Transcript of World Renowned Oncologist Connects Covid Vaxx To Cancer Explosion!

And why would a booster allow a cancer to come back? Well, it turned out it's very simple that boosters suppress the T-cell response. The first two will increase it a bit, but a booster suppresses it. And that's exactly what we found. But then a group from Madrid published a wonderful paper saying T-cell exhaustion after third COVID vaccine in cancer patients with an incredible data. Show it showed it very, very clearly. And so therefore any cancer suppressed and controlled by the immune system, you suspect might pop up after the booster. >> So, I want to remind people how we got the mRNA vaccine. It was never tested successfully and the vaccine they never had a successful coronavirus vaccine. Um and but they really, really wanted to push this mRNA vaccine. And this is from from the Milken Institute with Dr. Fauci and he's telling you how they're going to have to scare the hell out of people and make them more afraid of a coronavirus than they should be so then they can institute uh the the rollout of mRNA shots. I don't even call them vaccines. But let's listen, it's very short. >> Why don't we blow the system up? I mean, obviously we can't just turn off the spigot on the system we have and then say, "Hey, everyone in the world should get this new vaccine we've been giving to anyone yet." But there must be some way that we grow vaccines mostly in eggs the way we did in 1947. >> You know why? Because we've been proven that that that works and it's less toxic than an mRNA. So, he's saying, "Why can't we just force this?" He Do you hear him? "Why do we just force this on everybody? Why don't How do we got to get off the old vaccines that everybody's used to taking in their flu shot? We got to get something new on them." And here's what Fauci says. >> In order to make the transition from getting out of the tried and true egg growing, which we know gives us results that can be, you know, beneficial. I mean, we've done well with that, to something that has to be much better. Uh you have to prove that this works. And then you've got to go through all of the clinical trials, phase ones, phase twos, phase three, and then show that this particular product is going to be good over a period of years. >> Of Of Of course, they didn't do that with the mRNA vaccine. It was rushed through as called Warp Speed. Is there a better way to bring a medicine to market than at warp speed? And so, of course, they didn't do any of that, like he said. What did they do instead? >> That alone, if it works perfectly, is going to take a decade. >> They might >> Okay, so it didn't. They did it in 3 months. So, it did They didn't take a decade to study the vaccine. They just rushed it through, and here we go. >> a need or even an urgent call for an entity >> Right. >> of excitement out there that's completely disruptive, that's not beholden to bureaucratic strings and and and processes. >> So, >> You mean like a pandemic that's manufactured by this guy inventing a virus at the University of North Carolina, shipping it to Wuhan lab, and then having it get out accidentally get out and create a pandemic so we can have this new thing that is not uh subject to bureaucratic strings. Here's what he says about that. >> We really do have a problem of how the world perceives influenza, and it's going to be very difficult to change that unless you do it from within and say, I don't care what your perception is, we're going to address the problem in a disruptive way and in an iterative way because >> Which is exactly what they did with COVID. I don't care what If If not afraid of coronavirus, we're going to make you afraid of it, and we're going to do it in a disruptive way. Was there ever a bigger disruption in humanity than the lockdowns from COVID? I don't think so. And so, there he is telling you their plan, and that's just like a year before the the the pandemic. >> need both, but it is not too crazy to think that an outbreak of an novel avian virus could occur in in China somewhere. We could get the RNA sequence from that, beam it to a number of regional centers, if not local, if not even in your home at some point, and print those vaccines on a patch and self-administer. >> So, if that doesn't tell you exactly that they had this in mind and planned, they were talking about it in front of cameras with microphones. They were admitting their heinous evil plan. They're admitting it. That's what that is. And so, now we have doctors, the leading oncologists in the world, here's one of them, Dr. Professor Angus I can't pronounce his last name. How do you say his last name, Nick? >> Dalgleish. >> Dalgleish. So, he's [snorts] going to let you know that from his observational studies, he has drawing a connection between the mRNA vaccines and cancer. Now, let's watch. >> thing that people who've been stable with cancer melanoma for years started relapsing at the beginning of '22. And I asked for any reason why this might occurred, and I noticed they'd all been given boosters by their GPs, which I would if they'd asked me, I wouldn't have done that. And so, we had to look around. What's the reason? Why would a booster allow a cancer to come back? Well, it turned out it's very simple that boosters suppress the T-cell response. The first two will increase it a bit, but a booster suppresses it. And that's exactly what we found. But then a group from Madrid published a wonderful paper saying T-cell exhaustion after third COVID vaccine in cancer patients with an incredible data showing showed it very very clearly. And so therefore any cancer suppressed and controlled by the immune system, you suspect might pop up after the booster. Surgeons noted their colorectal patients were not were very difficult to treat. They were presenting late and they were presenting young. And they found that these patients had all had the booster, too. And they called you know, a red flag. And I called a red flag that just the suspicion that the the vaccine might be involved in the cancer. >> Are there any studies that have linked to the mRNA to cancer? Is there any sort of medical um um process that you can allude to that >> The strongest are the epidemiological studies. And uh the strongest was from Japan, a paper by Gibo and and his colleagues, which just had the raw data. And they noticed that the number of new cancer cases went up with each booster vaccine. >> So, again, this goes against the orthodoxy. And of course we now know that not only medical boards, but the the medical journals are completely corrupted by Big Pharma money and universities as well because they all relied on Dr. Fauci to fund their research and give them billions of dollars. And so now when a guy like this comes out and says this, they all attack him as he's some kind of a quack. But uh just what what's your reaction to when you hear this, Nick? >> Yeah, everything he says is 100% accurate. In fact, now over 70% of the global population was injected with a carcinogenic biological agent. And that biological agent is the mRNA gene transfer injections. We actually now have over 100 studies showing that the mRNA shots induce cancer or promote cancer by a 17 distinct mechanisms. He mentioned T-cell exhaustion was one of them. You also have turning off of tumor suppressor genes P53 and BRCA, hyperinflammation, overall immune dysregulation, um as well as just literally decimating uh multiple organ systems at the same time because it goes everywhere in the body. And you know, it's just a massive list. It's an absolutely massive list of mechanisms, but you know, the epidemiological data is undeniable. We have four major major data sets. And there's two in the United States. The first is the CDC Wonder mortality data. There's been 138,000 excess cancer deaths in the United States since the mRNA shots rolled out. Again, 138,000 more cancer deaths than normal. And then we had the SEER data set come out of the National Cancer Institute a few months ago. They found that multiple major cancers increased in young Americans right after the shots rolled out, including stomach cancer, colon cancer, brain tumors. They were up about 19%. Um so this should not be occurring. And then we had lastly Italian and South Korean studies totaling 8.7 million people combined comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated. And the vaccinated individuals suffered increased risks of seven major cancers, uh colon, prostate, breast, thyroid. Um all these cancers are up in the vaccinated. So, it's undeniable both mechanistically and at the population level. >> So, there's a chemical called SV40. Now, tell me about that and why has this been found inside the COVID vaccine? >> Yeah, SV40 is a portion of the DNA plasmid at the manufacturing process for the Pfizer mRNA injections. Basically, it's there to churn It's there in the DNA plasmid at the factory to churn out the mRNA, to help churn it out. The DNA plasmids are still in the vials. They don't clean them out. They say they do, but they don't. Over 10 studies have found these DNA plasmids, including SV40 segment of the plasmids in the vials. And so, when you inject it into people's arms, it's encased in the lipid nanoparticles. And we know SV40 is a cancer-promoting genetic material. And so, that's going to get into all of your bodily systems and promote cancer. And actually, it's possibly inserting itself into genomes, portions of this DNA plasmid. And we demonstrated that in a peer-reviewed study. We found a segment of this so-called vaccine genetic material fused in chromosome 19 in a stage four turbo bladder cancer patient. And so, you know, it's it's very bad. It's very, very bad. And that's another mechanism of promoting cancer is insertional mutagenesis or genomic integration of non-human synthetic vaccine DNA, um causing uncontrolled cell growth. >> And so, here's the South Korean study you were talking about. One year risk of cancers associated with COVID-19 vaccination, a large population-based cohort study in South Korea, and I'll just read you a couple of lines from this. Uh the uh oxygenetic potential of SARS-CoV-2 has been hypothetically proposed, but real-world data on the COVID-19 infection and vaccination are insufficient. Therefore, this large-scale population-based retrospective study in Seoul, South Korea aimed to estimate the cumulative incidences of subsequent risks of overall cancers 1 year after COVID-19 vaccination. Data from over 8 million individuals between '21 and '23 were obtained from the Korean National Health Insurance database. The participants were categorized into two groups based on their COVID-19 vaccination status. The risks for overall cancers were assessed using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. And data were expressed as hazard ratios with a 95% confidence uh uh interval. The thyroid cancer, gastric cancer, colorectal cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, and prostate cancer significantly increased at a 1-year post-vaccination. So, I That's a gigantic study, 8 million people. And so, why do you Why do you think that today this is still happening? That they're still giving out free vac co- mRNA COVID vaccines at CVA. What is going I mean, is is our government just that eagle evil or they just that corrupt or both? >> It's both. It's both. And honestly, I don't have a good answers to why they're doing this. It It It's now at this point with all this evidence, it does qualify as a form of homicide. It may be mass negligent. Um we don't know yet. You know, that has to be um kind of rolled out. You know, what what sort of crime is being committed here now because we know it's causing these cancers. We know it's actually caused mass deaths, extreme blood clotting including white fibrous clots. A study came out on that 2 days ago. 25% of corpses have these long anomalous clots in them now. 75% of embalmers are finding them. Um and yeah, so it's criminal. We now we know the FDA literally covered up 25 safety signals in early 2021. Ron Johnson's team found that out with internal communications of between FDA officials. They literally buried a sudden cardiac death signal. It was killing people, children, teenagers, everybody. And they told the scientist that found those signals to cease and desist, right? So, that is a crime to hide uh death signals from a product you're telling millions of people to get. >> And so people have been attacking that professor. And so I asked Grok, please answer my question succinctly that that professor who's the the oncologist, the world-renowned oncologist who's correlating and connecting the the shots with cancer. And I said, please answer my question as succinctly as possible without adding commentary or qualifiers. The people attacking the professor, world-renowned oncologist, were wrong about most things to do with COVID in retrospect, like lockdown, school closures, vaccine stopping transmission and contraction, and social distancing, correct? Grok says, yes. So, there you go. The when you So, when you see someone like that on social media, and then you see him being attacked, remember the people attacking him were wrong about everything to do with COVID. You'll see You'll see posts You'll see posts like this. Uh he's a world-renowned grifting quack. >> [laughter] >> Right? That's what people say. They go uh and so uh I asked I asked Rock. I said, "Is Is this world-renowned oncologist uh really world-renowned? Is he a leader in the field who was well-respected before he spoke out on COVID?" Yes. He is a legitimate, well-respected oncologist with a strong pre-COVID reputation in his field. He's not fringe or unknown. And here's his credentials. He's got great, unbelievable credentials. He's held senior roles in oncology and immunology for decades. And he's discovered of CD4 as a major receptor for HIV. He pioneered work on cancer immunotherapy and vaccine. And he's contributed to the development of something I can't promo promote pronounce which led to him receiving the Joshua Lederberg Prize in 2011. Um I could go on and on. He's got a great reputation. And I said, "Well, is he a quack?" They go, "No, he's not a quack. He's credentialed in career. He's the founding chair of oncology at St. George's University of London since 1991. He's a fellow of respected bodies, the Academy of Medical Sciences, Royal Colleges. Extensive publication record, hundreds of papers he's published, strong citations in immunology and oncology, and contributions to HIV research and cancer immunotherapy. His uh pre-COVID standing, respected in his niche for tumor immunology, cancer vaccines, HIV. Colleagues viewed Colleagues viewed him as a productive clinic clinician scientist. So, of course, after he came out and went against the orthodoxy and told the truth about his findings with cancer and the jabs, now they're calling him a quack. That That's the We've seen this over and over. Not only Dr. McCollough, leader in his field, but anybody the guy who's what's his name who invented the mRNA vaccine technology. We've had him on the show. Dr. Robert Malone, right? Again, the guy who has vaccine patents, the guy who invented the mRNA vaccine platform that was based that that they used the covid shot based on they're not calling him a quack. So anybody who goes against Big Pharma's narrative, they're going to call a quack. I just wanted to show people that that one of the most leading oncologists in the world, they'll also try to dismiss. And what do you think it's going to take, Nick? What do you think it's going to take for regular people to realize that they were lied to about covid on a scale their brains cannot comprehend. >> It's going to take an injury or death in their family from one of these products, I think in the end, particularly for those who have received six, seven, eight, nine mRNA booster shots. While something bad may not have happened to them or somebody they know, the moment something does, that's when most people wake up and that's what I've seen. Now, but it's very sad for people who have taken six booster shots. An autopsy study recently came out and found basically their hearts look like a Swiss cheese under the microscope, not with holes, but with multiple micro scars. And so these shots literally cause little microscopic scars throughout the heart that lead to sudden death. >> Do you think we'll ever have a a person who's you know, what like when Walter Cronkite turned on the Vietnam War, that's what they said it was the end of the Do you think that there'll be someone who's respected in society that comes out and says something about this? That people will finally wake up. >> It's going I think it's going to have to come from the propaganda mainstream media outlets that these individuals religiously watch. It's going to have to come from CNN and all these other outlets, unfortunately. [snorts] And so, but they're captured by Big Pharma, by they're captured by Pfizer. And so, you know, it's going to be very difficult to get that to happen. Uh, but it needs to happen for the sake of public safety. You know, we have a an ongoing uh, long-term mass casualty event, right? We have to put an end to it somehow. >> Nicholas Holschur, uh, at the McCullough Foundation. I appreciate you uh, taking time to help explain all this to everybody. Uh, everybody should follow you on uh, X on Twitter @NickHolschur. And uh, thanks again for taking time for us, pal. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Hey, come see me on tour. We'll be in Burbank, California August 30th with the live celebrity panel show. And then September 18th through the 20th in Chicago, Illinois and Rosemont, Illinois. Go to jimmydore.com for a link for tickets. >> [music]

The Miracles of Lourdes: A Place Where Hope and Healing Meet

Nestled in the foothills of the French Pyrenees, the town of Lourdes has become one of the world's most visited pilgrimage destinations. Every year, millions of people travel there seeking healing, peace, and spiritual renewal. While many arrive carrying physical burdens, others come searching for hope after exhausting every other option.

The story of Lourdes began in 1858 with a humble 14-year-old girl named Bernadette Soubirous. Between February and July of that year, Bernadette reported experiencing eighteen apparitions of a beautiful lady in a grotto called Massabielle. During one of these encounters, the lady instructed Bernadette to dig in the ground. At first, only muddy water appeared, but soon a clear spring began flowing. That spring continues to flow today and has become one of the most recognized symbols of Lourdes.

Since that time, countless pilgrims have visited the spring, many believing they have experienced extraordinary physical and spiritual healings.

Although thousands of people have reported remarkable recoveries, the Catholic Church officially recognizes only a small number as miracles. Each recognized case undergoes years—sometimes decades—of medical review and documentation before receiving official recognition.

John Traynor: A Soldier Given Another Chance

One of the most famous Lourdes miracles is that of John Traynor, a British soldier who served during World War I.

During the war, Traynor suffered devastating injuries. He was struck by machine-gun fire, sustained severe head trauma, and was left partially paralyzed. He also developed epilepsy and chronic pain. Multiple surgeries failed to restore his health, and doctors believed his disabilities were permanent.

In 1923, Traynor traveled to Lourdes as part of a pilgrimage for sick veterans. He was brought to the baths and later participated in the Blessed Sacrament procession.

According to eyewitness accounts, he suddenly found strength returning to his body. He stood, walked, and experienced the complete disappearance of his chronic pain and paralysis. Even more remarkable, his epileptic seizures reportedly never returned.

His recovery was carefully documented and eventually recognized as one of Lourdes' most extraordinary miracles.

Anna Santaniello: Healing After Decades of Illness

Anna Santaniello of Italy spent much of her adult life battling severe heart disease.

She experienced repeated episodes of breathlessness, swelling, weakness, and heart failure. Her condition progressively worsened despite years of treatment, leaving her unable to live a normalcy life.

In 1952, at the age of 41, she made a pilgrimage to Lourdes.

After bathing in the Lourdes waters, Anna reported feeling an immediate and overwhelming sense of strength. The symptoms that had plagued her for years disappeared. Doctors who followed her case found that the improvements remained permanent.

After decades of observation and medical review, her healing was officially recognized by the Church as a miracle in 2005.

Sister Bernadette Moriau: Freedom After Nearly Forty Years of Pain

French nun Sister Bernadette Moriau suffered from severe spinal nerve damage that caused intense, constant pain. She required braces, powerful medications, and could walk only with great difficulty.

Her condition lasted for almost four decades.

During a pilgrimage to Lourdes in 2008, she attended a blessing for the sick. Later that evening, she experienced what she described as a profound interior peace.

The next morning, she found she could stand and walk without assistance. She immediately stopped using her braces and medications. Medical examinations over the following years found no explanation for the lasting recovery.

In 2018, her healing became the 70th officially recognized miracle of Lourdes.

The Enduring Legacy of Lourdes

Since Bernadette first uncovered the spring in 1858, more than 200 million pilgrims have visited Lourdes. Thousands have reported healings of body, mind, or spirit.

Many visitors leave without experiencing a dramatic physical cure, yet they often describe finding something equally meaningful: renewed faith, inner peace, forgiveness, and hope.

For believers around the world, Lourdes represents far more than a place of reported miracles. It is a reminder that compassion, prayer, and hope continue to inspire millions of people more than 160 years after a young girl first knelt beside a small spring in a quiet French grotto.

Whether one visits seeking healing, answers, or simply peace, Lourdes remains one of history's most remarkable places of pilgrimage—a place where stories of faith and healing continue to be shared generation after generation.

BEFORE WE ARGUE ABOUT MARX, CAN WE TALK ABOUT THE WAR?

America Keeps Debating Capitalism and Communism While Trillions Disappear Into the War Machine

By John-Michael Talboo

Turn on talk radio and eventually somebody will start arguing about capitalism and communism.

Capitalism works.

No, capitalism has failed.

Socialism is coming.

Communism killed millions.

That wasn't real communism.

This is crony capitalism.

That isn't real capitalism.

Everybody retreats to a corner, grabs their favorite dead economist and starts swinging.

I have a simpler question.

Hey, guys—is it working?

Seriously.

How's everybody doing?

According to the Federal Reserve's 2025 household survey, 63 percent of American adults said they could cover a hypothetical $400 emergency expense entirely with cash or its equivalent.

That means more than a third could not.

Four hundred dollars.

In one of the richest countries in human history.

And before somebody says, “Well, technically most Americans can cover $400,” fine.

Congratulations.

We have apparently lowered the economic victory line to four hundred fucking dollars.

Shouldn't people have thousands saved?

Tens of thousands?

Shouldn't decades of increased productivity, technological advancement, automation and national wealth have produced a population that is becoming more economically secure?

Instead, we have people one car repair, medical bill or missed paycheck away from panic.

So I started reading Marx.

There. I said it.

Not because I suddenly want a hammer and sickle tattooed across my forehead. Not because I have forgotten Stalin, Mao, political prisons, mass killing or the horrific things committed by governments calling themselves communist.

One innocent person murdered by a government is already too many for me.

I started reading Marx because somebody should probably read Marx before deciding everything Marx ever said was wrong.

And here's my conclusion so far:

Marx may have been a better diagnostician than physician.

Maybe the prescription was wrong.

Maybe attempts to apply the prescription produced some of the worst governments in modern history.

But that does not automatically mean the diagnosis was imaginary.

Capital accumulates.

Workers can become alienated from what they produce.

Economic power can become political power.

A person can spend a lifetime creating value and still feel as if the product of his own labor belongs to somebody else.

I make music.

I understand that last one more than I would like to.

But while capitalism and communism are screaming at each other across the room, I keep noticing something sitting between them.

War.

War.

War.

War.

War.

You fuckers keep forgetting war.

MAYBE IT WORKED FOR YOU

This is the part of the capitalism debate I think older Americans desperately need to understand.

Maybe capitalism worked for you.

I mean that.

Maybe you worked hard.

Maybe you bought a house.

Maybe you raised a family.

Maybe you saved money.

Maybe you built a retirement.

Maybe the system, with all its flaws, delivered enough of what it promised that you honestly believe the American dream is still alive.

Good.

I'm glad.

But here's the problem:

It being good for you does not prove it is good for them.

Young people aren't evaluating capitalism from your childhood.

They aren't buying houses at the prices you saw.

They aren't paying your rent.

They aren't looking at your grocery bill.

They aren't entering your job market.

They aren't starting adulthood with your ratio of wages to housing costs.

You can tell a 25-year-old that capitalism works because you bought a house at 25.

He's going to ask you to show him the house he can afford.

And that's not Marxism.

That's a fucking Zillow search.

Maybe we need to stop treating young people's anger as ideological contamination and start listening to what they're actually telling us.

They can't buy homes.

Many don't feel financially secure enough to have children.

They don't believe Social Security will necessarily provide the same security older generations expected.

They watch companies report enormous numbers while being told their own labor isn't worth enough to keep pace with the cost of living.

Then somebody who bought a house decades ago turns on the radio and says:

“Why are these kids interested in socialism?”

Maybe ask them.

Seriously.

Ask.

And then do the difficult part.

Shut the fuck up and listen.

Because your success under a system does not invalidate their failure under the same system at a different point in time.

Maybe you received the spoils.

Maybe what they inherited were the bills.

Your spoils have become their inherited failure.

That doesn't mean you personally did something wrong.

It doesn't mean every older American is wealthy.

It doesn't mean every young American is poor.

It means economic systems exist through time.

Conditions change.

Markets consolidate.

Industries disappear.

Technology changes labor.

Housing prices change.

Debt changes.

Government policy changes.

And the version of capitalism you experienced may not be the version arriving on your son's doorstep.

If your son tells you the American dream looks dead from where he's standing, you have two choices.

You can tell him he's lazy.

Or you can walk over and look through his fucking window.

That's why I appreciated hearing a conservative radio host recently asking why younger Americans are becoming more receptive to socialism instead of simply calling them stupid.

Why?

That's the question.

Not, “How do we make them shut up?”

Not, “Which communist country should we tell them to move to?”

Why?

Why is an ideology that older generations were taught to fear suddenly finding an audience among younger Americans?

Maybe they're all idiots.

That's one theory.

Or maybe they're responding to the economic conditions directly in front of their faces.

You don't have to agree with their solution to take their diagnosis seriously.

Funny.

That's almost exactly where I landed with Marx.

THE EIGHT-TRILLION-DOLLAR NUMBER ISN'T EVEN THE WHOLE RECEIPT

Brown University's Costs of War project estimates that America's post-9/11 wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria and elsewhere have cost approximately $8 trillion.

Eight trillion dollars.

And even that number does not include all future interest costs on the money borrowed to fight those wars.

Brown also estimates that caring for post-9/11 veterans will cost another $2.2 trillion to $2.5 trillion by 2050, much of which has not yet been paid.

Stop for a second.

We're already talking about numbers so large that the human brain stops processing them.

A million seconds is about 11 and a half days.

A billion seconds is more than 31 years.

A trillion seconds is more than 31,000 years.

Now say “eight trillion dollars” again.

But here's the part that keeps bothering me.

That still isn't the whole war receipt.

The famous $8 trillion figure is an accounting of defined post-9/11 war and counterterrorism costs.

It is not a magical master spreadsheet containing every dollar America has spent on military aid, every proxy conflict, every weapons transfer, every military deployment, every operation and every new geopolitical confrontation through 2026.

Take Ukraine.

According to the federal government's own Ukraine oversight system, Congress appropriated $174.2 billion through five Ukraine supplemental appropriation acts enacted from fiscal year 2022 through fiscal year 2024.

Additional funds were allocated through annual agency appropriations and other supplemental legislation.

Now, let's be accurate.

That does not mean somebody loaded $174.2 billion in cash onto a plane and handed it to Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

The money covers different things.

Weapons.

Security assistance.

Replacing American weapons stocks.

American military activity in Europe.

Economic and humanitarian assistance.

Other costs associated with the U.S. response to the war.

Fine.

It's still money.

It's still resources.

It's still production capacity.

It's still political attention.

It's still part of the national ledger.

Now look at the Middle East.

Brown University's Costs of War project estimates that in the two years following October 7, 2023, the United States spent $21.7 billion in military aid to Israel.

Brown separately estimates another $9.65 billion to $12.07 billion for American military operations in Yemen and the wider region during that period.

Combined, Brown places those post-October 7 war costs at approximately $31.35 billion to $33.77 billion and counting.

And here's where people writing articles like this usually make a mistake.

They grab $8 trillion.

Then they grab Ukraine.

Then Israel.

Then Yemen.

Then the Pentagon budget.

Then nuclear weapons.

Then veterans.

Then intelligence.

They stack every scary number they can find and scream:

LOOK AT THE TOTAL!

I'm not going to do that.

Because some of these categories overlap.

Some figures measure appropriations.

Others measure obligations.

Others measure actual outlays.

Some include money spent inside the United States replacing weapons sent overseas.

Some cover different periods.

Some military costs are already embedded in broader Pentagon spending.

If I simply add every number together, somebody who understands federal budgeting can tear the argument apart in five minutes.

And they should.

If I'm going to criticize the war machine, I don't need to lie about it.

The real numbers are already fucking enormous.

WE SPENT MORE THAN $14 TRILLION AT THE PENTAGON AFTER AFGHANISTAN BEGAN

Brown University's Costs of War project reported that Pentagon spending totaled more than $14 trillion between the start of the Afghanistan war in 2001 and 2021, with researchers estimating that roughly one-third to one-half went to military contractors.

Again, don't add that $14 trillion directly to the $8 trillion.

There is overlap.

That's the point.

The American war budget is not one neat number.

It's a maze.

Pentagon base budgets.

War appropriations.

Emergency supplementals.

Military aid.

Weapons replacement.

Veterans' care.

Homeland security.

Interest on borrowed war money.

Nuclear weapons spending spread through the Department of Energy.

Intelligence programs.

Operations overseas.

Security assistance.

Contractors.

And now new military confrontations and new spending priorities are layered on top of old ones before we've finished paying the human and financial costs of the last wars.

Then there is China.

Brown University's Costs of War project estimated that the United States spent approximately $3.4 trillion between 2012 and 2024 on militarized rivalry with China.

Not a declared war with China.

Military competition.

Preparing.

Posturing.

Building.

Positioning.

Planning for a war everybody claims to hope never happens.

Maybe some of that spending prevented war.

That's a legitimate argument.

But if we're going to count the cost of the American military system, we have to acknowledge that preparing for wars costs trillions too.

In 2025, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimated that the United States spent approximately $954 billion on its military.

The entire world spent about $2.887 trillion.

The United States alone accounted for roughly one-third of global military expenditure.

And we're still told to have a serious national conversation about why ordinary Americans aren't economically secure without putting war at the center of the conversation.

How?

“THAT'S NOT REAL CAPITALISM”

Here's something funny I've noticed since reading Marx.

When communism produces a disaster, defenders sometimes say:

“That wasn't real communism.”

Capitalists laugh.

Then capitalism produces monopolies, regulatory capture, corporations influencing government, privatized profits and socialized losses, and defenders say:

“Well, that's crony capitalism. That's not real capitalism.”

Do you hear yourselves?

I'm not saying capitalism and Stalinism are morally equivalent.

They're not.

I'm saying both sides have developed a convenient rhetorical escape hatch.

When the system works, credit the system. When the system fails, declare that the system was never properly tried.

Maybe we should stop worshipping systems.

Maybe we should start auditing outcomes.

I am not a communist.

I am not interested in handing an authoritarian government control over every factory, farm, song, thought and fucking toothbrush.

But I'm also no longer interested in being told that questioning capitalism means I hate freedom.

I like markets.

I like creating something and selling it.

I'm literally making an album and planning to sell physical copies myself.

That's capitalism.

I also think a country where enormous numbers of people are financially fragile while trillions flow through a permanent military economy has a serious structural problem.

That's critique.

Apparently we're no longer allowed to hold both thoughts in our heads.

I can.

DID CAPITALISM EVER GET AN HONEST PERFORMANCE REVIEW WITH WAR DISTORTING THE FUCKING LEDGER?

Here's my question.

What if we've spent decades arguing over whether capitalism works while ignoring the extent to which American priorities have been shaped by perpetual war and militarized foreign policy?

How do you evaluate the economic system without discussing what the government chose to do with trillions of dollars?

I'm not saying take the $8 trillion and divide it by the population.

That's mathematically cute and economically simplistic.

The wars happened across decades.

Much of the spending was borrowed.

Dumping trillions directly into household bank accounts could create inflationary effects.

People would spend differently.

Government spending has multiplier effects.

Military spending supports jobs.

Some weapons are produced in American factories.

I understand all of that.

My question is about opportunity cost.

What else could even a fraction of these resources have done?

What if a trillion dollars had gone into modernizing America's electrical grid?

What if hundreds of billions had gone into medical debt relief?

Housing construction?

Public transportation?

Lead pipe replacement?

Mental health infrastructure?

Addiction treatment?

Veterans before they become homeless?

Small-business capital?

Emergency savings programs?

Domestic manufacturing that produces something other than another weapon to replace the weapon we sent somewhere else?

I'm not claiming every domestic program works.

Government can waste money without firing a missile.

Believe me.

I'm asking why war spending so often receives a different standard of scrutiny.

Tell Americans healthcare is expensive and suddenly everybody becomes a forensic accountant.

“How will we pay for it?”

Tell Americans college costs too much.

“How will we pay for it?”

Tell Americans housing is becoming unaffordable.

“How will we pay for it?”

A bridge is collapsing.

How will we pay for it?

People can't afford childcare.

How will we pay for it?

Then somebody says there's a new geopolitical threat 6,000 miles away and suddenly Congress discovers the fucking Venmo password.

BEFORE YOU TELL ME THERE'S NO MONEY, SHOW ME WHERE THE MONEY WENT

That is my position.

Before you tell working Americans they're irresponsible because they don't have enough savings, show me the national receipt.

Before you tell me capitalism has succeeded, tell me how we're measuring success.

GDP?

The stock market?

Billionaire wealth?

Corporate earnings?

Or whether a parent can survive a transmission failure without putting it on a credit card?

Before you tell me Marx was wrong about everything, explain why wealth and economic power repeatedly concentrate.

Before you tell me Marx was right about everything, explain the bodies produced by governments that claimed his ideological inheritance.

Before you tell me socialism is the answer, show me the safeguards against authoritarian power.

Before you tell me the free market is the answer, show me the free market that exists after corporations capture regulators, lobby lawmakers and receive government contracts worth billions.

And before either side starts another fucking ideological debate—

Tell me about the war.

Tell me about the $8 trillion.

Tell me about the future veterans' costs.

Tell me about the interest.

Tell me about Ukraine.

Tell me about Israel.

Tell me about Yemen.

Tell me about China.

Tell me about the contractors.

Tell me about the Pentagon's more than $14 trillion in spending during the first two decades after the Afghanistan war began.

Tell me why the United States accounts for about one-third of the world's military expenditure.

Then look at the American who can't comfortably absorb a $400 emergency and explain the system to him.

Then look at the 25-year-old who can't imagine buying a house and explain why he is stupid for questioning the system.

Maybe capitalism is the best foundation we've found.

Maybe Marx identified real diseases and prescribed dangerous medicine.

Maybe socialism contains tools worth using without becoming an authoritarian state.

Maybe the answer is a blended system better than the one we have now.

I don't know.

That's why I'm reading.

I'm reading Marx.

I'm reading Aleister Crowley.

I'm reading the books people tell me not to read.

I'm listening to people I disagree with.

Because I'm tired of receiving my opinions pre-chewed by people whose careers depend on keeping me angry at the other half of the country.

And now we have artificial intelligence entering the conversation.

Maybe AI shouldn't rule us.

I don't want to replace human oligarchs with an algorithmic king.

But give the machine the fucking spreadsheet.

Give it the budgets.

Give it the outcomes.

Give it the tax codes.

Give it the wages.

Give it the housing data.

Give it healthcare costs.

Give it military expenditures.

Give it 100 years of policy.

Tell it not to protect Marx.

Tell it not to protect capitalism.

Tell it not to protect Republicans.

Tell it not to protect Democrats.

Tell it to identify what worked, what failed, where the evidence is weak and what we're double-counting.

Then let human beings argue about values with the facts sitting naked on the table.

Because maybe our biggest problem isn't capitalism.

Maybe it isn't communism.

Maybe it isn't socialism.

Maybe our biggest problem is that we keep having ideological arguments while an entire permanent system of war sits in the corner with the national credit card.

And every few years it asks for a higher limit.

Maybe the people who benefited from yesterday's economy need to stop telling the people inheriting tomorrow's economy that everything is fine.

Maybe the younger generation isn't rejecting the American dream.

Maybe they're telling us they can't fucking find it.

And if that's true, the answer isn't to call them lazy.

The answer is to look at the books.

All of them.

War.

War.

War.

War.

There.

Now can we include it in the fucking debate?

Tyler Robinson & Trump Assassin Under Government Mind Control! Shocking Congressional Testimony!

Proof Trump Wrong On Iran War

If you read over these materials and still support war in Iran then we respectfully disagree. If anyone has 10 or less links making the opposite case, I will gladly look it over. ✌️ 

Beware the Iran ‘Pearl Harbor’ Moment - Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft https://share.google/JAN3Js9W146UqSGAK 

Iran's Ever Imminent Nukes: A History of Hysteria - Antiwar.com

https://original.antiwar.com/sahimi/2010/05/04/irans-ever-imminent-nukes/ 

The Big Lie About Iran’s Support for Terrorism - The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity

https://ronpaulinstitute.org/the-big-lie-about-irans-support-for-terrorism/

Ron Paul on Iran, Mossadegh, War, Blowback and the Middle East

https://www.mohammadmossadegh.com/news/ron-paul/ 

Ex-intel official Joe Kent says Charlie Kirk once advised him against supporting Iran conflict

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/homenews/media/5791326-joe-kent-charlie-kirk-iran-war/amp/ 

The War Against Iran: Decades in the Making

https://ic911.org/commentary/the-war-against-iran-30-years-in-the-making/

How We Know the 7 Wars in 5 Years Plan Was Real | by Tam Hunt | Medium

https://tamhunt.medium.com/how-we-know-the-7-wars-in-5-years-plan-was-real-b17e97c5ae95 

America Persistently Seeks to Destabilize Iran and Undermine Tehran’s Regional Influence in the Middle East - Global Research

https://www.globalresearch.ca/america-persistently-seeks-to-destabilize-iran-and-undermine-tehrans-regional-influence-in-the-middle-east/5625541 

We Can Afford Reparations, Disability Benefits, and More — If We Stop Choosing War: How the War Economy and Cultural Subversion Keep Us Trapped

https://mindtreasury.blogspot.com/2025/06/we-can-afford-reparations-disability.html

Thomas Massie LOSES To Epstein Class! Here’s What We CAN DO NOW! (Jimmy Dore)

Thomas Massie LOSES To Epstein Class! Here’s What We CAN DO NOW! (Jimmy Dore)

Jimmy reports that GOP Rep. Thomas Massie lost his congressional race in Kentucky after the Israel lobby, led by Miriam Adelson, spent over $32 million—shattering spending records—to defeat him, even thoug, as Trump himself noted, when directly asked Adelson refused to say whether she loves the United States or Israel more. He points out that voters under 55 overwhelmingly supported Massie, while the "Fox News geriatric crowd" over 55 voted for his opponent, suggesting the GOP will look radically different in the next presidential election as younger voters reject the Israel-first establishment.

Jimmy argues that the only nonviolent solution to our current crisis of democracy is for workers who are the "backbone of capitalism"—railroad workers, port workers, truck drivers, grocery store workers, and Amazon fulfillment workers—to stay home from work for several days or weeks, with a demand for publicly funded elections, campaign spending caps, and six-week election cycles. He adds that the same billionaires pushing AI data centers that eliminate jobs and build prisons for dissenters are now pushing a bipartisan anti-semitism bill that would censor speech critical of Israel, and that the system has become so oppressive that George Washington's words about armed resistance as a "last resort" are becoming newly relevant.



Very good summary of the wider situation by Dore who has learnt a lot in recent years. He's progressed a long way since waking up after all the Covid lies. He's on the same page as other alt media titans, when it comes to the economy and rule by oligarchs. I

[Posted at the SpookyWeather2 blog, May 21, 2026.]

Please Pardon Durk Mr. President!

Debunking the Debunkers: Art or Evidence? The Complex Case of Lil Durk and the Fight to Protect Artistic Freedom

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2024/12/art-or-evidence-complex-case-of-lil.html 

Debunking the Debunkers: Debunking Trap Lore Ross regarding rapper King Von being a serial killer and Lil Durk being guilty of homicide without a trial...

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2024/12/debunking-trap-lore-ross-contention.html

'I'm not suicidal': Burchett can't find words to describe alien revelations, discusses UFO filles'

Watch "'I'm not suicidal': Burchett can't find words to describe alien revelations, discusses UFO files" on YouTube

https://youtu.be/2GTzFNfdshM?si=5Oj4Aa2NkfNowWvo 

National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent Resigns Over Iran War

National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent Resigns Over Iran War

Joe Kent, Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, announced his resignation effective today.
Gateway Pundit

Bipartisan Revolt Targets Trump's War Powers After Massive Iran Strikes

Alert

Bipartisan Revolt Targets Trump's War Powers After Massive Iran Strikes

President Donald Trump's joint strikes with Israel against Iran have intensified a growing bipartisan push in Congress to rein in his war powers, with lawmakers in both parties demanding votes on resolutions aimed at limiting his authority to use military force in the region
Fox