I will probably stop commenting the Epstein Files. They are simply too much. That is: too much to cover. But yes, I´m still monitoring the situation.
We are paying attention.
The blog to end all blogs. Reviews and comments about all and everything. This blog is NOT affiliated with YouTube, Wikipedia, Microsoft Bing, Gemini, ChatGPT or any commercial vendor! Links don´t imply endorsement. Many posts and comments are ironic. The blogger is not responsible for comments made by others. The languages used are English and Swedish. Content warning: Essentially everything.
I will probably stop commenting the Epstein Files. They are simply too much. That is: too much to cover. But yes, I´m still monitoring the situation.
We are paying attention.
I´m not a big fanboy of Vaush, but he does make many good points in this clip about Nick Fuentes´ bizarre reactions to the Epstein revelations.
I´ve also been mystified by the "postmodern" tendencies of the Alt Right and their "high levels of irony" which the rest of us "don´t understand". It seems the political payment is finally due. The irony wasn´t a cover for un-ironic neo-Nazism. The irony doesn´t hide anything except mere grifting, nihilism and (perhaps) yet another layer of irony. It´s "irony" all the way down. Fuentes "ironically" supports Epstein. Obviously, a real Nazi would take the Epstein situation 100% seriously as evidence that the National Socialist worldview is true. I mean, a rich Jew with Israeli connections heading an international paedophile network from fucking Hymietown?!
I predicted years ago that the Alt Right would eventually collapse due to this kind and other kind of stuff, but I didn´t think the end would be this dramatic. I mean, Bannon seems to have been a friend of Epstein´s (and he is "classical" far right more than subculturally Alt Right) while the Groyper Standartenführer pretends to defend him. But sure, maybe we should grab some pop corn and enjoy the inevitable end of the comedy...
Look who just visited the White House. LOL. I´m glad that diplomacy works, whatever. Credit: Colombian Presidency Press Office.
Who or what is George Zinn? The elderly Zinn was the person who tried to distract the police in the immidiate aftermath of the Charlie Kirk shooting. He was recently sentenced to prison for this incident and for possession of child pornography. Many assume that Zinn is a leftist. Others place him in the foreground of various conspiracy theories. None of which is surprising, tbh. But who was Zinn really? The article linked below is written from a somewhat conspiracist perspective, but it does contain a lot of interesting (and surprising) information about "the Forrest Gump of Utah".
The most straightforward interpretation is that Zinn was (at least nominally) a Mormon and a conservative Republican. He was a local profile and "gadfly" who always showed up at Republican election meetings and conventions. The man was also something of a prankster. Zinn lived alone in a small flat, had no known job for decades, and may have had mental problems. I get the impression that the Mormon Church kept him under surveillence (!) after suspending him from active membership for unknown reasons. Many others saw him as a harmless kook.
The article further points out that many conspiracy theories about Zinn simply aren´t true. He isn´t Jewish (despite a Jewish-sounding last name), nor was he a witness to what *really* happened on 9/11, et cetera. But why on earth did he try to help Kirk´s assassin get away? Here, we can only speculate. Maybe Zinn is mentally ill. Or maybe he really did dislike Kirk for some reason. There were rumors that Kirk was turning against Israel, while the Mormon Church is staunchly pro-Israeli. The article-writer wants to think that the rabbit hole goes deeper, that Zinn may have been an "asset" for some intelligence agency, or that he was bribed by somebody to distract the police. He also speculates that there may be some connection to "Mormon" sex cults, and what not.
One thing´s for sure. It seems the weird good luck of the Utahan Forrest Gump has run out.
A far right(?) opponent of mass immigration into the United States is unhappy with the ICE raids in Minnesota, arguing that Republican-run states have a substantially larger problem with illegal aliens. However, corporate profits depend on them, so no action is ever taken there. The author calls ICE´s actions in the North Star State "enforcement theater" and "culture war".
Is everyone turning on the Donald?
| - Do you play red or blue? |
Ron Unz is a far right alt-media personality (und so weiter), but the article linked below is quite interesting. About half of it is a summary of a recent piece by longtime GOP strategist Karl Rove in the Wall Street Journal, arguing that Trump is losing the electorate even on his central campaign promise: putting an end to illegal immigration. The Greenland shenaningans were even less popular.
Unz then points out that America´s most important pod caster, Joe Rogan, seems to be fed up with Trump. More people follow the Joe Rogan Show than read newspaper or watch CNN. Rogan (who usually sounds like a somewhat left-leaning independent) may have played a role in Trump´s re-election, since he interviewed Trump on his show. Could Rogan´s criticism lose Trump the midterms?
Unz wonders aloud whether Trump might be going literally insane. He isn´t the only one. And yes, it´s Trump´s bizarre craving for the Nobel peace prize which triggered those reactions (same on my end). The article also references some less important people on the far right who are fed up with the Donald.
As I said, interesting.
Did Jeffrey Epstein actually live at the Vatican? Did he attend Latin Mass? He certainly met Pope John Paul II at one point. The YouTube content-creator comments these rumors/claims in this short video. Short form: "No" on both questions.
Personally, I wouldn´t be as confident. There´s so much shit in the zone right now. I wouldn´t be surprised if a few cardinals will be implicated in this sordid affair sooner or later. Dan Brown might consider writing a new novel. Assuming, of course, that *he* isn´t in the files somewhere...
And who the heck is "Steve" anyway?
In case anyone still follows the tradCath situation, the SSPX has declared that they will resume consecrating new bishops. Which is a direct challenge to the papacy of Leo XIV. According to canon law (or papal interpretation thereof), consecrations of bishops without the approval of the papacy result in immediate excommunication.
So this stuff will continue for another 25 years. Springtime for a certain kind of on-line content creators, theology nerds and, I suppose, Angry Young Men who are really hopeless sectarians.
Count me out, bruh.