DOJ in violation of The Epstein Files Transparency Act. Blanche stated that one particular document highlighted by Massie, which had 18 of the 20 names included in it redacted, was so heavily censored because it included “numerous victim names.”
However, the newly released version of the document without the prohibited redactions withheld only 2 of the 20 names, meaning that the DOJ illegally redacted 16 before being forced to publish its revised version.
Despite the brief time Massie was given to review unredacted versions of the Epstein Files released to the public, he was able to uncover the name of another potential co-conspirator implicated in one of the most disturbing documents to be released to the public. In the Epstein Files release EFTA00774231, a redacted sender emailed Epstein on April 24th, 2009, writing, “where are you? are you ok , I loved the torture video.”
Outrage over the gruesome content of the email alluding to a snuff film justifying the claims that the crimes of the Epstein network went far beyond human trafficking and child sexual abuse resounded throughout the public discourse after its revelation. That anger was amplified by the DOJ’s decision to redact the identity of the email’s author, as there was no indication it was the name of one of Epstein’s victims, whom the DOJ would be allowed to conceal in compliance with The Epstein Files Transparency Act. After viewing the unredacted version of the email, Massie announced that the disclosure revealed that Emirati business magnate Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem was the person who sent the email discussing the torture video to Epstein.
Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem, an Emirati businessman who is the chairman and chief executive officer of DP World and the chairman of the Ports, Customs & Free Zone Corporation, is referenced in 336 of the more than 3 million Epstein files currently available to the public. The files concerning Bin Sulayem reveal a years-long relationship between the two. In the Epstein Files release EFTA01155800, Epstein states that his relationship with Bin Sulayem began in 2002 in a letter of recommendation written regarding a property the Emirati businessman sought to lease in New York City.
Numerous other emails between Epstein and Bin Sulayem contain images withheld by the DOJ, exchanges regarding each party’s travel plans, dinner invitations, and numerous correspondences including Boris Nikolic, the biotech venture capitalist and Bill Gates adviser who was named as an executor of Epstein’s estate in his last will and testament amended just before his supposed death on August 10th, 2019. The earliest evidence of Epstein introducing Nikolic to Bin Sulayem is documented in Epstein Files release EFTA00897104, an email sent by Epstein to Bin Sulayem on October 11th, 2010. Epstein copies Nikolic on the email, the body of which reads “Boris, Nov 29 30.” An email written to Epstein at 6:50:20 pm on November 29th, 2010, by Nikolic, disclosed as Epstein Files release EFTA02415345, confirms that he and Bin Sulayem met on the date referenced in the October 2010 email.
Files documenting the notorious pedophile’s close relationship with Bin Sulayem also reveal communication with other members of Epstein’s innermost circle throughout their near decades-long relationship. In a June 27th, 2011 email exchange with a respondent named “Sarah K.,” presumably Sarah Kellen—who was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in Epstein’s 2008 non-prosecution agreement tendered by the former Trump Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta during his tenure as the US Attorney for the Southern District of Florida under the Bush administration—Bin Sulayem coordinates the receipt of a package sent to him from Epstein. Bin Sulayem also held similar discussions when coordinating visits with and receiving shipments from Epstein with another unindicted co-conspirator named in the non-prosecution agreement, Lesley Groff.
Bin Sulayem’s ingratiation into Epstein’s network also confirms that Epstein introduced him to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. This is confirmed in the Epstein Files release EFTA02600899, in which Bin Sulayem invites Barak to visit him for dinner to discuss business opportunities during his stay in Tel Aviv at a penthouse located at 1 Rothschild Boulevard.
In iMessages with Epstein on August 15th, 2015, Bin Sulayem coordinates a visit during a trip to New Mexico, where Epstein’s infamous Zorro Ranch, the site where he was alleged to have run a black market baby farm, was located. The Emirati business magnate admits he was traveling with his wife, three children, and their nanny when coordinating his visit with Epstein before sending him links to various pornographic websites. Epstein’s responses are sparse, solely confirming that he has sent a car to transport Bin Sulayem to meet with him. Bin Sulayem also refers to an email he sent Epstein from a private email address, which is redacted by the DOJ.
As in the case of other file redactions, US Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche responded to Massie’s revelation that Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem was the sender of the torture video email to Epstein by defending the DOJ’s decision to redact it. Blanche stated the redaction complied with The Epstein Files Transparency Act, as it was made due to the message only including Bin Sulayem’s email address, and as personally identifiable information, that information was required to be withheld. However, that explanation proved to be a Pyrrhic victory against Massie, as it also served as a tacit admission that Bin Sulayem was indeed the author of the email discussing the torture video with Epstein.
Reactions from other members of Congress who were able to review unredacted versions of the Epstein Files on Monday signify the seismic shift taking place against the Trump administration. Colorado Republican congressional representative Lauren Boebert spoke with a reporter when leaving the DOJ offices after viewing the unredacted Epstein files.
Boebert, who has been a strong ally of Trump’s during her tenure in Congress, appeared visibly angry during the interview. She expressed her belief that the Trump DOJ has knowingly redacted the names of accomplices of Epstein in violation of The Epstein Files Transparency Act.
“I think that there are folks who are definitely implicated and co-conspirators, and, you know, I don’t think everyone there that was talking about underage girls being trafficked are victims.”
When asked a follow-up question regarding the potential of clemency for convicted Epstein co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell, Boebert’s frustration showed as she vociferously rejected the premise, stating, “I think Ghislaine Maxwell should get more time, and she should definitely be in a harsher prison.” It’s absolutely disgusting.”
In November, President Trump attempted to persuade Representative Boebert to remove her name from the discharge petition that ultimately led to the passage of The Epstein Files Transparency Act. Trump similarly took that tactic against other key allies of his in Congress, including Representative Nancy Mace of South Carolina and then-Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia. That futile effort to continue to insulate the co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein resulted in an irreconcilable schism with Greene, which led to her resignation from Congress. Following the announcement of her resignation, Greene revealed that Trump attempted to persuade her to vote against releasing the Epstein Files because their disclosure would harm friends of the president who would be implicated in them.
The continued effort to protect the co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein has only further undermined President Trump’s legitimacy, as revelations of the extent of the cover-up he continues to perpetrate not only risks alienating crucial political allies but also, in doing so, furthers political momentum gaining traction against the president that could lead to action taken against key administration officials such as the impeachment of Attorney General Pam Bondi and potential criminal charges being brought against FBI Director Kash Patel. With its political foundation being shaken to its core in the fallout from how it has handled the release of the Epstein Files, it appears that it is only a matter of time before the house of cards that the Trump administration has turned itself into because of its unyielding commitment to protecting the pedophile elite comes crashing down.
Nirvana lead singer Kurt Cobain was the victim of homicide and did not kill himself, according to media reports citing a new investigation.
The grunge superstar died on April 5, 1994, aged 27, in his Seattle home. The official police probe concluded that Cobain had died of a shotgun wound to the head and ruled his death a suicide.
The murder conclusion follows a review of autopsy findings and crime scene materials by a team of independent forensic scientists, launched and financed by Nirvana fan Michelle Wilkins, the leader of the “Who Killed Kurt?” research group.
The evidence suggests that Cobain, who had struggled with a drug addiction, was incapacitated by a heroin overdose before being shot and the scene staged, Wilkins told the Daily Mail on Tuesday. Autopsy findings showed brain and liver necrosis consistent with oxygen deprivation from overdose, she said.
“The necrosis of the brain and liver happens in an overdose,” Wilkins said. “It doesn’t happen in a shotgun death.”
The team noted that Cobain’s left hand, wrapped around the gun’s barrel, was clean of blood, and blood staining on his shirt hem suggested that his body may have been moved. Investigators also concluded that the shotgun would not eject a shell with his hand on the forward barrel, yet a spent shell lay opposite the expected ejection direction.
The Sun also cited an alleged eyewitness who claimed he saw Cobain “being manhandled by three men into the greenhouse” before hearing a gunshot half an hour later.
The team has called on Seattle authorities to change Cobain’s cause of death to “undetermined” and reopen the investigation.
Public challenges to the suicide ruling emerged within days of Cobain’s death. Critics claim the rock star could not have injected the lethal heroin doze and then shot himself.
Cobain was survived by his wife, musician Courtney Love, and their daughter, Frances Bean, who was 20 months old at the time.
As Cobain died without a will, his estate passed in full to Love and the child. At the time of his death, the estate was valued at approximately $50 million, comprising songwriting royalties, publishing rights, and personal assets, equivalent to about $109 million in today’s money.
I have been working in the field of technology for 30 years. I used to be a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer, and began putting up my own websites in the late 1990s. I also did computer programming for years in Saudi Arabia in the 1990s, developing educational software that today would be considered “AI”, and I was even published in academic journals within my field at that time.
I was on the Internet before Google was, and watched Google grow into a worldwide dominant software company based on intelligence, as they built the best search engine in the world.
When they combined that search technology with a new email program called Gmail, it became the best email program in the world, mainly based on its search capabilities, but also its ease of use.
Google was smart to give it away for free, and thereby become the most used email program in the world.
But nothing is ever truly “free” when it comes to Big Tech. They use your data to study market trends and develop products and advertising based on what you reveal to them using their “free” programs.
Most of Google’s icons for their products are Freemason symbols, as you can see from the featured image of this article.
Google is also a major military contractor for the U.S., and their products have reportedly been used by the Zionist State of Israel in their attacks on Palestinians, and Iranian and Lebanese leaders.
Today, Gmail is used by Google to train their industry-leading AI program, Gemini. Most people who use Google do not even know this, or if they know, they don’t care. One has to allegedly manually turn it off, but some have found that even when turned off, it is accessing their emails.
Don’t allow Gemini AI access to your Gmail!
Gmail LLM is here: whether you want it or not, Gemini AI can use your Google emails to craft texts.
A Reddit user shared their conversation with the Gemini AI chatbot and was quite shocked to learn that the data used came from their Gmail emails, despite never having allowed access for the Large Language Model (LLM).
Gemini was quick to explain that they would not have access to private emails in Gmail, but the conversation proved otherwise…
The user on Reddit asked a very simple question: “Can you tell something about me?”
The answer came at quite a surprise as Gemini was obviously accessing this person’s Gmail email account for crafting the answer. The Large Language Model even mentioned email lists the person subscribed to on Gmail and gave examples of emails from their Gmail account saying “Gmail Items considered for this response”…
The conversation then went on with the person asking Gemini LLM how to “remove access to my Gmail email for you? I don’t like you [Gemini] having access”.
The chat bot gave a lengthy answer about how to remove access via the Google Account permissions for third-party apps, but Gemini AI was not even listed there. Instead, the user should have simply gone to Settings > Extensions > Disable “Google Workspace” – as otherwise it seems impossible to stop Gemini from using Gmail information for AI purposes.
The user went on to complain: “You’re not in ‘Third-party apps with account access’, but you still have access to my email. You’ve just listed them earlier.”
Yet again, Gemini was quick to deny using Gmail info for AI, or, if at all the LLM would only have “Limited Demo Access” which granted Gemini “temporary access to a small snippet of your email content to understand the context of your questions”. (Full article.)
The fact that Google shares data from people’s free Gmail accounts with the U.S. Government has been widely reported.
One of the most recent reports came from the Washington Post (via MSN) last week about how Homeland Security was targeting Americans who opposed Trump’s immigration policies, based on what they wrote in their Gmail emails.
Homeland Security is targeting Americans with this secretive legal weapon
Excerpts:
He had decided that the America he believed in would not make it if people like him didn’t speak up, so on a cool, rainy morning in the suburbs of Philadelphia, Jon, 67 and recently retired, marched up to his study and began to type.
He had just read about the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s case against an Afghan it was trying to deport. The immigrant, identified in The Washington Post’s Oct. 30 investigation as H, had begged federal officials to reconsider, telling them the Taliban would kill him if he was returned to Afghanistan.
“Unconscionable,” Jon thought as he found an email address online for the lead prosecutor, Joseph Dernbach, who was named in the story. Peering through metal-rimmed glasses, Jon opened Gmail on his computer monitor.
“Mr. Dernbach, don’t play Russian roulette with H’s life,” he wrote.
“Err on the side of caution. There’s a reason the US government along with many other governments don’t recognise the Taliban. Apply principles of common sense and decency.”
That was it. In five minutes, Jon said, he finished the note, signed his first and last name, pressed send and hoped his plea would make a difference.
Five hours and one minute later, Jon was watching TV with his wife when an email popped up in his inbox. He noticed it on his phone.
“Google,” the message read,
“has received legal process from a Law Enforcement authority compelling the release of information related to your Google Account.”
Listed below was the type of legal process: “subpoena.” And below that, the authority: “Department of Homeland Security.”
That’s how it began. Soon would come a knock at the door by men with badges and, for Jon, the relentless feeling of being surveilled in a country where he never imagined he would be.
Google hadn’t provided him a copy of the subpoena, but it wasn’t the conventional sort. Homeland Security had come after him with what’s known as an administrative subpoena, a powerful legal tool that, unlike the ones people are most familiar with, federal agencies can issue without an order from a judge or grand jury.
Though the U.S. government had been accused under previous administrations of overstepping laws and guidelines that restrict the subpoenas’ use, privacy and civil rights groups say that, under President Donald Trump, Homeland Security has weaponized the tool to strangle free speech.
For many Americans, the anonymous ICE officer, masked and armed, represents Homeland Security’s most intimidating instrument, but the agency often targets people in a far more secretive way.
Homeland Security is not required to share how many administrative subpoenas it issues each year, but tech experts and former agency staff estimate it’s well into the thousands, if not tens of thousands.
Because the legal demands are not subject to independent review, they can take just minutes to write up and, former staff say, officials throughout the agency, even in mid-level roles, have been given the authority to approve them. (Full article.)
I stopped corresponding with people on Gmail several years ago, as I attempted to explain to them the dangers and privacy issues with using the “free” Google email program.
As a result, I have lost email contact with family members, business associates, and fellow independent journalists over their refusal to not use Gmail to email with me.
Late last year, for example, my own mother purchased a new smartphone, and advised me as to what her new email address was, which was a Gmail email address.
I tried to explain to her that I do not email people on Gmail, and asked her not to take it personally, as it has been my policy for years. I suggested an alternative free secure email program.
She replied that she had already given everyone her new email address, and that she was not changing it. Well for most of my life in knowing my mother, we never had email until about 20 years ago, and I simply sent her physical letters through the postal system, so that is now how I need to communicate with her again.
Last week I was looking for an attorney in a legal matter I am involved in, and I was recommended an attorney from one of my former attorneys I have used.
But this attorney used a Gmail email, and I told him that no attorney should be using Gmail, as it automatically broke the attorney – client privilege. He was sympathetic to my “opinion,” but he made it clear that he was not going to change his email, and preferred not having me as a client as a result.
I get it. Google makes great products. And when your life is so dependent upon them, it takes a fair bit of work to get rid of them, and the products that are more secure, and even free, are just not as good as Gmail.
For most people who refuse to switch off of Gmail, it is primarily laziness and ignorance of the technology.
I have had the same issues with authors on Substack, a few times now. I do not maintain an account on Substack, and therefore never login, because Substack is run and owned by pretty much the same venture capitalists that fund and control X, and many other social media companies who track everyone. And their privacy policy, at least the last time I checked, is one of the worst ones on the Internet.
I issued a warning about Substack back in 2022:
Protecting Your Privacy Should be a High Priority in 2023 – Beware of Substack!
One can still read Substack articles and follow certain Substack pages without logging in and creating an account, by using an RSS feed.
The address would look like this: https://%5Bname%5D.substack.com/feed – Then you can read it through your RSS feed program. I use Thunderbird, and there is an article about it here:
But if you are not logged into Substack, then you cannot comment, and you also cannot support authors who provide paid subscriptions.
I have tried to contact certain publishers on Substack whose content I use, to find out if I can support them some other way outside of Substack. A couple of times that I have tried to do this, the authors replied with a Gmail email account. When I ask them for a non-Gmail account, I usually never hear from them again.
This is concerning, because like we saw during Trump’s first Administration, there were lots of Qanon accounts that were probably setup by the CIA or other intelligence agencies, or even Big Tech themselves.
Australian authorities were fully aware that inviting Israel’s president for a visit was going to ignite unrest and furious opposition. They invited him anyway, and sent in the police to assault the protesters.
I saw a video of two cops pinning a kid in a keffiyeh face down on the ground and proceeding to punch him over and over again long after he’d been subdued.
I saw another video of police repeatedly punching a middle-aged man who was holding his hands in the air until he fell to the ground.
I saw another video of police repeatedly pepper spraying a demonstrator directly in the face as he was visibly complying with their demands to move and providing no resistance whatsoever.
I saw another video of police manhandling Muslim men who were literally on their knees praying, presenting no possible threat of any kind.
That’s right kids, welcome to Australia, where the government invites the head of a genocidal apartheid state for a happy cuddle party and then beats the shit out of anyone who opposes this.
It’s a testament to the courage and vitality of the pro-Palestine movement in Australia that people keep showing up to anti-genocide protests even as authorities do everything they can to create a chilling effect on them.
After all, this happens as the state of Queensland moves to make it illegal to utter the pro-Palestine phrases “from the river to the sea” or “globalise the intifada”, with violations punishable by two years in prison. This is easily the single most bat shit insane speech suppression legislation in Australian history, and that’s an extremely high bar.
To be clear, not one person sincerely believes that “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is a genocidal or antisemitic statement. This is one of those many, many instances in which Israel supporters are pretending to believe something they do not actually believe in order to further outlaw criticism of Israel.
They’re trying to make it so that nobody feels comfortable opposing Israel’s abuses without first consulting with a lawyer about what exactly they are legally permitted to say in that moment, thereby throwing a chilling effect on pro-Palestine activism throughout the nation.
This comes weeks after the Australian government passed frightening new “hate speech” laws in the name of “combatting antisemitism” which will make it much easier to designate activist groups as “hate groups”. Australian officials have conspicuously refused to say that the new laws will not be used to ban groups for speech that is critical of Israel, which tells you all you need to know about the real intentions at work here.
This also comes as the state of New South Wales cracks down on protests with extreme aggression, banning protests in certain areas and seeking to outlaw the use of the phrase “globalise the intifada” to appease Australia’s obscenely powerful Israel lobby. Premier Chris Minns is presently defending the actions of the police he sent in to crack skulls at the Herzog protests on Monday.
Just two months ago a prominent member of the Australian Israel lobby publicly announced that he wants a total ban on pro-Palestine protests throughout the nation, and said it is criticism of Israel that is the problem, not just hatred toward Jews. Joel Burnie, Executive Manager of the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC), explicitly said that what he wants is “No more protests! No more protests!” in Australia.
“I for one as a Jewish leader will no long talk about antisemitism in isolation from Israel, because it’s the rhetoric and language on Israel that motivates the people to come and kill us,” Burnie said during a video conference, later adding that “ language on Israel invading all of our social spaces in Australia have made this country a very unsafe space and place for Jews.”
Increment by increment, Joel Burnie and his ilk have been getting their wish ever since. Australian civil rights are indeed being disintegrated to protect the information interests of a genocidal apartheid state.
“Australia is now the only democratic nation in the world without a national bill of rights. Some comprehensive form of legal protection for basic rights is otherwise seen as an essential check and balance in democratic governance around the world. Indeed, I can find no example of a democratic nation that has gained a new Constitution or legal system in recent decades that has not included some form of a bill of rights, nor am I aware of any such nation that has done away with a bill of rights once it has been put in place.”
This system plainly does not work. Australians desperately need speech protections enshrined in our Constitution, because we cannot trust our leaders to resist efforts to silence us whenever our speech becomes inconvenient to powerful people and influential lobbying groups.
For decades, Americans have been assured that two of the world’s most controversial chemicals are “safe in small amounts.” One is
Yet almost no one has asked the most important question: what happens when these two chemicals meet?
It turns out they form a partnership that neither regulators nor the public fully understand. Once they come into contact with a common third player, aluminum, the trio can create a complex molecule that alters how the body performs some of its most fundamental biochemical tasks.
1. Two Everyday Chemicals With Hidden Interactions
Fluoride is a highly reactive halogen. The form added to drinking water (as hydrofluorosilicic acid or sodium fluoride) is industrially derived rather than mined from natural mineral sources.
Glyphosate is a synthetic amino acid derivative designed to kill plants by disrupting a pathway that humans supposedly “do not have.” But our gut microbes do depend on that pathway, and so do our mitochondria through similar enzymes.
Each chemical on its own is already contentious. But when fluoride and glyphosate interact with aluminum, something new emerges: a ternary complex that behaves like a phosphate imposter in the body.
2. The Chemistry Simplified
In the presence of aluminum (Al³⁺), fluoride (F⁻) and glyphosate bind tightly to form a stable molecular structure known as an Al–F–Glyphosate complex. This can occur in acidic soils, water pipes, or inside living tissue.
Biochemically, this complex mimics phosphate, a fundamental molecule used in energy transfer (ATP), DNA, and numerous cellular signaling processes. The body cannot easily distinguish between true phosphate and this imitation.
When that happens, enzymes responsible for energy metabolism, hormone regulation, and neuronal activity can become confused. They may remain permanently switched “on” or “off,” misfiring the delicate systems that keep metabolism and brain function stable.
3. Why This Matters Biologically
When these complexes form, they are small enough and neutrally charged enough to cross protective membranes including the blood–brain barrier. Their phosphate-like geometry allows them to enter brain tissue, thyroid cells, and kidneys through natural phosphate transport channels.
The result can include:
Energy metabolism fatigue through disruption of ATP synthesis
Neurological stress from interference with nerve signaling enzymes
Thyroid suppression, because fluoride and glyphosate both block iodine uptake
Reduced detoxification capacity as the kidneys struggle to excrete the complex
In laboratory systems, aluminum–fluoride molecules are already known to mimic phosphate so precisely that scientists use them experimentally to “freeze” enzymes in active states. Imagine that happening not just in a Petri dish, but inside living human cells.
4. The Environmental Equation
This chemical combination is not exotic. It appears wherever three modern conditions overlap:
Widespread glyphosate application on crops and lawns
Municipal water fluoridation
The presence of aluminum, from cookware, processed food additives, geoengineering, or the soil itself in acidic regions
These elements coexist in most industrialized settings.
Across the United States, approximately 73 to 74 percent of residents served by community water systems (over 200 million people) drink fluoridated water each day.
Kentucky, West Virginia, Illinois, and Georgia maintain fluoridation rates above 95 percent.
Hawaii, Oregon, Utah, and much of Florida remain largely unfluoridated.
In May 2025, the State of Florida formally banned community-water fluoridation, joining Utah in rejecting the practice after state‑level health reviews cited safety uncertainties and escalating infrastructure costs.
5. The Human Cost of Chemical Complacency
Our regulatory framework still evaluates each compound in isolation. Pesticide agencies examine glyphosate. Dental-health agencies examine fluoride. Environmental departments handle aluminum. No one studies what happens when all three combine in the bloodstream of a child.
This siloed approach blinds policymakers to chemical synergy which is the way molecules can amplify each other’s effects even at very low levels. The emerging evidence on Al–F–Glyphosate complexes suggests that chronic low-dose exposure may produce subtle, but widespread biological stress, especially in infants, developing children, and those with impaired renal filtration.
6. Reducing Exposure Naturally
While we wait for regulators to catch up with reality, individuals can take protective steps to safeguard their families:
Filter your water thoroughly. Reverse osmosis or activated‑alumina systems remove fluoride and aluminum together.
Choose food consciously. Glyphosate residues cluster in non‑organic grains, legumes, and oats; select certified organic regenerative food when possible.
Rebuild mineral balance. Adequate calcium and magnesium help keep fluoride from binding to aluminum or displacing essential ions.
Strengthen antioxidant defenses. Nutrients such as vitamin C, selenium, and plant compounds like turmeric and moringa counter oxidative stress.
7. A Broader Perspective
The story of fluoride and glyphosate is about more than chemistry. It reflects a mindset that treats human biology as a controlled experiment and assumes small exposures are harmless. But the data suggest that “safe in isolation” does not equal “safe in combination.”
Public health advances will depend on reframing how we assess environmental mixtures. A truly protective policy must look at interactions, not averages.
Ghislaine Maxwell, the accomplice of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, has offered to provide information reportedly exonerating US President Donald Trump and former President Bill Clinton in exchange for a grant of clemency.
The ex-girlfriend of the convicted pedophile is currently serving 20 years in jail for multiple offenses, including child sex trafficking. Maxwell has come under new scrutiny as lawmakers try to investigate how Epstein, a well-connected financier, was able to sexually abuse underage girls for years.
Both Trump and Clinton are pictured and mentioned in the Epstein files, but they deny any wrongdoing.
Maxwell refused to answer questions before the US House Oversight Committee on Monday. During a virtual appearance from prison in Texas, she invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Maxwell’s lawyer, David Oscar Markus, stated that she would provide testimony if granted clemency.
”Both President Trump and President Clinton are innocent of any wrongdoing. Ms. Maxwell alone can explain why,” the attorney wrote on X.
Clinton and his wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, are set to sit for depositions later this month.
House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer discouraged the president from granting clemency to Maxwell.
Maxwell is the only person convicted of crimes related to Epstein, despite numerous high-profile figures from politics and finance having been implicated in the scandal.
Critics have suggested she received favorable treatment when she was transferred to a different federal prison after a 2025 interview with the deputy attorney general, alleging she may have been in line for a potential pardon.
The White House has denied clemency is under consideration. When asked about a potential pardon in November, Trump suggested he had not thought about it.
Members of Congress began reviewing unredacted versions of the Epstein files on Monday. Following the review, Representatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna stated they had found at least six names inappropriately redacted from the public versions, suggesting they might reveal the names from the House floor.
The latest batch of documents released by the DOJ from the Epstein Estate has triggered political fallout in several countries, including the UK, where Prime Minister Keir Starmer is under pressure to resign due to his appointment of former UK envoy Peter Mandelson, who had links to Epstein.
The Ars Goetia describes this economy. The Picatrix describes it. The Babylonian Maqlû incantation texts describe it. The mechanism never changes. Trauma opens a door. Innocence is the key. Break a child and something comes through. And that something delivers.
The Wise Wolf
Somewhere between the third and fourth million pages of the Epstein files, you stop seeing a crime and start seeing a church…
The mainstream press is sorting the dump for celebrity gossip. The alternative media is counting flight logs. The politicians are pointing across the aisle like the aisle isn’t part of the building. And everybody, every last one of them, is jamming this thing into a box marked “sex trafficking” because that box is familiar and safe and it implies the system still works and the FBI is going to ride in on a white horse and fix it.
The files don’t describe a criminal enterprise.
Criminals don’t build temples.
Criminals don’t name bank accounts after Canaanite gods.
Criminals don’t develop a clinical staging system for the spiritual effects of raping a child.
Criminals want money. They want power. They steal and they lie and they kill for it the way humans always have, and none of that requires dedicated ritual infrastructure on a private island.
What the Epstein files describe is something that uses crime the way a church uses a collection plate. The crime funds the operation. The operation is worship.
You can ignore the temple. You can ignore the twin pillars matching Jachin and Boaz from Solomon’s Temple. You can ignore the bank account literally named Baal. You can ignore the taxonomy of child destruction organized around “unlocking supernatural abilities.” You can ignore that every single one of these elements maps onto a system of religious practice documented in Scripture, in archaeology, and in the historical record for three thousand years.
[…]
Witchcraft, in America, means crystals. It means teenage girls on TikTok burning sage and reading tarot. It means Stevie Nicks and Harry Potter and a pentagram on a Hot Topic t-shirt. Somewhere along the line the most dangerous practice in human history got turned into an aesthetic, and nobody thought that was suspicious. Nobody asked who benefits from making the real thing look like a joke.
The Hebrew word is keshaphim. A mekasheph is someone who has entered a transactional relationship with an entity the text calls a shed, a destroyer, a demonic intelligence with will and appetite. The transaction is simple. You feed it what it wants. It gives you what you want. Power. Wealth. Protection. Influence. And the currency it accepts, the only currency it has ever accepted in any culture or any century where this practice surfaces, is the suffering of children. The younger the better. The more innocent the better. Not poetry. Terms of the deal.
The Epstein files contain correspondence about a “classic stage three.” Their term. A young girl whose sexual abuse has caused her to develop “special and supernatural abilities.” Not a casual mention. A staging system. A clinical taxonomy. A methodical framework for the progressive destruction of children built on the premise that shattering a child’s mind opens access to something beyond the material world.
That is not sex trafficking. That is keshaphim. That is the thing described in Exodus, Deuteronomy, Leviticus, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and Psalms, translated as “sorcery” in your English Bible and sanded down by centuries of church politics until it sounded like a fairy tale instead of a federal crime in progress.
The Oldest Franchise on Earth
The crime ring is new. The religion is old enough to have its own fossils.
Archaeologists have pulled thousands of urns from the tophets at Carthage. Each urn holds the cremated bones of a child sacrificed to Baal. Carbon dated. Cataloged. Published in peer-reviewed journals that nobody reads because the implications are too ugly for academic careers. These weren’t isolated atrocities. They were the output of an organized religious system with its own priesthood, its own temple architecture, its own calendar of holy days dedicated to feeding children into the fire.
The Hebrew word toph means drum. They beat drums during the sacrifice. Loud enough to cover the screaming.
The Israelite prophets weren’t screaming about Baal worship because it was exotic. They were screaming because it had eaten its way into the palace. Kings and judges and priests of God’s own nation had started buying Baal’s deal because Baal’s deal was simpler. You hand over a child. You get what you want. No commandments. No moral law. No accountability. Just commerce. A god you could do business with.
These people had watched seas part. They had watched fire fall from heaven. And they went back to Baal anyway, the same way a junkie goes back to the needle, because whatever Baal delivered was immediate and tangible and it didn’t ask you to be good first.
That religion never stopped. The entities on the other end of the deal didn’t die when Carthage burned or when Rome baptized itself or when cathedrals went up across Europe. They changed management. Mystery cults carried it through Greece and Rome. Gnostic sects smuggled it into the Christian era. Hermetic lodges kept it alive through the Renaissance under enough layers of symbolism to survive the Inquisition. Freemasonry built its pillars, those same twin pillars, into the architecture of Western governments. And when the CIA started researching trauma-based mind control and calling it MKULTRA, they weren’t inventing anything. They were translating a three-thousand-year-old liturgy into the language of psychiatry.
Jeffrey Epstein built a temple with those twin pillars on an island where children were destroyed and named his bank account after the same god those kids in Carthage were burned for. He is not an aberration. He is a franchise operator.
The Part Nobody Wants to Think About
Forget God for a second. Forget the Bible. Just look at the money.
I spent years working finance for billionaires. The one thing those people never do is waste capital. Every dollar deployed, every risk assumed, gets measured against expected return with the kind of precision that would make a NASA engineer nervous. These are the most efficient resource allocators the human race has ever produced.
These same people spent billions building and maintaining a global network of ritual child abuse with dedicated architectural infrastructure and multi-generational backing from the intelligence agencies of multiple nations. For decades.
That’s billions with a B. Exposed to catastrophic legal risk, reputational annihilation, and prison. For decades. By people who restructure entire corporations over a fraction of a percent on a quarterly report.
They didn’t build temples for fun. They didn’t classify stages of child trauma as an intellectual hobby. They didn’t name bank accounts after Baal as a gag. The most calculating people alive exposed themselves to the worst possible consequences over and over again for the same reason any rational actor takes on extreme risk: the return justified it.
Something answers when they call. Something delivers. And the return on investment is good enough that the smartest money on the planet keeps writing the check.
You tell me which conclusion is crazier.
What’s Actually Sitting in the Oval Office
The system is the religion. The religion is the system. That network connecting heads of state to intelligence agencies to Ivy League endowments to tech empires to a child sacrifice operation on a private island is not a malfunction in Western civilization. It’s a feature.
And it doesn’t belong to either party. That’s the whole trick.
Clinton flew on the plane. Trump was in the emails. The Bushes are in the files. Gates is in the files. Intelligence connections span every administration since the Cold War regardless of which colored jersey held the White House. If you’re reading this and your first instinct is to sort these names into “my team” and “their team,” you are doing the religion’s work for it. You are fighting with the other half of the country about which puppet is dirtier instead of looking up at the hand working both of them.
Red versus blue is not politics. It’s a containment system. Create two teams. Fund both. Let the congregation tear itself apart arguing over which team is righteous while the priesthood operates untouched behind the curtain. It’s the drums in the valley of Topheth, updated for cable news and Twitter, beating loud enough that nobody can hear the children under the noise.
Every four years they let you pick which branch of the operation runs the front office. Every four years you tell yourself this time is different. Every four years the same agencies protect the same networks and the same children vanish and the same entities get fed. Both sides point across the aisle because looking at the thing sitting above both aisles would break them.
Six million pages of federal documentation. Bipartisan legislation mandating their release. An active DOJ investigation. A bank account named after the god. A temple built to the god’s specifications. A science of child destruction documented in clinical language by people who knew exactly what they were doing.
The question is not whether they committed crimes. The question is whether the crimes were the point or the sacrament. Whether the trafficking was the business or the offering. Whether we are looking at a criminal ring or the clergy of the oldest religion on earth, one that has never had a reformation, never had a schism, never gone a single century without practicing, because the things it serves won’t allow it.
If the ruling class is a priesthood, the policies aren’t policies. They’re rituals. The wars aren’t wars. They’re offerings. The governance isn’t governance. It’s liturgy. And you’re not a citizen. You are an unwitting congregant in a church you never joined, funding sacraments you can’t see, inside walls so old they look like the natural shape of the world to everyone born inside them.
They Believe the Devil Is Going to Win
These people are not pretending. They believe in the entities they serve with more operational conviction than most Christians bring to a Sunday morning. They demonstrate that belief the way belief has always been demonstrated: through sacrifice, through infrastructure, through discipline, through the willingness to do things so terrible that normal people can’t metabolize the information even when the federal government hands it to them in a six-million-page PDF.
Their faith works. It shapes how they allocate capital, how they structure institutions, how they raise their children, how they pick their successors. It is the most committed religious practice on the planet and it has been running without interruption since before Abraham left Ur.
Hunhan ibn Izhaq (809-873 AD), an Arab Nestorian Christian, was the Baghdad House of Wisdom’s most prolific translator of Greek as well as personal physician to caliph al Ma’mun. In the latter role, he was imprisoned for a year for refusing to prepare a poison to kill one of Ma’mun’s enemies.
Following his release, al-Ma’mun appointed him as the House of Wisdom’s head of translation. It’s thanks to him that Europe gained access to Galen (a Greek physician 129-216 AD), Euclid, Hippocrates, Plato and other Greek philosophers and scientists whose work inspired the European renaissance. Ibn Izhak also translated (into Arabic) the entire Greek version of the Old Testament.
As a representative of the world’s largest and wealthiest empire in history (to that date), Ibn Izhak paid House of Wisdom translators the book’s weight in gold for each text they translated. It’s also under his guidance, al-Ma’mun contacted the Persian emir and the Byzantine emperor, requesting a copy of every book in their libraries. Amazingly they complied.
Muslim Arab philosopher, mathematician and physician al-Kindi was the House of Wisdom’s most senior scholar and sometimes translator during the ninth century. One of his projects was to apply Aristotle’s and Plato’s emphasis on logic and reasoning. to support the concept of monotheism. Neither Al Ma-Mun nor al-Kindi aw any conflict between the Islamic faith and logic, though this view would change with the advent of Islamic fundamentalism.
Both ibn Izhak and al-Kindi set a new standard for translation that, instead of translating word for word, emphasized the overall context of the translated text. The two scholars checked and corrected each other’s translations.
The author of 230 original works, al-Kindi was the first philosopher in history to do a detailed outline of all the branches of science
His Decrypting Encrypted Correspondence was the most comprehensive and advanced treatise on code breaking until World War II. He primarily used frequency analysis of letters and combinations of letters to decipher codes.
The U.S. houses 47% of global BSL-3 facilities — and 91.6% of countries operating them lack dual-use research oversight. As public discussion around biolabs intensifies following law enforcement’s recent raid of an illicit biolab in Las Vegas, now is a good time to become informed.
Unauthorized “basement biolabs” are undeniably dangerous. But risk is not limited to rogue operators. Government-run and NGO-run high-containment laboratories also handle some of the world’s most dangerous pathogens — and most operate within poorly enforced oversight frameworks.
A newly published global mapping study in the Journal of Public Health provides the most comprehensive count to date of Biosafety Level 3 (BSL-3) and Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4) laboratories worldwide. The numbers are striking — not just for scale, but for the massive oversight gaps.
The Global Count
3,625 total high-containment labs identified
3,515 BSL-3 laboratories
110 BSL-4 laboratories
149 countries have at least one BSL-3 lab
34 countries have at least one BSL-4 lab
This exceeds prior WHO and Global Biolabs estimates, reflecting rapid expansion and incomplete global tracking systems.
BSL-3 Labs
47.1% of all BSL-3 labs are in the United States
17.2% are in the United Kingdom
.
Together, the US + UK account for nearly two-thirds of all BSL-3 facilities globally. Of the 3,515 BSL-3 labs identified, detailed geolocation and pathogen information was publicly available for only 955 laboratories (~27%). That means roughly 2,500+ labs lack publicly accessible detailed location/pathogen data.
.
.
BSL-4 Labs (Highest Containment)
17 BSL-4 labs in the United States (highest globally)
13 BSL-4 labs in the United Kingdom
17 countries have only one BSL-4 lab
.Oversight Failure
This is where the findings become most concerning.
Among countries with at least one BSL-3 laboratory, 91.6% (131 of 143 countries) have no guidelines or oversight for dual-use research of concern (DURC). Only 12 countries (8.39%) report having DURC-related training or formal guidelines.
Dual-use research refers to experiments conducted for legitimate scientific purposes that could also be misused to enhance the danger or functionality of pathogens for nefarious purposes.
Documented Lab Leaks
The study cites prior data documenting 309 laboratory-acquired infections involving 51 different pathogens between 2000 and 2021, including cases that resulted in fatalities.
Yet despite these incidents, there is no comprehensive global registry of high-containment labs, no standardized international oversight mechanism, and no mandatory global reporting framework for dual-use research of concern (DURC) .
Key Takeaways
3,625 high-containment labs worldwide
Nearly half of BSL-3 labs in the US alone
>90% of countries with BSL-3 labs lack dual-use oversight
Only ~27% of BSL-3 labs have publicly available detailed geolocation data
No unified global registry exists
The infrastructure handling some of the world’s most dangerous pathogens is expanding — while global oversight remains fragmented, inconsistent, and in many regions virtually absent.
There must be an immediate and complete global moratorium on gain-of-function research, along with comprehensive investigations into the growing number of U.S. and international biolabs—including their funders—that may be conducting bioweapon research, to prevent another man-made pandemic: see this.
The Most Revolutionary Act 