Written 5/8/2024- updates attached below

I tried posting this on kendrick almost a week ago and it got no response, I messaged the mods to ask about Karma restrictions or account age requirements and they never replied. I made a new account and it was the same issue, but I found out last night I wasn’t fully banned, so I figured I’d throw it up and see if anyone finds it valuable. It’s written for people who have no prior knowledge of the rap game/music business. I don’t have to go as hard on obscuring names this time. One of the influencers I mentioned in my last post is known for doxxing and threatening violence against people who mention the many contradictions in their stories. (Sorry for any typos/mistakes I want to go to bed.)
Origins
I believe the current Drake and Kendrick Lamar beef is either completely or partially fabricated by certain industry leaders or the parties involved in an effort to distract from something bigger going down behind the scenes. If you were an influential label owner facing major accusations, and you needed to deflect media attention from yourself, recreating one of the most defining moments in rap history during the social media era would be a way to do it. It also wouldn’t hurt that two of the biggest rappers in the world were already sending shots at each other in their music for years prior. The public consensus is they are simply two famous rappers who hate each other and fighting over the spot for the top like in the 90’s. Only people who were directly involved could paint a more cohesive picture of the whole story. Even when all the cards drop, there is a good chance the average person won’t be able to find direct sources on their own and will continue to support their favorite artists and dismiss any evidence of their crimes like the drizzy subreddit or Ak fans.

As I said the beef between Kendrick and Drake has been brewing in the background for years, with both rappers sending shots and sneak dissing each other over the course of at least 8 years. The most agreed upon origin story is the first diss was the 2016 Big Sean and Kendrick collaboration, “Control,” and Drake responded with, “The Language”. Things stayed relatively lighthearted for a while and both were intentionally vague for many years. Before I go deep into the Kendrick and Drake stuff, it’s really important to examine some of Drake’s prior beefs because they add a ton of context to my theory. In my opinion Kendrick and Co. started scheming all of this some time around Mid 2020-Mid 2022, well after the whole Pusha T beef had transitioned into the Kanye beef.

What exactly started the beef is debatable, but at the time many attributed it to rumors of Drake pursuing Ye’s ex Amber Rose. Unfortunately the timeline isn’t 100 percent clear, and if I included every detail this would be at least 200+ pages so I’ll stick with the important stuff. The ultimate outcome of the Pusha T battle in 2018 was the revelation of Drake’s son Adidon that he had previously been hiding from the world along with getting Ye directly involved in the beef.

Here are some more examples of Drake antagonizing Ye and of him trying to use women as pawns to get material for his diss tracks. The Drake line, “Yeah, I probably go link to Yeezy, I need me some Jesus, but as soon as I start confessin' my sins, he wouldn't believe us," could be a reference to sleeping with Kim Kardashian, trying to double down on his threats to harm him or his family, or it could be a double entendre. Another example is using the name Kiki in another song, which was apparently one of Kim’s nicknames. Some other possible examples include the theories he may have tried the same thing with Kendrick’s wife Whitney around 2020-2021 in an attempt to use as ammo against Kendrick, which I’ll go into later. I don’t listen to much of either artist's music, but there are probably many of other examples in Drake’s catalogue that I’m leaving out. There is also his song Omerta released in 2019, which I'll go into below.

“Your baby mother call me when she lonely My tailor see me twice a week, he like my homie Forever grateful, forever thankful Diamond necklace, but she wears it on her ankle”

(Probably referring to Kim Kardashian since she had a few pictures with her wearing diamond ankle bracelets and was trying to make it into a trend.

“I plan to buy your most personal belongings when they up for auction”

(There were various rumors floating around for a while that Drake was blackmailing Ye with something and he was fighting to keep it from the public. I thought about it and this line might be referencing a sex tape with Kim or her little sister who me was very touch before she turned 18. In 2022 there was a whole storyline on Kim’s show where Ye flies to LA to prevent her second sex tape from being released.)

West Hollywood, know my presence is menacing
Cosa Nostra, shady dealings
Racketeering, the syndicate got they hand in plenty things The things that we've done to protect the name are unsettling But no regrets, though, the name'll echo Years later, none greater
Death to a coward and a traitor, that's just in my nature, yeah
(Drake and Ye both frequented the Delilah Nightclub located in West Hollywood and lived closeby on the same street for a while.)
"I don't carry cash 'cause the money is digital
It's the American Expresser, the debt collector"

(Sounds a lot more like it could be crypto to launder or send large amounts of ill gotten gains. It started becoming mainstream around them)

"Last year, niggas really feel like they rode on me
Last year, niggas got hot 'cause they told on me
I'm 'bout to call the bluff of anybody the fold on me"

These lines stood out because they could be referring to Ye telling the public about Drake's alleged threats a couple months before the songs release. This happened not long after the release of Sicko mode which was towards the end of 2018 as well. Ye was discussing the incident on Twitter and reached out to Drake and Travis to talk to him in private. In the next set of tweets Kanye publicly accused Drake of threatening him and his family in a major way. Surprisingly Ye seemed genuinely scared and amongst his, “crazy rants,” some of the stuff he said makes a ton of sense in hindsight. This also the beginning of his second serious public struggles with Bipolar disorder after being committed in 2016 shortly after an on stage rant where he calls out Jay Z for selling out and says he's afraid he might kill him.. As someone who shares the same diagnosis, I have a pretty good understanding of mania and psychosis and firmly believe that it's important not to write people off right away due to their mental illness. Some of my most thoughtful, creative, and productive periods were inspired by mania. Industry bigwigs have also been using mental illness to discredit influential black celebrities and visionaries going back decades, but it really picked up in the 80’s.

Dave Chappelle has gone into this a lot in the past and claims he experienced something similar before he quit show business and dipped to Africa. Their stories have a lot of interesting parallels if you’re familiar or curious. I remember he actually visited Ye at his house in Wyoming after he was reported to have had a, "mental breakdown," during his presidential run in 2020 thus marking his third breakown in six years.. The reason I put it in quotes is because it happened right after he publicly accused Kim of cheating and delivered his legendary speech on abortion. Dave went as far as going on live tv and telling the public he wasn’t crazy, he was just really struggling because he was the only one at the time fighting against the narrative, which can often be a suicide mission or a ticket to obscurity. These are three examples of someone speaking up and being deemed crazy, two years later came the nazi stuff and I'm sure we'll have plenty in store for 2024.

This is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the very common pattern of artists dying or having their careers destroyed either after they try to leave their label or threaten to reveal industry secrets. A few more interesting industry connections I made in my research include the connections between:

T.U.G. records and J Cole's independent label Dreamville are both managed by Interscope Records, whose parent company is Universal Music Group.

Universal Music Group also hac Drake's label OvO label as well as Ye and Kendrick's old labels on their roster before they left to form their own independent labels in 2022 (around the same time the disses between Kendrick and Drake started escalating). Finally Bad Boy Records, which is owned by Diddy, and Motown Records who own Diddy's other R&B label Love Records, are also both owned by Universal. This means every label I mention is currently or was previously owned by Universal Music Group.

Ye tried for years to get out of his contract with Defjam, which happens to be ran by Jay Z who is known to be a close associate of Diddy. Jay would always used his money and power to fight against it. Ye even spoke out publicly on a few occasions, including when he said Jay Z was trying to kill him during one of his concerts. My theory is after years of getting nowhere and having his reputation skewered, in 2022 Ye finally said, "Fuck it," and dropped all the anti- Semetic stuff intentionally in a successful attempt to force his label to into using their morality clause, which requires labels to drop an artist if they're accused of any major controversy that could hurt the label’s profits. For the fourth time in four years the media reported he was having a breakdown. Even though they tried to punish him by cutting off all of his sources of income and freezing his accounts he still managed to bounce back pretty quickly. It was often reported how much he was losing, but it rarely discussed how he still was filthy rich in spite of the retrictions. His label wanted to discourage other artists from trying the same thing. My theory is he might have bought Kim or Kylie's alleged sex tape and used it for his own leverage. For Kendrick, his transition to his independent label ApLang went a lot smoother, but he had to split ownership of his new label with the previous manager owner Dave Free. Sadly it's still difficult for new or more niche artists to establish themselves without the some help.

He may be a lot of things but Ye isn’t dumb just because he has a mood disorder and the guys at the top know this, which is why I think he has really played up his diagnosis when it benefitted him. He’s still one of the most talented musicians in the game and I really think he sees his bipolar like a superpower as he says. It’s like his own invisibility cloak. He can go off his meds for a little, make an album after staying up for 72 hours, go on a “psychotic” twitter rant dropping facts throughout, then start up again once he makes enough news headlines. I think it’s worth noting the first divorce rumors in 2020 coincided with Ye’s abortion speech during his presidential run and the cheating accusations. that led to him dropping out and moving to Wyoming, and a couple months ago in February 2024 he was committed again.

The point I’m making is bipolar is complex, but pretty manageable especially if you have a ton of money to find meds that work for you and a good doctor and can keep substance abuse and stress at a manageable level. I think Ye is smart enough to know this, but it’s just safer for him to really play up the mental issues in the media. He’s proven he can literally say whatever he wants after getting cancelled and the average person is just going to write it off as psycho babble. While bias in health care is a sad fact of society, if you can use it to your advantage I say go for it. It might’ve just kept the microscope off of him long enough to plan his attack.

Ye v. Drake: Quotes of 2018
(Start of the beef, drake threats, and suspicion towards Kardashian family. )

“ It’s not about rap. It’s about family. We have to be close as a family and never let these people infiltrate just for radio spins”

“We need to show the world that people can talk without people ending up dead or in jail.”

”This is a man speaking to a man that has been placed in the program to fuck with Kanye West head and set me up“

”See when you care about your family you don’t let no man push you to do nothing that could risk your freedom“

These first four tweets by Ye were all in reference to perceived threats made by Drake after their beef escalated circa 2018. He began speaking on the industry and talking more about his psych hospital commitment two years prior and how he thought they were going to kill him. It's pretty obvious how the whole thing was planned by the sketchy doctor who called it in and his physical trainer who has a ton of connections to weird shit involving his celebrity clients.

I found interesting that Ye might not have been the first major league rapper whose life Drake threatened. During a similar period of mental illness the up and coming rapper XXXtentacion accused Drake of stealing his flow and dissed him a few times. Not long after he made a post online saying if he dies, it was Drake who did it. There are tons of conspiracies online, but none of the evidence is strong enough to draw a definitive connection. Also while it maybe be coincidental, Kendrick’s latest album Mr Morale also painted the picture that Kendrick was dealing with some serious personal issues. Some lines throughout the album may have been used to bait Drake into escalating, but it wasn’t until The Weekend, Future, and Metro Booming dropped, “We Don’t Trust You,” then Drake and J. Cole dropped, “First Person Shooter,” which was followed a couple days later with, “Like That,” where Kendrick started the chain of events that has led us to today.

Kanye vs. Drake: Quotes of 2020

Summary: Ye runs for president and gets suppressed for saying what very well could be the truth and was immediately deemed insane by the media. Kim did a couple interviews and everything he said was immediatly false. There is almost guarenteed to be some sketchy shit going down revolving her and her family. Ye was absolutely terrified of her keeping the kids away from him and it seems like there are still efforts being made to this day to paint a certain image of him for ulterior motives.

Below are six more quotes from a fan taking a deep dive into his 2020 tweets courtesy of u/ thehatstore42069 on Yeezy
”NORTHY I AM GOING TO WAR AND PUTTING MY LIFE ON THE LINE AND IF I AM MURDERED DON’T EVER LET WHITE MEDIA TELL YOU I WASNT A GOOD MAN,” West, 43, wrote in the tweet, adding, “WHEN PEOPLE THREATEN TO TAKE YOU OUT OF MY LIFE JUST KNOW I LOVE YOU”

"I need a public apology from J Cole and Drake to start with immediately... I'm Nat Turner... I'm fighting for us."

"the utmost respect for all brothers" and said "we need to link and respect each other... no more dissing each other on labels we don't own"

"Ye is constantly trying to tell people that his family does not have his or his kids best interests at heart. He goes on to list others, linking them together with the thinking emoji. These people include rap artist Drake and Larsa Pippen, wife of Scottie Pippe. Kim K is goddaughter to Pippen's daughter, showing how close the families actually are. All of these families that associate with Ye through Kardashian connections, as well as Drake, have been accused of the same thing Kris has. EVERY SINGLE ONE of these people have mixed race children that are groomed from a young age to fuck around with celebrities so the parents can remain famous. Drake on numerous occasions has been accused of grooming girls and then getting handsy on their 18th birthday.”

“These labels want their artists to make them money and they dont care about anything else. When Kanye says things like this in an attempt to expose him, the first thing they wanna do is drug him up and put him back in the studio.”
“Righteous indignation is typically a reactive emotion of anger over mistreatment, insult, or malice of another. It is akin to what is called the sense of injustice. This is how they keep the black man down. Keep people outraged about trivial things and distract them from the real issues in the world. The real problems in the industry. If you tell people enough times that they are unequal or discriminated against they start to believe it. Drug them when they step out of line and toss them aside when the checks run out. Ye is realizing he is pawn in a bigger game, and now that he has all these roots in the game such as Yeezy or the Gap or his music, too many people cant risk (Afford) a Ye who speaks his mind.”
(End of quotes)

Amongst the twitter rant, Ye warned about the predatory nature of record deals and discussed trying to get out of his own deal, and said again how his life may be in danger if it wasn’t already and was doing anything he could to protect his kids. The most fascinating part to me though is the public call to arms he made to Drake, J Cole, and Kendrick on twitter. After inviting them to all link up, he said, “It’s time to get free, we will not argue amongst each other while some guy we don’t know in Europe is getting paid and putting that money in a hedge fund.” I believe if Ye was able to pull off this meeting, there is an ever so slight chance that all four artists might be working together to take down a greater enemy. Weirdly there have been times throughout the last couple years where these supposed enemies were photographed together being friendly or praise each other in interviews, then out of no where the disses would start flying again.

To wrap things up I want to share my a few of my theories about the Drake/Kanye beef

A. Everything is exactly as it seems and the beef is over. Ye let his mental illness ruin his life and career so Drake simply picked another target after Ye stopped putting out disses. All of these connections are just a coincidence and all of this was choreographed to boost Drake and Kendrick’s music sales and possibly distract people from the Diddy trial and possibly the complicated geopolitical issues currently facing the U.S.

C. There is also the possibility that all four rappers are in cahoots and Drake’s dirt isn’t as extreme as people are theorizing, at least in comparison to the rest of the business. This could explain why everything has played out like a movie and how they were able to predict each other’s moves so well. This could either mean they’re all just trying to boost their sales or they’re all trying to take down the “slave masters,” as Ye calls them, and change the dynamic of the music industry in favor of the artist.

D. They may be trying to help their friends in the industry who are being abused or in shitty contracts. I know a lot of famous rappers have done a lot of collaborations with Jhene Aiko and Anderson Paak, who were both signed to T.U.G. records which I mentioned above in the connections to Universal Music Group. Considering they are both frequent collaborators with all of the artists involved on both sides, it’s not unlikely they may have played some part in influencing the takedown.

T.U.G was started by Chris Stokes with his partner Ketrina Askew. Back in the early to mid 90’s were gaining popularity attracting lots of young up and coming talent. They often collaborated with Diddy and his associates. In the 2000’s Raz B from the boy band B2K claimed he was molested by Stokes and his friend Marques Houston, then quickly retracted his claims. Years later he came forward again and said we was bribed into silence and that the rest of the victims were bribed with hush money and had another singer corroborate his story and they came forward together to level the accusations. After some of his former B2K members made fun of him for his claims and accused it of being a shakedown, Raz B revealed Stokes and Houston had preyed a lot of the children associated with the label including at least one of the former bandmates and paid them off.

I thought it was worth noting that the second whistleblower named Quindon Tarver died young in a car crash after mentioning his abuse again a few years prior. He seems to have left the industry not long after the incidents occurred and has few credits to his name. To this day Raz B is still trying to get his justice, while Stokes and his partner Askew, who was also involved in the abuse are still running the label to this day. Askew also has a ton of lawsuits, accusing her of using shady tactics to try to foreclose on houses. (Don’t quote me if a lawyer wants to take a look just google her full name), and has been tied to a ton of LLCs, similar to Drake. This is a good example of a shitty record deal, but I'm sure they have countless other friends in the industry who have even worse. While they were never convicted even Chris Stokes' wife confirmed it to be true.

E. The theory I personally think fits the narrative best and is the most realistic conspiracy is that Kendrick and possibly J. Cole went to the meeting, but not Drake due to his close relationship with Lucian Grange, the president of Drake’s label. Silence often speaks louder than words and this could explain why Kendrick was so ruthless and put so much effort into finding dirt on Drake. Ye, Cole, and Kendrick co-writing would be like the rap allstar team and if J. Cole wasn’t involved, it would also answer the question of whether or not he baited Drake into the battle by asking him to feature. I don’t think Drake is really their primary target though, which would explain letting him off easy. Compared to his bosses and their bosses he’s a small fish. If you take the big guys down you stand a better chance of landing a bigger blow on their operation.

Another really interesting connection is Kendrick and Ye were both signed under Universal Music Group and they both got out of their deals around couple months apart in 2022. As we speak U.M.G’s CEO Lucian Grange, who is often acccused of giving Drake special treatment, is facing charges related to sex trafficking by no other than P Diddy. This could very well explain the timing of it all. The craziest timeline would be Diddy masterminding all of this and using his connections to get it done and all the allegations are bullshit. The guy does seem pretty confident all things considered and constantly posts himself in his Batman costume which could mean he’s a vigilante.

It seems like there's a slight religious angle as well. (Ye and Diddy are both very vocal advocates of Christianity and Drake and Lucian Grange are both Jewish.) Obviously this is a reach, but they’ve been saying rap music was specifically promoted by mostly white label owners in the 80’s to help in the ongoing effort to expedite the systematic oppression of those living in black neighborhoods and the destruction of their family systems. Apparently it was an intentional decision to heavily promote rappers that promoted the very things that were destroying their neighborhoods. (So people know I'm and atheist and have zero agenda, I just thought it was interesting, please stay away from anything antisemitic. War is wrong on both sides.)

*** If my favorite theory is true, there is a possibility the Kendrick and Ye are going after Drake due to their mutual disdain for him and because he’s got a ton of power to dominate the charts and hog the radio airtime like Meek Mill and OG Maco claimed years ago. Even him dropping a record the same day as you could really fuck your album sales up. I’m also sure some of the many rumors throughout the years have had a least some truth and he will most likely snitch to avoid cell block one. I think that Drake could have been instructed to instigate this whole mess in order to draw attention away from the UMG charges brought about by Diddy. Or on the other hand it could be that Kendrick, Ye, and possibly Cole, may have had intel that Drake was going to be involved in the Diddy trial and are just gonna let the receipts show themselves. It might not have been the original plan, but they’ve already accomplished their mission of humiliating him, assuring he couldn’t use his influence to slide through the cracks, and taking over the throne.

Please take everything I say with a grain of salt I have no connection to this world or lifestyle. Regardless I believe all of the knowledge above does a pretty solid job at painting a picture of what may have let up to this and what may have been the source.
——————————-
More details found the last couple days…

Drake and Diddy Connections+Coincidences

Drake- In the P Diddy wig video from 2016 he talks about going to party with Drake, Cash, and The Weeknd in Toronto. Drake is also one of Birdman’s protégées who is known for being a predator and is rumored to have used label artists to lure young women.

Travis Scott- Interview where he comes out and says Diddy tried to lure him. Still has a long history of associating with him, video of him running from Diddy, his connection to Ruby Rose while underage.

Tim Westwood- Diddy had connections with sex offender Tim Westwood who also inspired the Drake song, “Westwood”. They also both were victims of drive by shootings along with The Weekend and they were all facing some type of allegations.

T.I.- Also has been associate with Diddy through the years, in 2021 his kid died and 11 women can forward at the same time to accuse him and his wife of drugging and assaulting them. Clearly someone wanted to fuck his life up. Possibly due to him getting arrested so many times for wild shit and people wondering how he continued to get away with it shining a light on how powerful industry lawyers are. He also had recently talked about having a gynecologist check to see if his daughter is still a Virgin, which sounds like it could have been an industrty secret. Could have been because he worried about someone trying to take advantage of her to get to him? Regardless that shit is fucking insane.

50 Cent- Has been saying pretty much the same thing as Travis Scott and has trolled Diddy for most of his career. It came out that his wife was a sex worker who was possibly recruited Diddy to help ruin his career. It sort of worked, which raises the question if 50 Cent is the only victim.

Ray J- Him and his sister worked with T.U.G. records when they were very young. Chris Stokes in the nineties who had connections with Diddy. He has been involved in a lot of sex scandals and allegedly may have played a part in Whitney Houston's death. (Which is also allegedly connected to Michael Jackson's death and both were deemed suspicious and happened during their final tours when their masters (song rights), became more valuable than their lives. Sony Records and Tommy Motolla, who also abused Mariah Carey when she was trying to start her career. These are just a few of the alleged examples of labels taking out musicians when they were worth more dead, another is the signing of high risk artists and requiring them to get life insurance so they can profit beyond releasing all their posthumous records. Also the ever so common story of the rising star artist that die at 21 after their first album or two.

He also partied with Diddy in Vegas with along Floyd Mayweather and a bunch of other famous industry people and athletes.

Tory Lanez- Tons of blackmail, also was signed by Interscope under UMG. got sent to prison for ten years after trying to leave his label. Also history of SA and and other allegations of violence towards women.

French Montana- On Diddy's label, close with Rick and Khaled, tons of drug and sexual assault allegations, also dated a Kardashian. Generally grimy.

DJ Khaled- Diddy said he could get anything in Miami, either referring to drugs or women, could explain his connections and lack of any notable talent. (New update, he was one of the first to promote Chris Alvarez’s instagram not long after he turned 18).

Rick Ross- Diddy said some weird shit about him and licked his lips and kissed him at a show. Ross is also signed to Bad Boy under Diddy. He ended up getting involved in the current feud and spamming social media nonstop dissing and threatening Drake.

A lot of the back and forth was both of them threatening to release dirt on each other. One strange coincidence I found was Drake recently trolled Ross about the 20 million dollar renovation to his home on Star island, where Diddy is currently residing. It’s rumored back in the day that P Diddy was caught in a room full of rich guys on ecstasy possibly at the beginning stages of a gay orgy. Drake also mentioned in the same tweets about Rick Ross that Birdman owned a house on the island and asked Rick Ross why he didn’t help him out.

Considering Ross is so sketchy and Drake claims the house isn’t that big, that’s a ridiculous amount of money. He may be covering up evidence, or creating tunnels in his house to escape if shit pops off and Drake might know what’s good. Interestingly enough Ross is very close with French Montana and also signed to Bad. He said his beef was related to something involving French, and Drake’s tweet popped up the same day the info came out concerning the Chris Alvarez stuff.

The famous line from U.O.E.N.O.

Meek Mill- “OG Maco called himself defending his friend Quentin Miller by substantiating the ghostwriting claims and agreeing with Meek. He hit up Twitter saying, "Some of us been knew. Meek just put it in the air. Sucks to have to compete with 6 n****s and get compared to”

Meek mill also had a short beef with Drake, some disses included lines referring to TI’s homie pissing on Drake at the movie theater, which is also interesting considering the current case against him. He also dropped a line saying Diddy almost got a domestic charge when he smacked Drake, which could either be saying that Drake is like a woman, or saying he was Drake’s boyfriend/sugar daddy.
( If you made it to the end comment with the number 8)
I thought it was interesting how the beef just kind of disappeared and even Meek said it didn’t seem genuine. Considering the allegations against Meek in the Diddy trial, and his rumored affair with Kim contributing to ending Kanye’s marriage, Meek Mill definitely did some dirt on him.

“Niggas frauds I told the truth, don't ask me shit
All this industry fake enemy and rap shit”

“Money make a sucker that told look trill again”

One of the many chapters in Drake's history in which he is seen paying his way out of trouble and starting beefs randomly.
“Now when that shit went down with Chris, you wrote a check”
This line is referring to Chris brown beef, another beef that was lost to time. All I can remember off the top was someone throwing a champagne bottle at the other’s entourage.

Ty Dolla $ign- Huge feature artist, close with Ye. Grew up in the industry and talks about growing up on the road and being in the studio with his dad and Rick James who was should have already been in prison for life for dragging, torturing, and S assaulting multiple women and children throughout his career and was himself a victim of the industry. May be part of Ye's motivation, considering their recent close working relationship.
The end.
Courtesy of,
The Randomest Moniker

Previous
First Series Index Galactic Map State of War Map RoyalRoad Patreon Discord

MNS Oengro

“How’s the fuel status of the Oengro?” Grionc asked.
Vastae, eyes glued to his console, replied without hesitation. “We have just enough blink fuel for one jump, but we aren’t going anywhere once we get to the other side without a refueling ship.”
“One blink is all we need. And if the Oengro is good to go, the other, smaller ships should be fine too then,” Grionc responded, bringing up the system map on screen with her paws. “Four minutes to blink limit. Have the ship’s crew secure themselves for the blink and get ready for shift change to execute post-blink procedures when we arrive.”
“Yes, High Fleet Commander,” Vastae acknowledged with a brisk nod.
Suddenly, three quarters of the sensor readings on her sensor board disappeared, and the fidelity on the remaining took a nose-dive in accuracy. A low murmur ran through the sensor stations, which she waved away with a paw. “No need to panic. It looks like our friends jumped before we did, as arranged. Our sensors are on their own for now.”
Vastae swallowed hard. “Are you certain about this plan, High Fleet Commander?” Vastae asked nervously. “Not that I don’t trust what Sphinx— Speinfoent cooked up, but this is a last-minute plan modification we haven’t rehearsed. And with our fuel situation, we only get one chance here.”
Grionc put a calm smile on her face. “Remember that exercise we did with the Grass Eaters a while back?”
“Which one?”

4 months ago

“Since it’s New Years, it’s time to have some fun,” Mark announced with a grin to Grionc and the rest of the curious bridge crew. “I’m going to show you guys a fun teambuilding exercise we did on Terra.”
“Teambuilding exercise?” Grionc asked suspiciously.
Mark didn’t let her skepticism color his enthusiasm. “Well, I’m not sure how much teambuilding it does, but it is fun. And I have never seen aliens do it. In fact, this might be the first time this has ever been done outside of Sol!”
“Fine, fine. What are we doing?” she relented.
“This exercise is what we call the trust fall.”
“The trust fall?” Grionc repeated. “It’s about building trust? Like trust in your crew?”
Mark nodded vigorously. “It’s supposed to. I’m not sure if it truly works, but it truly is fun. You and I can demonstrate for the crew.”
Grionc sighed. “Sure. What do I do?”
“Come stand over here,” Mark pointed to a spot on the floor, and then stood in front of her with his back to her. “What I’m going to do is I’m going cross my arms… like this… and on the count of three, I’m going to fall backwards, and you have to catch me when I do.”
“Huh. That seems dangerous. What happens to you if I don’t catch you?” Grionc asked, mild concern creeping into her voice.
“Traumatic brain injury, probably. Something similar for your species too, I assume,” Mark shrugged nonchalantly. “But don’t worry about that. We have good medical facilities on the Nile, and you will catch me. That is the point of the exercise. Alright, you ready?”
Sensing his insistence, Grionc sighed and held her paws out, bracing herself. “Ready.”
“One, two, three…” Mark did as he described, crossing his arms, and falling backwards into Grionc’s outstretched arms. She grunted with slight effort as she intercepted his fall and then gently lowered him onto the ground, “Oomph. Huh. You Terrans are lighter than you look.”
“Yeah, my bones are nano-grafted,” Mark grinned, bounced up to full height, and circled around her back. “Okay, now it’s your turn.”
Grionc crossed her arms and held her breath for a moment. “One, two…”
She didn’t move. A few seconds later, she let go of her held breath. “I can’t.”
“What? Why not?”
Grionc muttered excuses. “No, it’s just— my tail— our balance mechanisms are different, I can’t just fall backwards on purpose—”
Mark insisted. “It’s not that difficult. Just let go. Don’t worry. I’m right here. I promise I’ll catch you.”
She held her breath once again, psyching herself up for a few more moments.
“One, two… doh, I can’t.”
Mark lightly patted her on the shoulder. “That’s okay… don’t worry… Hey, Speinfoent, come over here and give her a light shove. Alright, on the count of three. One, two—”
“Oh, no. Don’t you dare! No! Don’t touch— Yowwwwwww!”
Grionc continued, “And now… we fall. And we trust that our new friends will be there to catch us.”

ZNS 2228

“They’ve blinked,” the computer officer reported.
“Did we catch their blink vector?” Skvanu asked urgently.
“Calculating… got it! We triangulated their blink vector and probable destination! Entering it into our fleet navigation computers,” she responded, paws flying over the controls.
“How long before we can execute the blink?” Skvanu pressed.
“Two minutes before we hit the limit ourselves,” she replied, not looking up.
“Good, get the crews ready and start the countdown. I want to blink the millisecond we are clear of the system limit. And get all systems ready for what’s on the other side. They almost definitely have an ambush waiting for us. I’m guessing that’s where the remaining nine or so squadrons of Sixth Fleet are waiting for us,” Skvanu said confidently. “Twelve Lesser Predator squadrons to twenty-six of ours. Doesn’t matter how many upgrades they have, we will defeat them, especially since the first three will be within railgun range. Get those gunnery crews and point defense computers ready.”
“Blinking in seventy seconds,” she announced. “Sixty-five seconds—” Suddenly, she stood up, “Eight Whiskers, our FTL communications are open again! Both Datsot and Gruccud have just responded to our last message!”
Skvanu spun around to face her. “That makes sense. Whatever device they used to stop our communications must have been on one of the ships that just blinked out. Is there any priority intelligence from either?”
“Yes! Datsot has an emergency transmission for us. It’s from Ten Whiskers Ditvish!”
“What is it?” Skvanu asked, his voice serious.
She began to read. “Lesser Predators have entered Datsot system in force. Nine squadrons spotted so far. They may attempt to engage our garrison force there… His guidance is that we return immediately to trap these aggressor ships, but leaves the decision up to you…”
Skvanu absorbed the information with shock. If those ships are really in Datsot, they must not be on the other side of wherever the Oengro is blinking. And with that context, this now smelled exactly like a planned trap.
He thought out loud. “This must be what the Lesser Predators planned from the start. If we chase, we have no idea what they have on the other side. There may be refueling ships. They may have already gotten away. By the Prophecy, they may even be sacrificing three squadrons to get us to blink through a singularity or anomaly. But wait… If we return to Datsot immediately, we might catch those squadrons split from the rest of their ships and cripple their fleet!”
Having made up his mind, he shouted urgently at the navigation station, “Navigation, hold the blink!”
“Halting the blink procedures.”
“A handful of ships have already completed the blink!” the computer officer reported, almost in a panic.
“Cease blink procedures! Fleet-wide, cease the blink!”
The order went out immediately, and it was a testament to the discipline of the Znosian Navy that most squadrons managed to stop the countdown just seconds before it went through.
“How many ships went through?” Skvanu asked urgently.
“We managed to stop most of our ships, Eight Whiskers. Only five combat ships from Squadron 6 went through.”
He sighed in relief. “Only the Prophecy can help them now… Turn us around. Let’s get back to Datsot.”

TRNS Nile

“I think we are in sufficiently deep space,” Captain Gregor Guerrero said to his crew. “Drop us out.”
“Yes, captain. Emergency drop-out in five… four… three… two… one… now.”
The ship shuddered and creaked as the emergency-stop was activated. The blink engine wound down, forcing the ship back into normal space.
Gregor turned to his navigation officer. “How far from Plaunsollib did we travel, in regular space?”
“Two months on their Alcubierre drives if they combat burn with all their fuel. Four if they plan on stopping,” she replied immediately. “They’d be going too fast to aerobrake anyway.”
“Good,” Guerrero said, gluing his eyes to his sensor board. Ships in FTL are difficult to detect, even on gravidar, but the state-of-the-art technology on the Nile gave them a few seconds of warning.
A few seconds later, the sensor officer’s voice cut through the tense silence. “I’ve spotted the Puppers in blink! All of them, tight formation. They’ll pass us in about fifteen seconds.”
Guerrero nodded his pleasure. “Good, let them pass. Tell me when they’re out of range.”
The seconds ticked by. “Ten… five… they’ve passed our position… and now they’re out of range.”
“Now, switch on the blink disruption field,” he ordered.
The hum of the ship’s ambient noise went up an octave, signaling maximum power drain as the ship’s thirstiest system kicked in.
Gregor looked at his information panel. “Full emissions control. EMCOM Alpha. Deploy the FTL jammer drone and then shut off our engines. If things go well, we’re about to be joined by half the fucking Bunny Navy in a minute.”
“Aye, Captain. EMCOM Alpha.” The rest of the crew nodded, working their controls with practiced competence.
“Jammer drone out. You think they’ve got wild weasels, captain?”
“Unlikely, but we take no chances. If they don’t…” He shrugged. “… we’ll just get our drone back later.”
A tense minute passed, then the sensor officer reported, “Captain, Znosian ships spotted on gravidar! Two… three… five in total… They’ve just been forced out of blink.”
“Five squadrons?”
“No, Captain, five ships.”
Gregor furrowed his brow, surprised, and took another glance at his console. “Only five ships?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Alright, keep the disruption field up, and analyze the drive signatures on them. Maybe one of them is this Skvanu guy we’re supposed to hit,” he speculated hopefully.
After half an hour, Guerrero finally called it quits. “No more guests are showing up. Looks like they must have wizened up at the last moment.”
“Aye, sir,” the executive officer said, shaking her head in disappointment as well. “It was a good plan. Could have stranded their whole fleet out here.”
“Well, bad luck— these things happen in war, Lieutenant. Don’t worry. We’ll get them next time. How are the guests we did get doing?”
“Out of blink fuel, as expected. They’ve been dumping cargo in an organized fashion. I think they’re planning to see if they can reach Plaunsollib with their subspace drives in a reasonable amount of time and call triple A.” Then, she asked, “Where do you think the rest run off to?”
“Probably Datsot,” Guerrero guessed. “Phone Sphinx and tell him he’s probably got the whole shit storm heading his way, ETA about a couple days. Get the estimates to him.”
“Yes, sir.”
“Now, we just need to silence the witnesses so we can use this trick again. Bridge to CIC: let’s keep it simple. One Kestrel for each of the targets. We’ll swiss-cheese them with railguns after. Just in case.”
“Aye, Captain. We’re not dropping off those TRO drones here, are we?”
“Nah. Too much work. No one is finding these guys ever again anyway.”

MNS Trassau

“I just got off a call with the Nile,” Loenda announced. “Looks like the Grass Eaters have discovered our ruse in the other system. The main enemy fleet is heading our way right this second.”
Speinfoent sighed, and suggested, “If we burn closer for just half a day more—”
“No more,” Loenda declared. “We are already risking nine squadrons coming this far into the Datsot system limit.”
“Alright,” Speinfoent agreed reluctantly. “We can still give them a present they won’t forget any time soon.”
“That, we will. That we will.” Loenda turned to her console. “All ships in Battlegroup 2, dump your payloads as quietly as you can. Then wait half an hour to change your vector and make your way to the system blink limit.”
“Yes, Battlegroup Commander.”

ZNS 1841

“Ten Whiskers, the Lesser Predators are turning around,” the computer officer declared, doing her best to hide her relief.
“What? Where are they heading now?” Ditvish asked, confounded.
“Towards the shortest path to the system blink limit, I think.”
“That’s it? They’re just leaving now?”
“Combat computer speculates that they might have seen that Eight Whiskers Skvanu is heading back to Datsot, so they are breaking off the attack,” the officer offered.
“That’s… not very Lesser Predator of them, but very logical,” he admitted. “They must have realized their plan failed and are now cutting their losses.”
He didn’t mention that his fleet was the one that came out behind, losing yet another precious supply convoy and then sending the whole combat fleet on a wild predator chase for nothing. That State Security goon might start to become a problem if he didn’t spin this well in his after-action report.
A few hours later, a foreboding feeling coloring his mood, he ordered, “Sensors, boost our radars towards where they changed vectors. I want to check to see if they dropped any drones or traps.”
“Yes, Ten Whiskers.”
The 1841 boosted its radar towards the direction, blaring out signals on maximum strength and—
“Incoming… missiles? Ten Whiskers, many missiles! Dozens! Over a hundred! They’re well within our minimum abort range!”
“By the Prophecy!” Ditvish exclaimed. “All ships, execute combat burn away from them! Countermeasures and fire counter-missiles, at the ready! Track those missiles!”
Fortunately, the garrison fleet was still in high readiness from before. Their engines were ready to light up to full acceleration immediately.
Unfortunately, the missiles were already close. In desperation, his ships began dumping their entire loads of radar chaffs and flares into space behind them as they maneuvered away from the threat. Counter-missiles sped out of their tubes towards their rear, relying on their motherships’ sensors and radars to find the tiny alien missiles for them to engage.
Quietly gliding through space towards the enemy on inertia inherited from their motherships was the sizable swarm of Terran-made missiles. Obsolete for military purpose in Sol but still produced for the civilian and gray market, they were an easy addition on the TRO’s shopping list. Vast quantities of them had found their way into various shell corporations and dead drops all over Sol, then onto hastily constructed exterior pylons on Sixth Fleet ships.
While they were indeed several times outside of the maximum effective range of the Znosian ships at launch, missiles technically did have unlimited ballistic ranges in space — if their enemies were not moving and they did not need to constantly fire their thrusters to adjust course. Relying on a short first burn and then inertia, they flew most of the way towards the stationary enemy fleet completely undetected. By the time they were spotted, it was too late; the Znosians were well within their effective ranges.
Their intelligence chips might not have been super-Terran state-of-the-art computers, but the Pigeons had no problem realizing that they were discovered. They had been tracking the enemy targets using passive infrared sensors that did not alert enemy threat sensors to their presence. But the second that the targets started dropping flares to blind them, they activated their primitive late twenty-first century radars and homed in onto the priority targets they’d been given. Their main thrusters began their burns, adjusting their vectors to intercept the now-finally-moving enemy ships.
Then, they saw the incoming counter-missiles — fired by the enemies sporadically, obviously in panic.
The makers of the Pigeons might not have bothered to include next-generation electronic dazzlers on them, but penetration aid on missiles had been standard in Terran warfare for a century. They littered the space they were in with chaff and their own bright flares, coordinating with the other missiles in the area with short range laser communication to ensure that none in the swarm would confuse or disrupt each other.
The Znosian counter-missiles were certainly confused and disrupted though. Many veered off into phantom signals. Some lucky ones did manage to find their targets. When a few of their comrades dropped off their impromptu mesh net, the Pigeons constantly corresponded with laser communications to re-prioritize their targeting.
At the top of the list was the fattest, easiest target of them all: the enemy flagship 1841.
Seconds before impact, the missiles finalized their targets, and they spent every drop and fume of their remaining fuel on terminal maneuvers.
The Znosians’ close in weapons systems had milliseconds to engage the incoming threats. They performed admirably… for trying to deal with this unknown alien threat for the first time. A couple dozen more missiles were plucked out of space, but it was not enough.
Not nearly.
The rest slipped through the net.
Miraculously, the 1841 managed to survive initially. Despite it being the primary focus of the Pigeon mob, the other ships did their best to shield its most vital components in its rear with their own point defense. And the Pigeons — like most missiles of its era — were loaded with just enough firepower to destroy much smaller Terran ships. The larger hulls of the Znosian ships gave their obsolete mid-century intelligence chips a slightly more interesting exercise in module identification and targeting.
The massive Thorn-class battleship took fourteen hits to varying systems that the missiles visually identified as “that looks pretty important” on their final approach: its primary missile and gun tubes were trashed, venting atmosphere to space in those compartments. A proximity hit near the stern took out four of its eight massive main thrusters and several system modules at the rear of the ship. And perhaps worst of all, one Pigeon managed to zero in on its vulnerable front bridge, the explosion emptying its contents and occupants into vacuum.
Luckily for Ten Whiskers Ditvish, none of them hit the armored flag bridge where he was in the belly of the ship, vindicating the Znosian Navy’s practice of separating the two for redundancy.
Nonetheless, Ditvish fell to the ground as the simultaneous impacts temporarily overloaded the inertial compensators and shook the ship to its core. Sparks flew around him, and he smelled a pungent stink as the automated fire suppression systems kicked in to save as much as they possibly could.
He slowly climbed to his feet and looked at the scene around him. A sensor officer was spraying foam at a small fire with a handheld device, successfully extinguishing it in seconds. Several other of his crew were recovering and returning to their stations with remarkable calm. After all, they were elite, well-trained spacers and officers of the Znosian Navy.
Ditvish did the same, propping himself back into his command chair with slight effort. He operated his console in a concussed daze. One glance at the status board told him that the 1841 was a write-off. It wasn’t going to be combat effective ever again. At least its life pod systems were working, and he watched in relief as dozens then hundreds of crew members in the damaged sections of the ship climbed into theirs and ejected into the relative safety of vacuum.
He checked up on the other ships: several others were hit. Six had outright detonated: no survivors nor signals came from them. Two were irreparably damaged, their remaining crews also abandoning their ships in an orderly fashion. And another six had visible fires or scorch marks on their damaged hulls, but those crews were still valiantly fighting to keep their ships alive.
Ditvish noticed that the missile didn’t go for all his ships, just the ones on the outer edge on his sensor board— wait, the missiles—
To his horror, several more dozen missiles they’d detected were still active, and they were going for—
He looked at his computer officer’s station and yelled, “We have to warn them!”
She yelled something back at him, but he realized that he couldn’t hear her. Hitting the floor must have injured his hearing organs. He yelled again, hoping that she could still hear. “Warn the orbital support fleet! The logistics and fire support ships! Evasive maneuvers and take cover in the atmosphere!”
Her lips moved again. He got out of his chair and stumbled over to her in a daze, trying to hear what she was saying.
She was saying something.
It must be important.
“… not reach them. Our communication array… destroyed! Ten Whiskers, we need to get… We don’t have much time!”
Ditvish finally understood her from reading her lips. He didn’t respond. Just numbly watched the planetary battlemap of Datsot on the main screen.
It didn’t take long. They were completely defenseless.
The remaining missiles plucked every last orbital fire support and logistics transport ship out of the skies of Datsot. Most detonated; a few left behind trails of black smoke as they sank uncontrollably towards the planet’s surface.
Then, Ditvish’s hind legs gave out and he crumpled onto the bridge floor.
He was dimly aware of one of his subordinates dragging him towards the bridge escape pod as he blacked out.

MNS Trassau

“Don’t worry, Speinfoent,” Loenda said, putting her paws around the junior commander looking glumly at the image of Datsot retreating from their view as the rest of the bridge cheered the better-than-anticipated success of the raid. “We’ll come back, and next time, we’re coming back for everything.”
“That we will, Loenda. That we will.”

Meta

There is no research that shows the effectiveness of trust falls for building trust in a team and plenty of research showing that falling backwards from a full standing position without adequate bracing or padding can lead to serious brain, spinal, and back injuries.
Coercion or retaliation against Malgeir employees who refuse to participate in trust fall exercises may be considered investigable or actionable violations of workplace safety regulations by the Republic Office of Occupational Safety or anti-discrimination regulations by the Office of Equal Opportunity.
Whistleblowers are entitled to up to 25% of monetary penalties recovered. If you see something, say something.
Previous
Chapter 53: Apostasy

I hope that someone on here will read this post and give me some sound advice.
33/F 37/M We’ve been together for 6-7 months. He and I were Facebook friends for four years before dating. Flirting here and there but nothing serious because at the time he was going through a separation (13 year marriage). Fast forward to several months ago, we went on our first date and things took off fairly quickly from there. Within a month we were living together (I know, not the best move).
He moved in with me and pays majority all of my bills and expenses. I have been paying my way through my Master's program and my finances were not the best. I work as a revenue cycle manager and he works as a superintendent for a pipefitting company. He makes good money and never fails to remind me lol. Initially, our relationship was beautiful. He was attentive, generous, loving, and great with my kids (one who has special needs). Overall, it was everything I had hoped for. But after just a month of living together the arguments progressively started. He takes steroids and was powerlifter. When we met he told me he was going through withdrawal so I was patient with him when he was having his ups and downs. In addition, he's in the process of divorce and managing coparenting with his ex. I was patient through it all, cleared a space in my home for his children to sleep in so that they would be comfortable.
It was hard but manageable. His mood swings didn't affect me as much during the time because I knew there was a lot going on in his life. Well time went on and when he would have these mood swings he would say things to me like "I'm just not comfortable here" and "I don't like living in this city" and during our arguments he always threatened to leave me. He also constantly complained that he doesn't like being away from his kids (8, 11, 13) and that he just isn't happy without them. Which I completely understood. Though he did see them throughout the week and weekends-but still I understood.
March 8th I found out that I was 5 weeks pregnant and that's when things turned ugly. Though he told me he was elated and wanted to create a family with me there were constant loud arguments in front of the children (I take accountability because I did the yelling too). He would grab me, throw me across the bed when he was angry, hold me down, forcefully cover my mouth if I tried to talk, choked me quite a few times and broken things in my home during our fights. Cops had to be called out more than once. And my 11 year old hated having him around and was visibly afraid during the fights. My ex is a muscular bigger man and very very strong. He's gotten more and more physical with me, more and more argumentative and also started back on steroids during my pregnancy which effected his temperament. At 8 weeks pregnant we MUTUALLY decided to get an abortion (he sent me the money for it) because of the arguments, and me just not handling the pregnancy well-also to add his divorce was still not final. All of these factors influenced my decision to go through with the abortion and he supported me at first. But after the abortion, while I'm still bleeding, we argued and he called me a baby killer. Told me the only reason he was with me was because of the baby. Apologized a few hours later, bought me some gifts, sent me some money in an attempt to smooth it over. This was his pattern. Valentines Day, my birthday, mothers day..we argued and fought. I have never in my life delt with a man so up and down. One minute I'm being yelled at and disrespected and the next I'm the love of his life and he can't wait to marry me.
Yesterday was his daughters birthday and he told me he was taking her out after work (He leaves work at 3:30 every day). We spoke one time at 7pm, and I called him several times at 10pm, he calls me back once at nearly 11pm and gets to my house at almost 12am on a school night from "spending the day with is daughter." I should add that since his ex wife went back to work he drives 45 minutes from my house to hers to pick the kids up from the bus stop and take them home. He does this every day and usually gets home close to 7pm-8pm. I've expressed my comfortability with him spending time over there while she's present and his response is that he doesnt. But he does. Quite often. When he got home I was visibly upset, he asked "why the fuck are you making that face?" I didn't respond. And then he followed up with "this is our last weekend together." I asked for my house key, he yelled, had a tantrum, then left the house. Came back 5 minutes later and told me he loved me and didn't want to argue. I've heard that before. I told him he couldn't come back to my home.
What makes this break up hard is that he genuinely has done some amazing things for me, and my children. He's shown me a lot of love and encouragement. And has ALWAYS ALWAYS been thre when I needed him. I loved him and have asked him to seek therapy. This relationship has made me angry and resentful, and I just need out.
**I should add that his ex does not like me, though I take good care of her kids when they are with me. My ex has also shared things with her pertaining to our relationship that I've had to correct him on. He's gone to movies, and outings with her and the kids (which isn't a problem) except he lied about it. Which is why I don't have trust in him when he's out that way*

I recently had a ton of abdominal pain/discomfort, a fever, and swollen lymph nodes so I went to an in-network urgent care. This was covered by insurance. The provider that saw me at urgent care referred me to the ER (also in-network) for suspected appendicitis. At the ER, I had bloodwork and a CT scan done. It ended up being mononucleosis (my enlarged liver and spleen were causing the abdominal issues). My insurance is now denying coverage of my ER visit citing that it was not an emergency. I’m so stressed about this almost $10K bill. I’m in my early 20s and definitely do not have the means to pay it. Does anyone have any advice on who to contact to argue that this was an emergency? Does it not matter that urgent care told me to go to the ER? I have Aetna if that’s helpful and I am in Washington, DC. Thank you so much in advance for your help!

Edit: If you are going to comment on the length of this post, please don't. This is not a simple snark but rather an actual critical think piece about feminism and Taylor Swift.

Introduction

Pertaining to Taylor Swift, "Female Rage" has deviated from its intended meaning after Swift debuted a new performance of The Tortured Poets Department during the Eras Tour. Now, according to Swift's use of the phrase, female rage is interpreted as public backlash against Swift's dating choices rather than as a response to the broader injustices against women and women's rights. This post examines Taylor Swift's flawed feminism, philanthropy, branding, and the controversial trademark petition for the phrase "Female Rage: The Musical". Swift's background as an entertainer, indeterminate politics, and alignment with capitalism over feminism pervades her legacy, again threatening her public tolerance as not just an individual but as a brand.

Once Upon a Female Rage...

If you were cognizant in the early 2010's, you've heard countless jabs at Taylor Swift in the media. Magazines, radio, or online. Music critics did not take her seriously as a songwriter; parents put a woman on an unrealistic pedestal as the ideal role model for their children; she dated too much and used men as lyrical fodder. No matter the story, it inevitably spread, conjoined with everyone's respective opinions, and you'd be left to wonder, "Why does everyone hate this girl so much?"
Taylor's target demographic has always been young or adolescent girls, more so when Swift herself was one. She made music that spoke to the awkward misfit, cultivating a para-social relationship with fans on MySpace, then later twitter, Instagram, and YouTube, where Taylor posted relatable vlogs showcasing the life of a homegrown American girl. Taylor had a delayed public "growing up" and, compared to her female pop contemporaries, Swift never "gratuitously sexualized her image and seems pathologically averse to controversy" (and, apparently, never even had a sip of alcohol until she turned 21). She was more than happy to spin this narrative to allude to an inherent moral superiority above other women in the industry (Better Than Revenge, heard of it?), engaging in the very slut-shaming that she herself endured (the Madonna and Whore archetypes). The victim complex arose with the need to prove Taylor as a different type of pop girl. Based upon her holy and clean image, Swift had been dubbed "a feminist's nightmare", and that "[To Swift] other girls are obstacles; undeserving enemies who steal Taylor’s soulmates with their bewitching good looks and sexual availability." Feminism and Tennessee-Christian country values don't exactly mix, it seems.
Years later, Swift befriended Lena Dunham and thus experienced white feminism osmosis, where Dunham taught Swift that real feminists defend rapists, makes insensitive jokes about rape and abortion, and prioritize all-white casts. Swift then declared herself a feminist in 2014, saying,

"Becoming friends with Lena – without her preaching to me, but just seeing why she believes what she believes, why she says what she says, why she stands for what she stands for – has made me realize that I’ve been taking a feminist stance without actually saying so."

I suppose the male-centric songwriting subject that permeates Swift's discography contained covert feminism and that we just didn't see that. Perhaps, the "Bad Blood" song and music video were written only in jest and not about poor Katy Perry, for Swift, as a feminist, would "never make it a girl fight" or tear other women down (though all Katy did was date your terrible ex-boyfriend and allegedly steal three backup dancers from your tour). In 2013, Swift said, in response to Tina Fey and Amy Poehler's joke towards her serial dating, "There is a special place in hell for women who don't help other women."
There was that time in 2015 Taylor said that Nicki Minaj was "invited to any stage [she is] on" (as if Taylor expects to have access to every stage, award, and platform that Nicki might not otherwise have as a black female artist...yikes!) in response to Nicki's criticism of the white + thin VMA nominations. Later, Nicki responded with confusion, as Swift continued, "It’s unlike you to pit women against each other. Maybe one of the men took your slot..". Of course, this 'beef' was 'squashed' when Nicki performed with Taylor at the VMAs, with Nicki quite literally only having 38 seconds of stage time without Taylor. Maybe all that parading around with a legion of famous white women - similar to the way Taylor might've done with her numerous 1989-era handbags - was in fact a stance against gender inequality, and that this display of "girl power" should be enough to constitute Swift as a feminist icon.
Even while Swift says that Dunham informed her feminist outlook, she dances around the exact contents of those beliefs: "what she believes, what she says, what she stands for" is not exactly insightful towards what beliefs Swift might have inherited. Taylor never broaches women's rights topics such femicide, FGM, forced pregnancy & marriage, sex trafficking, women in slavery, women's financial and political oppression, women's educational rights, women's health, or women's autonomy, so we can assume she only gives a fuck about "girls supporting girls" (whatever that fucking means).
Despite some questionable (and sometimes vindictive) behavior, Taylor as a young woman did not deserve every media lashing that she received. We cannot deny that most headlines and criticisms perpetuated a misogynistic rhetoric which has plagued Swift for a majority of her career. Acknowledging events such as the development of her ED, her sexual assault trial, "Famous" lyric and MV depiction of Taylor, and the explicit Twitter deepfakes, for example, as both disgusting and unfortunate things that happened to a young woman in Hollywood does not negate the fact that Taylor is mostly a performative feminist.

Get Your Fucking Ass Up and Be a Philanthropist, It Seems Like Nobody Wants to Be a Philanthropist These Days

In 2013, Taylor Swift cut the ribbon at the grand opening of the Taylor Swift Education Center at the Country Music Hall of Fame in Nashville, Tennessee. The donation amount - $4 million - was the largest individual artist gift ever donated to the Country Music Hall of Fame, which is, of course, mentioned on Swift's website. The two-story facility features three classrooms, an instrument room, and an interactive children's exhibit gallery. Swift also performed at "All for the Hall" charity shows and has donated numerous artifacts from her career (such as notable guitars, tour costumes, etc) to the museum.
This was over 11 years ago, and it is still the only notable philanthropic contribution Taylor Swift has made.
For a woman of her net worth and stature, and a woman who recognizes the difficulties for women in film and music, you would think that Taylor Swift might establish a scholarship program for women to study the arts or something. Perhaps Swift might even consider becoming a member of organizations that support female artists, or one that supports LGBTQ+ causes (since she is now proudly an ally), yet she remains superficial with her graces. Broader philanthropy, such as donating relief aid to Palestinian women or women impacted by violence and discrimination will probably never receive any financial support from Miss Swift because then she'd be using her money towards philanthropies involving anyone but white entertainers.
She even says herself in Miss Americana, "My entire moral code as a kid and now is a need to be thought of as 'good'." Well, she's certainly thought of as good, though her actions say otherwise. She's more than happy to do a vaguely altruistic song and dance for a clip-worthy interview quote and mass appeasement, then fuck off to one of her mansions on a 20 minute private jet flight, rather than actually contribute to anything pertaining to the causes she has endorsed. Yet, far too many people continue to give a woman such as her their money, time, and energy, and she hoards these resources to herself.

I Like Some of the Taylor's Songs, But What the Fuck Does She Know About Feminism?

Swift continued with her self-proclaimed feminist campaign, positioning herself as a political activist and LGBTQ+ ally in the Miss Americana documentary. The primary focus of the documentary consists of the sexual assault trial, Andrea Swift's cancer diagnosis, Taylor's ED and body dysmorphia, media scrutiny, and, largely, finally speaking up about her politics publicly, mostly her opposition to the 2018 Tennessee Republican senate candidate, Marsha Blackburn, and Blackburn's beliefs. Swift says, following a scene discussing her experience during the trial,

"I just couldn't really stop thinking about it. And I just thought to myself, next time there is any opportunity to change anything, you had better know what you stand for and what you want to say."

We must ask ourselves, though: when has Swift ever spoken up to change anything? Okay, pulling her entire catalogue from Spotify because they didn't pay their artists enough and similarly pulling her catalogue from Apple Music are changes that she leveraged due to her revenue potential and power, but they are not pertinent to the average woman's rights. Moreover, these are issues that directly impacted Taylor's income, which was enough reason for her to protest in the first place. Swift has sold the most units for a female artist in first week sales, is the first female artist with 100k monthly Spotify listeners, is the first female artist to win the Album of the Year Grammy 4 times, and is the first female artist to do X, Y, and Z, all while being inoffensive and family-friendly to boot. The actual Taylor Swift seems unwilling to compromise the brand of Taylor Swift by contributing in meaningful ways to feminist causes, especially if it is for women outside of America and Hollywood.
The reason political anthems such as "The Man" and "Only the Young" of the Lover era feel disingenuous and corporate is because, well, it is. Taylor has taken every opportunity to advance her career or public image at the expense of other women. What is truly genuine to Taylor's outlook on other women is vying for male attention, taking down female competition, and vocalizing feminist injustices only if they directly impact her and her money. Some will argue that it's satisfactory for a woman with such a huge platform to even TALK about feminism, but that just isn't enough. It's even less impressive when you candidly look at the scope of her feminist lens: "If I was the man, then I'd be THE MAN", or "I really resent the ‘Be careful, buddy, she’s going to write a song about you’ angle, because it trivialises what I do", and, of course, "We all got crowns". Feminism, but only when it happens to me. It gets worse when you look at Taylor's track record of copying other famous women and removing other female artists as potential threats to her pop prowess.
It's good for PR to align yourself with certain blanket feminist and political beliefs, therefore good for branding, therefore good for ticketing and merchandise sales, therefore good for business. And Taylor Swift is a business.
She's not a feminist. Taylor Swift is a capitalist.

I Can't Pay Those Sweatshop Workers a Livable Wage or Benefits! How Else Would I Make My Billions?

Recently, Taylor's team filed to trademark the phrase "Female Rage: The Musical" after Taylor said during Paris N1 of the Eras Tour,

"So you were the first ones to see The Tortured Poets at the Eras Tour...or as I like to call it, 'Female Rage: The Musical'."

This trademark petition was filed last week on Saturday, and news comes about just as numerous unofficial fan-made merch designs have cropped up with this phrase plastered on Fruit of the Loom basics. I'm of the opinion Swift's team motioned for a trademark so that they can send out cease & desists to all those that make knockoff merch, which disrupts potential sales for Bravado, UMG's choice merchandising company; however, since it was filed earlier, perhaps Swift has bigger plans with the bizarre use of the gendered phrase. One Swiftie referred to the phrase "female rage" as "a funny Eras Tour joke". Could it be a possible fourth version of the Eras Tour Movie? Whatever the reason, the motion to capitalize off of such a concept is disgusting, but not unsurprising, for a woman that profits on her vain feminism.
Swift, through her company, TAS Rights Managements, has also trademarked over 200 phrases, including "1989", where she owns the property rights to this calendar year on keychains, phone cases, sunglasses, stationary, bags, beverage ware, clothing, entertainment services, your subconscious, and, of course, Christmas ornaments.
The vapid consumerism in Swiftie culture is, frankly, disgusting. Bravado's sustainability statement is non-existent, the quality control is abysmal, and the materials they use are horrible. The materials, such as acrylic and polyester, are made from petrochemicals. This means they are non-renewable, shed microplastics, and are quite toxic in production. The manufacturing process to make all of those lazy-rushed Eras Tour logo graphic tees is a huge blow to environmental well-being. Apparently, though, Swifties don't give a fuck. They sell out products in seconds and either have to face the manufactured scarcity or buy from a scalper that resells for 200% of the already ridiculous retail price. This doesn't include the environmental impact of vinyl records, CD, and cassette production, of which Taylor produces many variants that sell unsustainable amounts.
If we're talking about women's rights violations, why is no one acknowledging the women that work in the inhumane sweatshop conditions that have to pump out fugly t-shirts and hats? The millions of plastic microfiber dander they are inhaling, or the toxic dyes that touch their bare skin? Are they being compensated fairly for their skilled labour and are they in safe working environments? Do these women have minimal bargaining power, and do they have authority over their worker's rights? Is Taylor Swift female raging at their injustices? Does Taylor Swift ever feels bad that her wealth was built on the backs of women of color, disadvantaged by the demands of the global economy and garment industry? Do you think she ever says a little white feminist prayer for them before she goes to sleep at night?
What's even crazier is not that Taylor herself doesn't care, it's that Swifties don't care. There CANNOT BE ethical billionaires. You only make a billion dollars if you are exploiting other human beings for capital gain. Based on public perception of the possible "Female Rage: The Musical" trademark, it seems like Swifties are already asking for merch with this phrase. "If Taylor made it, I'd buy it." Oh, cool. So not only do you champion Miss Swift's avarice and billionaire status, but you also are unashamed to admit to your blind consumption of her music and merchandise, no matter where they might originate in production or sincerity. Just as Swift takes and takes and takes, Swifties' consumerism of Taylor Swift cannot be quelled.
The tortured artist's most vulnerable and sincere poetry...available now in 21 different versions!

I Am Tortured Poet, Hear Me Whinge

Look - even if Taylor's intention is to characterize TTPD as more "tortured" and "angry", the main thread of the album is "I was ghosted by my decade-long situationship with a controversial indie boy and my fucking stupid fans wrote a 'Speak Up Now' open letter prompting me to drop him" anger, which is adequately expressed in the lyrics and performances. The extent of Taylor's "female rage" on TTPD is on tracks such as "Who's Afraid of Little Old Me?", which contends with relentless media scrutiny; "But Daddy I Love Him", where Swift firmly states she'll date whoever she likes no matter how "Sarahs and Hannahs" may react; and "The Albatross", a track mythologizing her reputation and the consequences of dating her. Of course, these coincide with deep psychological wounds that formed during Swift's early years in the media, and so, from her feminist perspective, these subjects tackle the misogyny and double standards that she faced.
Yet Taylor Swift still has no grounds to be claiming that TTPD best exemplifies female rage and therefore she, in the context of this album, is female rage incarnate. As the daughter of a stock broker and mutual fund marketing executive, Taylor was born into wealth and allowed privileges like trips and subsequent relocation to Nashville all so that she might get a record deal. Her father even invested at least $120,000 into the then-fledgling label, Big Machine Records, which ensured Taylor's place with Borchetta after leaving her dead-end development deal with Sony. The fact that her parents were able to buy her a fucking brand new guitar for Christmas and pay for music lessons says so much about the financial security and safety of her childhood.
Money is privilege and protection, and despite Swift's experiences with misogyny and loser boyfriends, she does not know what female rage is.
Her rage is derived from her frustrations with her obsessive fans pulling the moral superiority card on Taylor in response to her rebound with Matty Healy. That's literally it. She's just pissed that the monster she created is no longer obediant, it's become a feral, sovereign entity that depletes the world of its natural resources and thinks it is more intelligent than it actually is because it's mommy has started to talk to it with big words. Apparently, 'illicit', 'elegy', 'nonchalant', and 'precocious' are considerably big words for the oafish monster, and I find it strange that this level of literacy is present in a group of fans that allegedly have GPAs of 3.5 or higher, but I digress.
Taylor Swift has never been one paycheck away from destitution. Taylor Swift has never experienced racial discrimination. She may have instances of gender discrimination, but she possesses the ideal white, blonde American beauty standard and therefore reaps the benefits of being a conventionally attractive woman. Taylor Swift has sufficient social capital. Taylor Swift is a billionaire woman prolonging her victimhood though she, as a woman, has mostly had control over her image and music (unlike her contemporaries). Taylor Swift is NOT entitled to be championed for her "female rage", nor should she be. Taylor Swift has never even been the struggling artist, for fuck's sake. I don't give a fuck if she's trying to fill the empty lunch tables of her past. Taylor Swift purporting herself, her unpolished album, and her lukewarm feminism as a musical bleeding with female rage is asinine.

Sigh Try and Come For My Job, Poors

Out there in the world right now is a 23-year-old woman, a recent college grad, who works as a barista. She has to wake up and get ready to go into a minimum wage job because she cannot get a job in her field. She doesn't have healthcare benefits or sick time, so she has to go into work no matter how she's feeling. All day long she is berated by vicious customers and creepy men, and, exhausted from being on her feet, she knows she has to go home to her shitty roommate that never does the dishes and her roommate's shitty dog. To comfort herself, she considers getting a treat, but thinks against it when she remembers that matcha lattes cost $15 and they taste like milky dirt. She knows that she needs to buy groceries this week, and so the woman resolves to go home, but notices that her gas tank is low. She goes to put gas in the car, but the pump stops at $27.86 because that's all that she has in her checking account. The woman, bereft and reeling, sinks into the driver's seat. "Well," she thinks, her head in her hands, "at least I don't have Taylor Swift's job. I just couldn't imagine."
Fame is somewhat of a choice. If at any moment Taylor feels that she is misunderstood, misconstrued, or overwhelmed by public opinion, she can LEAVE the public eye - Lord knows she has the retirement fund and residuals to do so. In "I Can Do It With a Broken Heart", the TTPD song about meeting the demands of your career-zenith mega-tour while in the relationship trenches, Taylor ends the song by rambling,

"You know you're good when you can even do it with a broken heart...you know you're good...and I'm good, cause I'm miserable, and no one even knows!...try and come for my job."

Yeah, obviously we wouldn't know, you recently passed the billionaire threshold and are the most famous and in-demand performer in the world right now. Taylor Swift makes an estimated $10 to $13 million dollars A NIGHT on the Eras Tour. Furthermore, the Eras Tour movie grossed $261.6 million globally, (which, as the producer, Taylor takes home 57% of the ticket sales) not counting the streaming revenue from Amazon Prime Video and the estimated $75 million deal that Disney paid to have it on Disney+. We're not even considering the income from cheap plastic popcorn buckets and drink cups plastered with colored squares in her Era-specific likeness.
It's funny. Taylor Swift often said that being famous wasn't hard, that she "isn't complaining". I'm sure it is difficult to always have to present in a good mood, else you'll end up misrepresented in the media, and I'm sure it's invasive to virtually have no privacy or semblance of anonymity. Still, Taylor Swift shows up each night of tour and performs. For a majority of her career, she has penned her sad songs while on the road. Most of "Red", her breakup album, was written in the thick of the Speak Now World tour. Now, some Swifties say they almost "feel bad" for attending the Eras Tour with Swift's revelations in this song, that they have had a 'dimmed experience' upon hearing Taylor's misery whilst performing. Despite the fact that Taylor said that "this was the happiest she's ever been" at Gilette Stadium in May, the lyrics "boohoo, woe is me, smile for the cameras and make the fans happy!!!" are jarring for Eras attendees.
While Taylor Swift was making double-digit millions a night in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and feeling miserable, Ana Clara Benevides Machado passed away due to heat exposure. The concert promoters, Time For Fun, are now the subject of a criminal investigation due to their lack of adequate hydration and safety. Taylor Swift cancelled the Sunday show that was to follow and offered VIP tent tickets to Benevides Marchado's family, which was a kind gesture, but perhaps incongruous to the incident of which they were offered as consolation. Everyone grieves differently, of course, but I'm not sure attending the very show at the very same venue that my daughter or sister passed away in two days prior, where the singer CONTINUED the show despite her death, would be healthy for closure.
There was no female rage at the show as Swift never saw Benevides Machado pass out. There was no female rage towards the disregard for fans as humans while Swift elected to proceed with her Brazil tour dates despite the country being in historic heatwaves (at risk of overheatting herself). If Taylor Swift was so shaken by touring with a broken heart or a fan's passing, she wouldn't have added an additional North American leg of Eras just two months after the Matty breakup. She's brokenhearted but willing to mend the cracks with your money and move onward with her worldwide female rage induced pillaging.
No matter what happens, even if you die at a Taylor Swift concert, Taylor collects a big fat check and flies away. She doesn't know you as anything other than a conversion rate or earning potential despite what her nearly 20-year long parasocial relationship with fans might otherwise indicate. She knows that, while some Swifties are without disposable income, they feel obligated to spend on a "48 Hours Only!" exclusive vinyl variant instead of necessities because they are so entrenched in Taylor Swift's intoxicating celebrity, they'll prioritize materialistic fandom before their needs. This is good enough for her because this means she can expand her real estate portfolio and finance her cat's lavish lifestyles. They're worth an estimated $100 million dollars. Her three cats could pool their net worth and solve world hunger.
While you and I might be denied bereavement leave and barely surviving the current political and economic climate, Taylor Swift has to, instead of gets to, perform for stadiums at full attendance for three nights in a row across the globe. You and I might be replaced by AI at our longtime jobs, but Taylor Swift is threatened with losing more and more money each time you listen to a "Stolen Version" of her songs. If we don't buy every variant of all of her albums, then who is going to pay for the fucking cats?
It is tone deaf to spend as she spends and lives as she lives in this economy, but this is her reality. She was able to donate $100,000 to all of her tour truck drivers, and that's wonderful, but it leads me to wonder about the ethos of the 2020s where one woman can hoard such life-changing amounts of money. Remember in 2014 when she gave a fan $90 ($120 in today's money) to get Chipotle because she had no fucking clue how much it cost? This is a 34-year-old woman who is increasingly out of touch with the reality for working class people and women in general. Normal everyday adults must wake up and go to their thankless jobs, and yet Taylor Swift, despite all her riches, incessantly references the lows of her life and career as a public figure and entertainer to farm sympathy and drive sales. And still, the corporate women have latched onto "I cry a lot, but I am so productive! It's an art!" as their cubicle battle cry.
Do you think that, from up in her private jet, Taylor Swift gazes at the world through her poetic, tortured eyes, and thinks, "All the little people, in their cars, walking, going about their lives...all those girls that don't support girls...do they know that I've made an album about female rage?"

Conclusion/TLDR

Thank you for reading. I would love to hear your critical insights towards this entire ordeal: TTPD, the trademark, the implications of it all.
TLDR: Taylor Swift is a bad feminist and is delusional to think that the TTPD eras set exemplifies female rage at women's injustice.

Hi everyone! 😁
I will preface by saying that it took me many years to find my Dentist and there is no way on Earth that I will go to anyone else. My experiences with dentists have been enough to fill up the Reddit servers and make them crash if I even started to touch upon my experiences of blatant lies and essentially, thievery, most notably perpetrated by their hygienists who are quite OBVIOUSLY financially motivated. I have the best dentist on planet Earth and I have no interest in deviating from him.
I apologize in advance that my post is rather long because I'm blowing off some steam as well. Please don't be angry about that. I'm just upset at the dental insurance world and, particularly, my Dentist's idiot office manager. The bottom line is I need some help figuring out dental insurance companies.
I have had a Humana PPO for quite a few years and my annual maximum cap is $6,000. The premium is a bit ridiculous at about $75 a month but they have historically have paid for most everything so I didn't really blink TOO much about it. HOWEVER, my Dentist stopped accepting/being "in network" of it at the beginning of the year. Most likely because his office manager is something of an idiot who even stopped the office from using CareCredit. I assume that he's trying to shave down his paperwork.
In any event, after having some work done recently I got a bill from my Dentist's office along with the handwritten note from that dingbat office manager stating that, "you are completely responsible for the entirety of this bill as Humana won't pay for anything".
I called Humana immediately and they told me that they DID pay for two of the charges and were never billed for the others and that they paid precisely what they would have been paying if he was in network but I am responsible for the rest. I wrote the dingbat office manager and told him exactly what they paid and what dates and to submit the remaining bills to Humana. He got all defensive. Knowing full well that I'm deaf and cannot handle speaking on the phone (we've discussed the issue of my having gone deaf from cancer treatment a number of times) he told me that I need to call him to discuss it. I once again reiterated that I am deaf in one ear and cannot utilize the phone well because of the reverberations. He wouldn't respond there after. THAT is a complaint that I will take up with my dentist when I see him next. My Dentist nor any of the other people around the Dentist like that office manager but the office manager has been there for 18 years so cannot essentially be let go. The point is that he never resolved anything nor submitted the bills to Humana as I requested. I am spitting nails angry about that.
In the interim I decided that I might want to look at other insurance companies that my Dentist DOES participate in. I cannot understand, unless I've actually grown quite old and senile since the last time I tried to read anything, that they mostly say that they pay a maximum of $1,500 to $2,000 per year. That is total, not per occurrence. I know I'm reading something wrong, RIGHT?
Anyway, to avoid being without any insurance at all while I'm busy canceling my Humana plan, I signed up for the BCBS A1 policy. It's capped at $2,000 per year. In February I simply had a cleaning and a couple of teeth refinished/resurfaced as they had minor erosion and the bill was $978. Humana said that they would covering all but $400 some odd dollars of it but only if their office manager actually submits the damn bills to them. It appears that I have to retrieve the bills myself and submit them because it seems that the office manager is quite adamant about excluding my insurance company as well as CareCredit from his list of daily chores. I wish I had some daily chores to do because I have been out of work due to cancer treatment for over 3 years now and I would LOVE to deal with the miniscule burden of what might be a difficult insurance company or the likes of Synchrony Bank's Carecredit for the sake of my employer's devoted patients.
I am trying to figure out if I have made a good decision by going with BCBS's A1 policy. I have read through the various posts here on Reddit and everybody raves about GEHA. Nobody busy raving about GEHA has ever bothered to respond to anybody inquiring about how to get it so I looked it up for myself and found out that you have to be a postal worker or a military retiree so please don't talk about GEHA. While internet searching for insurance, I made the miserable mistake of typing in my personal information with phone number BUT I back spaced out before pressing the "accept" key which allows agents to contact. Even though I never pressed the "accept" button and back spaced out when I realized that I was submitting information for massive lead share, at 8:01 this morning the freaking phone started ringing and by 9:00 I was so pissed off that I could have bitten somebody's head off if they looked at me wrong. One idiot told me that I had to completely revise my entire health care plan because I have an HMO that includes a dental plan even though no dentist within 400 miles of me participate in it and even if they did I am not leaving my dentist. She told me that I had to completely redo my whole plan anyway in order to get coverage with my dentist and that I could not purchase a standalone plan if I kept my health insurance. She was the biggest idiot I encountered all morning telling me that I can be arrested for having a standalone insurance policy for dental. 🙄 Talk about idiots that really shouldn't have jobs 🙄². I researched and found that I absolutely can purchase my own plan but you cannot comingle plans and benefits. Fine by me because there's not a dentist on the planet that accepts HMO that is worth going to. I asked the stupid idiot just why she thinks I've been paying $74 a month for a separate plan to start with FROM the same company that has my Medicare policy to start with and I've not been arrested in all these years nor is there an APB out for me. I finally got pissed off and told her to have a nice day and hung up on her. She had a whiny 1960s sort of commercial voice to start with that was irritating as hell. As you can tell, she put me in a raunchy mood for the whole rest of the day and I apologize to you that it's coming out in my text. Please accept my very sincere apology.
I know that the very second that I would be without insurance that some big horrible thing would happen so I cannot be without.
Please be kind enough to share your experience in researching and procuring standalone dental plans. I've already signed up for BCBS A1 but I have not remitted the first check yet because I haven't gotten the hard policy in the mail. Other contenders would be Aetna and Cigna.
Thank you VERY MUCH! 🌻 I truly appreciate your help! 🌷

[language-server.eslint] args = ["--stdio"] # should come by def with helix command = "vscode-eslint-language-server" # [language-server.eslint.config] # validate = "on" # I assume this enabled eslit to validate the file, which now shows me counts for errors, warnings, etc in helix # experimental = { useFlatConfig = false } # not sure why this is here # rulesCustomizations = [] # run = "onType" # problems = { shortenToSingleLine = false } # nodePath = "" # seems redundant, why do we need to override this, should get detected autom. # [language-server.eslint.config.codeAction] # [language-server.eslint.config.codeAction.disableRuleComment] # enable = true # location = "separateLine" # [language-server.eslint.config.codeAction.showDocumentation] # enable = true # why? # [language-server.eslint.config.codeActionOnSave] # enable = true # mode = "fixAll" # [language-server.eslint.config.workingDirectory] # mode = "location" # do we need to override this? [[language]] name = "tsx" language-servers = [ "eslint" ] roots = [ ".eslintrc", ] # formatter = { command = "prettier", args = [ "--parser", "typescript" ] } # formatter = { command = "dprint", args = [ "fmt", "--stdin", "tsx" ] } # auto-format = true 

2024-05-13T10:11:31.274 helix_lsp::transport [INFO] eslint -> {"jsonrpc":"2.0","method":"initialize","params":{"capabilities":{"general":{"positionEncodings":["utf-8","utf-32","utf-16"]},"textDocument":{"codeAction":{"codeActionLiteralSupport":{"codeActionKind":{"valueSet":["","quickfix","refactor","refactor.extract","refactor.inline","refactor.rewrite","source","source.organizeImports"]}},"dataSupport":true,"disabledSupport":true,"isPreferredSupport":true,"resolveSupport":{"properties":["edit","command"]}},"completion":{"completionItem":{"deprecatedSupport":true,"insertReplaceSupport":true,"resolveSupport":{"properties":["documentation","detail","additionalTextEdits"]},"snippetSupport":true,"tagSupport":{"valueSet":[1]}},"completionItemKind":{}},"hover":{"contentFormat":["markdown"]},"inlayHint":{"dynamicRegistration":false},"publishDiagnostics":{"tagSupport":{"valueSet":[1,2]},"versionSupport":true},"rename":{"dynamicRegistration":false,"honorsChangeAnnotations":false,"prepareSupport":true},"signatureHelp":{"signatureInformation":{"activeParameterSupport":true,"documentationFormat":["markdown"],"parameterInformation":{"labelOffsetSupport":true}}}},"window":{"workDoneProgress":true},"workspace":{"applyEdit":true,"configuration":true,"didChangeConfiguration":{"dynamicRegistration":false},"didChangeWatchedFiles":{"dynamicRegistration":true,"relativePatternSupport":false},"executeCommand":{"dynamicRegistration":false},"fileOperations":{"didRename":true,"willRename":true},"inlayHint":{"refreshSupport":false},"symbol":{"dynamicRegistration":false},"workspaceEdit":{"documentChanges":true,"failureHandling":"abort","normalizesLineEndings":false,"resourceOperations":["create","rename","delete"]},"workspaceFolders":true}},"clientInfo":{"name":"helix","version":"24.3 (2cadec0b)"},"processId":16484,"rootPath":"/Users/[redact]/Development/[project_name]/dealership-preferences","rootUri":"file:///Users/[redact]/Development/[project_name]/dealership-preferences","workspaceFolders":[{"name":"dealership-preferences","uri":"file:///Users/[redact]/Development/[project_name]/dealership-preferences"}]},"id":0} 2024-05-13T10:11:31.541 helix_lsp::transport [INFO] eslint <- {"jsonrpc":"2.0","method":"window/logMessage","params":{"type":3,"message":"ESLint server running in node v20.12.0"}} 2024-05-13T10:11:31.541 helix_term::application [INFO] window/logMessage: LogMessageParams { typ: Info, message: "ESLint server running in node v20.12.0" } 2024-05-13T10:11:31.542 helix_lsp::transport [INFO] eslint <- {"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":0,"result":{"capabilities":{"textDocumentSync":{"openClose":true,"change":2,"willSaveWaitUntil":false,"save":{"includeText":false}},"workspace":{"workspaceFolders":{"supported":true}},"executeCommandProvider":{"commands":["eslint.applySingleFix","eslint.applySuggestion","eslint.applySameFixes","eslint.applyAllFixes","eslint.applyDisableLine","eslint.applyDisableFile","eslint.openRuleDoc"]},"diagnosticProvider":{"identifier":"eslint","interFileDependencies":false,"workspaceDiagnostics":false},"codeActionProvider":{"codeActionKinds":["quickfix","source.fixAll.eslint"]}}}} 2024-05-13T10:11:31.542 helix_lsp::transport [INFO] eslint <- {"capabilities":{"codeActionProvider":{"codeActionKinds":["quickfix","source.fixAll.eslint"]},"diagnosticProvider":{"identifier":"eslint","interFileDependencies":false,"workspaceDiagnostics":false},"executeCommandProvider":{"commands":["eslint.applySingleFix","eslint.applySuggestion","eslint.applySameFixes","eslint.applyAllFixes","eslint.applyDisableLine","eslint.applyDisableFile","eslint.openRuleDoc"]},"textDocumentSync":{"change":2,"openClose":true,"save":{"includeText":false},"willSaveWaitUntil":false},"workspace":{"workspaceFolders":{"supported":true}}}} 2024-05-13T10:11:31.542 helix_lsp::transport [INFO] eslint -> {"jsonrpc":"2.0","method":"initialized","params":{}} 2024-05-13T10:11:31.542 helix_lsp::transport [INFO] eslint -> {"jsonrpc":"2.0","method":"textDocument/didOpen","params":{"textDocument":{"languageId":"typescriptreact","text":"unable to show, work code","uri":"file:///Users/[redact]/Development/[project_name]/dealership-preferences/__tests__/unit/test.spec.tsx","version":0}}} 2024-05-13T10:11:31.543 helix_lsp::transport [INFO] eslint <- {"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":0,"method":"client/registerCapability","params":{"registrations":[{"id":"8fa31d6f-70ae-4286-9652-d386372442e1","method":"workspace/didChangeWorkspaceFolders","registerOptions":{}}]}} 2024-05-13T10:11:31.543 helix_term::application [WARN] Ignoring a client/registerCapability request because dynamic capability registration is not enabled. Please report this upstream to the language server 2024-05-13T10:11:31.543 helix_lsp::transport [INFO] eslint -> {"jsonrpc":"2.0","result":null,"id":0} 

{ "extends": "@[org name]", "rules": { "object-curly-newline": "off" } } 

Special thanks to u/SpacePaladin15 for creating the NoP universe.
​
I'd also like to thank u/xskipy10 for their awesome fanart of the main cast as well as their recent Tohba meme and their fanart of Michael baysitting. You're work is a treasure!
​
Thank you as well to u/Accomplished-Golf-59 for his take on Michael, Teylim, and Tohba in his submission for the Banner Art Contest, and u/Spacer_Catgirl4969 for their awesome music video featuring a pixel-art Dohkar in his bar. Be sure to give ALL of these awesome creators your love and support.
​
And let's not forget u/Guywhoexists2812 who has been an awesome source of memes as well as sick pixel art, such as THIS and THIS!!!! And even THIS!!!!!! And how could I forget THIS!!!!!!!!!! Thank you so much!
​
Today, we join Dohkar and Davids as they continue the hunt for Albiel, and we have the final confrontation between father and son. And Bennic finally decides what side he's on. LETTUCE...continue...
​
First
​
Previous
​
Songs Mentioned/Used: Fire by Barns Courtney
​
Memory Transcript Subject: Patient T-143, Yotul Refugee Sponsor Date:[Standardized Human Time] January 16, 2137
​
That was Michael! It HAD to be!
​
There was no mistaking it. That was my joey’s voice. And it tore a swath through this building. I couldn’t hear the guards outside my cell anymore. Either they ran off, or the sheer sound alone was enough to knock them unconscious. Either way, it gave me hope. And as I began hearing gunfire in the distance, slowly getting closer, my heart surged.
​
This was it. This was my chance. Whoever these attackers were, there was no way Michael, Khornel, and Tohba coming over the loudspeakers at the same time as the attack was a coincidence. This was a raid! They were here to clear the place out and save the patients here! They were here to save me…
​
I hopped up and grabbed onto the barred window of my holding cell. I wasn’t even close to strong enough to get this door open, but perhaps one of the raiders were.
​
“HEEEEEYYYYY!!! HEEEEEELLLPPP!!! OVER HEEERRRREEE!!!!”
​
I listened as my voice echoed down the halls and corridors, waiting for a response. When none came, I waited for the sound to completely dissipate, and tried again.
​
“HELLOOOOOOOO!!!!! PLEASE!!! ANYONE!!!!! HEEEEEELLLPPP!!!!”
​
Once again, I listened to my voice bounce from wall to wall, echoing through the building, waiting for any kind of response…
​
^{“TEYLIM?!” TEYLIM, IS THAT YOU?!”}
​
My heart soared as tears of relief built in my eyes. It was faint from just how far away it was, I knew that voice anywhere!
​
Dohkar…
​
“YES!!!! DOHKAR, IT’S ME!!! I’M HERE!!!”
​
I began hearing footsteps echoing through the halls, getting closer to my cell. He was so close. Dohkar found me. He’d get me out, and then we could leave this place and find my joeys. It was almost over.
​
The footsteps were so close now. I could barely contain my excitement as I let go of the bars and landed back on the ground. I waited with baited breath as the steps arrived just outside. But…something was wrong… Those footsteps sounded a lot…heavier than a Venlil’s should…
​
The door opened, and the first thing I noticed…was the tall, menacing figure’s singular, sharpened, horn…
​
“Y-you’re not Dohkar…”
​
Memory Transcript Subject: Dohkar, Venlil Bartender Date:[Standardized Human Time] January 16, 2137
​
“Yeesh, the kid’s got some pipes, I’ll give him that.”
​
Davids and I were the only ones remaining from Squad 1. Chavez and our medic were the only others, and they were on their way back to the APC. We were on our own now, but seeing the complete and utter devastation of the Guild’s forces didn’t make that much of an issue. Occasionally we’d find one that was still conscious, but they were completely deaf from not getting their headset off quick enough.
​
“Yeah. Let’s keep moving. We still have a job to finish. Is there still interference keeping us from contacting Squad 2?”
​
Davids held a finger to his earpiece.
​
“Squad 2, this is 1-1 Sargent Davids, over.”
​
I listened in on my own ear piece. We were getting nothing but static.
​
Come on, Tevis.
​
“Squad 2, respond! This is 1-1 Sargent Davids. We are two men down and require assistance, over.”
​
For a moment, there was still nothing but static, until a haggered, pained, voice crackled through.
​
“This is Tevis. I read you Squad 1…”
​
“What the hell happened?! We lost contact with you as soon as we began the attack!”
​
“We were hit right away. Lost half my squad in the initial confrontation.”
​
“What’s your status?”
​
“Alive, but I’m the only one left. I found my original team…or…what’s left of them… But I’ve got the data we needed. Objective Complete.”
​
The grim tone in his voice said it all. They must’ve found something they REALLY weren’t supposed to.
​
“I’m aborting the mission. Even if we do manage to capture Albiel, there’s no way we’d be able to clear the facility with just the three of us. Meet back at the staging area where I’ll get back in contact with Magistrate Intellegence and request reinforcements.”
​
“We can’t just leave! Not when we’re so close!”
​
“We’re retreating. That’s an order, Dohkar.”
​
My free paw clenched itself into a fist. I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. Everywhere around us, the defenses were crumbling. Anyone who could possibly have gotten in our way was either dead, unconscious, or deaf. We had this! There was no reason NOT to continue.
​
Davids gave me a sympathetic look. He was a soldier, and he knew orders were orders. Still, I made a promise! I promised those pups, those pups who managed to wipe out an entire Guild Office’s worth of exterminators from half a town away, that I’d return and bring back Clem and-
​
^{“HEEEEEYYYYY!!! HEEEEEELLLPPP!!! OVER HEEERRRREEE!!!!”}
​
“Teylim?”
​
Protect the herd!
​
My ears perked up, and my senses were brought up to full alert.
​
“Dohkar, what did you say?”
​
“I…I thought I heard-“
​
^{“HELLOOOOOOOO!!!!! PLEASE!!! ANYONE!!!!! HEEEEEELLLPPP!!!!”}
​
“TEYLIM!”
​
PROTECT THE HERD!!!
​
My ears were on swivels, desperately trying to pinpoint the direction the voice was coming from. Once I’d narrowed it down, I took a few steps and cupped my paws around my snout as I shouted back.
​
“TEYLIM?!” TEYLIM, IS THAT YOU?!”
​
“Dohkar, what are you doin-“
​
“Quiet!”
​
I focused on my hearing as much as I could. Odds are, I’d probably get a decent chewing out for talking back to a superior officer, but if I found Teylim, it would be worth it. I listened as hard as I could.
​
^{“YES!!!! DOHKAR, IT’S ME!!! I’M HERE!!!”}
​
Protect the herd!!!
​
My mind immediately raced, trying to remember what was in that direction. My mind slowly formed a layout of the building until-
​
THE TEMPORARY HOLDING CELLS!!
​
“Davids! Hostage located! It’s Teylim!”
​
“You’re sure?!”
​
“Positive! She’s that way!”
​
“Dohkar! Davids! What are you-?”
​
“We’ve got a location on one of the hostages. We’re going after her!”
​
“Negative! I gave you direct orders to-“
​
Before I could respond, Davids did it for me.
​
“All due respect sir, the UN doesn’t follow YOUR orders.”
​
“Why you filthy pre-“
​
The signal cut off and Davids shouldered his rifle.
​
“Come on. We’ve still got hostages to save.”
​
I gave a thankful nod and we sprinted towards the holding cells. Tevis could run all he wanted, but WE still have a job to do.
​
Hang tight, Teylim…
​
Passing several other squads of downed exterminators on the way, we eventually made it to the holding cells. These were where we’d temporarily hold suspects until they were ready to be screened. I immediately spotted a pair of officers outside one of the cells, it’s door was wide open.
​
“Teylim?”
​
I jogged over to the open cell.
​
“Teylim?!”
​
Nothing. It was completely empty. The only thing that showed that anyone had been here…was a streak of green on the floor…
​
[Warning!: Anger Response Spiking Rapidly: Attempting To Compensate…]
​
I knelt down and ran a finger across the streak. It was fresh. She was here…and someone had hurt her…enough to draw blood. The only other clue I found were a few white hairs speckled with blue blood. Fissan fur…
​
Albiel…
​
I didn’t need to look anymore. I knew exactly who did this, and exactly where he would go.
​
“It’s your call, Sarge…”
​
“We finish the mission…and save the hostages.”
​
I led the way. The Chief’s office wasn’t far. A right turn here. A left turn there. And then a long hallway with the office at the very end.
​
Once the door to his office was inside, Davids and I both picked up the pace. There wasn’t a doubt in my mind that he was waiting for us. I knew my father. This was a test. He knew I’d go after Teylim. He wanted me to chase him.
​
“This is probably a trap!”
​
“Definitely!”
​
Once we made it to the door, we stacked up, both taking a side. Davids raised his hand and began silently counting down.
​
Five…
​
Four…
​
Three-
​
BANG!!!
​
The door flew open and an arm holding a sidearm shot out fired at Davids. Before I could even see what became of him, that same arm ripped me inside the room before I could react.
​
SLAM!!!
​
Before I could catch my bearings, I was yanked into the air and flung across the room, slamming over the desktop and landing roughly on the floor behind it.
​
Getting ragdolled like that brought back all sorts of unpleasant memories, but I did my best to shake myself loose from them. Disarmed, I went for the human pistol holstered to my hip and stood to aim at my attacker.
​
“Oh, I wouldn’t if I were you.”
​
“Dohkar!”
​
Albiel…
​
My grip on my weapon tightened and I could feel my teeth chipping as they ground against each other in rage.
​
There he was, the symbol of everything wrong with The Guild. The Chief. My father. Albiel. In one paw, he held Teylim, beaten, green dripping from the side of her mouth, and a patient shock collar around her neck. In the other paw, he held the remote for it.
​
“Let. Her. Go.”
​
“You never fail to disappoint me, Dohkar. You AND those failures of a squad you called your brothers.”
​
Bennic?
​
Did he hurt them too?
​
“Every time I think the bar couldn’t be any lower, you still somehow manage.”
​
His fur was matted and disheveled, and there was an outright manic look in his eyes. The only thing about him that was still prim and orderly was that damned horn, still and shiny and sharp as ever. Bennic was right. He really had lost it.
​
“ALL of this could’ve been yours one paw, Dohkar! Everything I’ve done! EVERYTHING I’ve built! I did so in the name of finding someone worthy enough to pass it all on to. I found you, along with the rest of your incompetent squad in a damned GUTTER! I gave you a home, a purpose, and THIS is how you all repay me?! Failure! Betrayal! Disappointment! And for WHAT?! ‘People’ like THIS?!”
​
His grip around Teylim’s neck tightened. I felt myself breaking apart as she shrieked in his grip.
​
“Dohkar, plea-“
​
“SILENCE, SAVAGE!!”
​
I tried aiming my weapon once he was distracted, but he quickly noticed and held up the remote. With a chuff, he regained a facsimile of his usual self, the mask he kept on to hide the madness I always knew was there.
​
“Even after you left, you continue to disappoint me at every turn: Cavorting about with primitives and predators far below your station, opening up that filthy excuse of a watering hole, so you could spend even MORE time with the mindless gutter trash that INFESTS this town?! Even when my expectations for you could not have been any lower, ALL you had to do…was STAY. AWAY Just look good for the ‘people’, continue on being the former ‘legend’ that everyone moron in this town believed you to be, and keep your noseless shout OUT of our business. But you couldn’t even do THAT, could you?! How I saw ANY potential in you in the first place continues to elude me.”
​
I didn’t respond, continuing to let him talk himself to death. Any moment now, David’s would break through that door, and I’d have my chance. I continued to just stare, only taking the occasional glance towards Teylim.
​
“Buuuut no matter. I’ll just have to start again. I’ll find a new backwater town, with just as neglectful management. I’ll find other downtrodden youths more than willing to stay loyal if it means a roof over their heads and food in their stomachs. I’ll build it all up again. And you…well…maybe you’ll surprise me and survive long enough to see it.”
​
“No. It stops here. I won’t let you take advantage of anyone else.”
​
“Oh? What are you going to do? Shoot me with your primitive space ape gun? We BOTH know you won’t risk hitting HER.”
​
He lifted Teylim closer to him, using her as a shield. My paws began to shake.
​
“Now here’s what’s going to happen. You are going to stand by and watch as I take my leave. And if you try to stop me, I’ll not only reunite this wretch with her mate, but I’ll be sure to find their tainted SPAWN as well, and take extra time in coming up with a creative end for him. Who knows? He might make for a decent recruit after all.”
​
“Dohkar!”
​
“Teylim…”
​
My mind went from plan to plan, idea to idea, finding no solution that wouldn’t end with Teylim getting killed. Even if I adjusted my aim, he’d just activate the collar before I could pull the trigger. I was also out of time for stalling.
​
“Dohkar! I need…you…to promise me…”
​
My eyes focused back on Teylim. Trails of tears flowed down her cheeks as her teeth clenched. At that moment, I knew exactly what she’d say. This was it. These were Lohrek’s last moments, before Albiel killed him… He made me make a promise, too.
​
No. Not again.
​
“Promise me… Whatever happens…watch over my joeys… Michael… Tohba… Protect them…”
​
No. No. No. Not again. Please not again.
​
“I…I…”
​
“PLEASE, DOHKAR! They’re all I have… Please… Promise me…that you’ll protect them…”
​
Every last part of me shook and shivered. I couldn’t find words to express the horror I was feeling, watching the death of my best friend play in front of me again, almost verbatim. So instead, I said what I wish I could’ve said to Loh.
​
“Like they were my very own pups.”
​
She forced a pained smile as Albiel’s grip loosened for just a moment.
​
“Well isn’t that precious? A mother’s love truly does run eternal. …Perhaps THAT was the missing piece. How might YOU all have turned out if you’d had a mother as well. Food for thought-“
​
“GYYYYAAAARRRGH!!!!!”
​
Albiel’s speech was interrupted as the Yotul he was holding shrieked out, twisting her head to the side and clamping her jaws onto his arm, causing blue to spurt out from around her teeth.
​
“GAAAAAHHH!!! VICIOUS BEAST!!!”
​
I watched in shock as with one massive swing of his arm, he shook Teylim off and sent her slamming into the wall with a sickening slap.
​
“TEYLIM!!!!!”
​
PROTECT THE HERD!!!
​
I raised my weapon. While I could’ve ended him right then and there, my only concern was the remote in his paw that he was pointing in her direction.
​
BANG!!!
​
Another splatter of blue, another shriek of pain from Albiel, and the remote was sent, sparking and nonfunctional, to the ground.
​
Out of the corner of my eye, I saw him make a break for it through the door, but my focus was entirely on Teylim. I slid down to the ground beside her and cradled her in my arms.
​
“Teylim! TEYLIM!!”
​
She was unresponsive. One of her legs had definitely been broken from the hit and while I could feel a pulse, it was weak
​
I turned on my ear piece and hoped it still worked.
​
“Medic!!! I need a medic in the Chief’s office! One soldier and one hostage critically injured!!! Medic!!!”
​
While I waited for a response, I went back to trying to rouse Teylim.
​
“Teylim! Wake up! Please!”
​
Still…nothing… She was getting weaker. I could feel it.
​
“Please, Teylim… You can’t leave us yet. We still need you. Your pups NEED you, you hear me? BOTH of them! Michael… Tohba… They need their mother. And…”
​
For the first time in a long time…I felt the old sting of tears build up in my eyes. They flowed down my face is thin streaks as I held one of the only friends I had left in my arms, pressing my head against hers.
​
“I need you, too… So please… Wake up…”
​
There was a moment of nothing but silence, before she took in a faint, raspy, gasp of air.
​
I reeled back in shock as her limbs finally moved, clinging onto me. Her chest convulsed as she coughed and sputtered, before finally, her eyes winced open, meeting mine.
​
“Doh..kar…?”
​
I couldn’t speak. My mind refused to create the right words for the relief I felt as I pulled her in, holding her close.
​
“Wow… Hehe… Never thought…I’d see the day YOU cried… HeheOH stars, it hurts to laugh…”
​
I pulled back and wiped at my face.
​
“I’m getting you out of here.”
​
Finally, right on queue, I heard multiple people enter the room. I turned and saw a pair of UN medics come in with a stretcher.
​
“We heard your request for a medic!”
​
“Here! Help her!”
​
“On it!”
​
As we got to work getting Teylim on the stretcher, I noticed there were only two.
​
“What about Davids?”
​
One of the medics gave me a sympathetic look before shaking his head.
​
Damnit…
​
Suddenly, I realized something. These medics… They weren’t ones that we’d left at the staging area…
​
“Wait. Aren’t you two supposed to still be at the bar?”
​
“We were needed to help care for the rescued patients. The staging area’s already being turned into a field hospital for all of them.”
​
I was…confused… We didn’t get to clearing out the facility yet. And as far as I knew, Tevis had already retreated back outside.
​
“What? But we didn’t-“
​
“That would be my handiwork, Dohkar.”
​
A voice crackled through the radio. It wasn’t Tevis, Mike, or anyone else I’d have expected to hear. It was…
​
“Ben?”
Memory Transcript Subject: Officer Bennic, Senior Extermination Officer Date:[Standardized Human Time] January 16, 2137
​
Madness…
​
Pointless, directionless madness…
​
I slowly made my way down the hall to just one of the many treatment rooms in the facility, my squad mates at my side, doing my best to not let what I saw in Chief’s office get to me.
​
Though, now that I thought about it, it made perfect sense. How willing he was to stand by in his code little room in the back of the building while the rest of us fought and died.
​
The perfect shields and distractions…
​
Don’t think… Just do… Follow orders…
​
We believed in The Guild. We believed in HIM. That’s how we were raised, after all. It’s how we all were. Albiel always DID prefer to recruit young. All the easier to mold into what he wanted.
​
Obedient little soldiers…just like me…
​
Don’t think… Just do… Follow orders…
​
I walked through the door. I remembered when we were shown these rooms the first time. “A necessary evil”, it was called. We didn’t like it, especially Dohkar. He was always stronger than us. Sometimes I wonder…
​
Don’t think… Just do… Follow orders…
​
There are two chairs in the room. The door to the rest of the facility, particularly the holding cells, had a line out the door of prisoners and patients. All waiting for the inevitable.
​
Don’t think… Just do… Follow orders…
​
The door was guarded. Two of the younger officers who’d been assigned this post for a while now. One remained focused, while the other constantly kept glancing at the rears of any female patient he could see. Even now, after we found out what he would do in his spare time, he never received punishment.
​
Don’t think… Just do… Follow orders…
​
I looked to the two patients already strapped to their chairs. In the left one, an elderly Venlil, a soldier if I remember right. He served this planet, and served it proudly, and paid the price with his eyesight. Is THIS what all those years of service has earned him?
​
Don’t think… Just do… Follow orders…
​
In the right, a Gojid female. She was only a pup when she was first brought here. She was adorned with two large burn scars. One that covered her entire forearm from a flamer burning her. The other wrapped around her neck, a permanent reminder of the collar that had been placed around it. What does a child do to deserve a life like this, I wonder.
​
Don’t think… Just do… Follow orders…
​
“Mr. Clem…?”
​
“It will be alright, child. I promise.”
​
“I don’t wanna! I don’t wanna get hurt again!”
​
The elder faces in my direction, his glassy eyes filled with nothing but hatred. I have a clue about who he is, but just to be sure…
​
“You’re Clem? You’re the one that helped Dohkar when he left The Guild, right?”
​
“Why are you doing this?’ What did we do?! You can’t just punish us without giving us a reason!”
​
If only he knew…
​
“This…isn’t a punishment… The Guild is under attack. Under direct orders by Extermination Chief Albiel, I am to oversee the scuttling of the facility, including the evacuation of staff, deletion of data…and termination of prisoners…”
​
The glassy eyes of the blind old man, glared white-hot daggers into my very being.
​
“You monsters! Dohkar really was right about you lot! You’re not protectors! You’re just murderers!”
​
He’s right…
​
Don’t think… Just do… Follow orders…
​
Those are my orders. While my fellow officers fight and die just to buy time, while my Chief, my father hides away in his office, making deals and planning HIS escape, I cover up what we should never have been doing in the first place.
​
Don’t think… Just do… Follow orders…
​
One of the doctors begins charging the machine. It whirs to life, sending the Gojid into hysterics. She knows what these chairs do, as do I…
​
Don’t think…
​
It’ll kill them…
​
Just do…
​
Just like it killed so many others before…
​
Follow orders…
​
…
​
Unfortunately…I don’t feel like following orders.
​
Without even NEEDING to think. I pull a sidearm from my holster, followed by my squad: Abra, Canuck, and Ento. My brothers. Among all the other officers in our branch, We were all recruited together, with Dohkar as our leader. When he left, we all stayed, but I did my best to fill his place.
​
So when I draw my weapon, the others do as well.
​
BANG!! BABANG!!! BANG!! BANG!!!
​
The doctor falls. The two guards fall. And the generator fueling the chairs sparks and dies. We unstrap the two from the chair and do our best to calm the patients.
​
“Wha-? What are you-?”
​
“For the first time in my life, doing my job. Now then, would an old soldier be willing to help me get these people organized and out of here?”
​
With more than a little hesitation, especially from the young Gojid girl, the two walked over to the other patients and began talking them down.
​
So, with me leading the way, letting the soldier and his cellmate ride in my back, we began to lead the line of patients toward the emergency exit, opening every cell along the way.
​
Don’t think… Just do…
​
It wasn’t easy. Many didn’t trust me, others were simply too out of it or just plain damaged to come out on their own, but with the coaxing of more of true or own, we’d add them to our long caravan.
​
There was only one we didn’t find…
​
Jerrik…
​
Memory Transcript Subject: Dohkar, Venlil Bartender Date:[Standardized Human Time] January 16, 2137
​
“Ben?”
​
“You’re clear, Dohkar. The patients are already at the staging area getting triaged and sorted by Canuck. The other UN soldiers here have already called for the medics and volunteers to come and help.”
​
I felt my heart warm as I heard Ben’s speaking. This wasn’t the old, beaten, Surulian still subservient to Albiel. This was my brother, my brother who is not truly seen for a long, long time. And he wasn’t alone.
​
“Canuck? Does that mean that Ento and Abra are there, too?”
​
“Copy that, commander!”
​
“Yeah…we’re here…I guess…”
​
Guys…
​
My brothers. My whole damn squad from training. My brothers who were taken with me. They were all there, helping how they could.
​
“How does it feel being on the right side again?”
​
“Like we’ve still got a LOT of work to do. And so do YOU. Go, Dohkar. We’ll handle things out here… Take. Him. Down…for all of us…”
​
…For all of us…
​
Protect the herd!
​
The signal cut out. I gave one last look to my friend on the stretcher. I didn’t need to look at the two medics.
​
“Tell me you have her.”
​
“We have her.”
​
Teylim gave me a weak smile and a nod.
​
“Go. Finish this.”
​
I turned, and ran. I ran as fast as my legs could carry me. And then, a familiar tune came to my mind. A promise I’d made the last time I left this wretched building.
​
A promise to burn everything my father built.
​
LORD, GIMME THAT FIRE!!!!
​
I ran.
​
LORD, GIMME THAT FIRE!!!!
​
I chased.
​
LORD, GIMME THAT FIRE!!!!
​
I raced to finally put his madness to an end.
​
BURN!!!! BURN!!!! BURN!!!!
​
Memory Transcript Subject: Patient J-902, Nevok Predator Disease Patient Date:[Standardized Human Time] January 16, 2137
​
I hid. I saw the others get let out and huddled together in a line. I knew the room they were being led to, so I hid.
​
I heard the roar of the predator through the speaker in my cell. I heard the screams of the guards. I heard the shots being fired.
​
My door opens. Many of the other ones opened, too. I peek around the doorway to make sure it’s safe. And it is.
​
**Nowhere is safe.**It’s so much brighter now. Now that I’m finally out of the cell. I can think clearly again. And with clarity, came pretty much everything I wished had stayed forgotten.
​
I failed. I couldn’t go through with it. And as punishment, I was locked away.
​
Father…
​
I fell to my knees and cried. Cried like a damn pup, just like I did when I begged him not to lock me in here.
​
Father…
​
I did EVERYTHING else right! I followed the training. I followed the beliefs. I did everything he told me to do! But still, he…
​
Father…
​
[Warning!: Anger Response Rising Steadily…]
​
I looked up. Above the cells, above the walkways, above all of this damned facility, was one window. HIS office…
​
Father…
​
“This way everyone! Stay together!”
​
I snap my attention towards a large group approaching my direction. I COULD go with them. I COULD go back outside…but…there’s something I have to do first.
​
As I make my way to the electroshock chamber, I spot the dead guards and doctor. I spot one of their weapons on the ground, and pick it up.
​
Just like my training, just as HE instructed me. The predator has been smoked out, fleeing from his hole out into the open. All that was left…
​
Was for someone to take the shot…
​
Next

Nicole has recommended Hillsong to her viewers and has heavily praised it. https://youtu.be/455SaO0lRnA?si=e2osk4YmvMFx_hlN (20:11-20:54 ; She recommends it at 20:50)
I just want to let everyone know what type of controversies Hillsong are involved with before you go to one and also to help anyone realize what kind of organization Nicole affiliates herself with. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillsong\_Church)
TW: SEXUAL ASSAULT & RAPE ⚠️

• Church's founder opposes abortion
• In 2006, Hillsong were stripped of A$414,000 from the grant on the grounds they had faked the Indigenous endorsement that was required to obtain it. Hillsong were also accused of offering the RACA A$280,000 in order to silence their complaints regarding the matter
• Pushes for a charity commission in Australia have stemmed from claims that religious organisations like Hillsong avoid taxes by paying their staff in tax-exempt fringe benefits
• Frank Houston, the father of Hillsong Church founder Brian Houston, was a pastor in New Zealand and Australia who sexually abused boys over the course of his ministry
• Although Brian Houston, then national president of the Assemblies of God denomination in Australia, was legally obligated to report the crime, he allegedly did not do so. Brian Houston stated that he felt it reasonable not to report the crime when it came to light at the time that the victim was an adult, and when the victim did not want the crime reported (an assertion that was denied by the victim)
• Victim testified that that Frank Houston offered him AU$10,000 as compensation at a McDonald's
• On 5 August 2021, NSW Police issued a warrant for Brian Houston to attend the Downing Centre Local Court in Sydney on 5 October, alleging that Houston concealed child sexual abuse by his late father, Frank. Houston was in the United States at the time of being charged. He has denied the charges and his lawyer stated he intends to plead not guilty. In January 2022, Houston resigned his chairmanship of the Hillsong board, as court proceedings were likely to be protracted.
• It considers homosexual practice sinful, and does not allow homosexuals to assume leadership roles. It issued a statement in February 2019 stating that it was inclusive; however, Houston had formerly said that Hillsong would accept those who did not follow a "homosexual lifestyle"
• Hillsong has been criticised for its involvement with Mercy Ministries, an evangelical charity with an anti-abortion view and a conservative perspective on homosexuality
• Hillsong's attitude towards criticism was portrayed negatively by former member Tanya Levin in her book People in Glass Houses: An Insider's Story of a Life In and Out of Hillsong. Specific criticisms covered authoritarian church governance, lack of financial accountability, resistance to free thought, strict fundamentalist teachings and lack of compassion.
• Many former church members have accused the church of exploiting volunteers, due to overwork, lack of recognition and interference in privacy
• On 20 August 2008, Michael Guglielmucci, a then pastor of Planetshakers Church, composed "Healer", a song about his experience of cancer. He was invited by Hillsong to add his song to the album This Is Our God. Later, he confessed that he had lied about having cancer.
• In 2015, American preacher Mark Driscoll was invited to attend the Hillsong annual conference. When it was revealed that Driscoll had made offensive comments about women, Brian Houston announced that Driscoll would no longer attend the conference. However, a pre-recorded interview with Driscoll was played during the conference.
• Around 2017, two Hillsong volunteers who attempted to convey their concerns about Lentz to Hillsong leadership were allegedly intercepted and dismissed
• In early 2021, Vanity Fair, the Christian Post and News.com.au reported that a female student at Hillsong Leadership College named Anna Crenshaw had been indecently assaulted by a married Hillsong administrator named Jason Mays, the son of the church's director of human resources. Mays received a 12-month ban from ministry, he was subsequently reinstated to his ministry role and volunteered with singing at worship services. Brian Houston subsequently apologised for his Tweet questioning Crenshaw's version of events
• In March 2022, Brian Houston resigned his position as global senior pastor after an internal investigation into his misconduct began. It was reported that in both 2013 and 2019 he had engaged in inappropriate behaviour with women connected to the church.
• Hillsong Dallas pastor Reed Bogard resigned in January 2021, two weeks before an internal investigation found that he had been accused of raping a female junior colleague while serving at Hillsong New York City.

TLDR; Hillsong has been criticised by politicians, media, community groups, Christian leaders and former members such as Tanya Levin. Criticisms have included Hillsong's finances, its ties to controversial organisations, its attitudes towards LGBTQ+ people and its treatment of critics as well as scandals involving Brian Houston and other prominent church leaders.
(EVERYTHING WAS TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM WIKIPEDIA)
Thoughts, anyone?

Having read a comprehensive book detailing the Hart Family/ Stampede Wrestling, as well as books by Bret Hart, Bruce Hart and Dynamite Kid, I can say it was great to hear from someone who was spoken about in all those books. It is fascinating to see all the intersecting points of view when it comes to anything Hart Family related.
Bret Hart book
Bruce Hart book
History of Stampede Wrestling book
History of the Hart Family as documented in various books
Dynamite Kid book
This book was short and a quick read, but you could tell it was written with honesty and truth. She doesn't shy away from her own mistakes and issues while detailing the own POV on a relationship where most people have only heard from Bret.
As always, it's done in chronological order. I hope you find it as interesting as I did...
Julie had a truly wild and horrific youth experience between being sent to juvenile detention centers and dealing with genuinely abusive step parents. She is honest and critical of her own behaviors as well and doesn't like the choices she made. I grew up in the area where she spent her teenage years, and I can confirm that the seedy ghetto areas of Saskatchewan are genuinely gross and terrifying places to be when you're young and directionless.
She talks about how she was r*ped while hitchhiking as a teenager and got pregnant. She gave the baby up for adoption and tried to press charges but got cold feet and ran to another neighboring city. She was afraid the man who assaulted her would escape the charges and come after her again. She was young and naively thought that if she had just switched towns, she could escape everything. When a cop found her, he accused her of running because she was lying about the assault. This type of bullshit is why women don't come forward.
Julie was working in Regina, Saskatchewan, at the arena where wrestling was held when it came in town. That's where she first saw Bret Hart, and Bret saw her too. He ended up asking her boss Gil to introduce the two. Bret spoke about this in his book, too, how Julie caught his eye while he was in the ring. Gil later warned Julie that dating a wrestler is risky because they have a lot of "stops on the road." Julie didn't understand that Gil wasn't criticizing or accusing Bret of anything, but how he knew how wrestlers were on the road, in terms of meeting women.
Julie speaks favorably on how Bret treated her younger sister Michelle (the future wife of Dynamite Kid) but I remember in Bret's book, him describing in detail how attracted he was to the underage Michelle when he met her. Julie says Bret treated her like a sister, and her book came out after Bret's, so I'll take her word for it.
Julie moved in with Bret in Calgary just a few months into their relationship and she remembers being a wreck of nerves and anxiety ay the start, unable to cook or even attend the big Hart Family Sunday dinner. Eventually, Bret got her out to the Hart house where she met Stu and Helen Hart. Helen was a sweetheart, but she remembers Stu eying her up and down, with Julie saying, "He gave me the once over." Adding, "Stu judged women on their teeth and legs." She said Stu stared at her teeth and legs as if she were a race horse he was inspecting.
Julie remembers how Stu would turn any conversation into something about wrestling. She mentioned being a Saskatchewan Roughrider fan (Canadian football team), and Stu went on a rant about Gene Kiniski, who briefly played for the Edmonton Eskimos This made me chuckle as Stu and Gene had a but of a rough relationship since Stu gave up on Gene when he was a rookie and hurt his knee. Gene went to Toronto where "Whipper" Billy Watson essentially turned Gene into the big name star he was known for.
In Bret's book, he described the first night Julie came to the Sunday Hart dinner and when Julie passed on the salad, Bret's sister Diana Hart snapped on her saying, "What, you're too good for fuckin' salad!?" Bret says his mom responded by saying to Julie, "So you met Bret's sister Diana." In Julie's book, she describes this event as well but doesn't mention the funny line from Helen. She says Bret just took Julie and decided to leave immediately. Bret's other sister, Georgia, followed them outside and apologized on behalf of Diana and excused Diana by pointing out how pregnant Diana was at the time.
Julie actually puts over Diana quite a bit and says she actually came to admire Diana for how outspoken she was. She says Diana had a great style and was a gifted artist. After reading so many Hart related books, it's refreshing to hear something positive about Diana. Diana is the "Black sheep" who married "The British Bulldog" Davey Boy Smith. Diana would write a scandalous and legal minefield of a book in 2001 called "Under the mat." It was quickly pulled from shelves after Owen Hart's widow Martha threatened legal action over what was said about her and Owen. Bret and Bruce Hart also denounce the book, calling it mostly lies, but not everything can be written off as fiction, including stories, some wild stores about Dean Hart. I desperately need this book.
Julie said she never got over the sight of Bret Hart eating an avacado as if it were an apple.
While Bret was in Japan wrestling with his brother Keith, Julie said she spent a lot of time with Keith's girlfriend. It was Keith's girlfriend who smartened Julie up to how wrestling works. Up to this point, she believed it to be legit, and even Bret had been selling it like this to her. She was furious, and when Bret called, she told him they were done and hung up on him. The next day, Bret's older brother Bruce stopped by to help her understand kayfabe and how silly it all was. Julie says she ended up feeling bad for reacting like that and yelling at Bret, but she says he forgave her immediately. Bret tells this same story in his book, adding details of how Julie would worry and stress about Bret Hart being brutalized every night.
Here's something I dont remember from Bret's book. He knocked up Julie very early into their relationship, and Julie got an abortion. She said they both weren't ready for being parents, but Julie says she was deeply saddened by their choice. She never expressed these misgivings with Bret, and assumes Bret was relieved, she didn't make it any more difficult on them. To Bret's credit, maybe he didn't mention it in his book for Julie's benefit. Or he did mention it very briefly, and I missed it.
Julie remembers accompanying Bret on a trip overseas where they went to a freaky sex show place where they had "baby tigers and lions and torture rooms."" She says at one point Bret got tied up on a table and was playfully whipped.
On this trip, Julie remembers a woman hitting on Bret right in front of her and had to yell at her to back off while Bret laughed. Julie was pissed and made them go back to the hotel. Once there, Julie was mouthing off to Bret before he grabbed her and "bodyslammed" her into the flower bed. He offered to help her up afterwards but she told him to fuck off.
A week later Bret came home smelling of perfume and Julie says she just snapped. She said she grabbed him and dug her finger nails into his face and eyes. She says Bret later would tell her that he never saw her the same after this incident. I don't remember Bret describing Julie ever getting physical like that in his book, but he did describe a lot of shouting matches.
Julie says she and Bret got married after her younger sister and Dynamite Kid. She says they got married in secret because Bret didn't like his siblings much and said they didn't deserve to be part of it.
When Julie was pregnant again this time they felt ready to start a family. Though Bret made Julie not tell anyone for the first 5 months of her pregnancy and when he "told" his parents, it was through a letter he left on their bed before he left for a wrestling tour. Julie remembers feeling hurt by this because Bret would say his parents always wanted their children to start families with someone who had money, a significant name and an education. Julie had none of those things and while she doesn't say it, you get the feeling that she thinks Bret was ashamed or embarrassed by her.
When she got pregnant again, she says Bret was mad at her for not being more careful with birth control. She says she became very irritable and bitchy throughout the pregnancy and always found something to be mad at Bret for. She is super critical of her behavior here and doesn't excuse it.
The night she gave birth, Bret left to go out for drinks, despite Julie asking him not to in case her water broke. When she woke up at 5am to her water breaking, she was furious that Bret didn't come home yet and had to call a friend to get her to the hospital. Bret was a no-show for her entire delivery and missed his second child being born. Julie says she was furious and seriously considered divorcing him then.
When Bret started touring with WWF, he was gone for much longer periods of time and this strained their marriage. Working for WWF really put a strain on Bret and filled him with confidence issues as well. She said between his self doubt and her loneliness, their marriage was barely holding on.
She remembers how Bret would call from the road and bemoan about how lonely he was. I'm reminded of his book, how he would complain about feeling lonely, then complain that the guilt of cheating on Julie was too much.
Julie says she got a literal itch and went to a doctor who told her that she caught "something" from a public washroom. A suspicious Julie went home and threw all her bedding in the garbage and then thought to check on her suspicion. She looked through their phone bills to find that Bret was placing a ton of calls to a girl from New Jersey and that he even kept the receipt for a Christmas present he bought this girl!
Julie describes how Bret called and she just screamed "I want a divorce!" Before she hung up and ripped the phone cord out of the wall. Eventually she agreed to go meet him and they started yelling at each other in a parking lot after a show. She says at one point Bret through a can of budweiser at her head, hitting her! She says wrestler Les Thorton got between the two and tried to calm them down. She remembers screaming how she won't get in the car with Bret and Bret yelled back, "Don't be stupid, get in the car! Your embarrassing yourself!" She says Bret later said the girl meant nothing to him and Julie should be greatful that Bret isn't addicted to drugs. Wild. At one point when they were back in the hotel room, a girl called the room asking for Bret and Julie snapped, breaking a lamp.
In Bret's book, he described how he decieved both Julie and this girl from New Jersey, neglecting to tell this side girl that he was married until she was head over heels in love with him. Bret talks about how tough this was for him and says that Stu and Helen Hart talked Julie out of leaving him.
Julie says their relationship was never the same after the affair. She couldn't trust him again.
Julie says when her grandmother died a few months after the affair, Bret was calling her everyday to check in but she said "I couldn't have cared less about those calls."
Julie says it was around this time that she and Bret started to regularly do cocaine. She said the coke helped her not think about the affair and how she would ask Bret to score some if she couldn't get it out of her head. She said she would do coke and sleep in the car just to avoid Bret. She suggests this all slowed down when Vince started cracking down on coke use with drug tests.
She speaks highly of Vince McMahon, this book was written in 2013, and she is greatful for what Vince was able to provide for her family and the opportunity he gave Bret. She says when she first met Vince, he was wearing a suit and sneakers. When she asked Bret why he wore sneakers, Bret said "so he can get around." During the show she noticed Vince was all over the place during matches, never sitting still and always running around from one person to another.
Julie remembers meeting Ozzy Osbourne at Wrestlemania 2 and "marking out" because he was her idol as a teenager. After the show, she says Ozzy was present as everyone had drinks at the hotel and Dynamite Kid spiked her drink. She said she could barely stand and Dynamite just laughed at her the whole time.
Julie notes how devoted Bret was to making sure his kids had the best toys, and how Bret would drive to every toy store before Christmas and find what the kids wanted. She appreciates this but also wishes Bret didn't miss so many plays and dances and activities due to his schedule. She was starting to really resent wrestling and wanted Bret to quit. She hated having this big house that felt empty most of the time without Bret home. In Bret's book, he wanted her to get a job to fix her loneliness.
She says her 3rd pregnancy was easier than her second and Bret was very sweet to her and praised how good she looked.
Julie brings up how devastated Bret was when his brother Dean died in 1990. She remembers watching him wrestle the next night at Survivor Series ppv and seeing the pain on his face. Bret talks about how tough this was in his book and how much shame he felt. Dean needed a kidney transplant and none of the Hart brothers stepped up. Bret didn't want to derail his career. Though you can't blame anyone more than Dean himself, who was stubborn and often went against doctors orders, so even with a mew kidney, Dean may have still died.
Julie talks about continuing her partying and drug lifestyle into the early 90s when she would party with a local band and inviting them to live at her house. She said Bret was very understanding and never pushed her for details on those nights out. Some nights Bret would watch the kids all night while Julie was getting fucked up and partying.
On of those musicians, Marc, was very close with Julie and while Julie never says she hooked up, she does say her younger sister Michelle did hook up with Marc, a bunch of times in secret. She doesn't specify if this was before or after Michelle left Dynamite Kid, but she says Marc did move in with Michelle and help her with the kids. This would have been after Dynamite went back to UK, since I'm sure Dynamite would have kicked the door down and attempted to murder Marc if this were in the final months of of Michelle and Dynamite's marriage.
Julie's brother committed suicide and Julie didn't have the support system around to prevent her from spiraling into heavy drinking.
In 1996, Bret Hart was filming a movie (Sinbad) in South Africa and halfway through, asked Julie to come join him. Julie is very honest about how she was self sabatoging her life at this point but was still deeply in love with Bret. She was excited to read an early draft of some Shakespeare work that was at a museum, but Bret couldn't be bothered to go with her so she went by herself.
She says her and Bret shared a perfect moment watching the sun set, but Bret got mad at her when she decided to record it.
Julie describes sneaking cigarettes because Bret didn't know she picked the habbit up again.
The trip ended when Julie was asking Bret something but he just ignored her several times in a row. When she finally looked at what had his attention, she saw he was gawking at a topless sunbather on the beach. She stormed off to the hotel room after telling Bret to show her more respect than that. Julie says Bret followed her to the room, with him saying she always ruins these trips. When Julie started packing her bags, she says Bret pushed her hard onto the bed. She started spewing insults at him, before, she says, Bret grabbed her by the hair and threw her from the bed and onto the floor! Julie says she started crying and demanding that Bret get her home immediately or else she would find someone who would. Bret screamed at her "Get the fuck out! I've had it with you! We're fucking done! I will put you on a plane tonight, but don't expect to win me back!"
Having read Bret's book, he does mention the trip to South Africa where he filmed the Sinbad movie. But Bret makes no mention of inviting Julie on the trip and instead points out how it coincided with a WWF tour in South Africa at the same time. Bret does talk about how the Dutch found the area and how beautiful itnwas there, which was something Julie mentioned as well that Bret talked about. Bret does mention getting a lot of ladies phone numbers on the last few days of the trip and seeing a drunk Yokozuna swapping spit with some South African PR woman when they were both very drunk. Bret makes no mention of Julie being there or how he got physical with her.
The Hart's always try to shy away from controversial truths, just ask any one of them where Bruce Hart met his wife. They will all say at a wrestling show, and neglect to mention how Bruce Hart was a 33 year old substitute teacher who knocked up his 17 year old student. Gross. (I'll never not bring this up when talking about the Hart's btw)
Julie talks about Mathew Hart, Georgia and BJ's son who died in 1996 from Necrotizing Fasciitis, a legitimate flesh eating virus. From everyone's account, the poor boy suffered for 2 weeks until he died. Julie says she and Bret took their kids on vacation when the poor kid died. A lot of people act as though the Hart Family curse started at the Screwjob in 1997, but really it started with Dean in 1990 and Mathew in 1996.
Julie remembers how gleeful Bret was when he called her up and bragged about giving a drunken Vince McMahon his tag team finishing move. Julie warned Bret that Vince wasn't the type to forget that and she suspects that it played a part in the screwjob. This sounds silly imo but what do I know, I found it an interesting and unique take if nothing else.
Julie remembers the morning of the 1997 Survivor Series ppv, someone warned Bret that Vince and Shawn were seen the night before talking and getting into an elevator together.
Julie says she and her lawyer were sitting somewhere in the arena as the Montreal Screwjob happened. Julie says she got up, looking at the monitor and said, "Holy shit, that's not supposed to happen!" And her lawyer, also shocked, said, "No, it is not."
Julie says she and the layer had to sprint to catch up to Bret and Vince and she describes her scolding of Triple H and Shawn Michaels, saying the words just poured out of her. It's maybe the most memorable scene of that documentary, watching Triple H and HBK shrink into children as Julie dresses them down.
Julie says the 1997 holidays were anything but cheerful and says she was boozing a lot and doing coke "from time to time."
Julie wanted to get a nanny or house keeper but Bret refused and put his foot down on the subject.
Julie says Bret asked for a divorce in early 1998 and she handled it poorly. She is critical of her immediate response to run away from home and stay at a hotel. When she returned home for clothes, her confused daughter asked her what was going on and a rageful Julie said "Your dad wants a divorce and I can't stay in the same house as him anymore! Julie says she was so blinded by her anger she didn't see the damage she was doing then.
Julie says that the Wrestling with Shadow's documentary crew needed Julie and Bret to reshoot something that didn't come out right when they originally shot it. So Julie and Bret had to pretend to be a in a marriage again talking things out about Bret's career. Julie says her and Bret slept together after they shot the scene and she was hurt when Bret said afterward, "One for the road, I guess."
The next time she heard from Bret, he told her to get a lawyer because he had one already.
Julie says she and Bret spent many nights yelling at eachother over the phone, with Bret calling her a whore and saying he didn't take all those bumps so Julie to take all his money. This is a statement Bret would repeat a lot to Julie over the years of them fighting. He would call her a money grabbing whore and how he didn't take a bunch of bumps so Julie could end up with the money.
Just as Julie was ready to sign custody papers, Bret's personal assistant contacted Julie and told her that Bret had been seeing some girl in the States for months. The assistant said she felt guilty arranging their meetups behind Julie's back. Julie said she later told Bret that she isn't signing shit and she needed to contact her lawyers with the new developments. She said Bret first tried denying it, calling his assistant jealous and a liar. Then Bret blamed Julie because Bret said he "couldn't get past her traumatic past." What the fuck Bret, I'm pretty sure he is referring to Julie being sexually assaulted as a teenager. (He makes this clear later in the book) Then he bragged about his new girl looking better than Julie and being younger than Julie, with Bret also saying the kids will love the new girl. Bret even later said Julie was getting heavier and letting herself go.
Pretty wild story here. Julie says that Bret started neglecting the kids, even when he was in town, and often skipped out on seeing them altogether. For Canada Day 1998 Bret promised to take them out and to the fireworks. Julie says they waited all day, expecting a fun evening with their dad. But Bret didn't show up with their friend Dean, until after 9pm, (stoned and drunk according to Julie) after Julie tried to call Bret repeatedly and got no answer.
Julie isn't proud of this, but says before Bret arrived that night, Julie had sat the kids down and told them Bret was off smoking pot with a new girlfriend. Julie knew immediately she shouldn't have said it, she saw her kids starting to cry and knew she tarnished how they look at their dad.
Bret was pissed off that Julie decided to take the kids to the fireworks, and when Julie had herself and the kids in the car, an enraged Bret started punching the drivers side window until Julie agreed to get out and talk.
Bret grabbed and dragged her off around the corner of the house where Julie defiantly told him that the kids know he smokes pot and is seeing someone else.
Julie says Bret snapped, slammed her hard up against the wall and yelled, "You bitch! I hate you! I hate you!" Then Julie claims that Bret grabbed her by the throat and slammed her on the ground where he continued to choke her until their son Blade came around the corner and screamed at Bret to get off his mom!
As Julie was catching her breath, their friend Dean, who was still there and in shock, tried to help Julie up. Bret took off with their son Blade and a panicked Julie called the police. She foolishly said to the 911 opperater that her husband pro wrestler, Bret Hart, had taken her child againt her will. The police arrived and seemingly didn't know who Bret was, tried to get Julie to press charges. The police were able to call Bret and convince him to bring the kid to the police station, so the cops could bring him home. Bret makes no mention of this in his book.
Julie says Bret stopped by the next day and apologized and tried to ask her to sit down for coffee. Julie explained how they scarred their children for life the night prior and she wasn't interested in speaking to him in friendly terms yet.
Julie defends Bret a bit by saying she could see in person that she wasn't the cause of his anger and that he was just deeply angry and disappointed with things. This would be 1998 and even Bret describes how bitter and despondent he was at this time. Julie says he stopped being around the kids and it hurt them, especially their boys Blade and Dallas who started getting a chip on their shoulders and seeking conflict. One time Julie asked Dallas about Bret and Dallas said, "He never calls and is never around."
Julie says things were getting stable but she and Bret started secretly sleeping together again and complicated things. She says Bret would pick her up and drove to a seedy part of town before casually dropping her off at home after. She says she was initially amused by this but eventually began to wonder how many other women Bret does this with. It made her feel uncomfortable to say the least.
One time as she was being dropped off, Julie asked Bret if he was happy. Bret said no and that he couldn't get happy. Then Bret asked if Julie was seeing anyone, but didn't let her answer, he just said "of course you are." Julie realizes now that Bret was suffering some deep depression and at the time she mistook codependency for love.
Eventually Bret's other girlfriend caught wind of his and Julie's rendezvous and made Bret break things off. Julie could hear the woman on the other end of the line when Bret called to inform Julie that they need to set boundaries in their relationship now.
Julie says Bret once called her to say he tested for hepatitis and that Julie should get checked out as well.
Julie later found out that the girl Bret was seeing was nearly the same age as their daughter.
Julie says her and Bret continued to sleep together behind his girlfriends back though, with Bret always asking for "coffee" before making a move, which Julie always reciprocated.
Bret would break up with his girlfriend near the end of 1998 and ask Julie if he can spend the holidays with her and the kids. Julie relents, and soon they seem to be trying to salvage their relationship with Bret more present then he ever has been.
Soon after the new year, Bret and Julie take a trip together to Hawaii. Julie finally builds up the courage to ask Bret what he thinks of them getting back together, and Bret says he doesn't want to get "trapped" again. Julie snapped and said, "That's it I'm done, I can't keep playing these games with you!"
During this conversation, as Julie was walking away, Bret randomly said, "My therapist said that sometimes girls, like the ones your age when all that stuff happens to you, they like it." Julie burst into tears and ran out of the room. What the fuck Bret, to imply that that when his wife was a 16 year old girl, she liked getting r*ped!
Helen Hart died a few weeks after 9/11 in 2001. She was from New York, and Julie remembers how devastated Helen was following the September attacks. Helen went back to New York a few weeks later to visit her sister, but due to the border concerns, she was held up for hours after her plane landed back in Calgary. She wasn't able to reach her insulin and eventually went into a coma.
Helen was on an off ventilation a few times while at the hospital, and one day Alison (Bret's sister) called and told him to come visit asap, because Helen was back on a ventilator and it wasn't looking good. Bret thought Alison being an alarmist and decided to visit the next day. Julie says she wishes they had visited that night, because Helen passed away a few hours later.
One afternoon, Julie came home to find her son Dallas on the phone, when she asked him who he was speaking to, Dallas said, "It's dad, but he sounds drunk." Bret told Julie that he fell off his bike and couldn't get up. He wasn't speaking clearly and couldn't properly explain where he was. Julie and her daughter Beans, drove around looking for Bret based off his perception and directions.
Julie and Beans found him laying casually in the grass, as if he was resting. She said one of Bret's eyes was wide open and the other was closed, and half his mouth was dropping. She struggled to move him as he slurred his words and insisted he was fine. Eventually an ambulance was called and Bret was loaded in.
Julie says the stroke changed him, made him mooder and more depressed. She isn't casting judgment, just pointing out changes she noticed as she spent every day at the hospital with him, helping to feed and cloth Bret, even helping him to the bathroom.
Julie remembers one night that Bret confided in her that he feared he got a stroke as punishment for all the bad things he done. He told her that the morning he got a stroke, he was planning on signing the divorce papers.
Several months later, with Bret moving aorund more, he spent Easter with Julie and the kids, but Julie found an email from some woman in Italy, directed to Bret and it suggested some heavy sexual stuff. Julie felt stupid and used again. When she confronted him on it, he denied anything and she reluctantly believed him.
A week later as Bret prepared for a trip, she found a plane ticket to Italy, when she asked Bret where he was going, he said England. Julie drove him to the airport and told him to get the fuck out.
Bret went to Italy to be with a fan he met at a contract signing, who was obsessed with him since she was a little girl. Julie says she is exactly what Bret needed to feel like the Hitman again. After reading Bret's book, this assessment is completely accurate.
The Italian woman's name was Cynthia and she was also just a year older than Bret's daughter Jade. Julie said Jade had the hardest time accepting Cynthia, whom Bret was determined to integrate into the family.
When Bret's dad Stu died, Julie remembers how she, Bret and Stu's granddaughter Jenni all stood by the bed and watched as he passed. She remembers how she kissed his cheek and told him he could go see Helen now, he didn't need to be here and longer. I remember the speech Stu gave at Helen's funeral, with one line in particular staying with me, "I'm glad for the time I had with her," he said full of love, but his pain was on display too, "Ill never get over this" he finished solemnly, "I don't have enough time."
Julie remembers one day that their son Blade called her from Bret's house, begging for her to pick him up. Blade and Bret started arguing about Cynthia, with Bret saying to his own son, "Don't make me pick between you and Cynthia, because I'll pick Cynthia! And if you don't like it you can get the fuck out!"
Julie started calling Bret "Hitman" when he acted like this to his children, with Julie telling them that their father still loves him and not to worry about what The Hitman says, because it's coming from a broken mind.
One day after Julie bought a house, Bret randomly showed up with a turkey and tried to hit on her. Julie found it amusing and asked him if Cynthia knew he was there. Bret tried to make a move on her but Julie made it clear that won't happen so Bret left. As he left, he told Julie, "I still have cravings for you and I'm not sure I'll ever get over them." To which Julie just cooly responded with, "You will."
After Bret left that day, Julie called his assistant who confirmed that Cynthia was literally on a plane back to Italy right then. Julie laughed at how pathetic it was for Bret to say goodbye to Cynthia and then an hour or two later, show up at Julie's with a turkey and looking for sex.
Bret secretly married Cynthia and months later told the kids after the fact. Their son Blade was so furious he could barely speak to Julie when he got home and eventually blurted out, "Dad married that girl!" Their other son Dallas was also furious and explained how Bret callously told the kids "tell your mom, make sure you tell your mom." He was clearly trying to hurt Julie and used the kids to do so.
When Bret was inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame in 2006, Julie insisted on going and told Bret if he doesn't find a way for her to be there, then she would call Vince McMahon herself and arrange it. Bret promised her she would be there but asked her to be discreet about it.
Julie got asked to do an online interview leading up to the Hall of Fame, and she let slip that she would be at the show to support Bret. Later, an irate Bret called her, yelling about how she was supposed to be discreet. Julie clued in on the fact that Bret didn't tell his new wife yet about Julie coming and now he was in hot water. In the end, Bret refused to allow Julie to come to the Hall of Fame to support him.
In Bret's Hall of Fame speech, he just talked about his new wife and how Cynthia was there for him after his stroke and just put her over big. He didn't mention Julie and only mentioned 2 of his 4 children. She says her children were extremely hurt by this and calls it the ultimate betrayal.
Julie started running low on money in 2008 and even attempted to be on a reality show. It was all a BS scam though and she had to invest money into it and eventually it all fell through. She speaks of this with a bit of shame while framing it as something she learned from.
Julie was facing bankruptcy and foreclosure on the house, so as a last resort, she called Bret. She asked him for 9 grand to cover 3 mortgage payments so she can sell the house. Bret chastised her for having money problems before ultimately saying no. He suggested that she rent the house out or have the kids pay rent. As they left, Julie warned him that if she loses the house, Bret may need to take the kids at him place. She doesn't say what he said to this, but she does say, "His response was too cruel to put into writing." Good lord, considering all she told so far, I wonder what Bret said that was so bad, Julie didn't want to even write it down?
Julie does point out that Bret didn't owe her a damn thing and she was in this situation by her own doing. Julie felt like she was letting her kids down most of all.
Julie would move in with her daughter Beans where they split the rent together. She got a job making $14/hour working as a janitor at a local middle school and Julie notes that she was living well below the poverty line.
Julie remembers how absurd it was for her to show up to her janitor job driving a Lexus.
Julie ended up selling her Lexus to her daughter Beans, and Julie bought herself a 1999 Sunfire. It was the first car she ever bought with her own money.
Julie's father died in 2012 and Julie says she wrote a letter to him, promising to make him proud, and stuffed it inside his coffin.
Julie says she spends most of her days being a grandma to Jade's daughter and how grateful she is to be close to her kids still.
Bret can't say the same, Julie notes how he travels alone or with his wife and never offers invites to his kids. She says it breaks her heart to see how far Bret drifted away from their children, even if all her kids insist that they don't care. This was in 2013, so potentially Bret and his kinds could have a better relationship by now.
Julie spends the last several pages of the book detailing her kids and all the ways she loves them. You can tell she is a mother first and foremost, you can tell she loves them unconditionally. Jade, Dallas, Beans and Blade, weird names for kids but I also have a weird name so I can't judge.

I am an older ape and I have read countless hours of DD since the sneeze. One of the biggest achievements of this sub was to educate people on techniques being used to subvert us and our stock.
A main piece is this:
https://www.reddit.com/Superstonk/s/a6Ju1N8XpM by another ape
Enjoy the read :) I don’t take any credit for this work.
You may remember that a few days back, u/[redacted] put up this post about shills infiltrating /BIZ/ https://www.reddit.com/Superstonk/comments/mscsb5/putting_shills_on_blast_a_concerned_biznessman/
In that post, there was a HUGE image on:
SUPPOSED**methods used by banks and the hedgefunds to dismantle online communities
I had trouble reading that image (definitely NOT phone or text-to-speech friendly), and tried to find the original text version. It turns out that it can be found here: https://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5. I copy-pasta it here for your convenience, and included some markup to make it easier to read. I take no credit for this work.
COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum..
There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a 'uncontrolled forum.'
Technique #1 - 'FORUM SLIDING'
If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by 'forum sliding.' In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to 'age.' Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a 'forum slide.' The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a 'forum slide' and 'flush' the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then 'replying' to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting 'slides' down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.
Technique #2 - 'CONSENSUS CRACKING'
A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at www.abovetopsecret.com) is 'consensus cracking.' To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger 'evidence' or disinformation in your favour is slowly 'seeded in.' Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then 'abort' the consensus cracking by initiating a 'forum slide.'
Technique #3 - 'TOPIC DILUTION'
Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.
Technique #4 - 'INFORMATION COLLECTION'
Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a 'show you mine so me yours' posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your 'favourite weapon' and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favourite 'technique of operation.' From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.
Technique #5 - 'ANGER TROLLING'
Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to 'stage' a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to 'lead' the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you 'do not care what the authorities think!!' inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.
Technique #6 - 'GAINING FULL CONTROL'
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the 'ultimate victory' as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a 'honey pot' gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.
CONCLUSION
Remember these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must be considered such as initiating a false legal precidence to simply have the forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share then with HQ.
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
   
2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit.
   
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.
   
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
   
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
   
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
   
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
   
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
   
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
   
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
    
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
    
12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
    
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.
    
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
    
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
    
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.
    
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
    
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'
    
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
    
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
    
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
    
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
    
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
    
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
    
25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.
    

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.
4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial.
Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo.
With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.
7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.
I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.
8) Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:
a) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT - FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.
b) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR - there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to 'get permission' or instruction from a formal chain of command.
c) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay - the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.
How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
One way to neutralize a potential activist is to get them to be in a group that does all the wrong things. Why?
1) The message doesn't get out.
2) A lot of time is wasted
3) The activist is frustrated and discouraged
4) Nothing good is accomplished.
FBI and Police Informers and Infiltrators will infest any group and they have phoney activist organizations established.
Their purpose is to prevent any real movement for justice or eco-peace from developing in this country.
Agents come in small, medium or large. They can be of any ethnic background. They can be male or female.
The actual size of the group or movement being infiltrated is irrelevant. It is the potential the movement has for becoming large which brings on the spies and saboteurs.
This booklet lists tactics agents use to slow things down, foul things up, destroy the movement and keep tabs on activists.
It is the agent's job to keep the activist from quitting such a group, thus keeping him/her under control.
In some situations, to get control, the agent will tell the activist:
"You're dividing the movement."
[Here, I have added the psychological reasons as to WHY this maneuver works to control people]
This invites guilty feelings. Many people can be controlled by guilt. The agents begin relationships with activists behind a well-developed mask of "dedication to the cause." Because of their often declared dedication, (and actions designed to prove this), when they criticize the activist, he or she - being truly dedicated to the movement - becomes convinced that somehow, any issues are THEIR fault. This is because a truly dedicated person tends to believe that everyone has a conscience and that nobody would dissimulate and lie like that "on purpose." It's amazing how far agents can go in manipulating an activist because the activist will constantly make excuses for the agent who regularly declares their dedication to the cause. Even if they do, occasionally, suspect the agent, they will pull the wool over their own eyes by rationalizing: "they did that unconsciously... they didn't really mean it... I can help them by being forgiving and accepting " and so on and so forth.
The agent will tell the activist:
"You're a leader!"
This is designed to enhance the activist's self-esteem. His or her narcissistic admiration of his/her own activist/altruistic intentions increase as he or she identifies with and consciously admires the altruistic declarations of the agent which are deliberately set up to mirror those of the activist.
This is "malignant pseudoidentification." It is the process by which the agent consciously imitates or simulates a certain behavior to foster the activist's identification with him/her, thus increasing the activist's vulnerability to exploitation. The agent will simulate the more subtle self-concepts of the activist.
Activists and those who have altruistic self-concepts are most vulnerable to malignant pseudoidentification especially during work with the agent when the interaction includes matter relating to their competency, autonomy, or knowledge.
The goal of the agent is to increase the activist's general empathy for the agent through pseudo-identification with the activist's self-concepts.
The most common example of this is the agent who will compliment the activist for his competency or knowledge or value to the movement. On a more subtle level, the agent will simulate affects and mannerisms of the activist which promotes identification via mirroring and feelings of "twinship". It is not unheard of for activists, enamored by the perceived helpfulness and competence of a good agent, to find themselves considering ethical violations and perhaps, even illegal behavior, in the service of their agent/handler.
The activist's "felt quality of perfection" [self-concept] is enhanced, and a strong empathic bond is developed with the agent through his/her imitation and simulation of the victim's own narcissistic investments. [self-concepts] That is, if the activist knows, deep inside, their own dedication to the cause, they will project that onto the agent who is "mirroring" them.
The activist will be deluded into thinking that the agent shares this feeling of identification and bonding. In an activist/social movement setting, the adversarial roles that activists naturally play vis a vis the establishment/government, fosters ongoing processes of intrapsychic splitting so that "twinship alliances" between activist and agent may render whole sectors or reality testing unavailable to the activist. They literally "lose touch with reality."
Activists who deny their own narcissistic investments [do not have a good idea of their own self-concepts and that they ARE concepts] and consciously perceive themselves (accurately, as it were) to be "helpers" endowed with a special amount of altruism are exceedingly vulnerable to the affective (emotional) simulation of the accomplished agent.
Empathy is fostered in the activist through the expression of quite visible affects. The presentation of tearfulness, sadness, longing, fear, remorse, and guilt, may induce in the helper-oriented activist a strong sense of compassion, while unconsciously enhancing the activist's narcissistic investment in self as the embodiment of goodness.
The agent's expresssion of such simulated affects may be quite compelling to the observer and difficult to distinguish from deep emotion.
It can usually be identified by two events, however:
First, the activist who has analyzed his/her own narcissistic roots and is aware of his/her own potential for being "emotionally hooked," will be able to remain cool and unaffected by such emotional outpourings by the agent.
As a result of this unaffected, cool, attitude, the Second event will occur: The agent will recompensate much too quickly following such an affective expression leaving the activist with the impression that "the play has ended, the curtain has fallen," and the imposture, for the moment, has finished. The agent will then move quickly to another activist/victim.
The fact is, the movement doesn't need leaders, it needs MOVERS. "Follow the leader" is a waste of time.
A good agent will want to meet as often as possible. He or she will talk a lot and say little. One can expect an onslaught of long, unresolved discussions.
Some agents take on a pushy, arrogant, or defensive manner:
1) To disrupt the agenda
2) To side-track the discussion
3) To interrupt repeatedly
4) To feign ignorance
5) To make an unfounded accusation against a person.
Calling someone a racist, for example. This tactic is used to discredit a person in the eyes of all other group members.
Saboteurs
Some saboteurs pretend to be activists. She or he will ....
1) Write encyclopedic flyers (in the present day, websites)
2) Print flyers in English only.
3) Have demonstrations in places where no one cares.
4) Solicit funding from rich people instead of grass roots support
5) Display banners with too many words that are confusing.
6) Confuse issues.
7) Make the wrong demands.
8) Compromise the goal.
9) Have endless discussions that waste everyone's time. The agent may accompany the endless discussions with drinking, pot smoking or other amusement to slow down the activist's work.
Provocateurs
1) Want to establish "leaders" to set them up for a fall in order to stop the movement.
2) Suggest doing foolish, illegal things to get the activists in trouble.
3) Encourage militancy.
4) Want to taunt the authorities.
5) Attempt to make the activist compromise their values.
6) Attempt to instigate violence. Activisim ought to always be non-violent.
7) Attempt to provoke revolt among people who are ill-prepared to deal with the reaction of the authorities to such violence.
Informants
1) Want everyone to sign up and sing in and sign everything.
2) Ask a lot of questions (gathering data).
3) Want to know what events the activist is planning to attend.
4) Attempt to make the activist defend him or herself to identify his or her beliefs, goals, and level of committment.
Recruiting
Legitimate activists do not subject people to hours of persuasive dialog. Their actions, beliefs, and goals speak for themselves.
Groups that DO recruit are missionaries, military, and fake political parties or movements set up by agents.
Surveillance
ALWAYS assume that you are under surveillance.
At this point, if you are NOT under surveillance, you are not a very good activist!
Scare Tactics
They use them.
Such tactics include slander, defamation, threats, getting close to disaffected or minimally committed fellow activists to persuade them (via psychological tactics described above) to turn against the movement and give false testimony against their former compatriots. They will plant illegal substances on the activist and set up an arrest; they will plant false information and set up "exposure," they will send incriminating letters [emails] in the name of the activist; and more; they will do whatever society will allow.
This booklet in no way covers all the ways agents use to sabotage the lives of sincere an dedicated activists.
If an agent is "exposed," he or she will be transferred or replaced.
COINTELPRO is still in operation today under a different code name. It is no longer placed on paper where it can be discovered through the freedom of information act.
The FBI counterintelligence program's stated purpose: To expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, and otherwise neutralize individuals who the FBI categorize as opposed to the National Interests. "National Security" means the FBI's security from the people ever finding out the vicious things it does in violation of people's civil liberties.
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.

1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.
   
2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "How dare you?" gambit.
   
3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors." (If they tend to believe the "rumors" it must be because they are simply "paranoid" or "hysterical.")
   
4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
   
5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nutcase," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and, of course, "rumor monger." Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the "more reasonable" government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to shoot down.
   
6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).
   
7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
   
8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
   
9. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hangout route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.
   
10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
    
11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If evidence exists that the Vince Foster "suicide" note was forged, they would have reported it. They haven't reported it so there is no such evidence. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press who would report the leak.
    
12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. E.g. If Foster was murdered, who did it and why?
    
13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing distractions.
    
14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as "bump and run" reporting.
    
15. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the "facts" furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.
    
16. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges "expose" scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.
    
17. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, "What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?" Don t the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.
    

For the sake of transparency, I am not the architect of the following discoveries, and am just helping to forward their message and clean it up. Copywrite of the following work belongs to no one and everyone is not only welcome to share these findings as if they were their own, but openly encouraged to do so.
Introduction
If you think you know anything about MAGA. Trust me, you know nothing. Not even his most devout followers or haters will have considered the following. And for the sake of our democracy and way of life, I hope people read this.
This work may very well help to shift the narrative on Trump in a meaningful and foundational way, but I don't want this work exacerbate any feelings of ill will to MAGA members, for they have been prey to possibly one of the largest con jobs our world has ever seen, especially without the help of this counternarrative.
Snippet From My Thesis On MAGA
As I work on tidying up the master file with the helpful dms I got, allow me to post just the most contentious part of it below, now that it’s able to stand on its own.
MAGA didn’t begin in 2015. I argue it began in 2001 on 9/11, while also harnessing and funneling decades of anti-government resentment till many Americans would openly call for a “wrecking ball” figure to help “drain the swamp.”

A Key Fueling Factor To American Outrage- Inflation
Many elements contributed to growing American anger that would later contribute to MAGA, this is a snippet from the larger work.
Rising Cost of Living
o In 1950, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) was 24.1. By 2000, it had risen to 168 (a 597% increase), and by 2023, it had reached 304.7, a 1163% increase from 1950.
o Housing prices saw a drastic rise overtime, with the median home price increasing from $7,354 in 1950 to $388,700 in 2023, a staggering 5185% increase.
o While rising rent costs can contribute to overall inflation and cost of living, even the left has largely failed to address how exponentially increasing real estate prices impact the cost of living. This omission has made many other conspiracy theories seem more plausible in its wake.
o If we don’t find real solutions for real estate that also aren’t extreme, then society will feel more and more pressure to accept “unreasonable solutions” like Trump, even though he’s the last person on earth who could solve it, considering his business acumen and history.
MAGA Dynamics and Blind Devotion
In 2016, it wasn't just the left calling the MAGA movement a cult. Trump famously said, "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters." Even the left failed to grasp the gravity of this statement. As someone who nearly died in a deadly cult and based on my research, I don't know of a single cult where the founder could openly commit murder without losing members. Trump didn't just believe he'd created one of the largest cults ever; he believed he'd created the most fanatical. Let's hope his followers prove him wrong by showing a willingness to criticize him, regardless of their vote.

The MAGA Question
Instead of challenging MAGA supporters on fallacious beliefs, ask them this question to see if they’re at least able to see a world where Trump isn’t a biblical King: "If Trump admitted he was behind 9/11 and used resulting insurance money and donations from hostile governments to create false “grass root” campaigns. And did it all in a way to make it seem like others committed his own atrocities. And that he intended to destroy America in every way if he got elected, would you still vote for him?"

Yet even then, getting through to a MAGA supporter inevitably refers to 9/11 “research” out there when they realize individual positions are usually fallacious. This quagmire me decide to investigate this tragedy, to see if there was a more plausible counter theory. Honestly, the more I looked the more surprised I became. Here are my findings that are but a snippet of my full thesis on MAGA.

9/11 Conspiracy Theories and MAGA
Conspiracy Theories and Credibility:
o First off, conspiracy theories should involve some effort to verify narratives, rather than just repeating claims across multiple sources that mistake themselves as evidence; like a bunch of people who repeat “bob farted” across multiple websites may see that as evidence, when in fact, it was Sean. Sorry Sean.

Early Origins of MAGA:
o Although some believe MAGA began in 2015, its roots lie as early as the 1980s with Rush Limbaugh and later became "serious" on 9/11.
o 9/11 conspiracy theories claim controlled demolitions were used, but the lack of any cellphone recordings of explosions weakens this theory.

Suspicious Factors:
o The official narrative involving chaotic jet fuel leading to a straight fall seemed questionable.
o The collapse of a third building (WTC 7), which wasn’t directly hit, fueled suspicions.
o Airline stocks were heavily shorted before the attacks, raising concerns about insider trading. Harvey Pitt, Republican SEC Chairman at the time, investigated this and claimed there was nothing amiss, but was criticized for later crimes and forced to resign.
o It’s also suspicious that in Trumps 2000 book “The America We Deserve” that he stated, “I really am convinced we’re in danger of the sort of terrorist attacks that will make the [1993] bombing of the Trade Center look like kids playing with firecrackers. No sensible analyst rejects this possibility, and plenty of them, like me, are not wondering if but when it will happen*.”*
§ Yet democrats would largely miss this point entirely and obsess over his false claim that he called for Bin Laden to be killed, when he had not. Somehow conspiracy theorists would find this ‘cool’ rather than suspicious.
CNN Fact Check Donald Trump Osama Bin Laden Book Claim

Reports and Simplified Narratives:
o FEMA's 2002 report and NIST's 2005 report provided technical explanations of the tower collapses.
o However, the Port Authority Chairman stuck to the oversimplified narrative that "jet fuel melted steel beams," even though he knew this was a half-truth, as detailed in the next section, fueling anti-government conspiracies. The question is why.

Potential Impact:
o 9/11 conspiracy theories sowed distrust in the government, which may have been one of the attackers' objectives. Anyone that heavily profited from this tragedy, and helped further those objects, should be questioned.
o The ‘Loose Change’ “documentary” pointed out suspicious parts of the story, but failed to give any clear claims as to who was purportedly behind it. It also failed to note the Twin Towers titanic design flaw that could result in a straight fall. Even the 2015 version of this film fails to mention nearly all of the known facts in this report.
o The Director of that film later states:
“I DON’T THINK WE’D HAVE PRESIDENT TRUMP IF IT WEREN’T FOR 9/11”
“9/11 created a culture of fear, of xenophobia, this sense of entitlement and everything we’ve seen. Warrantless wire-tapping, Guantanamo Bay, everything that’s happened led us to this point, we wouldn’t be here without 9/11. They want to kick out all the Mexicans and Muslims because of this culture of fear and bigotry and xenophobia that directly led to the election of fucking Donald Trump. [laughing] That’s our world now! We had Reagan before, and Governor Schwarzenegger. But President Donald Trump? It’s just weird. Everything is just weird.”
Theoutline Reflecting On Loose Change
o While the director was in the right to ask questions, he failed to ask the most obvious ones.
o However, his lead “researcher,” Jason Bermas, would turn out to be a full blown MAGA wingnut.
Patriot Jason Bermas
o Anyone that would benefit politically and financially from 9/11 should be fully investigated.
Further Reading:
Harvey Pitt - Wikipedia
Politifact How 911 Attacks Helped Shape Modern Misinformation
It will never be possible to defeat MAGA followers “logically” with people who believed his parties rhetoric “that 9/11 was an inside job.”

I say… what if those Republican leaders were self reporting?
What if Trump followers have been rallying behind the very man responsible for its orchestration?

The Twin Towers and Larry Silverstein
Architectural Pitfalls of the Twin Towers:
· The Twin Towers had unique architectural flaws due to the excessive heavy load on their exoskeletons to allow for more floor and leasing space, which greatly contributed to their straight collapse after the 9/11 attacks. This was the first and last skyscraper made in this way.
· For anyone who said that “any other building would have fallen sideways,” you were right, though perhaps not entirely how you may have imagined. A "Coke Can" analogy shows how a similar weakened structure can result in a straight fall, contrary to conspiracy theories claiming controlled demolitions. This isn't something I'm asking you to take for granted, or to read from media sources you don’t trust. This is something you can verify on your own, in person, in real time, in reality.
· However Trump, despite being close friends with Silverstein as we’ll cover later, claimed "It wasn’t architectural defects, you know, the World Trade Center was always known as a very, very strong building” per the attached PolitiFact article.
· Supporting Article:
Engineering Experts Explain the Collapse of the Twin Towers
Politifact Donald Trumps 911 Speculation

Larry Silverstein, The Leasor Of The Twin Towers:
· Nearly went bankrupt after losing his main tenant Drexel Burnham in 1980 after he built tower 7 with him in mind.
· I don't know how many of us understand the level of desperation a situation like this can cause in someone and how many potential crimes it can easily push them towards.
· He is known for then saying, “…looking up at the twin towers and thinking, my building is huge, but it is made diminutive by the twin towers. So I said to myself, wouldn't it be incredible someday to own those?" That's not the statement of a sane person who nearly went bankrupt, and if anything, hints towards jealousy.
· He managed to secure Salomon Brothers two years later, which later paid $300 million in securities fraud penalties casting suspicion over the entities who saved Silverstein, in addition to their overall plans for the future.
· How he would become able to outbid everyone else in 2001, for the right to lease the twin towers, would become a mystery we will untangle later.
Further Reading
Manhattan Institute – Silverstein On Ground Zero
Justice Department: Salomon Brothers Securities Fraud

Trump and Real Estate Connections
Historical Context and Redevelopment Plans:
· A redevelopment plan commenced in the 1990s by Gov. Pataki and Mayor Giuliani, spurred a commercial revival in downtown Manhattan, making the World Trade Center prime property. Pataki would go on to criticize trump, while the other would prove to be one of this wildest, if not craziest, supporters to truly fanatical degrees.
Further Reading:
Manhattan Institute: Rebuilding Ground Zero
· Tom Leppert was the CEO of Turner construction which right wing conspiracy theorists claimed helped ensure the towers would fall straight down. He also became part of Trumps transition team. While there’s no evidence of explosives being used, tampering with the exoskeleton and weaking the relatively thin central column ahead of time are theoretically plausible.
Huffpost Donald Trump Transition Team
Wikipedia Tom Leppert

The bidding for the World Trade Center lease involved only a few major real estate firms as allowed by the Port Authority Chairman. Below are the allowed bidders and their estimated worth at the time included:

· Donald J. Trump’s Organization:
o Worth around $1.5 billion in 1996 after multiple bankruptcies. Confirmed only by Forbes magazine in 2005.
· Tishman Speyer:
o Valued at approximately $1.8 billion in 2000, would soon face ‘tenant issues’ with many scrupulous legal claims against them.
· Gale & Wentworth:
o Worth a few million.
· Mortimer Zuckerman’s Boston Properties:
o Mortimer Zuckerman alone was worth around $2 billion.
· The Rouse Company:
o Mainly a shopping mall operator.
· Brookfield Properties:
o A Canadian firm valued at over $20 billion in 2000.
· Vornado Realty Trust:
o Worth an estimated $2-3 billion. Had the highest bid, but was unexpectedly outed by the Port Authority Chairman, paving the way for Silverstein’s win. CEO of Vornado Trust, Steven Roth would later do many deals with Trump in 2005 and beyond.
· Larry Silverstein:
o As mentioned, was nearly bankrupt in the 1980s, and was mysteriously awarded the right to lease the World Trade Center contract at $3.2 billion, twice the original asking price of 1.2 Billion. It would still be owned by the Port authority of NY and NJ, he would just own the rights to lease it.
o Port Authority Chairman, Lewis Eisenberg, made this unexplained decision, who also later became Trumps lead fundraiser in 2015.
o After putting down only $125 million, as per the contract, Silverstein would be getting back $100 million just 6 weeks after his bid and with an uncommon terrorist insurance addition. His exaggerated bid and insurance contract would also greatly inflate the amount of money he could get from an insurance claim. If the winning bid was 1.5 billion, the insurance payout would also have been much less.
o In real estate, its quite rare for a prudent investor to bid twice the asking price, as demonstrated by the other companies that backed out, of which I find no connections to Trump.
o If anyone had known about 9/11 ahead of time, like Trump claims he did, it would become drastically easier to outbid all competitors, knowing that for pennies on the dollar, you would be getting much more back.

Further Reading:
NY Times Article on World Trade Center Deal
Wikipedia on Lewis Eisenberg
Patch On Lew Eisenberg Leading Trump Fundraising
NY Times Article Silverstein Gets Most Of His Money Back

Giuliani’s Gangster Acts
Arguably, if the above points are what they objectively appear to be, that would be a bad thing. You’d think that would be enough. However, Guliani would say “hold my beer’ to those sentiments.

1. Outdated Equipment for First Responders:
· Due to Giuliani’s inadequate leadership, first responders used old equipment that failed to warn them to evacuate the towers. Which contributed to their deaths while they searched for survivors.
NY Times Article: Giuliani’s Preparedness on 9/11
2. Obstructed Recovery Efforts:
· Giuliani delayed proper search and rescue operations for days, possibly costing lives of citizens and first responders who didn’t know they needed to leave.
· 20 Years later he would claim that some of Bidens actions were so reckless that… “It would be as if I got down to ground zero and said take out the firefighters, all you civilians see if you can get yourselves out.” Self report?
NBC News Report: Giuliani’s Role in Recovery
NY1: Giuliani Reflects on 9/11 Anniversary
3. Twin Towers Fund and Privatization:
· Giuliani privatized the Twin Towers relief funds, making them unauditable.
NY Times Article on Privatization
NY Post Article: Giuliani and Twin Towers Fund
4. Survivors Threaten To SUE Guliani For Relief Funds
· Even after privatizing the twin towers fund, Giuliani would make it incredibly difficult for the victims to receive their fair share. Requiring many of them to spend unnecessary money on advisors and consultants.
· Even with their legal pressure, he only agreed to “give the remaining 100 million to victims,” out of 170 million, if he could first put the money into the bank account of a charity in which he controlled.
· From the attached article: “But Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, said that he remained adamantly opposed to any transfer of funds to Mr. Giuliani's charity.
He also objected to Mr. Giuliani's continued control over even the $15 million in his private charity. Mr. Giuliani, he charged, gives every indication of using the Twin Towers Fund to maintain a staff of loyal supporters and to advance his political aspirations.
'The concern that politics will infiltrate the fund becomes even more apparent when one reviews the list of the mayor's former political appointees who are assuming senior staff positions or serving on the fund's board of directors,'' he wrote in a letter on Monday to Eliot L. Spitzer, the state attorney general.”
NY Times Article On Guliani Pressed To Disperse Twin Tower Funds
· However, there is no evidence of Giuliani making good on this promise.
· There are honestly no words for this. All associates of Guliani should be investigated.
5. Attempted Election Cancellation in 2001:
· Giuliani tried to cancel the 2001 election to stay mayor longer. He even considered removing term limits with Governor Pataki’s support. Similar to how Trump has “joked” about increasing his own term limits.
Business Insider: Giuliani and Pataki’s Attempt to Cancel Elections
Esquire Trump Joke Third Term
6. Motive
· In 2000, Guliani unfortunately got prostate cancer. We have to be willing to ask if this was a motive for his corrupt acts.
SurvivorNet: Giuliani’s Cancer


Silverstein’s Unscrupulous Greed
1. Initial Settlement Demands and Profit Claims:
· Despite only having been out for $25 million, Silverstein initially sought nearly $8 BILLION in insurance settlements and argued for "loss of revenue from those buildings," which is quite an uncompassionate claim considering how many lost their lives. Talk about a prime example of the working and lower classes making sacrifices while rich elites complain they didn’t profit enough from the same tragedy.
2. Rebuilding Contributions and Insurance Payout:
· Despite the fact that he only owned the leasing rights to the twin towers, ‘Silverstein Properties’ received up to $4 billion from insurance payouts, instead of the Port Authority, which would be customary as the owner.
· While it's assumed that most of that money went to rebuilding, this isn't actually known or proven. It would be different if he had a separate insurance policy that was not connected to the rebuilding of the towers, with different monies going to the Port Authority to rebuild. This was not the case.
History.com: Rebuilding of Ground Zero
· He additionally refused to return the rights of Building 1 to the Port Authority until he secured additional funds from an $8 billion state fund. Talk about heartless.
Wikipedia: Larry Silverstein
· Various entities would contribute a total of $20 billion to rebuild all six damaged or destroyed towers, including four towers leased by Silverstein and two others he hadn't. This makes it unlikely that he had to go out of pocket with his 4 Billion.
3. Estimated Net Worth:
· While earlier records of Silverstein's net worth are unavailable, aside from his near bankruptcy in 1980, he is currently estimated to be worth around $1 billion.
Forbes Profile: Larry Silverstein

Silverstein’s Controversial Alignment with Trump
Larry Silverstein's connections and public persona have often been scrutinized. This scrutiny became particularly relevant in 2015 when he publicly displayed his support for Donald Trump:

• Long-standing Relationship: Silverstein revealed a 30-year-long acquaintance with Trump, emphasizing the depth of their connection. This means his relationship started in 1985, roughly two years after gaining a powerful criminal organization as a tenant in his tower 7, that saved him from bankruptcy, and 6 years before Trumps first, of many, bankruptcies. This also means they knew each other before 9/11.
• Supportive Yet Vague: He commended Trump for diligently pursuing what he believed to be right, echoing Trump's own ambiguous rhetoric. When pressed about the righteousness of Trump’s goals, Silverstein ambiguously responded, "well, it’s... you know... we’ll find out." This mirrors Trump’s evasive " Well, we're going to have to see what happens" stance, when questioned about committing to a peaceful transfer of power prior to January 6th—an event that ultimately unfolded with violence and chaos.
• Early Endorsement: By voicing his support when Trump announced his presidential campaign, Silverstein positioned himself as one of the early prominent figures in the MAGA movement.

Watch Silverstein Discuss Trump
CNN Trump On 2020 Election

The Man Who Boasted
When most people witness a tragedy, especially of this size, it takes time for their brains to comprehend what happened, it takes even more time to process it. Thus, anyone who was able to brag about their own assets hours after this tragedy on a radio show, is at least worthy of Investigation, especially if this very event helped reshape a misinformation landscape in which he would thrive as its King.
Politifact – How 911 Attacks Helped Shape Modern Misinformation

· Insensitive Boasts About Building Height:
o Trump also boasted that with the fall of the Twin Towers, his building became the tallest in Manhattan—an inaccurate and insensitive claim given the context.
Independent 9 11 Trump Tallest Building
· Early Claims and Revisions:
o Shortly after 9/11, Donald Trump claimed he saw the second plane hit the towers from his Manhattan apartment. He also made an unfounded claim that he saw thousands of Muslims in New Jersey cheering, a statement that has been widely debunked. Despite varying explanations and suggesting that he saw it on an untraceable video that was “widely covered,” these claims helped fueled significant conspiracy theories. If anything, this was a self-report.
o Snopes: Trump Claims Muslims Cheered
o FactCheck.org: Trump’s Revised 9/11 Claim
· Visit to Ground Zero:
o A week after the attacks, Trump visited Ground Zero and stated that although he was present, he wouldn’t consider himself a first responder. This attempt at humility struck many as morbidly insensitive, considering the true heroism displayed by actual first responders.
ABC News: Trump Shares New Details About Morning of 9/11

Legacy of Suspicion:
These actions paint Trump as one of the more suspicious figures post-9/11, who may have used the tragedy for personal and political gain. His connections with figures like Larry Silverstein and Lewis Eisenberg, the Port Authority chairman, hint at deep financial interests potentially influenced by the 9/11 aftermath. Meanwhile, survivors and first responders faced challenges in securing support, highlighting the disparities between their experiences and the political maneuvers at play. Again morbidly juxtaposing the struggles of the poor and working class versus elite swamp members such as Trump and his ilk.

While being, arguably, one of the more suspicious Americans of potentially “being an insider," Trump would go on to cast doubt everywhere else with his new holier than thou rhetoric and hints and claims that “it was an inside job” for the next 15 years.

What if he was speaking from personal experience.

The Deepfake Dilemma
Now in a world where Trump's followers already discount reality, the emergence of AI-generated deepfakes threatens to further distort the truth. This technology could transform legal standards of evidence, making it easy to dismiss genuine evidence against the right as fabricated, while baseless accusations against the left might be accepted as the long-awaited proof.

The Potential Escalation of MAGA Actions
Given the willingness of MAGA supporters to storm the Capitol on January 6th, bolstered by Trump's incendiary rhetoric, the potential for escalation is alarming. The advent of fabricated images and videos could present unprecedented national security threats.

Trump's Incendiary Rhetoric on January 6th
Trump's speech on January 6th was a clear incitement, as he urged his followers to "fight like hell" to "stop the steal," despite admitting DURING THE SPEECH that there was no evidence of the massive electoral fraud he claimed. As well as his lawyers laughable court “arguments.”
“...while there is no evidence to prove any wrongdoing…”
Npr.Org Read Trumps Jan 6 Speech
LawAndCrime Come On Now

This speech, coupled with his undermining of constitutional processes, underscores the risks and intentional deceit of his rhetoric. Too bad Republicans senators and our Supreme Court have either claimed he was above the law, or continue to postpone his court dates till after elections. A wild position when treason is on the table. Did that dude commit treason that claims he wants to become a dictator? I dunno, lets let him potentially get elected and then find out!

Elon Musk's Political Shift
Elon was once very much a leftist, unfortunately in more and more far left “activists” continue to attack him endlessly for not agreeing with them on their own singular issues and perspectives. To them I say congratulations, you successfully pushed the most powerful man on earth into the far right. Great job. Great job.
Elon Musk's journey from a liberal supporter to a figure embraced by the far right highlights the volatile nature of political affiliations in today's polarized environment. His actions since acquiring Twitter—such as promoting unfounded conspiracy theories and making high-profile firings—suggest a departure from his initial free speech advocacy.
Especially when considering he fired Don Lemon from his platform for an interview he found offensive. Canceling opinions you find offensive isn’t free speech, it’s literally the opposite. I’m sure many people were offended by the examples below. What about them?
Far Right Support Examples: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

The Need for a Critical Approach
Supporters of Trump should critically evaluate why he did not pardon the January 6th insurrectionists during his term, despite using them as political leverage now. This pattern of using allies until they are no longer useful is evident throughout his political and personal dealings.
What better example could there possibly be as to what trump truly thinks of his supporters, how sacrificial he sees them as part of his endless narratives, then his refusal and failure to pardon January 6th insurrectionists while still in office?
Of course, anyone “just on the grass” or outside the building should only get a day in jail at most, however people that barged inside the capital should naturally get much more.
And while trump refused to pardon those people before, he now calls them “hostages” and is using them as political bait to a truly wild degree. It's very likely he will make good on this promise to further embolden the narrative that “Democrats are trying to take you down and only I can save you.”
His supporters need to seriously ask, “Why didn’t he pardon us before?”
Also, remember when he claimed he would pay legal fees for supporters that were violent at his rallies, but then seemed to falter and change his mind. Much like how Amber Heard donated her money, “by pledging it.”
List of allies he was quick to discard or dump. And let's face it, all of these people have done more for him than the average MAGA supporter. The only person he cares about is himself.
Trump claims that Mike Pence, the man he vetted more than anyone else, “has gone to the dark side.”
Trump seems to have supported the chants to “Hang Mike Pense,” at least in jest? We hope? There are also no links of him condemning them. Yet admittedly this one point doesn’t have hard evidence like a recording or video as far as I know, it certainly fits his brand.
Mike Flynn, a Trump appointee, later testifies against him.
Trump admits Flynn lied on his behalf, accidentally testifying against him, but does pardon him. As long as you’re colluding with Russia you’re ok it seems?

The Future Under Trump's Influence
Trump's rhetoric about overriding constitutional norms to address what he calls "massive fraud" hints at authoritarian aspirations. His praise for dictators and divisive language further aligns with dangerous historical precedents.
Important Articles:
“How a second trump term could end us democracy.” -commondreams
“Ask the expert: What a 2nd Trump term could mean for democracy and advancing policy.” - Msu Today
“Judgement Day” for political opponents.

To predict the future lets base it on known facts:
Apparently, he will help attack our constitution like he may have with the Twin Towers.
“A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.”
Stated he intended to be a Dictator on day one, but then promises it will be just for a day. Is that how that works? Or is it “Once you go Dictator you don’t go back?”
Praising dictators, referring to immigrants as vermin etc, akin to Hitlers rhetoric against “blood mixing.”
More fraudulent use of lawyers and courts that gets everyone else in trouble but him, with them arguing he's above the law. This further shows how much he will consistently use people for his own ends and then dump them when they're no longer of use.
Warning from republicans and notes on ass kissing. As well as being generally unfit for office.
If you want help from Trump you better kiss his ***
Trumps says he kept Omarosa just because she said nice things about him, while defaming her
DeSantis: "You can be the most worthless Republican in America, but if you kiss the ring, he’ll say you’re wonderful."
Thehill Trump Views People Who Kiss His A As Weak.
And if you dare to speak out against trump, you better kiss his ****
Politico Graham Breaks With Trump On Abortion
WashingtonPost Trump Graham Abortion
News Yahoo 30 More Republicans Denounce Donald Trump Unqualified President
Hot take, if he’s elected president America, and the world, is frankly fucked.

Predicting MAGA 2024 And Beyond
Naturally there are endless possibilities of what MAGA and dictators around the world decide to do this year and into the future. I believe that the one thing that insinuates when it's time for their next evil actions is dictated by their standings in the polls or when a fellow dictator needs a little more political pressure from war torn inflated oil prices etc.
Dictators Unite
While writing my thesis, I speculated that dictators globally were uniting, finding mutual benefits in their governance and deceitful tactics. This theory is increasingly recognized as these autocrats appear to be forming a coalition, undermining peaceful unity efforts through conspiracy theories to preserve their power.
Unherd How Autocrats Unite
The True Nature of MAGA
MAGA was never genuinely about speaking truth to power or restoring America's glory. It has been an elaborate scheme funded by immense wealth, perpetuating anti-American sentiments through fabricated grassroots movements by domestic and foreign actors. This movement has primarily enriched a select few power-hungry dictators and may have been responsible for some of our most horrific moments in history in the past and acts yet to come.
Trump and MAGA
While 'MAGA' predates Trump, he conveniently stepped into a role long in the making. Despite occasional deviations from the MAGA ideology, such as promoting vaccines to emphatic boos, Trump has largely embodied its principles. The real architects of MAGA, however, are likely disillusioned with his unpredictable attacks, which contradict their broader agenda of absolute power.
Nbc News Donald Trump Booed
Trump as a Martyr
Regardless of election outcomes, Trump is poised to claim interference. His rhetoric and the devout belief of his followers in his divine anointment could lead to his martyrdom, especially given his age and the vulnerabilities it brings. This martyrdom could solidify his legacy while serving the interests of MAGA strategists who find him increasingly burdensome even if he “wins.”
Factcheck Trumps Bogus Voter Fraud Claims
La Times Trump Democrats Effort Presidential Ballot

u/neodestiny and friends.
Introduction
If you think you know anything about MAGA. Trust me, you know nothing. Not even his most devout followers or haters will have considered the following. And for the sake of our democracy and way of life, I hope people read this.
This work may very well help to shift the narrative on Trump in a meaningful and foundational way, but I don't want this work exacerbate any feelings of ill will to MAGA members, for they have been prey to possibly one of the largest con jobs our world has ever seen, especially without the help of this counternarrative.
Snippet From My Thesis On MAGA
As I work on tidying up the master file with the helpful dms I got, allow me to post just the most contentious part of it below, now that it’s able to stand on its own.
MAGA didn’t begin in 2015. I argue it began in 2001 on 9/11, while also harnessing and funneling decades of anti-government resentment till many Americans would openly call for a “wrecking ball” figure to help “drain the swamp.”
This work may very well help to shift the narrative on Trump in a meaningful and foundational way, but I don't want this work exacerbate any feelings of ill will to MAGA members, for they have been prey to possibly one of the largest con jobs our world has ever seen, especially without the help of this counternarrative.
A Key Fueling Factor To American Outrage- Inflation
Many elements contributed to growing American anger that would later contribute to MAGA, this is a snippet from the larger work.
Rising Cost of Living
o In 1950, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) was 24.1. By 2000, it had risen to 168 (a 597% increase), and by 2023, it had reached 304.7, a 1163% increase from 1950.
o Housing prices saw a drastic rise overtime, with the median home price increasing from $7,354 in 1950 to $388,700 in 2023, a staggering 5185% increase.
o While rising rent costs can contribute to overall inflation and cost of living, even the left has largely failed to address how exponentially increasing real estate prices impact the cost of living. This omission has made many other conspiracy theories seem more plausible in its wake.
o If we don’t find real solutions for real estate that also aren’t extreme, then society will feel more and more pressure to accept “unreasonable solutions” like Trump, even though he’s the last person on earth who could solve it, considering his business acumen and history.
MAGA Dynamics and Blind Devotion
In 2016, it wasn't just the left calling the MAGA movement a cult. Trump famously said, "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters." Even the left failed to grasp the gravity of this statement. As someone who nearly died in a deadly cult and based on my research, I don't know of a single cult where the founder could openly commit murder without losing members. Trump didn't just believe he'd created one of the largest cults ever; he believed he'd created the most fanatical. Let's hope his followers prove him wrong by showing a willingness to criticize him, regardless of their vote.

The MAGA Question
Instead of challenging MAGA supporters on fallacious beliefs, ask them this question to see if they’re at least able to see a world where Trump isn’t a biblical King: "If Trump admitted he was behind 9/11 and used resulting insurance money and donations from hostile governments to create false “grass root” campaigns. And did it all in a way to make it seem like others committed his own atrocities. And that he intended to destroy America in every way if he got elected, would you still vote for him?"

Yet even then, getting through to a MAGA supporter inevitably refers to 9/11 “research” out there when they realize individual positions are usually fallacious. This quagmire me decide to investigate this tragedy, to see if there was a more plausible counter theory. Honestly, the more I looked the more surprised I became. Here are my findings that are but a snippet of my full thesis on MAGA.

9/11 Conspiracy Theories and MAGA
Conspiracy Theories and Credibility:
o First off, conspiracy theories should involve some effort to verify narratives, rather than just repeating claims across multiple sources that mistake themselves as evidence; like a bunch of people who repeat “bob farted” across multiple websites may see that as evidence, when in fact, it was Sean. Sorry Sean.

Early Origins of MAGA:
o Although some believe MAGA began in 2015, its roots lie as early as the 1980s with Rush Limbaugh and later became "serious" on 9/11.
o 9/11 conspiracy theories claim controlled demolitions were used, but the lack of any cellphone recordings of explosions weakens this theory.

Suspicious Factors:
o The official narrative involving chaotic jet fuel leading to a straight fall seemed questionable.
o The collapse of a third building (WTC 7), which wasn’t directly hit, fueled suspicions.
o Airline stocks were heavily shorted before the attacks, raising concerns about insider trading. Harvey Pitt, Republican SEC Chairman at the time, investigated this and claimed there was nothing amiss, but was criticized for later crimes and forced to resign.
o It’s also suspicious that in Trumps 2000 book “The America We Deserve” that he stated, “I really am convinced we’re in danger of the sort of terrorist attacks that will make the [1993] bombing of the Trade Center look like kids playing with firecrackers. No sensible analyst rejects this possibility, and plenty of them, like me, are not wondering if but when it will happen*.”*
§ Yet democrats would largely miss this point entirely and obsess over his false claim that he called for Bin Laden to be killed, when he had not. Somehow conspiracy theorists would find this ‘cool’ rather than suspicious.
CNN Fact Check Donald Trump Osama Bin Laden Book Claim

Reports and Simplified Narratives:
o FEMA's 2002 report and NIST's 2005 report provided technical explanations of the tower collapses.
o However, the Port Authority Chairman stuck to the oversimplified narrative that "jet fuel melted steel beams," even though he knew this was a half-truth, as detailed in the next section, fueling anti-government conspiracies. The question is why.

Potential Impact:
o 9/11 conspiracy theories sowed distrust in the government, which may have been one of the attackers' objectives. Anyone that heavily profited from this tragedy, and helped further those objects, should be questioned.
o The ‘Loose Change’ “documentary” pointed out suspicious parts of the story, but failed to give any clear claims as to who was purportedly behind it. It also failed to note the Twin Towers titanic design flaw that could result in a straight fall. Even the 2015 version of this film fails to mention nearly all of the known facts in this report.
o The Director of that film later states:
“I DON’T THINK WE’D HAVE PRESIDENT TRUMP IF IT WEREN’T FOR 9/11”
“9/11 created a culture of fear, of xenophobia, this sense of entitlement and everything we’ve seen. Warrantless wire-tapping, Guantanamo Bay, everything that’s happened led us to this point, we wouldn’t be here without 9/11. They want to kick out all the Mexicans and Muslims because of this culture of fear and bigotry and xenophobia that directly led to the election of fucking Donald Trump. [laughing] That’s our world now! We had Reagan before, and Governor Schwarzenegger. But President Donald Trump? It’s just weird. Everything is just weird.”
Theoutline Reflecting On Loose Change
o While the director was in the right to ask questions, he failed to ask the most obvious ones.
o However, his lead “researcher,” Jason Bermas, would turn out to be a full blown MAGA wingnut.
Patriot Jason Bermas
o Anyone that would benefit politically and financially from 9/11 should be fully investigated.
Further Reading:
Harvey Pitt - Wikipedia
Politifact How 911 Attacks Helped Shape Modern Misinformation
It will never be possible to defeat MAGA followers “logically” with people who believed his parties rhetoric “that 9/11 was an inside job.”

I say… what if those Republican leaders were self reporting?
What if Trump followers have been rallying behind the very man responsible for its orchestration?

The Twin Towers and Larry Silverstein
Architectural Pitfalls of the Twin Towers:
· The Twin Towers had unique architectural flaws due to the excessive heavy load on their exoskeletons to allow for more floor and leasing space, which greatly contributed to their straight collapse after the 9/11 attacks. This was the first and last skyscraper made in this way.
· For anyone who said that “any other building would have fallen sideways,” you were right, though perhaps not entirely how you may have imagined. A "Coke Can" analogy shows how a similar weakened structure can result in a straight fall, contrary to conspiracy theories claiming controlled demolitions. This isn't something I'm asking you to take for granted, or to read from media sources you don’t trust. This is something you can verify on your own, in person, in real time, in reality.
· However Trump, despite being close friends with Silverstein as we’ll cover later, claimed "It wasn’t architectural defects, you know, the World Trade Center was always known as a very, very strong building” per the attached PolitiFact article.
· Supporting Article:
Engineering Experts Explain the Collapse of the Twin Towers
Politifact Donald Trumps 911 Speculation

Larry Silverstein, The Leasor Of The Twin Towers:
· Nearly went bankrupt after losing his main tenant Drexel Burnham in 1980 after he built tower 7 with him in mind.
· I don't know how many of us understand the level of desperation a situation like this can cause in someone and how many potential crimes it can easily push them towards.
· He is known for then saying, “…looking up at the twin towers and thinking, my building is huge, but it is made diminutive by the twin towers. So I said to myself, wouldn't it be incredible someday to own those?" That's not the statement of a sane person who nearly went bankrupt, and if anything, hints towards jealousy.
· He managed to secure Salomon Brothers two years later, which later paid $300 million in securities fraud penalties casting suspicion over the entities who saved Silverstein, in addition to their overall plans for the future.
· How he would become able to outbid everyone else in 2001, for the right to lease the twin towers, would become a mystery we will untangle later.
Further Reading
Manhattan Institute – Silverstein On Ground Zero
Justice Department: Salomon Brothers Securities Fraud

Trump and Real Estate Connections
Historical Context and Redevelopment Plans:
· A redevelopment plan commenced in the 1990s by Gov. Pataki and Mayor Giuliani, spurred a commercial revival in downtown Manhattan, making the World Trade Center prime property. Pataki would go on to criticize trump, while the other would prove to be one of this wildest, if not craziest, supporters to truly fanatical degrees.
Further Reading:
Manhattan Institute: Rebuilding Ground Zero
· Tom Leppert was the CEO of Turner construction which right wing conspiracy theorists claimed helped ensure the towers would fall straight down. He also became part of Trumps transition team. While there’s no evidence of explosives being used, tampering with the exoskeleton and weaking the relatively thin central column ahead of time are theoretically plausible.
Huffpost Donald Trump Transition Team
Wikipedia Tom Leppert

The bidding for the World Trade Center lease involved only a few major real estate firms as allowed by the Port Authority Chairman. Below are the allowed bidders and their estimated worth at the time included:

· Donald J. Trump’s Organization:
o Worth around $1.5 billion in 1996 after multiple bankruptcies. Confirmed only by Forbes magazine in 2005.
· Tishman Speyer:
o Valued at approximately $1.8 billion in 2000, would soon face ‘tenant issues’ with many scrupulous legal claims against them.
· Gale & Wentworth:
o Worth a few million.
· Mortimer Zuckerman’s Boston Properties:
o Mortimer Zuckerman alone was worth around $2 billion.
· The Rouse Company:
o Mainly a shopping mall operator.
· Brookfield Properties:
o A Canadian firm valued at over $20 billion in 2000.
· Vornado Realty Trust:
o Worth an estimated $2-3 billion. Had the highest bid, but was unexpectedly outed by the Port Authority Chairman, paving the way for Silverstein’s win. CEO of Vornado Trust, Steven Roth would later do many deals with Trump in 2005 and beyond.
· Larry Silverstein:
o As mentioned, was nearly bankrupt in the 1980s, and was mysteriously awarded the right to lease the World Trade Center contract at $3.2 billion, twice the original asking price of 1.2 Billion. It would still be owned by the Port authority of NY and NJ, he would just own the rights to lease it.
o Port Authority Chairman, Lewis Eisenberg, made this unexplained decision, who also later became Trumps lead fundraiser in 2015.
o After putting down only $125 million, as per the contract, Silverstein would be getting back $100 million just 6 weeks after his bid and with an uncommon terrorist insurance addition. His exaggerated bid and insurance contract would also greatly inflate the amount of money he could get from an insurance claim. If the winning bid was 1.5 billion, the insurance payout would also have been much less.
o In real estate, its quite rare for a prudent investor to bid twice the asking price, as demonstrated by the other companies that backed out, of which I find no connections to Trump.
o If anyone had known about 9/11 ahead of time, like Trump claims he did, it would become drastically easier to outbid all competitors, knowing that for pennies on the dollar, you would be getting much more back.

Further Reading:
NY Times Article on World Trade Center Deal
Wikipedia on Lewis Eisenberg
Patch On Lew Eisenberg Leading Trump Fundraising
NY Times Article Silverstein Gets Most Of His Money Back

Giuliani’s Gangster Acts
Arguably, if the above points are what they objectively appear to be, that would be a bad thing. You’d think that would be enough. However, Guliani would say “hold my beer’ to those sentiments.

1. Outdated Equipment for First Responders:
· Due to Giuliani’s inadequate leadership, first responders used old equipment that failed to warn them to evacuate the towers. Which contributed to their deaths while they searched for survivors.
NY Times Article: Giuliani’s Preparedness on 9/11
2. Obstructed Recovery Efforts:
· Giuliani delayed proper search and rescue operations for days, possibly costing lives of citizens and first responders who didn’t know they needed to leave.
· 20 Years later he would claim that some of Bidens actions were so reckless that… “It would be as if I got down to ground zero and said take out the firefighters, all you civilians see if you can get yourselves out.” Self report?
NBC News Report: Giuliani’s Role in Recovery
NY1: Giuliani Reflects on 9/11 Anniversary
3. Twin Towers Fund and Privatization:
· Giuliani privatized the Twin Towers relief funds, making them unauditable.
NY Times Article on Privatization
NY Post Article: Giuliani and Twin Towers Fund
4. Survivors Threaten To SUE Guliani For Relief Funds
· Even after privatizing the twin towers fund, Giuliani would make it incredibly difficult for the victims to receive their fair share. Requiring many of them to spend unnecessary money on advisors and consultants.
· Even with their legal pressure, he only agreed to “give the remaining 100 million to victims,” out of 170 million, if he could first put the money into the bank account of a charity in which he controlled.
· From the attached article: “But Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, said that he remained adamantly opposed to any transfer of funds to Mr. Giuliani's charity.
He also objected to Mr. Giuliani's continued control over even the $15 million in his private charity. Mr. Giuliani, he charged, gives every indication of using the Twin Towers Fund to maintain a staff of loyal supporters and to advance his political aspirations.
'The concern that politics will infiltrate the fund becomes even more apparent when one reviews the list of the mayor's former political appointees who are assuming senior staff positions or serving on the fund's board of directors,'' he wrote in a letter on Monday to Eliot L. Spitzer, the state attorney general.”
NY Times Article On Guliani Pressed To Disperse Twin Tower Funds
· However, there is no evidence of Giuliani making good on this promise.
· There are honestly no words for this. All associates of Guliani should be investigated.
5. Attempted Election Cancellation in 2001:
· Giuliani tried to cancel the 2001 election to stay mayor longer. He even considered removing term limits with Governor Pataki’s support. Similar to how Trump has “joked” about increasing his own term limits.
Business Insider: Giuliani and Pataki’s Attempt to Cancel Elections
Esquire Trump Joke Third Term
6. Motive
· In 2000, Guliani unfortunately got prostate cancer. We have to be willing to ask if this was a motive for his corrupt acts.
SurvivorNet: Giuliani’s Cancer


Silverstein’s Unscrupulous Greed
1. Initial Settlement Demands and Profit Claims:
· Despite only having been out for $25 million, Silverstein initially sought nearly $8 BILLION in insurance settlements and argued for "loss of revenue from those buildings," which is quite an uncompassionate claim considering how many lost their lives. Talk about a prime example of the working and lower classes making sacrifices while rich elites complain they didn’t profit enough from the same tragedy.
2. Rebuilding Contributions and Insurance Payout:
· Despite the fact that he only owned the leasing rights to the twin towers, ‘Silverstein Properties’ received up to $4 billion from insurance payouts, instead of the Port Authority, which would be customary as the owner.
· While it's assumed that most of that money went to rebuilding, this isn't actually known or proven. It would be different if he had a separate insurance policy that was not connected to the rebuilding of the towers, with different monies going to the Port Authority to rebuild. This was not the case.
History.com: Rebuilding of Ground Zero
· He additionally refused to return the rights of Building 1 to the Port Authority until he secured additional funds from an $8 billion state fund. Talk about heartless.
Wikipedia: Larry Silverstein
· Various entities would contribute a total of $20 billion to rebuild all six damaged or destroyed towers, including four towers leased by Silverstein and two others he hadn't. This makes it unlikely that he had to go out of pocket with his 4 Billion.
3. Estimated Net Worth:
· While earlier records of Silverstein's net worth are unavailable, aside from his near bankruptcy in 1980, he is currently estimated to be worth around $1 billion.
Forbes Profile: Larry Silverstein

Silverstein’s Controversial Alignment with Trump
Larry Silverstein's connections and public persona have often been scrutinized. This scrutiny became particularly relevant in 2015 when he publicly displayed his support for Donald Trump:

• Long-standing Relationship: Silverstein revealed a 30-year-long acquaintance with Trump, emphasizing the depth of their connection. This means his relationship started in 1985, roughly two years after gaining a powerful criminal organization as a tenant in his tower 7, that saved him from bankruptcy, and 6 years before Trumps first, of many, bankruptcies. This also means they knew each other before 9/11.
• Supportive Yet Vague: He commended Trump for diligently pursuing what he believed to be right, echoing Trump's own ambiguous rhetoric. When pressed about the righteousness of Trump’s goals, Silverstein ambiguously responded, "well, it’s... you know... we’ll find out." This mirrors Trump’s evasive " Well, we're going to have to see what happens" stance, when questioned about committing to a peaceful transfer of power prior to January 6th—an event that ultimately unfolded with violence and chaos.
• Early Endorsement: By voicing his support when Trump announced his presidential campaign, Silverstein positioned himself as one of the early prominent figures in the MAGA movement.

Watch Silverstein Discuss Trump
CNN Trump On 2020 Election

The Man Who Boasted
When most people witness a tragedy, especially of this size, it takes time for their brains to comprehend what happened, it takes even more time to process it. Thus, anyone who was able to brag about their own assets hours after this tragedy on a radio show, is at least worthy of Investigation, especially if this very event helped reshape a misinformation landscape in which he would thrive as its King.
Politifact – How 911 Attacks Helped Shape Modern Misinformation

· Insensitive Boasts About Building Height:
o Trump also boasted that with the fall of the Twin Towers, his building became the tallest in Manhattan—an inaccurate and insensitive claim given the context.
Independent 9 11 Trump Tallest Building
· Early Claims and Revisions:
o Shortly after 9/11, Donald Trump claimed he saw the second plane hit the towers from his Manhattan apartment. He also made an unfounded claim that he saw thousands of Muslims in New Jersey cheering, a statement that has been widely debunked. Despite varying explanations and suggesting that he saw it on an untraceable video that was “widely covered,” these claims helped fueled significant conspiracy theories. If anything, this was a self-report.
o Snopes: Trump Claims Muslims Cheered
o FactCheck.org: Trump’s Revised 9/11 Claim
· Visit to Ground Zero:
o A week after the attacks, Trump visited Ground Zero and stated that although he was present, he wouldn’t consider himself a first responder. This attempt at humility struck many as morbidly insensitive, considering the true heroism displayed by actual first responders.
ABC News: Trump Shares New Details About Morning of 9/11

Legacy of Suspicion:
These actions paint Trump as one of the more suspicious figures post-9/11, who may have used the tragedy for personal and political gain. His connections with figures like Larry Silverstein and Lewis Eisenberg, the Port Authority chairman, hint at deep financial interests potentially influenced by the 9/11 aftermath. Meanwhile, survivors and first responders faced challenges in securing support, highlighting the disparities between their experiences and the political maneuvers at play. Again morbidly juxtaposing the struggles of the poor and working class versus elite swamp members such as Trump and his ilk.

While being, arguably, one of the more suspicious Americans of potentially “being an insider," Trump would go on to cast doubt everywhere else with his new holier than thou rhetoric and hints and claims that “it was an inside job” for the next 15 years.

What if he was speaking from personal experience.

The Deepfake Dilemma
Now in a world where Trump's followers already discount reality, the emergence of AI-generated deepfakes threatens to further distort the truth. This technology could transform legal standards of evidence, making it easy to dismiss genuine evidence against the right as fabricated, while baseless accusations against the left might be accepted as the long-awaited proof.

The Potential Escalation of MAGA Actions
Given the willingness of MAGA supporters to storm the Capitol on January 6th, bolstered by Trump's incendiary rhetoric, the potential for escalation is alarming. The advent of fabricated images and videos could present unprecedented national security threats.

Trump's Incendiary Rhetoric on January 6th
Trump's speech on January 6th was a clear incitement, as he urged his followers to "fight like hell" to "stop the steal," despite admitting DURING THE SPEECH that there was no evidence of the massive electoral fraud he claimed. As well as his lawyers laughable court “arguments.”
“...while there is no evidence to prove any wrongdoing…”
Npr.Org Read Trumps Jan 6 Speech
LawAndCrime Come On Now

This speech, coupled with his undermining of constitutional processes, underscores the risks and intentional deceit of his rhetoric. Too bad Republicans senators and our Supreme Court have either claimed he was above the law, or continue to postpone his court dates till after elections. A wild position when treason is on the table. Did that dude commit treason that claims he wants to become a dictator? I dunno, lets let him potentially get elected and then find out!

Elon Musk's Political Shift
Elon was once very much a leftist, unfortunately in more and more far left “activists” continue to attack him endlessly for not agreeing with them on their own singular issues and perspectives. To them I say congratulations, you successfully pushed the most powerful man on earth into the far right. Great job. Great job.
Elon Musk's journey from a liberal supporter to a figure embraced by the far right highlights the volatile nature of political affiliations in today's polarized environment. His actions since acquiring Twitter—such as promoting unfounded conspiracy theories and making high-profile firings—suggest a departure from his initial free speech advocacy.
Especially when considering he fired Don Lemon from his platform for an interview he found offensive. Canceling opinions you find offensive isn’t free speech, it’s literally the opposite. I’m sure many people were offended by the examples below. What about them?
Far Right Support Examples: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

The Need for a Critical Approach
Supporters of Trump should critically evaluate why he did not pardon the January 6th insurrectionists during his term, despite using them as political leverage now. This pattern of using allies until they are no longer useful is evident throughout his political and personal dealings.
What better example could there possibly be as to what trump truly thinks of his supporters, how sacrificial he sees them as part of his endless narratives, then his refusal and failure to pardon January 6th insurrectionists while still in office?
Of course, anyone “just on the grass” or outside the building should only get a day in jail at most, however people that barged inside the capital should naturally get much more.
And while trump refused to pardon those people before, he now calls them “hostages” and is using them as political bait to a truly wild degree. It's very likely he will make good on this promise to further embolden the narrative that “Democrats are trying to take you down and only I can save you.”
His supporters need to seriously ask, “Why didn’t he pardon us before?”
Also, remember when he claimed he would pay legal fees for supporters that were violent at his rallies, but then seemed to falter and change his mind. Much like how Amber Heard donated her money, “by pledging it.”
List of allies he was quick to discard or dump. And let's face it, all of these people have done more for him than the average MAGA supporter. The only person he cares about is himself.
Trump claims that Mike Pence, the man he vetted more than anyone else, “has gone to the dark side.”
Trump seems to have supported the chants to “Hang Mike Pense,” at least in jest? We hope? There are also no links of him condemning them. Yet admittedly this one point doesn’t have hard evidence like a recording or video as far as I know, it certainly fits his brand.
Mike Flynn, a Trump appointee, later testifies against him.
Trump admits Flynn lied on his behalf, accidentally testifying against him, but does pardon him. As long as you’re colluding with Russia you’re ok it seems?

The Future Under Trump's Influence
Trump's rhetoric about overriding constitutional norms to address what he calls "massive fraud" hints at authoritarian aspirations. His praise for dictators and divisive language further aligns with dangerous historical precedents.
Important Articles:
“How a second trump term could end us democracy.” -commondreams
“Ask the expert: What a 2nd Trump term could mean for democracy and advancing policy.” - Msu Today
“Judgement Day” for political opponents.

To predict the future lets base it on known facts:
Apparently, he will help attack our constitution like he may have with the Twin Towers.
“A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.”
Stated he intended to be a Dictator on day one, but then promises it will be just for a day. Is that how that works? Or is it “Once you go Dictator you don’t go back?”
Praising dictators, referring to immigrants as vermin etc, akin to Hitlers rhetoric against “blood mixing.”
More fraudulent use of lawyers and courts that gets everyone else in trouble but him, with them arguing he's above the law. This further shows how much he will consistently use people for his own ends and then dump them when they're no longer of use.
Warning from republicans and notes on ass kissing. As well as being generally unfit for office.
If you want help from Trump you better kiss his ***
Trumps says he kept Omarosa just because she said nice things about him, while defaming her
DeSantis: "You can be the most worthless Republican in America, but if you kiss the ring, he’ll say you’re wonderful."
Thehill Trump Views People Who Kiss His A As Weak.
And if you dare to speak out against trump, you better kiss his ****
Politico Graham Breaks With Trump On Abortion
WashingtonPost Trump Graham Abortion
News Yahoo 30 More Republicans Denounce Donald Trump Unqualified President
Hot take, if he’s elected president America, and the world, is frankly fucked.

Predicting MAGA 2024 And Beyond
Naturally there are endless possibilities of what MAGA and dictators around the world decide to do this year and into the future. I believe that the one thing that insinuates when it's time for their next evil actions is dictated by their standings in the polls or when a fellow dictator needs a little more political pressure from war torn inflated oil prices etc.
Dictators Unite
While writing my thesis, I speculated that dictators globally were uniting, finding mutual benefits in their governance and deceitful tactics. This theory is increasingly recognized as these autocrats appear to be forming a coalition, undermining peaceful unity efforts through conspiracy theories to preserve their power.
Unherd How Autocrats Unite
The True Nature of MAGA
MAGA was never genuinely about speaking truth to power or restoring America's glory. It has been an elaborate scheme funded by immense wealth, perpetuating anti-American sentiments through fabricated grassroots movements by domestic and foreign actors. This movement has primarily enriched a select few power-hungry dictators and may have been responsible for some of our most horrific moments in history in the past and acts yet to come.
Trump and MAGA
While 'MAGA' predates Trump, he conveniently stepped into a role long in the making. Despite occasional deviations from the MAGA ideology, such as promoting vaccines to emphatic boos, Trump has largely embodied its principles. The real architects of MAGA, however, are likely disillusioned with his unpredictable attacks, which contradict their broader agenda of absolute power.
Nbc News Donald Trump Booed
Trump as a Martyr
Regardless of election outcomes, Trump is poised to claim interference. His rhetoric and the devout belief of his followers in his divine anointment could lead to his martyrdom, especially given his age and the vulnerabilities it brings. This martyrdom could solidify his legacy while serving the interests of MAGA strategists who find him increasingly burdensome even if he “wins.”
Factcheck Trumps Bogus Voter Fraud Claims
La Times Trump Democrats Effort Presidential Ballot

u/neodestiny and friends.
For the sake of transparency, I am not the architect of the following discoveries, and am just helping to forward their message and clean it up. Copywrite of the following work belongs to no one and everyone is not only welcome to share these findings as if they were their own, but openly encouraged to do so.
Introduction
If you think you know anything about MAGA. Trust me, you know nothing. Not even his most devout followers or haters will have considered the following. And for the sake of our democracy and way of life, I hope people read this.
This work may very well help to shift the narrative on Trump in a meaningful and foundational way, but I don't want this work exacerbate any feelings of ill will to MAGA members, for they have been prey to possibly one of the largest con jobs our world has ever seen, especially without the help of this counternarrative.
Snippet From My Thesis On MAGA
As I work on tidying up the master file with the helpful dms I got, allow me to post just the most contentious part of it below, now that it’s able to stand on its own.
MAGA didn’t begin in 2015. I argue it began in 2001 on 9/11, while also harnessing and funneling decades of anti-government resentment till many Americans would openly call for a “wrecking ball” figure to help “drain the swamp.”

A Key Fueling Factor To American Outrage- Inflation
Many elements contributed to growing American anger that would later contribute to MAGA, this is a snippet from the larger work.
Rising Cost of Living
o In 1950, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) was 24.1. By 2000, it had risen to 168 (a 597% increase), and by 2023, it had reached 304.7, a 1163% increase from 1950.
o Housing prices saw a drastic rise overtime, with the median home price increasing from $7,354 in 1950 to $388,700 in 2023, a staggering 5185% increase.
o While rising rent costs can contribute to overall inflation and cost of living, even the left has largely failed to address how exponentially increasing real estate prices impact the cost of living. This omission has made many other conspiracy theories seem more plausible in its wake.
o If we don’t find real solutions for real estate that also aren’t extreme, then society will feel more and more pressure to accept “unreasonable solutions” like Trump, even though he’s the last person on earth who could solve it, considering his business acumen and history.
MAGA Dynamics and Blind Devotion
In 2016, it wasn't just the left calling the MAGA movement a cult. Trump famously said, "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters." Even the left failed to grasp the gravity of this statement. As someone who nearly died in a deadly cult and based on my research, I don't know of a single cult where the founder could openly commit murder without losing members. Trump didn't just believe he'd created one of the largest cults ever; he believed he'd created the most fanatical. Let's hope his followers prove him wrong by showing a willingness to criticize him, regardless of their vote.

The MAGA Question
Instead of challenging MAGA supporters on fallacious beliefs, ask them this question to see if they’re at least able to see a world where Trump isn’t a biblical King: "If Trump admitted he was behind 9/11 and used resulting insurance money and donations from hostile governments to create false “grass root” campaigns. And did it all in a way to make it seem like others committed his own atrocities. And that he intended to destroy America in every way if he got elected, would you still vote for him?"

Yet even then, getting through to a MAGA supporter inevitably refers to 9/11 “research” out there when they realize individual positions are usually fallacious. This quagmire me decide to investigate this tragedy, to see if there was a more plausible counter theory. Honestly, the more I looked the more surprised I became. Here are my findings that are but a snippet of my full thesis on MAGA.

9/11 Conspiracy Theories and MAGA
Conspiracy Theories and Credibility:
o First off, conspiracy theories should involve some effort to verify narratives, rather than just repeating claims across multiple sources that mistake themselves as evidence; like a bunch of people who repeat “bob farted” across multiple websites may see that as evidence, when in fact, it was Sean. Sorry Sean.

Early Origins of MAGA:
o Although some believe MAGA began in 2015, its roots lie as early as the 1980s with Rush Limbaugh and later became "serious" on 9/11.
o 9/11 conspiracy theories claim controlled demolitions were used, but the lack of any cellphone recordings of explosions weakens this theory.

Suspicious Factors:
o The official narrative involving chaotic jet fuel leading to a straight fall seemed questionable.
o The collapse of a third building (WTC 7), which wasn’t directly hit, fueled suspicions.
o Airline stocks were heavily shorted before the attacks, raising concerns about insider trading. Harvey Pitt, Republican SEC Chairman at the time, investigated this and claimed there was nothing amiss, but was criticized for later crimes and forced to resign.
o It’s also suspicious that in Trumps 2000 book “The America We Deserve” that he stated, “I really am convinced we’re in danger of the sort of terrorist attacks that will make the [1993] bombing of the Trade Center look like kids playing with firecrackers. No sensible analyst rejects this possibility, and plenty of them, like me, are not wondering if but when it will happen*.”*
§ Yet democrats would largely miss this point entirely and obsess over his false claim that he called for Bin Laden to be killed, when he had not. Somehow conspiracy theorists would find this ‘cool’ rather than suspicious.
CNN Fact Check Donald Trump Osama Bin Laden Book Claim

Reports and Simplified Narratives:
o FEMA's 2002 report and NIST's 2005 report provided technical explanations of the tower collapses.
o However, the Port Authority Chairman stuck to the oversimplified narrative that "jet fuel melted steel beams," even though he knew this was a half-truth, as detailed in the next section, fueling anti-government conspiracies. The question is why.

Potential Impact:
o 9/11 conspiracy theories sowed distrust in the government, which may have been one of the attackers' objectives. Anyone that heavily profited from this tragedy, and helped further those objects, should be questioned.
o The ‘Loose Change’ “documentary” pointed out suspicious parts of the story, but failed to give any clear claims as to who was purportedly behind it. It also failed to note the Twin Towers titanic design flaw that could result in a straight fall. Even the 2015 version of this film fails to mention nearly all of the known facts in this report.
o The Director of that film later states:
“I DON’T THINK WE’D HAVE PRESIDENT TRUMP IF IT WEREN’T FOR 9/11”
“9/11 created a culture of fear, of xenophobia, this sense of entitlement and everything we’ve seen. Warrantless wire-tapping, Guantanamo Bay, everything that’s happened led us to this point, we wouldn’t be here without 9/11. They want to kick out all the Mexicans and Muslims because of this culture of fear and bigotry and xenophobia that directly led to the election of fucking Donald Trump. [laughing] That’s our world now! We had Reagan before, and Governor Schwarzenegger. But President Donald Trump? It’s just weird. Everything is just weird.”
Theoutline Reflecting On Loose Change
o While the director was in the right to ask questions, he failed to ask the most obvious ones.
o However, his lead “researcher,” Jason Bermas, would turn out to be a full blown MAGA wingnut.
Patriot Jason Bermas
o Anyone that would benefit politically and financially from 9/11 should be fully investigated.
Further Reading:
Harvey Pitt - Wikipedia
Politifact How 911 Attacks Helped Shape Modern Misinformation
It will never be possible to defeat MAGA followers “logically” with people who believed his parties rhetoric “that 9/11 was an inside job.”

I say… what if those Republican leaders were self reporting?
What if Trump followers have been rallying behind the very man responsible for its orchestration?

The Twin Towers and Larry Silverstein
Architectural Pitfalls of the Twin Towers:
· The Twin Towers had unique architectural flaws due to the excessive heavy load on their exoskeletons to allow for more floor and leasing space, which greatly contributed to their straight collapse after the 9/11 attacks. This was the first and last skyscraper made in this way.
· For anyone who said that “any other building would have fallen sideways,” you were right, though perhaps not entirely how you may have imagined. A "Coke Can" analogy shows how a similar weakened structure can result in a straight fall, contrary to conspiracy theories claiming controlled demolitions. This isn't something I'm asking you to take for granted, or to read from media sources you don’t trust. This is something you can verify on your own, in person, in real time, in reality.
· However Trump, despite being close friends with Silverstein as we’ll cover later, claimed "It wasn’t architectural defects, you know, the World Trade Center was always known as a very, very strong building” per the attached PolitiFact article.
· Supporting Article:
Engineering Experts Explain the Collapse of the Twin Towers
Politifact Donald Trumps 911 Speculation

Larry Silverstein, The Leasor Of The Twin Towers:
· Nearly went bankrupt after losing his main tenant Drexel Burnham in 1980 after he built tower 7 with him in mind.
· I don't know how many of us understand the level of desperation a situation like this can cause in someone and how many potential crimes it can easily push them towards.
· He is known for then saying, “…looking up at the twin towers and thinking, my building is huge, but it is made diminutive by the twin towers. So I said to myself, wouldn't it be incredible someday to own those?" That's not the statement of a sane person who nearly went bankrupt, and if anything, hints towards jealousy.
· He managed to secure Salomon Brothers two years later, which later paid $300 million in securities fraud penalties casting suspicion over the entities who saved Silverstein, in addition to their overall plans for the future.
· How he would become able to outbid everyone else in 2001, for the right to lease the twin towers, would become a mystery we will untangle later.
Further Reading
Manhattan Institute – Silverstein On Ground Zero
Justice Department: Salomon Brothers Securities Fraud

Trump and Real Estate Connections
Historical Context and Redevelopment Plans:
· A redevelopment plan commenced in the 1990s by Gov. Pataki and Mayor Giuliani, spurred a commercial revival in downtown Manhattan, making the World Trade Center prime property. Pataki would go on to criticize trump, while the other would prove to be one of this wildest, if not craziest, supporters to truly fanatical degrees.
Further Reading:
Manhattan Institute: Rebuilding Ground Zero
· Tom Leppert was the CEO of Turner construction which right wing conspiracy theorists claimed helped ensure the towers would fall straight down. He also became part of Trumps transition team. While there’s no evidence of explosives being used, tampering with the exoskeleton and weaking the relatively thin central column ahead of time are theoretically plausible.
Huffpost Donald Trump Transition Team
Wikipedia Tom Leppert

The bidding for the World Trade Center lease involved only a few major real estate firms as allowed by the Port Authority Chairman. Below are the allowed bidders and their estimated worth at the time included:

· Donald J. Trump’s Organization:
o Worth around $1.5 billion in 1996 after multiple bankruptcies. Confirmed only by Forbes magazine in 2005.
· Tishman Speyer:
o Valued at approximately $1.8 billion in 2000, would soon face ‘tenant issues’ with many scrupulous legal claims against them.
· Gale & Wentworth:
o Worth a few million.
· Mortimer Zuckerman’s Boston Properties:
o Mortimer Zuckerman alone was worth around $2 billion.
· The Rouse Company:
o Mainly a shopping mall operator.
· Brookfield Properties:
o A Canadian firm valued at over $20 billion in 2000.
· Vornado Realty Trust:
o Worth an estimated $2-3 billion. Had the highest bid, but was unexpectedly outed by the Port Authority Chairman, paving the way for Silverstein’s win. CEO of Vornado Trust, Steven Roth would later do many deals with Trump in 2005 and beyond.
· Larry Silverstein:
o As mentioned, was nearly bankrupt in the 1980s, and was mysteriously awarded the right to lease the World Trade Center contract at $3.2 billion, twice the original asking price of 1.2 Billion. It would still be owned by the Port authority of NY and NJ, he would just own the rights to lease it.
o Port Authority Chairman, Lewis Eisenberg, made this unexplained decision, who also later became Trumps lead fundraiser in 2015.
o After putting down only $125 million, as per the contract, Silverstein would be getting back $100 million just 6 weeks after his bid and with an uncommon terrorist insurance addition. His exaggerated bid and insurance contract would also greatly inflate the amount of money he could get from an insurance claim. If the winning bid was 1.5 billion, the insurance payout would also have been much less.
o In real estate, its quite rare for a prudent investor to bid twice the asking price, as demonstrated by the other companies that backed out, of which I find no connections to Trump.
o If anyone had known about 9/11 ahead of time, like Trump claims he did, it would become drastically easier to outbid all competitors, knowing that for pennies on the dollar, you would be getting much more back.

Further Reading:
NY Times Article on World Trade Center Deal
Wikipedia on Lewis Eisenberg
Patch On Lew Eisenberg Leading Trump Fundraising
NY Times Article Silverstein Gets Most Of His Money Back

Giuliani’s Gangster Acts
Arguably, if the above points are what they objectively appear to be, that would be a bad thing. You’d think that would be enough. However, Guliani would say “hold my beer’ to those sentiments.

1. Outdated Equipment for First Responders:
· Due to Giuliani’s inadequate leadership, first responders used old equipment that failed to warn them to evacuate the towers. Which contributed to their deaths while they searched for survivors.
NY Times Article: Giuliani’s Preparedness on 9/11
2. Obstructed Recovery Efforts:
· Giuliani delayed proper search and rescue operations for days, possibly costing lives of citizens and first responders who didn’t know they needed to leave.
· 20 Years later he would claim that some of Bidens actions were so reckless that… “It would be as if I got down to ground zero and said take out the firefighters, all you civilians see if you can get yourselves out.” Self report?
NBC News Report: Giuliani’s Role in Recovery
NY1: Giuliani Reflects on 9/11 Anniversary
3. Twin Towers Fund and Privatization:
· Giuliani privatized the Twin Towers relief funds, making them unauditable.
NY Times Article on Privatization
NY Post Article: Giuliani and Twin Towers Fund
4. Survivors Threaten To SUE Guliani For Relief Funds
· Even after privatizing the twin towers fund, Giuliani would make it incredibly difficult for the victims to receive their fair share. Requiring many of them to spend unnecessary money on advisors and consultants.
· Even with their legal pressure, he only agreed to “give the remaining 100 million to victims,” out of 170 million, if he could first put the money into the bank account of a charity in which he controlled.
· From the attached article: “But Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, said that he remained adamantly opposed to any transfer of funds to Mr. Giuliani's charity.
He also objected to Mr. Giuliani's continued control over even the $15 million in his private charity. Mr. Giuliani, he charged, gives every indication of using the Twin Towers Fund to maintain a staff of loyal supporters and to advance his political aspirations.
'The concern that politics will infiltrate the fund becomes even more apparent when one reviews the list of the mayor's former political appointees who are assuming senior staff positions or serving on the fund's board of directors,'' he wrote in a letter on Monday to Eliot L. Spitzer, the state attorney general.”
NY Times Article On Guliani Pressed To Disperse Twin Tower Funds
· However, there is no evidence of Giuliani making good on this promise.
· There are honestly no words for this. All associates of Guliani should be investigated.
5. Attempted Election Cancellation in 2001:
· Giuliani tried to cancel the 2001 election to stay mayor longer. He even considered removing term limits with Governor Pataki’s support. Similar to how Trump has “joked” about increasing his own term limits.
Business Insider: Giuliani and Pataki’s Attempt to Cancel Elections
Esquire Trump Joke Third Term
6. Motive
· In 2000, Guliani unfortunately got prostate cancer. We have to be willing to ask if this was a motive for his corrupt acts.
SurvivorNet: Giuliani’s Cancer


Silverstein’s Unscrupulous Greed
1. Initial Settlement Demands and Profit Claims:
· Despite only having been out for $25 million, Silverstein initially sought nearly $8 BILLION in insurance settlements and argued for "loss of revenue from those buildings," which is quite an uncompassionate claim considering how many lost their lives. Talk about a prime example of the working and lower classes making sacrifices while rich elites complain they didn’t profit enough from the same tragedy.
2. Rebuilding Contributions and Insurance Payout:
· Despite the fact that he only owned the leasing rights to the twin towers, ‘Silverstein Properties’ received up to $4 billion from insurance payouts, instead of the Port Authority, which would be customary as the owner.
· While it's assumed that most of that money went to rebuilding, this isn't actually known or proven. It would be different if he had a separate insurance policy that was not connected to the rebuilding of the towers, with different monies going to the Port Authority to rebuild. This was not the case.
History.com: Rebuilding of Ground Zero
· He additionally refused to return the rights of Building 1 to the Port Authority until he secured additional funds from an $8 billion state fund. Talk about heartless.
Wikipedia: Larry Silverstein
· Various entities would contribute a total of $20 billion to rebuild all six damaged or destroyed towers, including four towers leased by Silverstein and two others he hadn't. This makes it unlikely that he had to go out of pocket with his 4 Billion.
3. Estimated Net Worth:
· While earlier records of Silverstein's net worth are unavailable, aside from his near bankruptcy in 1980, he is currently estimated to be worth around $1 billion.
Forbes Profile: Larry Silverstein

Silverstein’s Controversial Alignment with Trump
Larry Silverstein's connections and public persona have often been scrutinized. This scrutiny became particularly relevant in 2015 when he publicly displayed his support for Donald Trump:

• Long-standing Relationship: Silverstein revealed a 30-year-long acquaintance with Trump, emphasizing the depth of their connection. This means his relationship started in 1985, roughly two years after gaining a powerful criminal organization as a tenant in his tower 7, that saved him from bankruptcy, and 6 years before Trumps first, of many, bankruptcies. This also means they knew each other before 9/11.
• Supportive Yet Vague: He commended Trump for diligently pursuing what he believed to be right, echoing Trump's own ambiguous rhetoric. When pressed about the righteousness of Trump’s goals, Silverstein ambiguously responded, "well, it’s... you know... we’ll find out." This mirrors Trump’s evasive " Well, we're going to have to see what happens" stance, when questioned about committing to a peaceful transfer of power prior to January 6th—an event that ultimately unfolded with violence and chaos.
• Early Endorsement: By voicing his support when Trump announced his presidential campaign, Silverstein positioned himself as one of the early prominent figures in the MAGA movement.

Watch Silverstein Discuss Trump
CNN Trump On 2020 Election

The Man Who Boasted
When most people witness a tragedy, especially of this size, it takes time for their brains to comprehend what happened, it takes even more time to process it. Thus, anyone who was able to brag about their own assets hours after this tragedy on a radio show, is at least worthy of Investigation, especially if this very event helped reshape a misinformation landscape in which he would thrive as its King.
Politifact – How 911 Attacks Helped Shape Modern Misinformation

· Insensitive Boasts About Building Height:
o Trump also boasted that with the fall of the Twin Towers, his building became the tallest in Manhattan—an inaccurate and insensitive claim given the context.
Independent 9 11 Trump Tallest Building
· Early Claims and Revisions:
o Shortly after 9/11, Donald Trump claimed he saw the second plane hit the towers from his Manhattan apartment. He also made an unfounded claim that he saw thousands of Muslims in New Jersey cheering, a statement that has been widely debunked. Despite varying explanations and suggesting that he saw it on an untraceable video that was “widely covered,” these claims helped fueled significant conspiracy theories. If anything, this was a self-report.
o Snopes: Trump Claims Muslims Cheered
o FactCheck.org: Trump’s Revised 9/11 Claim
· Visit to Ground Zero:
o A week after the attacks, Trump visited Ground Zero and stated that although he was present, he wouldn’t consider himself a first responder. This attempt at humility struck many as morbidly insensitive, considering the true heroism displayed by actual first responders.
ABC News: Trump Shares New Details About Morning of 9/11

Legacy of Suspicion:
These actions paint Trump as one of the more suspicious figures post-9/11, who may have used the tragedy for personal and political gain. His connections with figures like Larry Silverstein and Lewis Eisenberg, the Port Authority chairman, hint at deep financial interests potentially influenced by the 9/11 aftermath. Meanwhile, survivors and first responders faced challenges in securing support, highlighting the disparities between their experiences and the political maneuvers at play. Again morbidly juxtaposing the struggles of the poor and working class versus elite swamp members such as Trump and his ilk.

While being, arguably, one of the more suspicious Americans of potentially “being an insider," Trump would go on to cast doubt everywhere else with his new holier than thou rhetoric and hints and claims that “it was an inside job” for the next 15 years.

What if he was speaking from personal experience.

The Deepfake Dilemma
Now in a world where Trump's followers already discount reality, the emergence of AI-generated deepfakes threatens to further distort the truth. This technology could transform legal standards of evidence, making it easy to dismiss genuine evidence against the right as fabricated, while baseless accusations against the left might be accepted as the long-awaited proof.

The Potential Escalation of MAGA Actions
Given the willingness of MAGA supporters to storm the Capitol on January 6th, bolstered by Trump's incendiary rhetoric, the potential for escalation is alarming. The advent of fabricated images and videos could present unprecedented national security threats.

Trump's Incendiary Rhetoric on January 6th
Trump's speech on January 6th was a clear incitement, as he urged his followers to "fight like hell" to "stop the steal," despite admitting DURING THE SPEECH that there was no evidence of the massive electoral fraud he claimed. As well as his lawyers laughable court “arguments.”
“...while there is no evidence to prove any wrongdoing…”
Npr.Org Read Trumps Jan 6 Speech
LawAndCrime Come On Now

This speech, coupled with his undermining of constitutional processes, underscores the risks and intentional deceit of his rhetoric. Too bad Republicans senators and our Supreme Court have either claimed he was above the law, or continue to postpone his court dates till after elections. A wild position when treason is on the table. Did that dude commit treason that claims he wants to become a dictator? I dunno, lets let him potentially get elected and then find out!

Elon Musk's Political Shift
Elon was once very much a leftist, unfortunately in more and more far left “activists” continue to attack him endlessly for not agreeing with them on their own singular issues and perspectives. To them I say congratulations, you successfully pushed the most powerful man on earth into the far right. Great job. Great job.
Elon Musk's journey from a liberal supporter to a figure embraced by the far right highlights the volatile nature of political affiliations in today's polarized environment. His actions since acquiring Twitter—such as promoting unfounded conspiracy theories and making high-profile firings—suggest a departure from his initial free speech advocacy.
Especially when considering he fired Don Lemon from his platform for an interview he found offensive. Canceling opinions you find offensive isn’t free speech, it’s literally the opposite. I’m sure many people were offended by the examples below. What about them?
Far Right Support Examples: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

The Need for a Critical Approach
Supporters of Trump should critically evaluate why he did not pardon the January 6th insurrectionists during his term, despite using them as political leverage now. This pattern of using allies until they are no longer useful is evident throughout his political and personal dealings.
What better example could there possibly be as to what trump truly thinks of his supporters, how sacrificial he sees them as part of his endless narratives, then his refusal and failure to pardon January 6th insurrectionists while still in office?
Of course, anyone “just on the grass” or outside the building should only get a day in jail at most, however people that barged inside the capital should naturally get much more.
And while trump refused to pardon those people before, he now calls them “hostages” and is using them as political bait to a truly wild degree. It's very likely he will make good on this promise to further embolden the narrative that “Democrats are trying to take you down and only I can save you.”
His supporters need to seriously ask, “Why didn’t he pardon us before?”
Also, remember when he claimed he would pay legal fees for supporters that were violent at his rallies, but then seemed to falter and change his mind. Much like how Amber Heard donated her money, “by pledging it.”
List of allies he was quick to discard or dump. And let's face it, all of these people have done more for him than the average MAGA supporter. The only person he cares about is himself.
Trump claims that Mike Pence, the man he vetted more than anyone else, “has gone to the dark side.”
Trump seems to have supported the chants to “Hang Mike Pense,” at least in jest? We hope? There are also no links of him condemning them. Yet admittedly this one point doesn’t have hard evidence like a recording or video as far as I know, it certainly fits his brand.
Mike Flynn, a Trump appointee, later testifies against him.
Trump admits Flynn lied on his behalf, accidentally testifying against him, but does pardon him. As long as you’re colluding with Russia you’re ok it seems?

The Future Under Trump's Influence
Trump's rhetoric about overriding constitutional norms to address what he calls "massive fraud" hints at authoritarian aspirations. His praise for dictators and divisive language further aligns with dangerous historical precedents.
Important Articles:
“How a second trump term could end us democracy.” -commondreams
“Ask the expert: What a 2nd Trump term could mean for democracy and advancing policy.” - Msu Today
“Judgement Day” for political opponents.

To predict the future lets base it on known facts:
Apparently, he will help attack our constitution like he may have with the Twin Towers.
“A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.”
Stated he intended to be a Dictator on day one, but then promises it will be just for a day. Is that how that works? Or is it “Once you go Dictator you don’t go back?”
Praising dictators, referring to immigrants as vermin etc, akin to Hitlers rhetoric against “blood mixing.”
More fraudulent use of lawyers and courts that gets everyone else in trouble but him, with them arguing he's above the law. This further shows how much he will consistently use people for his own ends and then dump them when they're no longer of use.
Warning from republicans and notes on ass kissing. As well as being generally unfit for office.
If you want help from Trump you better kiss his ***
Trumps says he kept Omarosa just because she said nice things about him, while defaming her
DeSantis: "You can be the most worthless Republican in America, but if you kiss the ring, he’ll say you’re wonderful."
Thehill Trump Views People Who Kiss His A As Weak.
And if you dare to speak out against trump, you better kiss his ****
Politico Graham Breaks With Trump On Abortion
WashingtonPost Trump Graham Abortion
News Yahoo 30 More Republicans Denounce Donald Trump Unqualified President
Hot take, if he’s elected president America, and the world, is frankly fucked.

Predicting MAGA 2024 And Beyond
Naturally there are endless possibilities of what MAGA and dictators around the world decide to do this year and into the future. I believe that the one thing that insinuates when it's time for their next evil actions is dictated by their standings in the polls or when a fellow dictator needs a little more political pressure from war torn inflated oil prices etc.
Dictators Unite
While writing my thesis, I speculated that dictators globally were uniting, finding mutual benefits in their governance and deceitful tactics. This theory is increasingly recognized as these autocrats appear to be forming a coalition, undermining peaceful unity efforts through conspiracy theories to preserve their power.
Unherd How Autocrats Unite
The True Nature of MAGA
MAGA was never genuinely about speaking truth to power or restoring America's glory. It has been an elaborate scheme funded by immense wealth, perpetuating anti-American sentiments through fabricated grassroots movements by domestic and foreign actors. This movement has primarily enriched a select few power-hungry dictators and may have been responsible for some of our most horrific moments in history in the past and acts yet to come.
Trump and MAGA
While 'MAGA' predates Trump, he conveniently stepped into a role long in the making. Despite occasional deviations from the MAGA ideology, such as promoting vaccines to emphatic boos, Trump has largely embodied its principles. The real architects of MAGA, however, are likely disillusioned with his unpredictable attacks, which contradict their broader agenda of absolute power.
Nbc News Donald Trump Booed
Trump as a Martyr
Regardless of election outcomes, Trump is poised to claim interference. His rhetoric and the devout belief of his followers in his divine anointment could lead to his martyrdom, especially given his age and the vulnerabilities it brings. This martyrdom could solidify his legacy while serving the interests of MAGA strategists who find him increasingly burdensome even if he “wins.”
Factcheck Trumps Bogus Voter Fraud Claims
La Times Trump Democrats Effort Presidential Ballot

I was talking with someone else on the sub about this, and I felt like it was worthy of further discussion. Everyone on the political spectrum - including Free Speech Libertarians - has co-opted the meaning of the word "Ban."
A public school refusing to stock a book in it's library, even for ideological reasons, has not "banned" the book. If the same school (district) refuses to include a particular book as part of it's curriculum, it likewise has not been "banned." Refusing to provide taxpayer-funded access to a book is no more "banning" the book than the school cafeteria refusing to serve pizza has "banned" pizza.
Remember when Hobby Lobby was accused of "banning" contraceptives because they wouldn't include the abortion pill in their health plan? We knew they were neither "banning" nor even blocking access for the individual. They have simply declined to pay for it. In public terms, If Medicare/Caid does not cover a procedure, the state has not banned your access to it. Since most of us here are Libertarians, you'd think we'd understand this.
The entire "schools are banning books" canard is culture-war catnip at best, and at worst, it's something-something chilling effect. That's not ideal, to be sure. But it doesn't constitute a crisis or an assault on speech or information. Especially when the vast majority of books not made available at school libraries are still available at public libraries. I'd also mention that if a book is prominent enough to be used as a political football, it's probably available for pennies on a reseller site.
We can be against the idea of a public school district refusing to provide a book for political reasons. I am absolutely against this, no matter the book. But I also feel the need to contextualize that with a bare minimum of effort, anyone can still access the book if they wish.
Thank you for attending my TED Talk.

DISCLAIMER: I'd like to note that I do not consider myself an expert on many of the topics he talks about or even economics in general but a lot of what I'm about to say is pretty easily verifiable and basic, and I'll try to be clear that I'm expressing my opinion and not fact when I'm doing so. Given my lack of expertise, none of what I say here should be considered as the final authority on these topics, it's a reddit post for fucks sake, I encourage everyone to search up the relevant data and information on the topics they are interested in or claims they find dubious. It's really not that hard and all the links and data I'm gonna cite here took me less than five minutes to find for each piece of information. If you're not familiar with where to find this data it might take you longer but I promise that anyone with access to the internet can do the same thing I'm doing. Finally, for those looking for some opinionless, academic argument, that's not what this is, this is gonna sound like a rant because it is, I'm posting this for nothing more than my own satisfaction, take from it what you will.
Ok I'm writing this after I finished the whole thing and I said that I'd try to be clear that I'm expressing my opinion and not fact when I'm doing so and the basically entire second half of this is my opinion and I don't make that very clear so sorry about that.
Honestly I'd love to be wrong because I really do think that younger people are at a disadvantage compared to previous generations at the same age but the arguments he makes and the data he uses throughout his talk just sound like such bullshit to me.
https://www.ted.com/talks/scott\_galloway\_how\_the\_us\_is\_destroying\_young\_people\_s\_future?
https://www.profgalloway.com/war-on-the-young/
Scott Galloway recently did a Ted talk titled "How the US is destroying young people's future", as well as an accompanying blog post. He's made some fair points about how young people have been put at an inherent disadvantage and that they have it harder than previous generations. That's most likely true and I personally support that point of view, but the a lot data and numbers he makes this argument with seem to be cherry picked, misleading, or just straight up wrong. So let's break his talk down. u/JustTaxLandLol made a pretty good post about him comparing median wages to the S&P500 (https://www.reddit.com/badeconomics/comments/1cc3rs8/scott\_galloway\_compares\_median\_wage\_to\_sp500/) but I think that Galloway's mistakes are much more comprehensive than just that particular slide.
The first slide with data makes a claim about how pre-tax income, adjusted for inflation, has decreased across generations from grandparents to parents to kids, and that cost of public colleges and home prices have increased significantly across generations too. First of all, categorising generations by whether they have children or grandchildren is kinda nuts. That's a very wide, overlapping, range of ages. If he has actually fixed age ranges for each generation that don't overlap and just made these categorisations for the sake of understandability to a nonacademic audience, I still think that's the wrong choice but fine. However, his claim that real income has decreased across generations is weak at best. This working paper (https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/files/2024007pap.pdf) from the Fed Reserve was published February 2024, and from the figures that start at page 35, shows that by almost every categorisation they could think of, GenZ earns more at the same age than every previous generation before them. There's some conflict here with Raj Chetty's work but I don't have the time or knowledge to reconcile the two perspectives but at best, the pre-tax income numbers Galloway presents are questionable at best. Furthermore, he doesn't provide anyone a chance at even checking the sources he gets this information from. Not once in his entire talk does he cite a single source. He couldn't even have some tiny text at the bottom of his tables or diagrams saying what organisation he got this data from. Ok so that crossed out bit is wrong, he does have sources they're just very very faint and you can see them if you squint hard enough at the bottom left corner of his graphs. But the source he gives for this slide is a joke. Here's the link https://www.profgalloway.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Table-01.png
His "source" is his own analysis. Ok so by his analysis, the average cost of public college is 56000*0.43 = 24080. I'm gonna use numbers from this US News page (https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/paying-for-college-infographic), which might not be the most reliable source in the world, but it's probably somewhere in the ballpark. So according to US News, average tuition for the 2023-2024 school year for out of state students going to a public school is 23,630 and 10,662 for in state students. If these numbers are anywhere near accurate, the only conclusion I can draw is that Galloway has cherry-picked his data by only including the cost for out of state students in his analysis. First of all, public schools in the US are there to provide affordable access to higher education FOR RESIDENTS OF ITS STATE. Using only out of state numbers is absolutely ridiculous. Secondly, even if he used only the in state numbers, 10662/56000 is approximately equal to 19%. So if I use his very very questionable pre-tax income numbers, cost of public college for in state students has still increased across his categorisation of generations. It's not like his point would have been invalidated if he had used the in-state numbers, a trend of tuition increasing as a percentage of real income across multiple generations is still very bad. This is my opinion but I guess that he just wanted to find a nice shocking number. I didn't catch this but in their post, u/JustTaxLandLol notes that later on Galloway says "real median income from labor is up 40% since 1974" so he's also contradicting himself in the same talk.
I couldn't be bothered to look into the house price to income column he has so I don't have any comments on that.
His next slide is a point about how the percentage of 30 year olds earning more than their parents did at 30 has been decreasing very significantly over time. This is from a paper in 2016 by Raj Chetty (link: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aal4617). I've seen some counterarguments about the methods used in the paper but there are counterarguments for basically every inequality paper in existence so I'd take them with a grain of salt. Those points are more complex than the scope of this post and I lack the expertise to be making them anyways so I believe this slide. I'll admit that Galloway makes a good argument for this slide.
Right after this slide he says "As a result, people over the age of 55 feel pretty good about America, but less than one in five people under the age of 34 feel very good about America. This creates an incendiary, righteous movement...". He supports this with data on the percentage of US adults who feel "extremely proud" to be American.
Before I talk about the data on this slide, I'd like to be a little anal about things and pick apart his wording and causal claims he makes. When Galloway says "as a result" he's making a causal claim about the relationship between a young person's earning ability and their national pride. Leaving aside the econometric issues of making random causal claims, this is a ridiculous marginalisation of all the other critically important issues in the US. It seems pretty clear to me that reduced national pride amongst younger individuals is a combination of a lack of social mobility (or however you want to word your version of the fading American dream), the continued existence of systematic racism and sexism, US response to ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, bodily autonomy (abortion), and many other issues. Not to say that the economic disadvantages of young people doesn't play a role in causing this lack of national pride but come on. He also says "this creates an incendiary righteous movement...". Ok if the "as a result" from the last sentence could be interpreted as the economic disadvantages of young people play some part in their dissatisfaction with the government, it should be obvious to anyone not living under a rock that many of the political conflicts and movements that have erupted in the US over the past few years have little, if anything, to do with earning ability. In the slide after the poll data he shows three photos, one of a MeToo protest, one of a BLM protest, and another of a pro-Palestine protest. I can only interpret this as him making the claim that the younger generations economic difficulties are causally linked to those movements, which is totally bananas.
Now lets talk about the data. He got this from the Gallup polls (link: https://news.gallup.com/poll/394202/record-low-extremely-proud-american.aspx, there's a link to download the pdf with the poll numbers at the end of this article). There are 5 options for the Gallup poll: "Extremely proud"; "Very proud"; "Moderately proud"; "Only a little proud"; or "Not at all proud". So Galloway is cherry-picking again. To be fair, it's true that even including the rest of the answers, a quick glance at the data suggests (very strongly) that young people are less proud than older people. There are also more young people who choose "Not at all proud" (11% for 18-34 and 1% for 55+). Though there is probably some argument to be made about whether "extreme" pride is a good thing. Furthermore, "pretty good" and "very good" do not reflect the extremity of choosing, well, the most extreme option.
As an introduction to his next slide he says that "a decent proxy for how much we value youth labor is minimum wage". I've never heard of this before and am very very skeptical but I'm willing to attribute this to my own ignorance so I'll leave that sentence alone. So on this slide there's a graph with two lines, one is minimum wage across time adjusted for inflation, the other is whats supposed to be minimum wage if adjusted for productivity (also adjusted to inflation I assume). Galloway got this data form the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) (https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/), which shows that this gap between productivity began around 1979. This was when Carter was president and right before the Reagan administration. Those who know about the economic history of this time probably won't be surprised since a lot of the policies of this time were rather inegalitarian and heavily favoured the wealthy. I agree that many of the policies of the time contributed heavily to the inequality America faces today and though I haven't read any studies about how this affects minimum wage workers, I believe that minimum wage workers or low income workers in general today have significantly lower purchasing power relative to a few decades ago.
What I have a problem with here is the idea that productivity and minimum wage should increase in tandem. According to the EPI, "Productivity measures how much total economywide income is generated (i.e., for workers, business owners, landlords, and everybody else together) in an average hour of work" and "pay is defined as the average compensation (wages and benefits) of production and nonsupervisory workers. The pay for this group is one appropriate benchmark for 'typical worker pay' because production and nonsupervisory workers have made up roughly 80% of the U.S. workforce over the entire period shown in the figure and because the data for production and nonsupervisory workers exclude extremely highly paid managerial workers like CEOs and other corporate executives". Before I try to break down my complaints with the measures used, my immediate reaction when I saw this was that it seems rather stupid to compare the relationship between average productivity and minimum wage in an industrial economy against the same relationship in a service oriented one. There are just more jobs now that let you make an impact on the economy far beyond what you are paid and it is so so difficult to quantify this change. Using a similar argument, I really have no clue how macro people make models or do estimates for things like productivity but I'm quite skeptical about the reliability of using such a measure of productivity because of the increased prevalence of second, third, or n-th order effects that would be present in a measure of something like total gdp but pretty much impossible to identify for any employer. For those who want to read more about this difference between productivity and compensation I think this is the most relevant paper from EPI (https://files.epi.org/2015/understanding-productivity-pay-divergence-final.pdf). There are some points I'm not satisfied with in this paper like them attributing the entirety of the difference between median hourly compensation to average consumer hourly compensation but that would take more time than I want to spend on this.
Now we're still on the same slide. Galloway says "we've kept it [minimum wage] purposely pretty low" twice in three sentences. Now he's suggesting that there's some collective out there that has the political power and desire to keep minimum wage low. By "we" I think he means to suggest that the old-timers have banded together to screw the young people over. Ok buddy. I'm stepping outside the bounds of what's considered strictly economics here a little but pinning the injustices of society on some ethereal enemy whose existence can never be disproven is the same as taking "advantage of the flaws in our species with medieval institutions, Paleolithic instincts, and godlike technology" (Galloway's words, same TED talk) to me. Maybe there really is some cabal of scheming geezers out there who have some twisted desire to keep the minimum wage low, but I'm more inclined to believe that a lot of these "injustices" are a result of our existing political and societal institutions being poor and inefficient aggregators of our desires as a society, rewarding selfishness instead of cooperation. This certainly makes the problem harder to solve than if there were just some evil 'others' we could get rid of and be done with. Having a target to direct our outrage at, believing that I am good and they are bad, is easier than facing the reality that everyone is born with the selfishness that creates the injustices we live with but that's not gonna make people more agreeable. As an economist, I study the theory of incentives to use the same human selfishness that creates all the problems Galloway talks about to create solutions that hopefully improve our quality of life. This is what I believe is the beauty of being human, all the good and bad that happens stem from the same desires, it is our job to create institutions and systems that allow us to channel our desires in a way that benefits everyone, but I digress. The point is, this enemy that Galloway creates is an effective tactic at convincing people of his argument, but I don't believe such a perspective benefits society at all. Mistakes should be corrected, that doesn't mean they're always the result of ill intentions.
His next slide compares the difference between percentage increase in median household income against percentage increase in median home price, as well as a comparison of the median monthly mortgage between 2019 and 2024. I have nothing to say about the graph, I agree that over time, home prices have increased to an unacceptable level. The Fed funds rate went from 2.4 percent in Feb 2019 to 5.33 percent in Feb 2024 (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/fedfunds). To his credit, Galloway does attribute this increase in mortgage payments to "an acceleration in interest rates" but what's the alternative? Don't increase interest rates? Then if I was Galloway I'd make the same TED talk and talk about how the continued low interest rates contributed to rampant inflation that made all the poor people even poorer. It seems like he's decided to take whatever bad economic event that seems somewhat relevant and made it to be the result of some group's dogged determination to keep the younger generation down. Why is the increase from pre- to post-covid prices on anything surprising. I'd like to meet the genius who saw covid coming and intentionally created this increase in home prices.
He also says "the most expensive homes in the world, based on this metric, are number three, Vancouver. Why? Because 60 percent of the cost of building a home goes to permits...". I have no idea what point he's making here. Based on what metric, median home price? Monthly mortgage payments? Why do I care about Vancouver, a Canadian city, being number three? Then he talks about how "the incumbents that own assets have weaponized government". Either he's switched to talking about oligopolistic lobbyists in general without saying so or he's still talking about Canada. I dunno. Someone please explain. Then he says "this is the transfer I'm going to be speaking about". Also, everything he just said is talking about how there exists a group of people trying to PREVENT transfers of wealth to new entrants. And there was huge applause after that sentence. Nutsos, all of them.
Ok next slide. Galloway presents two pie charts, comparing the share of household wealth by age in 1989 to 2023. So he's talking directly about inequality in wealth now. Inequality in the US is really really bad, that's a fact. I'm a big fan of the work of Emmanuel Saez, Gabriel Zucman, and Thomas Piketty. These people have been at the forefront of research on inequality for many years now and though their work is not flawless, I'm convinced by the data they present and the methods by which they have aggregated the data and what they show is that inequality is worse than even what the pie charts Galloway presents suggest. However, this is not to say that Galloway makes a valid argument. Please note the grey bits in the pie chart. If Galloway has shown the numbers for everyone under 40 and above 70, the group that's excluded are those between 40 and 70. So those in the age range of 40-70 owned 100 - 19 - 12 = 69% of household wealth in 1989 and 100 - 30 - 7 = 63% in 2023. I could probably go and find how the age demographics of the population have changed over time and I think that with declining birth rates, the percentage change in age demographics would be pretty close to the percentage change in household wealth but I'm tired of beating every slide to death so I'll leave that to someone else if anyone's motivated enough to do that (if my hypothesis is wrong here just comment and I'll make that change). My first thought when I saw this though was again, this guy has paid no regard to structural change in society. Given the increased accessibility of buying stocks over the past three decades is it really that surprising that older people who have had more time and cash at the start of the digital age to invest in companies that are now massive mega-corporations have experienced a higher return on their capital. This is not to say that none of this change in the share of wealth held by those under 40 is due to some inherent unfairness in our society and I have neither the time nor knowledge to separate these effects out but to say that this was a "purposeful" effort to cut their wealth in half is complete and utter bullshit. Also, this guy makes another causal claim WITH NOTHING BUT A CHANGE IN SHARE OF HOUSEHOLD WEALTH. Congratulations everyone Scott Galloway has just made every econometrician in the world redundant, I always knew my professors were just trying to confuse me with funny symbols and Greek letters, someone get this guy a Nobel Prize.
Then while introducing his next slide Galloway says that his analyst's presence in the audience "brings the average age of the entire conference down in 11 days". So he's saying that TED knows exactly who's showing up to their event before it happens and that they have the exact birthdates of everyone in the audience too and that they've given this information to one of their speakers. A friend of mine has told me he's just making a joke and that I should let this point go because I'm being too anal about things but yeah I become anal about things when someone suggests sweeping institutional changes in a talk viewed by millions of people so thought I'd include it anyways just as another example of the bullshit this guy has been spewing.
When he moves on to the actual content in the slide the first point he makes is about lower acceptance rates in schools. So I don't have data on this because I couldn't be bothered to go find any so again, I'll change my statement if anyone has reliable data indicating otherwise but I think its pretty safe to say that way less people used to apply than before and combined with an increase in international student applications and enrollments the competition is just way higher than before. The most obvious explanation would be that higher education institutions have made the mistake of not increasing enrollments at a rate quick enough to meet demand. However, according to US News (https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-many-universities-are-in-the-us-and-why-that-number-is-changing) there were 3982 degree-granting postsecondary institutions in the US. and UCLA is ranked 15th in national universities. So why is it surprising now that university education is becoming more popular that higher ranked universities are harder to get into. So instead of expanding enrollment I think that a well thought out plan of affirmative action would be a much better option of giving "unremarkable kids and giving them a shot at being remarkable" (what this well thought out plan may be I don't know, I honestly didn't even search up any statistics about affirmative action this was just the first solution I thought of that didn't involve ignoring the crowning achievement of statistics). To his credit, Galloway does include a point about income-based affirmative action at the end of his talk, though he overwhelmingly emphasises increasing enrollment in schools. I don't have any data about that but I think that class sizes at public universities are large enough as it is.
The rest of the slide gives numbers on college debt of house price compared to first year income. College debt is ridiculously high and many people struggle because of it. I don't have the solution and neither does Galloway because he doesn't really mention it. I think that house price-to-first year income is a poor comparison because it doesn't take into account average rate of income increase and no normal person from any generation is looking to buy a house with first year income but there's probably a more appropriate metric out there that shows a similar change anyways so I'm ok with that.
Then he talks about him and his "colleagues" who "artificially constrain supply to create aspiration and scarcity". I would like to meet the professors who have control over enrollment rates because none of mine did. Then he says "to my colleagues in higher ed: we're public servants, not fucking Chanel bags". The marketing professor from NYU says he's a public servant...ok.
The slide after that compares Harvard's increase in endowment compared to their increase in enrollment and he calls them a "hedge fund offering classes". I see no issue with this point, he made a great argument, can't really criticise anything here.
Don't worry though he makes up for it by immediately making one of the most egregious statements in this whole talk. We're looking at his next slide, the one titled "Grand Bargain" now. He says that the government should take some of the money that's supposed to be used to forgive existing loans to about 500 of the top public universities to reduce tuition by 2% and year, expand enrollments by 6% a year, and increase vocational programs to 20% of the degrees granted. Then the slide after that, claims this will double freshman seats and cut costs in half in just 10 years. Ok so he thinks that most of the money "earmarked to bail out the one third of people that got to go to college on the backs of the two thirds that didn't" should go to future students instead because, I assume from the tone of his words, he doesn't think they need or deserve all that loan forgiveness. So why bring up the increase in college debt previously (the slide I talked about three paragraphs ago)? Anyways that's not the crazy thing. Let's see what happens if you reduce tuition by 2% a year for 10 years. So the calculation goes like this 0.98^{10} is approximately equal to 0.81. So with the number he puts up, tuition decreases by 19% in ten years. If everything before this slide could be attributed to cherry-picking, stupidity, or lack of good data, then fine he's just ignorant even though he shouldn't have been if he went up there to make that talk. But now this is just a FUCKING BAREFACED LIE. I cannot think of a greater insult to the audience's intelligence than the fact that this guy didn't think anyone would pull out a fucking calculator and do the calculation themselves. I won't blame the audience for not saying anything because I'm not sure I would have wanted to do that either but at least from youtube and reddit comments there are a decent number of people who didn't realise this. A similar calculation shows that expanding enrollment by 6% per year increases seats by about 80% total (1.06^{10}). Not sure how that translates in terms of freshman seats but at least this is closer than the tuition claim.
Then his next slide compares wages to the s&p500. This is the point of u/JustTaxLandLol's post and I think his post and the discussion in the comments covers most if not all of my thoughts so you can just read that. https://www.reddit.com/badeconomics/comments/1cc3rs8/scott_galloway_compares_median_wage_to_sp500/
Ok next slide, "The Transfer: Purposeful". Oh yay he's about to make another causal claim with nothing but a graph on the change in top marginal tax rates for corporations and individuals. And if we skip ahead to the next slide we'll realise that this claim is that the gradual decrease in top marginal tax rates for corporations and individuals results in lowered senior poverty and child poverty either remains constant or increases. Yes everybody the newest advancement in economic research has just been released. Lowering top tax rates decreases senior poverty and increases child poverty. And Scott Galloway made that argument in 24 seconds (transcript on TED website has time markers).
Man I really set out with the intention to keep the tone of this post as neutral as I could but I'm just writing out my internal dialogue with less swearing now. I apologise to those who would have preferred a more careful and less emotional knee-jerk response of an analysis but this is a reddit post, its not like there are standards.
Now he moves on to talking about social security. Galloway says "it would cost 11 billion dollars to expand the child tax credit. But that gets stripped out of the infrastructure bill". So zero explanation about why it would cost 11 billion dollars to expand the child tax credit, why not more or less, no comment about how many children it would affect, how much money it would mean for each child or family, just some number that you have to accept. Most of the time there's no why to the amount of funding that the government allocates to policies but at least there's some breakdown to how its going to be used, Galloway doesn't even have that. This is before we even consider the fact that child tax credit was expanded this year (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/child-tax-credit-2024-who-qualifies/). Maybe he's talking about some other issue that I'm not aware of but I don't think so. He says he got the social security spending data from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which is a think tank. I don't want to sort through their website to fact check so I'll accept it as the truth but as far as I know the actual social security administration releases their facts and figures for the year August of next year so I'm not sure why he didn't just use the 2022 numbers from a more reliable source.
His next few couple slides are about the increasing age of politicians. I think this is a great point but he probably should have used a better example of a younger politician than Justin Trudeau.
Then at around the 10 minute mark, using his slide titled "Generational Theft", Galloway claims that "we pumped the economy" during covid so that the Nasdaq would gain value, causing "intergenerational theft". I don't know if he thinks it was intentional or not but how is he going to completely ignore the fact that the stimulus checks were primarily for households that were struggling due to the greatest unemployment rate we have seen in our lifetime (https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/06/11/unemployment-rose-higher-in-three-months-of-covid-19-than-it-did-in-two-years-of-the-great-recession/). I'm really kind of tired of this so I'll let those at the CBR make my argument for me. "Within the first 10 days, households spent an average of 29 cents from every dollar received. The bulk of this spending was on food, rent, and bills" (https://www.chicagobooth.edu/review/how-effective-were-stimulus-checks-us). Damn so turns out struggling families did need these stimulus checks pretty urgently. Shocker. I also think that most people in finance would agree that tech stocks surged over covid because people needed fucking technology... People built PCs to play video games, used online shopping services because they couldn't go to malls, all that.
The next slide is supposed to support his point that the increase in stock prices doesn't allow young people to find "disruption". What. The only thing that matters to any investor is the percentage increase in value of the stock price after you've invested. It doesn't matter if 7 dollars is 1 share of apple or 0.04 of a share of apple. Its stock price going up by 100% means you get 14 dollars either way. I think this guy's arguments are getting dumber as the talk goes on, I actually had to go and find data to refute his points earlier on. Now arithmetic does the work for me, I should have hired a grade schooler to do my analysis.
His next point is about how algorithmic content selection is bad. Yeah its bad. Its bad for everyone, turns everyone into psychos. Though I think there's a very good argument to be made about how such content could affect developing brains. He makes a point about age-gating social media at the end of the talk. This is actually the only drastic measure he proposes that I agree with so I'll leave this alone too.
After a couple slides about Zuckerberg and TikTok (which I agree with, though I think Zuckerberg's damage probably leans more towards older people than young now), he gives a bunch of graphs showing upward trends in all sorts of terrible things happening to young people. Every single one is an issue of critical importance in the US, but importantly, no comparison to older people. For all we know, the trend on every graph could be the same or even worse for older generations. If I had written about this first then I'd go and find the data for it but at this point I just want to be done with this but can't stop without getting to the end so I'm just gonna slap this slide with lack of comparisons and move on.
His next slide shows the difference in 30 to 34 year olds who have at least one child, some of that is probably due to family planning but I still think its a great indicator of people not wanting to have children because its not affordable. Great point, I believe in it.
Next slide, oh god it's a happiness report. I think happiness reports are a fun conversational tidbit but I see no way for it to be reliable enough to be used as an argument in any semi-serious setting. That said, I have no idea how they do these measurements so maybe I'm wrong.
As if the happiness report wasn't bad enough, Galloway is gonna compare the biggest one-day market cap gain (in an unspecified time frame) to the budget of several policies implemented by the government. Oh man. This is too stupid, there's so many things to pick from it'd take too much effort to sort through them. Someone else please make the argument for me.
Then he says universal basic income should have been called negative income tax. Wow the frequency of good points is going up, though I think this is accompanied by an increase in the frequency of absolutely idiotic arguments.
Then he says we should eliminate capital gains tax deduction. The issue of taxing capital gains is a very serious one, but I don't think it actually matters that much how much we tax realised capital gains. Again, not an expert but here's my understanding. If you have a high net worth with a lot of it in stocks and you need cash, you don't have to sell them and get taxed on the realised gains. You go to the bank and say I want to borrow money, I'm going to put these stocks up as collateral so if I can't pay you back you can take these stocks which are somewhere around the value of the principal amount plus total interest over the course of this loan. Because the bank is now convinced they'll get the money back regardless of if you make the payments or not, they say ok here's the money you asked for at a nice low interest rate. Then you take the money, you keep your stocks, which will probably gain value at a rate that exceeds the interest rate by a pretty decent margin, and you can probably make your interest payments pretty easily because hey, you were rich to begin with. If you're really strapped for cash a couple years down the line, you can sell some of the stocks that are now worth more than they were before and cover your payments and not have to pay taxes on the rest that you don't have to sell. Free money. There's plenty more ways to avoid taxes if you're rich but you get my point by now. Now that's a lot of problems without a solution. Luckily we have some economists far more skilled than I am who work very hard to find solutions to these problems. Here's one example of a policy that may help (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/05/03/opinion/global-billionaires-tax.html). This is an opinion piece written by Gabriel Zucman (famous economist), for the New York Times. If you don't have an NYT subscription, sorry for giving a link you can't read but if you search Gabriel Zucman billionaire tax, you could probably get a decent idea of what this talks about. Here's Zucman tweeting his proposal for his suggestion (https://twitter.com/gabriel\_zucman/status/1763253132572729623). It probably requires a little more thinking than the NYT article but he did present this at the G20 so that might sound more exciting to you than some news article.
Then Galloway says "we need to remove 230 protection for all algorithmically-elevated content". Zero mention on what 230 protection is so here's an explanation (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230). Basically that was a fancy way of saying that companies should be held accountable of the content on their platform, even if it's posted by an unrelated third party. I'm not sure getting rid of it in its entirety is a great idea (though I have no arguments against that except Orwellian ones) but I certainly agree that most if not all social media platforms have abused this protection and it should be at the very least restricted. To what extent? Again, I have no clue.
Then he goes "break up Big Tech". That's the whole suggestion. This is a terrible idea but the fact that he doesn't elaborate more on how to do this, the ramifications of doing so, or really provide any explanation at all makes me automatically ignore this. Then he makes his point about age-gating social media, like I said before, I agree with it.
His next suggestions are universal pre-K, great idea, then "reinstate the expanded child-tax credit". Not sure what he's going on about here, child tax credit exists and like I said before, was just expanded. Then it's income-based affirmative action. I don't know what kind of affirmative action is best and that sounds like an interesting idea so I won't criticise it. I think the rest of his suggestions are pretty normative arguments so I'll leave those alone too.
Don't get me wrong, I wholeheartedly agree with the overall theme of his talk. I believe that young people in the US (and many places worldwide) are at a massive disadvantage when it comes to accumulating wealth, buying homes, inter-generational transfers, etc. But you cannot go up on a popular platform like this, make claims as sweeping as he has, and make suggestions as radical and drastic as he has, with garbage arguments and data like this. Saying the right things for the wrong reasons is arguably worse than just saying the wrong thing because it makes it easy for those who want the status quo to remain to make counterarguments. Given how divisive opinions have become over the past decade or so I guess I shouldn't be surprised at how many people are eating this up but it kinda scares me how easily people will eat up this shit as long as its for a cause that sounds like its going for some kind of radical change for the good of all and has some imaginary "them" as the common enemy to everyone.
So that's it, I've finally covered all his points. I'm free, thank fuck. I should really proofread this but this has been my past eight hours and my back is breaking from all this sitting, I'm just gonna post this and read it over tomorrow. Maybe do a tl;dr, fix some formatting.
EDIT: As u/myphriendmike and u/Mordoci have pointed out, my dummy corp example was just tax fraud, that's illegal and so it's a bad example, I've removed it. Zucman has some estimates on the "real" tax rate wealthy people (mostly billionaires) pay, maybe I'll include that at some point.
I also corrected my wording in some places.

I'm running into this for Aetna.
I was undergoing physical therapy at a physical therapy department of a hospital. According to my insurance coverage, it should be copay only with deductible waived. But Aetna billed it at full deductible, and then a % after deductible is met because they said 'it was done in an outpatient facility of a hospital'
My issue is that the Aetna website Medical Coverage page for physical therapy doesn't mention this distinction. It only mentions the copay and that deductible is waived. Then when I go into the more detailed 32-page Benefits Overview doc, or the 125-page Benefit Plan Description doc, it also does not break down that the coverage is different for physical therapy in a hospital setting. It also only mentions copay there and no deductible there.
There ARE services like 'infusion therapy' where if the coverage is different based on where it is performed, it is clearly broken down in the table with the coverage level for each setting in the detailed benefits overview. For Physical Therapy, it just mentions copay and deductible waived and no breakdown provided.
So now I'm stuck where the insurance is insisting on a set of coverage conditions that are not mentioned in their plan documents that I thoroughly read when I signed up but the agents see it on their end. Even the agent on the phone said they had told their higher ups to document the different coverage for physical therapy in plan documents many times but it hasn't happened.
If I appeal, the agent told me even if they cover the first visit on copay and waived deductible, they won't cover future physical therapy claims on copay so i'd be stuck in the same condition. But when I signed up for the full year, I signed up based on the plan documents and the coverage that was listed in them at the time (and is still listed).
Can Insurance just change plan coverage documents with different conditions mid-way through the year? Is that Legal?

Audio: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l42yKCnUBa0
Jean Baudrillard, a famous writer on the topic of “postmodernism,” explained postmodernism by means of four stages that symbols and objects have progressed through.
Stage 1: “Basic reflection of reality.” Here, symbols and objects attempt to create an objective reflection of reality. For example a chair is made to be sat on and is valuable if it fulfills its purpose, and a shirt is valuable if it covers your skin. The symbols, stories, myths, etc. of our ancestors were an attempt to describe reality as best they could (agree with the results or not). A symbol or image of a god was meant to represent an objectively existent force in reality. Here I see a comparison to very early Polytheism and the Stellar Tradition, where we accepted the objective, dualistic and spiritual nature of reality, the existence of the gods, and so on, with very complex systems that understood reality itself is complex. Inherently this can only ever be, at best, an attempt at metaphysical knowledge about reality, but it is an honest attempt.
Stage 2: "Perversion of reality.” Here the relationship between value and objective reality begins to shift, for example a chair may still serve its primary function, but be more valuable if made with a rare material, by someone of note, and/or for someone of great importance. There may be no practical difference between the stage 1 and stage 2 chairs, and yet the stage 2 chair is given more value. Symbols (perhaps most famously the serpent) are also twisted, for example as a means to control people, or even by demonizing all gods and saying there is only One True God. The complexity of reality is ignored, in favor of a simple “good vs. evil” breakdown, where everything is either Godly or Demonic. The comparison here is the SolaAgricultural tradition and, especially, Monotheism. There is an acceptance of some sort of reality, but that reality is twisted intentionally, whether that be to control people, confuse them, or anything of the sort.
Stage 3: “Pretense of reality.” Here we have the appearance of reality, but much more of a detachment from it. The idea that gods are "just archetypes," or that magic is “just psychology,” illustrate this, along with Physicalism at large. People pretend these are the totality of reality, of which they consider themselves to be the "true seekers," but in the end they outright ignore the most important aspects of our reality. Christian Nationalism is another illustration, where leaders outright lie and fabricate history under the pretense of truth, such as the U.S. being founded as a Christian nation. Objects mainly have value thanks to Materialism and Consumerism, not to mention advertising, and the rejection of higher reality makes such things easier to fall for.
Stage 4: "Bears no relation to any reality whatsoever." This is what may be called "postmodernism," total detachment from reality. An very worrying illustration is the democratization of science, where politics and public opinion now hold as much (or more) sway as empirical evidence (with strict empiricism or “scientism” already falling under "stage 3,” since there are so many other forms of knowledge than empirical knowledge.). Here, a shirt or chair like from stage 1 may be significantly less valuable than an identical shirt or chair endorsed by a famous celebrity. We all know politicians lie when they make promises and yet cheer any time they make one anyways. Our symbols only represent our made up realities: watered-down Christianized ideology such as we see running rampant in polytheistic revival, or modern pop-cultural fictions and multiverses, for example.
Baudrillard gives the example of Main Street at Disney Parks. Not only do we spend more time and money on these fabrications than reality (e.g. replacing the gods on our altars with Disney stuff), but our very differentiation between the "real world" and "Disney world" is a delusion. Disneyland is part of the “real world”. There is no inner child to most adults which is in hiding and in need of release, rather they are very outwardly children yet still wield great power. The world is childish and run by mental and spiritual children. The "perfect world" of Disney is still draining your so-called "real" money (which itself belongs to stage 3, as paper money has no objective value).How often do we obsess over the lives and stories of fictional people, such as families in TV shows, meant purely as consumer content? Even I am guilty of this. Our biggest "influencers" are literal morons on terrible platforms, platforms which encourage us to pretend our true selves are only the best moments we choose to share online.
Stage 5: To these 4 stages I propose adding a 5th in the 21st century: “replacement of reality.” Artificial intelligence, virtual and alternate realities, one of the most recent symbols of status at the time of writing this is the new Apple headset, costing thousands of dollars, people just walking around and existing in a totally manufactured reality, one which will inevitably be shaped by those in positions of power and wealth. The popularity of fake news also may deserve ranking in this new, 5th stage, perhaps even something like plastic surgery.
It is important to note that I do not believe we necessarily pass linearly through these stages. For example there are currently people whose beliefs and practices conform to any one of these 4+ stages, or they fit different stages depending on the context.
Morality is another way to look at the stages, and for this I will use the modern example of the debate on abortion. In stage 1, morality is a quest for objective truth, so for instance with abortion we would realize that the issue is objectively complicated.
In stage 2, morality is twisted to fit the reality promoted by those in power, so for us this would be that abortion is always wrong. They still believe in an objective morality in theory, but twist and simplify that morality.
Stage 3 brings us Moral Relativism, whether abortion is right or wrong depends on who you ask, what culture you were raised in, etc. There is no objective morality, but this itself is an objective truth in a way. This is opposed to the second stage Monotheists who believe abortion is objectively wrong all together, or first stage folks who know the topic can be more complicated than black and white. Basically whatever the culture says is moral, is. Whatever morals the Relativist has, they do not believe them to be more correct than any other morals.
Finally in stage 4+, morality is completely dependent on what those in power (politicians, corporations, influencers, etc.) say is moral. It's a warped form of Moral Relativism, really. This individual believes that morals are relative, but not to culture or anything of the sort. Instead, morals are relative to whatever suits them best at the time, and whatever they are told by "authorities" of high symbol/object value. They do not believe the values and morals of others are equally valid to theirs (stage 3), nor do their actions suggest any belief in a consistent objective morality, warped or otherwise (stage 1 and 2). Instead, their morals are relative to whatever their own pseudo-reality is, whatever is to their benefit, and this itself mainly stems from the aforementioned authorities. And note that someone may be, say, a stage 2 monotheist when it comes to religion, but a stage 4 on morality, and so on.
"Whataboutism" is another illustration of moral Postmodern manipulation. Say a person is telling you how evil the current president of the U.S. is because they do X. You ask, "what about the fact that your favorite president did X too, were they also evil?" The Postmodernist will then say you are engaging in "whataboutism." To one who accepts Moral Realism it is immediately clear why the question is valid though: the answer determines if the person is truly opposed to X or simply using it against those they don’t like, special pleading. Postmodernists simply believe whatever they need or want to at the time to support their own biases, not that X is actually immoral.
Our paper money is another example of stage 3, “pretense of reality.” The paper money system is entirely theoretical, in reality the paper is worth very, very little. It's just tied to this conceptual system that, were it to be cast aside, would make all cash meaningless paper. Stage 1 would be things like services, sustenance, shelter, useful things, symbols that were thought to impact reality, etc., objective things all people need. Stage 2 is illustrated by gold, we give it meaning beyond what it has, but it's a real thing with a limited amount of it in the world, you cannot get trillions in debt just printing new gold into existence as with stage 3 cash. And for stage 4+, what better example than NFTs and Bitcoin, or views, likes, and upvotes?
Social media gives us insight into the world of stage 4 / Postmodernism. All the big-name forums or social media platforms, as well as many smaller ones, are oversaturated with advertisements, these new religious symbols and their new valuable objects, to the point where advertisers choose which platforms or outlets survive and which crash and burn. Whole sites wield the power to silence dissenters of whichever ideologies they find unappealing. In many cases people are extremely limited in the number of characters they can use at once, making true discourse impossible. People live entirely fake lives to instill jealousy in others, who go on to lie to themselves and others as well, and groupthink is encouraged through voting systems which create hiveminds and drive out any independent thought. All these fit with Baudrillard’s fourth stage - none of this is reality. Consumerism is objectively less valuable than individuation and freedom, it is not a valid way to live life, it only wastes life, time, and resources. Human thought is not limited by a character count, this does not describe reality in any way, instead creating a new "reality" where any idea longer than a few sentences is a "word salad" and cannot hold one's attention. There are fewer and fewer "great thinkers," and they are not the ones being heard and viewed. The endless, manufactured, touched up selfies, vacations wasted taking pictures instead of living, time lost in the imagery rather than the real event - this is not objective reality. It not only rejects reality but twists and perverts it, replacing it with a manufactured (simulated) one.
Cancel culture is another unfortunate offspring of Postmodernist thought. Due to the power held and used by the creators and maintainers of all these stage 4 images and objects, "reality" is now defined by such entities. A famous actor was fired from all his roles including a massive franchise on mere accusations of abuse, before the crimes were even brought to court (where it turned out things were not so clear cut). If it can happen to a rich, beloved movie star, imagine what could happen to you. I am not suggesting you feel bad for a billionaire who helps fabricate reality, nor do I believe we have a great and trustworthy justice system in place. All I want to illustrate is how a mere accusation led to guilt and punishment because corporations and the more popular political party said they were guilty, and culture followed blindly, before it even reached the justice system at all. Even in cases where someone ends up being guilty, they cannot be found guilty before investigation and judgment. But this does not matter in a world where reality is whatever is most popular at the time.
All forms of media contribute to this, there is no longer any reality in culture outside of the images and realities created for us, created to distract us from this disturbing rejection of reality. Games, shows, movies, children’s content, fiction and non-fiction works, governments, news outlets… not every single individual instance of these may be wholly negative, but the positive ones are becoming more and more rare. I’ve found an interesting source of philosophy on this matter in the poetry of Jim Morrison, famously known as the singer of The Doors, whose father was all too familiar with the fabrication of reality. Morrison wrote about how the powers that be use content from films to museums (where we simulate history) and everything in between to blind citizens to their power over us, our values, even our own meanings regarding life. He feared that humans had become simple spectators, staring blankly into the screen, letting it write their reality for them. He even predicted the "meta" nature of our modern culture, where everything has become self-referential, filled with cameos and easter eggs, dead actors resurrected and old ones de-aged, because media-created reality is now the only reality. All it can reference is itself, lest it shatter the illusion or acknowledge reality. Just look at how our culture cannot even create new content, just remakes, sequels, shared universes, etc.
"There are no longer “dancers,” the possessed. The cleavage of men into actor and spectators is the central fact of our time. We are obsessed with heroes who live for us and whom we punish. If all the radios and televisions were deprived of their sources of power, all the books and paintings burned tomorrow, all shows and cinemas closed, all the arts of vicarious existence… We are content with the “given” in sensation’s quest. We have been metamorphosized from a mad body dancing on hillsides to a pair of eyes staring in the dark." - Jim Morrison
Another great example of postmodernism is the idea of secularism, that we can separate the public from the religious, or that there are actually people who have no religion whatsoever. This rejects the reality that religion applies to many aspects of life, that someone who is non-theistic or simply “spiritual” still is often religious. For example we can look to sports, where all sorts of weird rituals and ceremonies take place that have nothing to do with the layman understanding of religion, gods, the divine, etc, but are studied as such by religious scholars nonetheless. It can even tie back to the Disneyland example, such as how we pretend America is a secular country, or delude ourselves into thinking the hateful Atheism of France (or places like the USSR before it) is somehow not its own form of religion. In stage 1 we recognized there was no separating the spiritual and religious from daily life. Stage 2 keeps this mostly in place but twists it to fit monotheism. It's not until stage 3 that this really changes to keeping religion “private,” and stage 4 flips the whole thing on its head to where the state and corporations have become god, and the gods have become fantasy.
Postmodernism has even seeped into the WLHP to a great extent. For example, with the identification of the Christian entity Satan with all sorts of beings that have no correlation to him. The Satanist who says that The Devil is Setesh, the Serpent, Prometheus, or any other such deity is placing objective reality on the backburner in favor of a popular cultural meme - that all these beings are Satan, despite their histories, characteristics, mythologies, etc. It is Postmodernism which allows certain groups from the late 1900s to claim absurd things like being the first and only Satanists with no regard for objective reality, or which allows organizations to claim the title of Romantic Satanists when their values and acts fly in the face of that literary movement. It's why people who think they are on the WLHP can still fall for things like Physicalism against all evidence and reason. It's how occultists can create completely made up identities for themselves that, even after being exposed as fraudulent, are still parroted blindly by their followers. And in a wider sense it applies to modern polytheism overall, where new age, fluff bunny occultists come in changing polytheism to monotheism, or saying all male and female goddesses are just a manifestation of duo-theism. There is no escaping Postmodern irrationality.
Our symbols of the divine, of deeper spiritual meanings and truths, of a reality beyond this one, have all been replaced with corporate logos, meme templates, and easter eggs. Like me, many others also have altars in every room of the house, their altars are simply shrines to brands, consumer content, companies, political parties, famous actors, etc. The utility of an object no longer defines it, but instead it is the fabricated social status a thing is supposed to create, such as an uncomfortable designer chair being ten times the cost of a more comfortable and practical one. If your car can reliably get you place to place, but isn’t sporting the right hood ornament, or a fresh coat of paint, all the fancy add ons and a high floor price, then the object simply is not as valuable as if it had these entirely unnecessary things, and therefore the individual themselves is judged as less valuable. Two identical shirts can vary in price by hundreds of dollars based solely on the name printed on the tag inside. All of these values are entirely manufactured and completely detached from objective reality.
Perhaps worst of all is that people and objects have become harder to tell apart, as best exemplified with celebrities. They are fake people with false personalities who we are supposed to see as the ideal human beings. All of their flaws are edited and filtered out, and then we are condemned for not being on par. To postmodern companies, the individual is literally just an object to be used as a means to an end, a cog in a machine rather than an individual with needs, goals, drives, etc. Politicians are themselves celebrities now, and I do not only mean literal actors running for office, but rather that people cheer for them like they do a rock star, consume their media like it is a drug, defend them as if they were their favorite comic character… What gives these politicians and celebrities their power? An association with the new system of symbols and objects of value, the system which disregards reality all together in order to encourage things like Consumerism and obedience.
Postmodernism has an influence over almost every aspect of our lives. It encourages people to believe any fleeting thing they want, or more often are told to want, is of foremost importance or value. It allows constant advertising to empty us of any "inconvenient" meaning or value and fill the void with Consumerism and material things, or to fill it with work lives that are ultimately pointless and amount to nothing more than some conceptual material wage (money itself not even being "real"). The value of objects defines and overtakes the value of the individual. A disregard for objectivity means a disregard for the scientific method itself, allowing science to become a process of authoritarianism at worst and democracy at best, a process of media propaganda rather than a quest for truth. Whatever facts benefit the high-object-value people and the symbols they associate with are true, and facts which do not are false, being able to change at the drop of a hat as needed.
Postmodernism is clearly the natural outcome of our move from profound reality to a fabricated simulation of reality created to control, stifle, and subdue human beings… an immoral and dangerous metaphysics too blind to see that without any objective reality nobody can ever be correct, including themselves.

Audio: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l42yKCnUBa0
Jean Baudrillard, a famous writer on the topic of “postmodernism,” explained postmodernism by means of four stages that symbols and objects have progressed through.
Stage 1: “Basic reflection of reality.” Here, symbols and objects attempt to create an objective reflection of reality. For example a chair is made to be sat on and is valuable if it fulfills its purpose, and a shirt is valuable if it covers your skin. The symbols, stories, myths, etc. of our ancestors were an attempt to describe reality as best they could (agree with the results or not). A symbol or image of a god was meant to represent an objectively existent force in reality. Here I see a comparison to very early Polytheism and the Stellar Tradition, where we accepted the objective, dualistic and spiritual nature of reality, the existence of the gods, and so on, with very complex systems that understood reality itself is complex. Inherently this can only ever be, at best, an attempt at metaphysical knowledge about reality, but it is an honest attempt.
Stage 2: "Perversion of reality.” Here the relationship between value and objective reality begins to shift, for example a chair may still serve its primary function, but be more valuable if made with a rare material, by someone of note, and/or for someone of great importance. There may be no practical difference between the stage 1 and stage 2 chairs, and yet the stage 2 chair is given more value. Symbols (perhaps most famously the serpent) are also twisted, for example as a means to control people, or even by demonizing all gods and saying there is only One True God. The complexity of reality is ignored, in favor of a simple “good vs. evil” breakdown, where everything is either Godly or Demonic. The comparison here is the SolaAgricultural tradition and, especially, Monotheism. There is an acceptance of some sort of reality, but that reality is twisted intentionally, whether that be to control people, confuse them, or anything of the sort.
Stage 3: “Pretense of reality.” Here we have the appearance of reality, but much more of a detachment from it. The idea that gods are "just archetypes," or that magic is “just psychology,” illustrate this, along with Physicalism at large. People pretend these are the totality of reality, of which they consider themselves to be the "true seekers," but in the end they outright ignore the most important aspects of our reality. Christian Nationalism is another illustration, where leaders outright lie and fabricate history under the pretense of truth, such as the U.S. being founded as a Christian nation. Objects mainly have value thanks to Materialism and Consumerism, not to mention advertising, and the rejection of higher reality makes such things easier to fall for.
Stage 4: "Bears no relation to any reality whatsoever." This is what may be called "postmodernism," total detachment from reality. An very worrying illustration is the democratization of science, where politics and public opinion now hold as much (or more) sway as empirical evidence (with strict empiricism or “scientism” already falling under "stage 3,” since there are so many other forms of knowledge than empirical knowledge.). Here, a shirt or chair like from stage 1 may be significantly less valuable than an identical shirt or chair endorsed by a famous celebrity. We all know politicians lie when they make promises and yet cheer any time they make one anyways. Our symbols only represent our made up realities: watered-down Christianized ideology such as we see running rampant in polytheistic revival, or modern pop-cultural fictions and multiverses, for example.
Baudrillard gives the example of Main Street at Disney Parks. Not only do we spend more time and money on these fabrications than reality (e.g. replacing the gods on our altars with Disney stuff), but our very differentiation between the "real world" and "Disney world" is a delusion. Disneyland is part of the “real world”. There is no inner child to most adults which is in hiding and in need of release, rather they are very outwardly children yet still wield great power. The world is childish and run by mental and spiritual children. The "perfect world" of Disney is still draining your so-called "real" money (which itself belongs to stage 3, as paper money has no objective value).How often do we obsess over the lives and stories of fictional people, such as families in TV shows, meant purely as consumer content? Even I am guilty of this. Our biggest "influencers" are literal morons on terrible platforms, platforms which encourage us to pretend our true selves are only the best moments we choose to share online.
Stage 5: To these 4 stages I propose adding a 5th in the 21st century: “replacement of reality.” Artificial intelligence, virtual and alternate realities, one of the most recent symbols of status at the time of writing this is the new Apple headset, costing thousands of dollars, people just walking around and existing in a totally manufactured reality, one which will inevitably be shaped by those in positions of power and wealth. The popularity of fake news also may deserve ranking in this new, 5th stage, perhaps even something like plastic surgery.
It is important to note that I do not believe we necessarily pass linearly through these stages. For example there are currently people whose beliefs and practices conform to any one of these 4+ stages, or they fit different stages depending on the context.
Morality is another way to look at the stages, and for this I will use the modern example of the debate on abortion. In stage 1, morality is a quest for objective truth, so for instance with abortion we would realize that the issue is objectively complicated.
In stage 2, morality is twisted to fit the reality promoted by those in power, so for us this would be that abortion is always wrong. They still believe in an objective morality in theory, but twist and simplify that morality.
Stage 3 brings us Moral Relativism, whether abortion is right or wrong depends on who you ask, what culture you were raised in, etc. There is no objective morality, but this itself is an objective truth in a way. This is opposed to the second stage Monotheists who believe abortion is objectively wrong all together, or first stage folks who know the topic can be more complicated than black and white. Basically whatever the culture says is moral, is. Whatever morals the Relativist has, they do not believe them to be more correct than any other morals.
Finally in stage 4+, morality is completely dependent on what those in power (politicians, corporations, influencers, etc.) say is moral. It's a warped form of Moral Relativism, really. This individual believes that morals are relative, but not to culture or anything of the sort. Instead, morals are relative to whatever suits them best at the time, and whatever they are told by "authorities" of high symbol/object value. They do not believe the values and morals of others are equally valid to theirs (stage 3), nor do their actions suggest any belief in a consistent objective morality, warped or otherwise (stage 1 and 2). Instead, their morals are relative to whatever their own pseudo-reality is, whatever is to their benefit, and this itself mainly stems from the aforementioned authorities. And note that someone may be, say, a stage 2 monotheist when it comes to religion, but a stage 4 on morality, and so on.
"Whataboutism" is another illustration of moral Postmodern manipulation. Say a person is telling you how evil the current president of the U.S. is because they do X. You ask, "what about the fact that your favorite president did X too, were they also evil?" The Postmodernist will then say you are engaging in "whataboutism." To one who accepts Moral Realism it is immediately clear why the question is valid though: the answer determines if the person is truly opposed to X or simply using it against those they don’t like, special pleading. Postmodernists simply believe whatever they need or want to at the time to support their own biases, not that X is actually immoral.
Our paper money is another example of stage 3, “pretense of reality.” The paper money system is entirely theoretical, in reality the paper is worth very, very little. It's just tied to this conceptual system that, were it to be cast aside, would make all cash meaningless paper. Stage 1 would be things like services, sustenance, shelter, useful things, symbols that were thought to impact reality, etc., objective things all people need. Stage 2 is illustrated by gold, we give it meaning beyond what it has, but it's a real thing with a limited amount of it in the world, you cannot get trillions in debt just printing new gold into existence as with stage 3 cash. And for stage 4+, what better example than NFTs and Bitcoin, or views, likes, and upvotes?
Social media gives us insight into the world of stage 4 / Postmodernism. All the big-name forums or social media platforms, as well as many smaller ones, are oversaturated with advertisements, these new religious symbols and their new valuable objects, to the point where advertisers choose which platforms or outlets survive and which crash and burn. Whole sites wield the power to silence dissenters of whichever ideologies they find unappealing. In many cases people are extremely limited in the number of characters they can use at once, making true discourse impossible. People live entirely fake lives to instill jealousy in others, who go on to lie to themselves and others as well, and groupthink is encouraged through voting systems which create hiveminds and drive out any independent thought. All these fit with Baudrillard’s fourth stage - none of this is reality. Consumerism is objectively less valuable than individuation and freedom, it is not a valid way to live life, it only wastes life, time, and resources. Human thought is not limited by a character count, this does not describe reality in any way, instead creating a new "reality" where any idea longer than a few sentences is a "word salad" and cannot hold one's attention. There are fewer and fewer "great thinkers," and they are not the ones being heard and viewed. The endless, manufactured, touched up selfies, vacations wasted taking pictures instead of living, time lost in the imagery rather than the real event - this is not objective reality. It not only rejects reality but twists and perverts it, replacing it with a manufactured (simulated) one.
Cancel culture is another unfortunate offspring of Postmodernist thought. Due to the power held and used by the creators and maintainers of all these stage 4 images and objects, "reality" is now defined by such entities. A famous actor was fired from all his roles including a massive franchise on mere accusations of abuse, before the crimes were even brought to court (where it turned out things were not so clear cut). If it can happen to a rich, beloved movie star, imagine what could happen to you. I am not suggesting you feel bad for a billionaire who helps fabricate reality, nor do I believe we have a great and trustworthy justice system in place. All I want to illustrate is how a mere accusation led to guilt and punishment because corporations and the more popular political party said they were guilty, and culture followed blindly, before it even reached the justice system at all. Even in cases where someone ends up being guilty, they cannot be found guilty before investigation and judgment. But this does not matter in a world where reality is whatever is most popular at the time.
All forms of media contribute to this, there is no longer any reality in culture outside of the images and realities created for us, created to distract us from this disturbing rejection of reality. Games, shows, movies, children’s content, fiction and non-fiction works, governments, news outlets… not every single individual instance of these may be wholly negative, but the positive ones are becoming more and more rare. I’ve found an interesting source of philosophy on this matter in the poetry of Jim Morrison, famously known as the singer of The Doors, whose father was all too familiar with the fabrication of reality. Morrison wrote about how the powers that be use content from films to museums (where we simulate history) and everything in between to blind citizens to their power over us, our values, even our own meanings regarding life. He feared that humans had become simple spectators, staring blankly into the screen, letting it write their reality for them. He even predicted the "meta" nature of our modern culture, where everything has become self-referential, filled with cameos and easter eggs, dead actors resurrected and old ones de-aged, because media-created reality is now the only reality. All it can reference is itself, lest it shatter the illusion or acknowledge reality. Just look at how our culture cannot even create new content, just remakes, sequels, shared universes, etc.
"There are no longer “dancers,” the possessed. The cleavage of men into actor and spectators is the central fact of our time. We are obsessed with heroes who live for us and whom we punish. If all the radios and televisions were deprived of their sources of power, all the books and paintings burned tomorrow, all shows and cinemas closed, all the arts of vicarious existence… We are content with the “given” in sensation’s quest. We have been metamorphosized from a mad body dancing on hillsides to a pair of eyes staring in the dark." - Jim Morrison
Another great example of postmodernism is the idea of secularism, that we can separate the public from the religious, or that there are actually people who have no religion whatsoever. This rejects the reality that religion applies to many aspects of life, that someone who is non-theistic or simply “spiritual” still is often religious. For example we can look to sports, where all sorts of weird rituals and ceremonies take place that have nothing to do with the layman understanding of religion, gods, the divine, etc, but are studied as such by religious scholars nonetheless. It can even tie back to the Disneyland example, such as how we pretend America is a secular country, or delude ourselves into thinking the hateful Atheism of France (or places like the USSR before it) is somehow not its own form of religion. In stage 1 we recognized there was no separating the spiritual and religious from daily life. Stage 2 keeps this mostly in place but twists it to fit monotheism. It's not until stage 3 that this really changes to keeping religion “private,” and stage 4 flips the whole thing on its head to where the state and corporations have become god, and the gods have become fantasy.
Postmodernism has even seeped into the WLHP to a great extent. For example, with the identification of the Christian entity Satan with all sorts of beings that have no correlation to him. The Satanist who says that The Devil is Setesh, the Serpent, Prometheus, or any other such deity is placing objective reality on the backburner in favor of a popular cultural meme - that all these beings are Satan, despite their histories, characteristics, mythologies, etc. It is Postmodernism which allows certain groups from the late 1900s to claim absurd things like being the first and only Satanists with no regard for objective reality, or which allows organizations to claim the title of Romantic Satanists when their values and acts fly in the face of that literary movement. It's why people who think they are on the WLHP can still fall for things like Physicalism against all evidence and reason. It's how occultists can create completely made up identities for themselves that, even after being exposed as fraudulent, are still parroted blindly by their followers. And in a wider sense it applies to modern polytheism overall, where new age, fluff bunny occultists come in changing polytheism to monotheism, or saying all male and female goddesses are just a manifestation of duo-theism. There is no escaping Postmodern irrationality.
Our symbols of the divine, of deeper spiritual meanings and truths, of a reality beyond this one, have all been replaced with corporate logos, meme templates, and easter eggs. Like me, many others also have altars in every room of the house, their altars are simply shrines to brands, consumer content, companies, political parties, famous actors, etc. The utility of an object no longer defines it, but instead it is the fabricated social status a thing is supposed to create, such as an uncomfortable designer chair being ten times the cost of a more comfortable and practical one. If your car can reliably get you place to place, but isn’t sporting the right hood ornament, or a fresh coat of paint, all the fancy add ons and a high floor price, then the object simply is not as valuable as if it had these entirely unnecessary things, and therefore the individual themselves is judged as less valuable. Two identical shirts can vary in price by hundreds of dollars based solely on the name printed on the tag inside. All of these values are entirely manufactured and completely detached from objective reality.
Perhaps worst of all is that people and objects have become harder to tell apart, as best exemplified with celebrities. They are fake people with false personalities who we are supposed to see as the ideal human beings. All of their flaws are edited and filtered out, and then we are condemned for not being on par. To postmodern companies, the individual is literally just an object to be used as a means to an end, a cog in a machine rather than an individual with needs, goals, drives, etc. Politicians are themselves celebrities now, and I do not only mean literal actors running for office, but rather that people cheer for them like they do a rock star, consume their media like it is a drug, defend them as if they were their favorite comic character… What gives these politicians and celebrities their power? An association with the new system of symbols and objects of value, the system which disregards reality all together in order to encourage things like Consumerism and obedience.
Postmodernism has an influence over almost every aspect of our lives. It encourages people to believe any fleeting thing they want, or more often are told to want, is of foremost importance or value. It allows constant advertising to empty us of any "inconvenient" meaning or value and fill the void with Consumerism and material things, or to fill it with work lives that are ultimately pointless and amount to nothing more than some conceptual material wage (money itself not even being "real"). The value of objects defines and overtakes the value of the individual. A disregard for objectivity means a disregard for the scientific method itself, allowing science to become a process of authoritarianism at worst and democracy at best, a process of media propaganda rather than a quest for truth. Whatever facts benefit the high-object-value people and the symbols they associate with are true, and facts which do not are false, being able to change at the drop of a hat as needed.
Postmodernism is clearly the natural outcome of our move from profound reality to a fabricated simulation of reality created to control, stifle, and subdue human beings… an immoral and dangerous metaphysics too blind to see that without any objective reality nobody can ever be correct, including themselves.

Audio: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l42yKCnUBa0
Jean Baudrillard, a famous writer on the topic of “postmodernism,” explained postmodernism by means of four stages that symbols and objects have progressed through.
Stage 1: “Basic reflection of reality.” Here, symbols and objects attempt to create an objective reflection of reality. For example a chair is made to be sat on and is valuable if it fulfills its purpose, and a shirt is valuable if it covers your skin. The symbols, stories, myths, etc. of our ancestors were an attempt to describe reality as best they could (agree with the results or not). A symbol or image of a god was meant to represent an objectively existent force in reality. Here I see a comparison to very early Polytheism and the Stellar Tradition, where we accepted the objective, dualistic and spiritual nature of reality, the existence of the gods, and so on, with very complex systems that understood reality itself is complex. Inherently this can only ever be, at best, an attempt at metaphysical knowledge about reality, but it is an honest attempt.
Stage 2: "Perversion of reality.” Here the relationship between value and objective reality begins to shift, for example a chair may still serve its primary function, but be more valuable if made with a rare material, by someone of note, and/or for someone of great importance. There may be no practical difference between the stage 1 and stage 2 chairs, and yet the stage 2 chair is given more value. Symbols (perhaps most famously the serpent) are also twisted, for example as a means to control people, or even by demonizing all gods and saying there is only One True God. The complexity of reality is ignored, in favor of a simple “good vs. evil” breakdown, where everything is either Godly or Demonic. The comparison here is the SolaAgricultural tradition and, especially, Monotheism. There is an acceptance of some sort of reality, but that reality is twisted intentionally, whether that be to control people, confuse them, or anything of the sort.
Stage 3: “Pretense of reality.” Here we have the appearance of reality, but much more of a detachment from it. The idea that gods are "just archetypes," or that magic is “just psychology,” illustrate this, along with Physicalism at large. People pretend these are the totality of reality, of which they consider themselves to be the "true seekers," but in the end they outright ignore the most important aspects of our reality. Christian Nationalism is another illustration, where leaders outright lie and fabricate history under the pretense of truth, such as the U.S. being founded as a Christian nation. Objects mainly have value thanks to Materialism and Consumerism, not to mention advertising, and the rejection of higher reality makes such things easier to fall for.
Stage 4: "Bears no relation to any reality whatsoever." This is what may be called "postmodernism," total detachment from reality. An very worrying illustration is the democratization of science, where politics and public opinion now hold as much (or more) sway as empirical evidence (with strict empiricism or “scientism” already falling under "stage 3,” since there are so many other forms of knowledge than empirical knowledge.). Here, a shirt or chair like from stage 1 may be significantly less valuable than an identical shirt or chair endorsed by a famous celebrity. We all know politicians lie when they make promises and yet cheer any time they make one anyways. Our symbols only represent our made up realities: watered-down Christianized ideology such as we see running rampant in polytheistic revival, or modern pop-cultural fictions and multiverses, for example.
Baudrillard gives the example of Main Street at Disney Parks. Not only do we spend more time and money on these fabrications than reality (e.g. replacing the gods on our altars with Disney stuff), but our very differentiation between the "real world" and "Disney world" is a delusion. Disneyland is part of the “real world”. There is no inner child to most adults which is in hiding and in need of release, rather they are very outwardly children yet still wield great power. The world is childish and run by mental and spiritual children. The "perfect world" of Disney is still draining your so-called "real" money (which itself belongs to stage 3, as paper money has no objective value).How often do we obsess over the lives and stories of fictional people, such as families in TV shows, meant purely as consumer content? Even I am guilty of this. Our biggest "influencers" are literal morons on terrible platforms, platforms which encourage us to pretend our true selves are only the best moments we choose to share online.
Stage 5: To these 4 stages I propose adding a 5th in the 21st century: “replacement of reality.” Artificial intelligence, virtual and alternate realities, one of the most recent symbols of status at the time of writing this is the new Apple headset, costing thousands of dollars, people just walking around and existing in a totally manufactured reality, one which will inevitably be shaped by those in positions of power and wealth. The popularity of fake news also may deserve ranking in this new, 5th stage, perhaps even something like plastic surgery.
It is important to note that I do not believe we necessarily pass linearly through these stages. For example there are currently people whose beliefs and practices conform to any one of these 4+ stages, or they fit different stages depending on the context.
Morality is another way to look at the stages, and for this I will use the modern example of the debate on abortion. In stage 1, morality is a quest for objective truth, so for instance with abortion we would realize that the issue is objectively complicated.
In stage 2, morality is twisted to fit the reality promoted by those in power, so for us this would be that abortion is always wrong. They still believe in an objective morality in theory, but twist and simplify that morality.
Stage 3 brings us Moral Relativism, whether abortion is right or wrong depends on who you ask, what culture you were raised in, etc. There is no objective morality, but this itself is an objective truth in a way. This is opposed to the second stage Monotheists who believe abortion is objectively wrong all together, or first stage folks who know the topic can be more complicated than black and white. Basically whatever the culture says is moral, is. Whatever morals the Relativist has, they do not believe them to be more correct than any other morals.
Finally in stage 4+, morality is completely dependent on what those in power (politicians, corporations, influencers, etc.) say is moral. It's a warped form of Moral Relativism, really. This individual believes that morals are relative, but not to culture or anything of the sort. Instead, morals are relative to whatever suits them best at the time, and whatever they are told by "authorities" of high symbol/object value. They do not believe the values and morals of others are equally valid to theirs (stage 3), nor do their actions suggest any belief in a consistent objective morality, warped or otherwise (stage 1 and 2). Instead, their morals are relative to whatever their own pseudo-reality is, whatever is to their benefit, and this itself mainly stems from the aforementioned authorities. And note that someone may be, say, a stage 2 monotheist when it comes to religion, but a stage 4 on morality, and so on.
"Whataboutism" is another illustration of moral Postmodern manipulation. Say a person is telling you how evil the current president of the U.S. is because they do X. You ask, "what about the fact that your favorite president did X too, were they also evil?" The Postmodernist will then say you are engaging in "whataboutism." To one who accepts Moral Realism it is immediately clear why the question is valid though: the answer determines if the person is truly opposed to X or simply using it against those they don’t like, special pleading. Postmodernists simply believe whatever they need or want to at the time to support their own biases, not that X is actually immoral.
Our paper money is another example of stage 3, “pretense of reality.” The paper money system is entirely theoretical, in reality the paper is worth very, very little. It's just tied to this conceptual system that, were it to be cast aside, would make all cash meaningless paper. Stage 1 would be things like services, sustenance, shelter, useful things, symbols that were thought to impact reality, etc., objective things all people need. Stage 2 is illustrated by gold, we give it meaning beyond what it has, but it's a real thing with a limited amount of it in the world, you cannot get trillions in debt just printing new gold into existence as with stage 3 cash. And for stage 4+, what better example than NFTs and Bitcoin, or views, likes, and upvotes?
Social media gives us insight into the world of stage 4 / Postmodernism. All the big-name forums or social media platforms, as well as many smaller ones, are oversaturated with advertisements, these new religious symbols and their new valuable objects, to the point where advertisers choose which platforms or outlets survive and which crash and burn. Whole sites wield the power to silence dissenters of whichever ideologies they find unappealing. In many cases people are extremely limited in the number of characters they can use at once, making true discourse impossible. People live entirely fake lives to instill jealousy in others, who go on to lie to themselves and others as well, and groupthink is encouraged through voting systems which create hiveminds and drive out any independent thought. All these fit with Baudrillard’s fourth stage - none of this is reality. Consumerism is objectively less valuable than individuation and freedom, it is not a valid way to live life, it only wastes life, time, and resources. Human thought is not limited by a character count, this does not describe reality in any way, instead creating a new "reality" where any idea longer than a few sentences is a "word salad" and cannot hold one's attention. There are fewer and fewer "great thinkers," and they are not the ones being heard and viewed. The endless, manufactured, touched up selfies, vacations wasted taking pictures instead of living, time lost in the imagery rather than the real event - this is not objective reality. It not only rejects reality but twists and perverts it, replacing it with a manufactured (simulated) one.
Cancel culture is another unfortunate offspring of Postmodernist thought. Due to the power held and used by the creators and maintainers of all these stage 4 images and objects, "reality" is now defined by such entities. A famous actor was fired from all his roles including a massive franchise on mere accusations of abuse, before the crimes were even brought to court (where it turned out things were not so clear cut). If it can happen to a rich, beloved movie star, imagine what could happen to you. I am not suggesting you feel bad for a billionaire who helps fabricate reality, nor do I believe we have a great and trustworthy justice system in place. All I want to illustrate is how a mere accusation led to guilt and punishment because corporations and the more popular political party said they were guilty, and culture followed blindly, before it even reached the justice system at all. Even in cases where someone ends up being guilty, they cannot be found guilty before investigation and judgment. But this does not matter in a world where reality is whatever is most popular at the time.
All forms of media contribute to this, there is no longer any reality in culture outside of the images and realities created for us, created to distract us from this disturbing rejection of reality. Games, shows, movies, children’s content, fiction and non-fiction works, governments, news outlets… not every single individual instance of these may be wholly negative, but the positive ones are becoming more and more rare. I’ve found an interesting source of philosophy on this matter in the poetry of Jim Morrison, famously known as the singer of The Doors, whose father was all too familiar with the fabrication of reality. Morrison wrote about how the powers that be use content from films to museums (where we simulate history) and everything in between to blind citizens to their power over us, our values, even our own meanings regarding life. He feared that humans had become simple spectators, staring blankly into the screen, letting it write their reality for them. He even predicted the "meta" nature of our modern culture, where everything has become self-referential, filled with cameos and easter eggs, dead actors resurrected and old ones de-aged, because media-created reality is now the only reality. All it can reference is itself, lest it shatter the illusion or acknowledge reality. Just look at how our culture cannot even create new content, just remakes, sequels, shared universes, etc.
"There are no longer “dancers,” the possessed. The cleavage of men into actor and spectators is the central fact of our time. We are obsessed with heroes who live for us and whom we punish. If all the radios and televisions were deprived of their sources of power, all the books and paintings burned tomorrow, all shows and cinemas closed, all the arts of vicarious existence… We are content with the “given” in sensation’s quest. We have been metamorphosized from a mad body dancing on hillsides to a pair of eyes staring in the dark." - Jim Morrison
Another great example of postmodernism is the idea of secularism, that we can separate the public from the religious, or that there are actually people who have no religion whatsoever. This rejects the reality that religion applies to many aspects of life, that someone who is non-theistic or simply “spiritual” still is often religious. For example we can look to sports, where all sorts of weird rituals and ceremonies take place that have nothing to do with the layman understanding of religion, gods, the divine, etc, but are studied as such by religious scholars nonetheless. It can even tie back to the Disneyland example, such as how we pretend America is a secular country, or delude ourselves into thinking the hateful Atheism of France (or places like the USSR before it) is somehow not its own form of religion. In stage 1 we recognized there was no separating the spiritual and religious from daily life. Stage 2 keeps this mostly in place but twists it to fit monotheism. It's not until stage 3 that this really changes to keeping religion “private,” and stage 4 flips the whole thing on its head to where the state and corporations have become god, and the gods have become fantasy.
Postmodernism has even seeped into the WLHP to a great extent. For example, with the identification of the Christian entity Satan with all sorts of beings that have no correlation to him. The Satanist who says that The Devil is Setesh, the Serpent, Prometheus, or any other such deity is placing objective reality on the backburner in favor of a popular cultural meme - that all these beings are Satan, despite their histories, characteristics, mythologies, etc. It is Postmodernism which allows certain groups from the late 1900s to claim absurd things like being the first and only Satanists with no regard for objective reality, or which allows organizations to claim the title of Romantic Satanists when their values and acts fly in the face of that literary movement. It's why people who think they are on the WLHP can still fall for things like Physicalism against all evidence and reason. It's how occultists can create completely made up identities for themselves that, even after being exposed as fraudulent, are still parroted blindly by their followers. And in a wider sense it applies to modern polytheism overall, where new age, fluff bunny occultists come in changing polytheism to monotheism, or saying all male and female goddesses are just a manifestation of duo-theism. There is no escaping Postmodern irrationality.
Our symbols of the divine, of deeper spiritual meanings and truths, of a reality beyond this one, have all been replaced with corporate logos, meme templates, and easter eggs. Like me, many others also have altars in every room of the house, their altars are simply shrines to brands, consumer content, companies, political parties, famous actors, etc. The utility of an object no longer defines it, but instead it is the fabricated social status a thing is supposed to create, such as an uncomfortable designer chair being ten times the cost of a more comfortable and practical one. If your car can reliably get you place to place, but isn’t sporting the right hood ornament, or a fresh coat of paint, all the fancy add ons and a high floor price, then the object simply is not as valuable as if it had these entirely unnecessary things, and therefore the individual themselves is judged as less valuable. Two identical shirts can vary in price by hundreds of dollars based solely on the name printed on the tag inside. All of these values are entirely manufactured and completely detached from objective reality.
Perhaps worst of all is that people and objects have become harder to tell apart, as best exemplified with celebrities. They are fake people with false personalities who we are supposed to see as the ideal human beings. All of their flaws are edited and filtered out, and then we are condemned for not being on par. To postmodern companies, the individual is literally just an object to be used as a means to an end, a cog in a machine rather than an individual with needs, goals, drives, etc. Politicians are themselves celebrities now, and I do not only mean literal actors running for office, but rather that people cheer for them like they do a rock star, consume their media like it is a drug, defend them as if they were their favorite comic character… What gives these politicians and celebrities their power? An association with the new system of symbols and objects of value, the system which disregards reality all together in order to encourage things like Consumerism and obedience.
Postmodernism has an influence over almost every aspect of our lives. It encourages people to believe any fleeting thing they want, or more often are told to want, is of foremost importance or value. It allows constant advertising to empty us of any "inconvenient" meaning or value and fill the void with Consumerism and material things, or to fill it with work lives that are ultimately pointless and amount to nothing more than some conceptual material wage (money itself not even being "real"). The value of objects defines and overtakes the value of the individual. A disregard for objectivity means a disregard for the scientific method itself, allowing science to become a process of authoritarianism at worst and democracy at best, a process of media propaganda rather than a quest for truth. Whatever facts benefit the high-object-value people and the symbols they associate with are true, and facts which do not are false, being able to change at the drop of a hat as needed.
Postmodernism is clearly the natural outcome of our move from profound reality to a fabricated simulation of reality created to control, stifle, and subdue human beings… an immoral and dangerous metaphysics too blind to see that without any objective reality nobody can ever be correct, including themselves.